Many Republicans, and even some others (such as Mr. Burka) have complained that Democrats are acting feisty on the wrong side of public opinion. But this is not a really good argument against Democrats for two different reasons. First, there is no very good way to know public opinion on the issue right now. Second, American tradition is not to listen to public opinion regarding the efficacy of democracy.
First Point: There is no very good way to know public opinion of the Voter ID issue right now. Proponents of Voter Suppression who point to public opinion point to the February-March poll by the University of Texas's Texas Politics Series, which found significant support for "voters should be required to present a government-issued photo id at the polls before they can be allowed to vote." The problem is, they don't really know about the issue. As Katherine pointed out yesterday, "we already have voter identification," it simply is not a strict photo identification. And many voters do not know that. When asked about their knowledge of the law in the same poll, 42% incorrectly stated that there is already Voter ID law and another 9% were not confident enough to answer. That's a majority of Texans who do not understand the issue!
In the Spring of 2008, I took a Public Opinion class at the University of Texas by Daron Shaw, someone I consider to be a very knowledgeable pollster. (Oh, Fox News thinks he is good, too.) He taught that polls are not necessarily a reliable barometer for public opinion if the voters were not knowledgeable on the topic. To quote from my notes: "Shaw thinks that if it something people haven't really thought about and cared about, than there really is no public opinion that is valid on it."
This is one reason that Democrats are not falling line and file behind the February-March poll. The only voters who have really "thought and cared about" Voter ID are a small amount of very politically active Republicans and Democrats. The majority of voters, who are not very politically active, have not thought much on the issue.
But there is a second point, too: Even if public opinion is clearly against Democrats, public opinion is not a judge of the efficacy of democracy. This is why the founding fathers sat in a room and discussed the Constitution alone, and then they made the Bill of Rights. True, state legislatures had to accept the Constitution, but it was not put to a referendum! If public opinion was followed when making decisions about Democracy, the Civil Rights Era would be nothing more than a footnote in our textbooks -- there would be no major Civil Rights Act!
The Democratic Party is the party that championed the Civil Rights Act under John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Baines Johnson, and we will continue to support civil rights whether or not public opinion "agrees" with us. The reason for this is because civil rights -- specifically VOTING rights -- are not up for a vote.
So, to recap. We cannot really trust any polls on Voter ID because there is no thoughtful and informed public opinion on the issue. Even if there was, this is a voting rights issue; and voting rights are not up for vote.
House Speaker Joe Straus and dozens of GOP House members who signed their names to blanket objections which block insurance reform are doing what Republicans do best: serving their masters in the insurance lobby.
When they placed their partisan voter ID bill at the top of the regular calendar -- ahead of the Texas Department of Insurance sunset bill, they hoped to block key insurance reforms. Like the common-sense, pro-consumer amendment that would require Insurance Commission review and approval of insurance rates before companies could assess them.
Of course, if they succeed in passing voter suppression legislation, they'll put into law bureaucratic barriers to the ballot box. They'll have fewer angry voters to overcome because fewer angry voters will be allowed to vote. That's the whole point of the GOP voter ID plan: put structural barriers into the law that guarantees them power no matter how voters might feel.
Democrats have tried several times to move insurance reform to the top of the calendar. Republicans have said no. But they've made it clear they put their cronies in the insurance industry before the needs of hardworking Texans who now pay the highest insurance rates in the nation.
In this, new Republican House Speaker looks more and more like the man he vanquished, notorious former Speaker Tom Craddick. It's a shame, really. No matter the face in the chair, it's the insurance industry that controls the Republican Party. It's not really a party at all. It's an insurance industry PAC.
It was a holiday yesterday, so you might not have been paying full attention to the Texas legislature-- specifically the Texas House.
Voter ID has slowed the Texas House to a near crawl. Republican's put the bill on the calendar and refuse to take the highly controversial bill off the general calendar.
KT then made it a point to discuss who controls what part of the legislative process. It looks a little like this:
Republicans control the Texas Senate.
Republicans control the Texas House.
Republicans set the calendar.
Republicans set the speaker.
Republicans set the agenda.
Had Craddick not be ousted, had they still hovered somewhere just south of 90 members, etc., etc. But the fact is, he was, and they don't. So it's up to the House Rs, not the House Ds, to get the train back on track. They're the ones who have to get the Ds to compromise, because unless they do, the Ds can use, in the Speaker's parlance, the process that's available to them.
Smith even quotes the Speaker himself from the Quorum Report.
