That’s the question ABC News is asking after Eric Holder went off the reservation and proclaimed that requiring voters to show ID was ushering in the era of Jim Crow. Even though ID was required to see Holder make his speech to the NAACP. And to see Mitt Romney. And for the upcoming Joe Biden appearance in front of the same group
(ABC News) The Jim Crow-era poll taxes have been outlawed for more than 50 years, but if you ask Attorney General Eric Holder, they may be making a comeback in the form of state voter ID laws.
“We call those poll taxes,” Holder said, detouring from his prepared remarks during a speech at the NAACP on Tuesday to equate Texas’s photo ID law to the poll taxes of the early 1900s.
Those poll taxes were deemed unconstitutional by the 24th Amendment, but the analogy may not be completely off-base.
“The comparison is in the effects,” said Jane Dailey, a history professor at the University of Chicago. “They have an effect of discouraging voters in a more indirect way than poll tax laws, which have the same effect but are much more obviously standing in the way of Democratic participation.”
Why would showing ID be discouraging? People have to show ID for almost everything nowadays.
Voter ID laws, enacted in 11 states over the past two years, require voters to show a government-issued photo ID that the state will provide for free. But while the ID is free, the documents residents need to prove their identity in order to get that ID, such as a birth certificate, are not.
An interesting argument. But,
Supporters of the voter ID laws claim the ID should not be an impediment to voting because everyone has access to a free ID and the documents required to get it are things that voters should already have.
“You have to have a birth certificate to enroll in our public schools,” Texas State Sen. Tommy Williams said during the Texas court trial this week. “I mean, it’s a very common thing that you have to have, and I don’t really see it — it’s just one of the things of life.”
I’ve taken a quick perusal through the requirements for many schools systems in deep blue areas, such as NYC, Boston, D.C., and LA, and they all have some sort of requirement for ID. In NYC, to enroll you need
- Child’s birth certificate or passport
- Child’s immunization records
- Two of six methods showing proof of residence (for parent(s))
Obviously this means that the NYC public schools are practicing Jim Crow and trying to keep minorities from getting an education. In some liberal areas, such as my own home county in NC (Wake County leans liberal), the parent needs an ID to register their kids for school. Why does the liberal education system hate Blacks and other minorities?
Crossed at Right Wing News and Stop The ACLU.
On a related note, don’t forget Holder’s crusade to have Florida stop purging illegal and ineligible voters from the voter rolls was slapped down by the courts.
Florida has since stopped the purge, but the federal court made it clear that the voter rolls in a state are the responsibility of the state and not the Federal government.
It’s amazing how much Dems used to whine about voter fraud when they lost in 2000 and 2004, but, when they win, they say “voter fraud? What voter fraud?”
If it’s good enough for the NAALCP, then its good enough for the pols.
And, in actuality, I’ve never been asked to show my child’s birth certificate. All i’ve needed to do is show that I lived in the district.
How else do you explain all the illegals going to school? Some states courts have even rule that you can’t deny taxpayer-funded, or property-tax funded public education to illegal felons.
Also recall, some cities are even pushing to have illegals allowed to vote in local elections. Local elections, which are almost always tied to state and federal elections and ballots in order to save money.