MARION COUNTY, In. (By
Jonathan Alter,
Newsweek) September 15, 2008
The GOP is working to keep eligible African-Americans from voting in
several states.
It was a mainstay of Jim Crow segregation: for 100 years after the Civil
War, Southern white Democrats kept eligible blacks from voting with poll
taxes, literacy tests and property requirements. Starting in the 1960s,
the U.S. Supreme Court declared these assaults on the heart of American
democracy unconstitutional.
Now, with the help of a 2008 Supreme Court
decision, Crawford vs. Marion County (Indiana) Election Board, white
Republicans in some areas will keep eligible blacks from voting by
requiring driver's licenses. Not only is this new-fangled discrimination
constitutional, it's spreading.
GOP proponents of the move say they are merely trying to reduce voter
fraud. But while occasional efforts to stuff ballot boxes through phony
absentee voting still surface, the incidence of individual vote
fraudvoting when you aren't eligibleis virtually non-existent, as "The
Truth About Vote Fraud," a study by the Brennan Center for Justice
at New York University, clearly shows. In other words, the problem
Republicans claim they want to combat with increased ID requirements
doesn't exist. Meanwhile, those ID hurdles facing individuals do nothing
to stop the organized insiders who still try to game the system.
The motive here is political, not racial. Republicans aren't bigots
like the Jim Crow segregationists. But they know that increased turnout
in poor, black neighborhoods is good for Democrats. In that sense, the
effort to suppress voting still amounts to the practical equivalent of
racism.
In Crawford, the court upheld an Indiana law essentially requiring a
passport or driver's license in order to vote. But more than two thirds
of Indiana adults have no passports and nearly 15 percent have no
driver's licenses. These eligible voters, disproportionately
African-American, will need to take a bus or catch a ride from a friend
down to the motor vehicles bureau to make sure they obtain a nondriver
photo ID. Otherwise, they cannot vote in Indiana this year.
To get an idea of how many African-Americans nationwide lack driver's
licenses, recall Hurricane Katrina in 2005, when thousands were stranded
without transportation. "Crawford Republicans" could make the old "Jim
Crow Democrats" look like pikers when it comes to voter suppression.
Consider Wisconsin, a swing state. Republicans officials there are
suing to enforce a "no match, no vote" provision in state regulations,
where voters must not only show a photo ID, but establish that it
matches the name and number in the Department of Motor Vehicles or
Social Security Administration database. (Democrats are resisting the
suit.) These lists are riddled with errors in every state, as the
Brennan Center has proven in its report, "Restoring
the Right to Vote."
How error prone? Florida wrongly purged tens of thousands of
law-abiding, mostly Democratic, voters from the rolls in 2000, claiming
they were felons. (This, among other things, cost Al Gore the
presidency). Even after the
Help America
Vote Act (HAVA) and worldwide attention, the Florida software is
still flawed. It requires only an 80 percent match to the name of a
convicted felon. "So if there's a murderous John Peterson, the software
disenfranchises everyone named John Peters," Andrew Hacker writes in a
recent
New York Review of Books.
Voters caught in these snafus can have their rights restored but not
if they fail to straighten things out before Election Day. Otherwise
they are granted "provisional ballots" that are sometimes counted and
sometimes not. Even obtaining a provisional ballot can require an
appearance in front of a judge in some states. Faced with the hassle,
most voters just give up.
The ability of actual felons to get their right to vote back varies
by state. It's especially hard for felons to vote in Virginia; a bit
easier in Pennsylvania and Michigan. (Other countries are far more
generous to ex-convicts, figuring that having paid their debt to society
they should be allowed to vote again.)
All of this would seem to favor John McCain over Barack Obama this
year, but some voting-rights trends are pointing in the opposite
direction.
In Ohio, where the governor and secretary of state changed in 2006
from Republican to Democrat, a new law allows voters to register to vote
and fill out an absentee ballot at the same time between Sept. 30 and
Oct. 6. This will mean a week of furious campaigning and early voting in
a key state.
Advantage Obama. With 470,000 students enrolled in Ohio's public
colleges and universities and nine out of 10 are Ohio residents,
expect a bumper crop of young voters.
The combination of voter suppression and early voting make turnout
predictions perilous. And without knowing turnout, most polling is
deeply flawed.
So about the only thing we know for sure this year is that with the
Crawford decision we are seeing a return to the days when one political
party saw a huge advantage in preventing as many poor people as possible
from voting. That's understandable politically, but also un-American.