"Democrats have been using the process that's available to them to use in a way that I wouldn't suggest is helpful," he said in an impromptu gaggle with the press during floor discussion of the Top 10 Percent Rule debate. "I would say the more they talk, the more explaining they have to do and I feel like the entire Republican caucus agrees with me on that. And I just hope they put aside some of this, some of the abuses of the process - legitimate - but I think ill-timed beyond just making their point."
Smith finally boils down the debate to the simplest point.
As for the explaining to be done, I would say it falls to those people who are so hell-bent on passing voter ID ahead of windstorm, insurance sunset, and other bills that pass the test of pressing need.
This is a complicated issue. Republicans control every branch of government in Texas. The far right wants voter suppression legislation over any other bill. They have made that decision... not democrats.
We have 1 day left to get to work on the people's business. It is only up to the Republican's in the House to get that done. They are the ones in power after all.
As the Republicans' voter suppression legislation gets closer to either a vote, a special session, or irrelevance, it's worth noting why so many of us consider this bill to be voter suppression, rather than voter identification.
Simply put: we already have voter identification. It's your voter registration card, and when you vote, you must present that card. In absence of that card, you can present a driver's license, government-issued bill, passport, or other forms of ID.
Proponents of the voter-suppressing ID requirement seem to think that this process leads to widespread voter fraud. Except that's not true. The Report of the Commission on Federal Election Reform states that "there is no evidence of extensive fraud in U.S. elections or of multiple voting."
Instead, it is a concerted effort to disenfranchise those groups that have traditionally been marginalized and blocked from practicing their full rights as citizens of the United States of America. From the National Journal:
...it's not the mainstream majority of voters who are at risk here. It's the smaller percentage of Americans who are on the electorate's margins -- students, the elderly, low-income voters, African Americans, non-English-speaking residents -- who disproportionately tend to lack photo IDs. The same group is more likely to lack proof of citizenship such as passports and birth certificates.
...
These barriers are not quaint relics of a forgotten era. At the risk of repeating ourselves, let's look again at the landmark 2008 Survey of the Performance of American Elections, the first empirical, post-election analysis of its kind. Conducted by the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, that survey found that in category after category -- voter registration, wait times, mail/absentee ballots -- African Americans and Hispanics encountered more problems at the polls than whites.
The statistics on ID requirements were particularly disturbing. A full 70 percent of African Americans and 65 percent of Hispanics were asked to show "picture ID," compared with only 51 percent of whites -- even in states where no such ID is required.
Our country is already facing a situation where minorities are having difficulty casting their ballots. We don't need to be making it more difficult for people to vote--we need to be doing all we can to increase turnout. SB362, the Republicans' Voter Suppression Legislation, works contrary to this goal, and against recommendations of the Federal Election Reform Commission. From their report:
The introduction of voter ID requirements has raised concerns that they may present a barrier to voting, particularly by traditionally marginalized groups, such as the poor and minorities, some of whom lack a government-issued photo ID. They may also create obstacles for highly mobile groups of citizens. Part of these concerns are addressed by assuring that government-issued photo identification is available without expense to any citizen and second, by government efforts to ensure that all voters are provided convenient opportunities to obtain [an ID].
Let's see how the Republicans' Voter Suppression Legislation does on these two counts: making IDs available for free, and making sure all voters have opportunities to receive one. Short version: it doesn't.
No two words ever summed up Paul Burka better than two he offered last week: "Principles, Schminciples."
While "reporting" on voter ID over the last few days, Paul Burka has become the stenographer for the Republican Party of Texas. Following one of his rants on voter ID, Democrat Glenn Smith -- who has posted a few items of his own here on BOR over the last few days -- correctly pointed out that Burka is lambasting Democrats for standing up for our principles on voter ID; which is the same thing Republicans are doing.
Principles, schminciples. This is about public opinion. The Democrats are on the wrong side of public opinion and they’re behaving like children. That is not a good combination.
The "wrong side of public opinion" for standing up against voter suppression? And we're not even the ones who have to call it voter suppression -- Burka did it himself not more than a month ago, in his piece for Texas Monthly, "Manic Suppression."
What started out as a fear that hordes of illegal immigrants would descend on the polls—a ridiculous scenario, since illegal immigrants want nothing to do with official government activities—has now become voter suppression, pure and simple. [...]
Voter ID is a terrible idea, bad for democracy and mean-spirited to boot. We can only hope it won’t soon be the law in Texas.
