![]() |
|
| |
|
Marie Cocco: Your Papers, PleasePosted on Jul 12, 2006By Marie Cocco Editor’s note: In this column, Cocco argues that the current push to require voters to supply proof of citizenship at the voting booth has very little to do with preventing illegal voting and much more to do with keeping away from the polls those most likely to vote for Democrats. WASHINGTON—I hereby declare on oath that I will carry my valid U.S. passport, my birth certificate or my naturalization papers so that proof of citizenship can be offered on demand to partisan election workers, who will determine on Election Day if I may cast a vote. Congress has not—yet—passed this requirement. But the day draws closer as the debate over illegal immigration is odiously transformed into an assault on the right of U.S. citizens to vote. The ugliness was most public when the House leadership was forced to put off a vote to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act, the landmark legislation that was supposed to consign the most noxious forms of voting discrimination to the dustbin of history. Initially, objections came from Southern Republicans who claimed their states should no longer be singled out for scrutiny because of past discrimination. Soon enough, another agenda became clear. Far more lawmakers were incensed at the law’s requirement that language assistance be given at the polls to voters who aren’t sufficiently proficient in English. A spending amendment that would prohibit federal funds from being used on language assistance failed—but only after a majority of House Republicans went on record as supporting it. They affixed to their brows the usual xenophobic blinders, unwilling to see the facts: About two-thirds of those requiring language assistance at the polls aren’t newcomers but native-born U.S. citizens. They include large numbers of Alaskans and Native Americans, as well as Puerto Ricans. Besides Hispanic-Americans, millions of Asian-American voters use the assistance, which includes foreign-language ballots. The Voting Rights Act may survive. But what of the rights of citizens who are unable to produce the paper trail that Republicans now seek from people who register to vote—or who try to vote, once registered? Rep. Henry Hyde (R-Ill.) is sponsoring a measure that would require people who register to vote at motor vehicle offices and other public facilities to produce documents proving their citizenship, instead of merely affirming citizenship, as many states require now. A voter who changes his or her registration—say, by moving from one state to another, or even from one county to another—also would have to produce this proof. In states where registration takes place on Election Day, the voter would have to bring the documents to the polls. Hyde would require a passport—held by only 25% of American citizens, according to the State Department. Or a birth certificate—likely to be interred in a file drawer several states away from where the voter now lives if, in fact, the certificate is available at all. Blacks in the Jim Crow South often were denied admission to hospitals; births at home often went unrecorded. Minorities and elderly people (read, mostly Democrats) are least likely to be able to produce a birth certificate. Naturalized citizens—even those who became citizens decades ago—would have to produce their naturalization papers. Obtaining a replacement copy from the Homeland Security Department now costs $220. “You’re 86 years old, you’re homebound, you might be lucky if somebody comes to visit you once in a while,’’ Rep. Charlie Gonzalez (D-Texas), who chairs the civil rights task force of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus, said in an interview. “Where do you turn? How do you get this done?’‘ Hyde says “voting fraud is legendary in many cities.’’ Legend seems quite the proper word. No army of illegal immigrants, or other noncitizens, is storming the voting booth. Between October 2002 and September 2005, according to data Hyde supplied to support his legislation, the Justice Department won 55 convictions for election fraud—while hundreds of millions of ballots were cast. Typically the convictions were for “vote buying” by zealous partisans at all levels of political combat. A handful of cases involved convictions of noncitizens who voted; one had been a candidate for the Florida Legislature. Another prosecution involved a Canadian who voted illegally in 2000 and 2002 during elections in Avery County, N.C. Some believe the solution to this scourge is to force Americans to undertake a paper chase at their own expense—a passport costs $97, a copy of a birth certificate $10 to $20. Together with a proposal to require all voters to show a photo ID—a mandate that’s consistently been found to discriminate against minorities, the poor and the elderly—the intent is clear. The scheme has little to do with blocking illegal immigrants from voting illegitimately. It is meant to keep from the polling place those legitimate citizens whose votes might go against Republicans. Previous item: Classic Molly Ivins: Economic Morality Has Been Buried Next item: Joe Conason: Sen. Lieberman Literally in Bed With Drug Lobby Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment
|
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. |
By tevitts@ameritech.net, July 20, 2006 at 5:02 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
I would think that a requirement for a passport, driver’s license, birth certificate, etc. would be declared unconstitutional. They’re poll taxes, outlawed by an amendment in the 1960’s. You cannot be required to pay a tax or fee in order to vote.
Report thisHere in Ohio, a voter proved identification by a signature, which was compared to the signature in registration book. Starting with the next election, a voter will have to show a state issued i.d. (again, a poll tax.) But, it’s much harder to forge a signature than to get a fake id. You could probably go into any high school in the country and within 15 minutes know 3 places to get a fake id. It takes hours of practice to forge a signature. If the intent is to prevent voter fraud, rather than suppress the vote, this would hardly seem the proper course.
By Frank Goodman, Sr., July 19, 2006 at 4:51 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
I say, let anyone present in the country vote in the precinct he finds himself. Few aliens would elect to vote. Those who do would have an inducement, even if it is a few dollars paid for their vote. A warm body that appears to be older than ten would qualify. World citizens have as much, or more, interest in the outcome of an American election as an American citizen. It is doubtful that any influx of such voters could swing an election disastrously to a dire outcome than the discombable in Florida in 2000.
Report thisBy Aaitje, July 17, 2006 at 9:26 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Why do you think ALL Republicans fly into a tizzy about the possibility of granting *any* form of amnesty to undocumented aliens their starving of budgets for border control has allowed into this country?
Sen. Cornyn of Texas (R) publicly stated that the Republicans need to tamper down on immigration, *especially* illegal immigration into this country because “we all know they’ll all turn into Democratic voters.”
Of course they’re conveniently forgetting that those undocumented workers have children. Many of them. And *they’re* American born U.S. citizens, and watching how Republicans and ignorant Americans against any form of foreigners in this country treat their family—-you think they’ll be a little upset?
Maybe just a little? Upset enough to go to the polls the year they turn 18, and vote against the political party that were the most unfriendly to their undocumented family members?
Ask ex-Gov Pete Wilson why his political career ended before he’d liked it to. He got passed Prop 187 that was very unfriendly to undocumented immigrants, and the majority of Californians voted for this Proposition, but it was all over for the Republican hold on California from that moment forward.
Report this