The recent Supreme Court decision on the Voting Rights Act is bound to bring voter ID laws back into the media discussion. And, unfortunately, that means some of these discussions will suffer from a familiar problem: The unwillingness to point out that the problem such laws are allegedly fighting–voter fraud–doesn’t exist.
Here’s how an Associated Press story (7/14/13) about the court hearings over the Pennsylvania’s ID law put it:
Critics derided the law as a cynical GOP effort to discourage young adults, minorities, the elderly, the poor and the disabled from going to the polls. Republicans said most Pennsylvanians have driver’s licenses to use as photo ID and claimed that the law would discourage voter fraud.
One side says X, the other says Y.
It would responsible– and entirely accurate--to point out that the problem of “fraud” has never been documented. But that would probably qualify as taking a side in the dispute, and that is apparently something of a no-no.
The New York Times also had a piece on the same issue today (7/16/13) which almost fell into the same “balance” trap:
As in other states that have passed strict voter ID requirements, Republicans, who controlled the legislature and governor’s office in Harrisburg, last year argued that the law was needed to prevent voter fraud. Photo IDs, already a part of modern life, could be easily obtained, they said.
Opponents said the law’s intent was to simply to limit participation by students and minority poor and elderly voters, who disproportionately lack the required IDs and tend to vote Democratic.
The Times did, though, add one more thing:
Michael Rubin, a Washington lawyer working with the American Civil Liberties Union to oppose the law, said the state had no evidence of fraud and no plan to present any at the trial, which is taking place in Commonwealth Court in Harrisburg and is expected to last two weeks.
This is better–though attributing this statement of fact to the legal team challenging the law still contributes to the idea that this is something that one side of the debate believes.
We would have a much different discussion of voter ID if media outlets felt obliged to consistently and clear point out that it is an attempt to “solve” a problem that does not exist.
“Facts all come with points of view
Facts don’t do what I want them to”
– “Crosseyed and Painless”, Talking Heads
It’s not true that voter fraud “doesn’t exist.” Rather, it’s an extremely small problem (especially compared to vote suppression). After all, when I lived near Chicago, it was well-known that some of the names of the voters belonged to the legally dead. Of course, there are much better ways than voter ID laws to prevent that kind of thing.
First, it is the law of the land that only US citizens may vote. Thus, by the “necessary and proper” clause of the Constitution, the federal government has to do what is necessary and proper to make sure that ONLY citizens vote. Second, there are examples of voter fraud going on, like in Florida. Third, the Obama administration gave millions of dollars to Kenya so that they have Voter ID’s for the youth, since Kenya has a law that only citizens may vote. Fourth, SCOTUS made a ruling on Arizona Voter ID laws, and basically pointed out that Arizona can take the federal government to court, since they are preventing Arizona for exercising both what is in their State Constitution and The Law of the Land.
Good Judgement by the Supreme Court
These Republican asshats showed their cards – the Republican leader in the state congress said that passing the laws would be the guarantee that Romney would win PA. Morons couldn’t even get that right.
The problem is the press that does this “both sides do it” dance. So right wing nut jobs won’t scream with an Alaskan shrill about the “lamestream media”. The problem is, the loons still scream about it even though the media has a conservative bias and very few of the talking heads will actually call the Rethuglicans out when they pull these kinds of tricks.
First, it is the law of the land that only US citizens may vote. Thus, by the “necessary and proper” clause of the Constitution, the federal government has to do what is necessary and proper to make sure that ONLY citizens vote. Second, there are examples of voter fraud going on, like in Florida.
So then show us all this evidence you have that Illegals, and non-citizens are voting in huge batches (and not being caught, and jailed) and are causing issues with the elections. It is amazing that after how many decades of voting with out needing a specific license, many are able to show they are eligible to vote and do.
Once again, we are going to use millions of gallons of sulfuric Acid to remove the dragon bones from peanut butter.
This whole argument is preposterous.The very idea that by showing proper ID you will disenfranchise a certain sect of people because they are too incapable of getting ID is a lie.If the right thinks there is advantage in this they are fools.If the left screams foul they are fools as well.it would be like saying the reason we can’t pass Obama care is because people are too stupid to understand it and get the proper forms.Just pass it.Get everyone on track,and shuddddup
Padrem……..In Philadelphia alone there were fifteen wards that had 100% for Obama.Statistically that is impossible.Forget the peoples intent.Their is always a 2%-6% mistake factor at least.That tells me you have thee most centered, brilliant ,mistake free group of people(yes it was predominantly black areas)ever assembled to vote.Or you had massive fraud.What kind of fraud.?….who knows.The winning party is not going to investigate.And the losers get shouted down.It would take the winners to launch the investigation over how they won.Not gonna happen.So you need to make any fraud harder before hand