So what has happened to that "we can only hope" over the last month? Politics, my friends. Politics. And if there is one thing that Burka will place over "voter suppression, pure and simple" it is politics. Because he is not a reporter; he is not a party advocate; he is not a policy expert; he is not a Democrat; he is not a Republican. Paul Burka -- as soon as there is any partisanship -- forgets that he is one of the brightest political reporters in the state, and becomes that guy sitting at the horse track, eating bags and bags of peanuts, yelling at the horses and jockeys at how they are all doing it wrong.
The Democrats’ problem in Texas is that although the favorable/unfavorable view of the Republican party has declined from 62/26 in 2000 to 45/42 in 2008 (Texas numbers), the Democrats can’t close the deal with these disaffected voters. Their party’s favorable/unfavorable numbers have hardly changed over the last eight years. This juvenile display is not going to help.
If voter ID is going to be defeated, House members will have to be the ones to do it. This puts new Republican speaker Joe Straus, who supported voter ID in 2007, in the hot seat.
If they walk on this issue, they will do harm to their party. It makes no sense to go nuclear over an issue on which public opinion is 70% against you. And that number will climb if the D’s walk.
Straus’s speakership is at risk on this bill. He could face a revolt from Republicans if he cooperates in killing it or a revolt from Democrats if he aids its passage and sends it to a conference committee with the Senate, where he will be subject to enormous pressure from Perry, Dewhurst, and GOP donors.
I don’t know whether a photo I.D. requirement will reduce Democratic voting, but it appears to Democrats as if Republicans think it will, and that is why the battle is raging.
The Democratic trend in urban and suburban Texas continues, making voter ID an issue not only for Republican primary voters but also for Republican legislators themselves as they face electoral battles with a reinvigorated and well-financed Democratic opposition.
Why has Burka ignored everything he wrote a month ago? Why is he now constantly calling out the Democrats and posting Republican talking points? Why isn't he putting pressure on Straus -- which is where he said it belonged a month ago -- and focusing his ire on Democrats?
Watch the current proceedings of the Texas House live here.
While the chubbing of the local and consent calendar continued today, it was allowed to be sped up as Democrats began limiting their questioning to Democratic authored bills and resolutions.
But the larger news is the revelation of potential points of order by the Democratic caucus that could threaten the Voter ID bill.
Dunnam said the minutes for the Voter ID committee hearing were not filed within the requisite three days. He said the timestamp on the minutes shows they were approved four days after the hearing - a violation of the rules. He said he has shown Speaker Joe Straus the minutes and the timestamp, and that the speaker is considering them....Dunnam said he is so confident about the technicality - called a "point of order" - that "we've asked them to go ahead and bring the bill forward." No word on whether Straus thinks it will stand.
Quorum Report provides an update that notes how Republicans can play a role in ending the slowdown of the local and consent calendar.
In it, Straus affirmed that committee minutes must be submitted within three days or the bill becomes ineligible. Democrats subsequently brought the Speaker the time stamped minutes indicating a seven day delay in turning in the minutes of the voter id hearing.
Democrats have requested the Speaker recognize them for a motion to suspend the rules in order to take up voter ID specifically for the purpose of offering up and getting a ruling on this and other points of order. If the point of order is sustained, they will stop slow-boating the Local and Consent Calendar.
This morning, after the parliamentary inquiry, the minutes were presented to the Speaker showing the time stamps. He was also presented with another Point of Order on Voter ID which is, if possible, stronger than the one on the minutes.
We have proposed that the Voter ID bill be brought forward so that the Points can be called and sustained immediately and the House proceed with other business. We are informed that the House Republican Caucus would prefer to continue on the present course in part to avoid them having vote on the TDI Sunset bill.
There is another Point of Order that is stronger as well though one would think this one is sufficient. And now it's interesting to see that it's the Republican caucus that might not be willing to move forward because of other major bills that they don't want to deal with.
So why -exactly- was Anthony Holm, spokesman for GOP sugardaddy Bob Perry, in the TX GOP House Caucus meeting? Who's running this show?
That's a good question -- did Bob Perry tell Republicans to reject the compromise
House Republicans continued their hardline stance in support of voter ID late into Saturday night, rejecting yet another compromise by House Democrats. From the Statesman:
After about a half-hour meeting of the House Republican Caucus, chairman Larry Taylor of Friendswood said Republicans rejected a proposal from Democrats to move the voter ID bill and the Texas Department of Insurance sunset bill to Tuesday’s calendar.
“There’s a commitment to follow the rules on behalf of our caucus,” Taylor said after their meeting. “We’re just saying, ‘Let’s just follow the rules that we set at the beginning of the session.”
Rep. Taylor is either (a) an absolute idiot, or (b) terrible at spinning lies. The rules of the House allow you to take up House bills out of order -- which was the proposal by Rep. Dunnam. For Republicans to fulfill the promise isn't breaking any rules -- it's simply using the rules that are there.
Meanwhile, right-wing House Republicans are publicly berating other moderate Republicans for, oh, trying to be sensible.
While not active in any recent GOP incumbent primary challenges to our knowledge, some are grumbling that Holm also serves as the spokesman for controversial homebuilder Bob Perry.
While he does give to both sides, Bob Perry is the largest single contributor to Republican candidates up and down the ballot.
But the grumbling stems from Perry’s role in creating and supporting the Texas Residential Construction Commission.In its recommendations this year, the Sunset Commission Staff was so critical of the agency that it actually recommended its elimination.Perry’s people are credited with the original rule writing for the Commission.
So...maybe this explains some of the strife behind the scenes -- Perry's spokesperson is not well liked by all Republicans, and there were members upset months ago about the hire. Interesting.
So why -exactly- was Anthony Holm, spokesman for GOP sugardaddy Bob Perry, in the TX GOP House Caucus meeting? Who's running this show?
That's a good question -- did Bob Perry tell Republicans to reject the compromise
House Republicans continued their hardline stance in support of voter ID late into Saturday night, rejecting yet another compromise by House Democrats. From the Statesman:
After about a half-hour meeting of the House Republican Caucus, chairman Larry Taylor of Friendswood said Republicans rejected a proposal from Democrats to move the voter ID bill and the Texas Department of Insurance sunset bill to Tuesday’s calendar.
“There’s a commitment to follow the rules on behalf of our caucus,” Taylor said after their meeting. “We’re just saying, ‘Let’s just follow the rules that we set at the beginning of the session.”
Rep. Taylor is either (a) an absolute idiot, or (b) terrible at spinning lies. The rules of the House allow you to take up House bills out of order -- which was the proposal by Rep. Dunnam. For Republicans to fulfill the promise isn't breaking any rules -- it's simply using the rules that are there.
Meanwhile, right-wing House Republicans are publicly berating other moderate Republicans for, oh, trying to be sensible.
While not active in any recent GOP incumbent primary challenges to our knowledge, some are grumbling that Holm also serves as the spokesman for controversial homebuilder Bob Perry.
While he does give to both sides, Bob Perry is the largest single contributor to Republican candidates up and down the ballot.
But the grumbling stems from Perry’s role in creating and supporting the Texas Residential Construction Commission.In its recommendations this year, the Sunset Commission Staff was so critical of the agency that it actually recommended its elimination.Perry’s people are credited with the original rule writing for the Commission.
So...maybe this explains some of the strife behind the scenes -- Perry's spokesperson is not well liked by all Republicans, and there were members upset months ago about the hire. Interesting.
Andy Brown, Travis County Democratic Party Chair released the following letter, this afternoon regarding Voter Suppression Legislation (full letter in quoted section below).
One note is that I was told by a House Member that a Republican Representative is attending a wedding on Saturday, so my guess is that might not be voted on tomorrow, but in any case, please contact your representatve today and ask them to vote AGAINST Voter ID.
With Rep. Kuempel still recovering and assuming Speaker Straus does not vote, we have a 74 Dems to 74 Repubs match-up...
The Republican Voter Suppression legislation is scheduled to reach the House floor tomorrow. Senate Bill (SB) 362 is on the Texas House calendar for Saturday. It is critical that your State Representative and House Speaker Joe Straus hear your opposition to this unnecessary, partisan legislation.
The Republican controlled House and Senate both struggle to debate local bills and find solutions on important issues ranging from windstorm insurance, green jobs, and the use of the Federal Recovery and Reinvestment Act, among others. The Texas House is now slated to spend an entire day debating voter suppression legislation.
There are three things you can do to prevent this waste of time.
Call or e-mail House Speaker Joe Straus and tell him to focus the House's efforts on real priorities instead of threatening Texans right to vote. His capitol phone number is (512) 463-0686 and you can e-mail his office directly here.
Contact your State Representative and let them know you oppose SB 362 because; it has nothing to do with voter fraud and everything to do with using the reins of government to gain partisan advantage by making it harder for certain Texans to vote. You can find your State Representative online.
Show your support to our Democratic leaders by going to the House gallery, wearing blue, while they debate this bill on Saturday. Republicans have flooded the capitol wearing red in previous debates, and we need to support our Democrats while they spend the entire day debating this Republican voter suppression legislation.
Join in the fight to stop this restrictive and unnecessary bill.
