PLANK AUGUST 21, 2012
-
Read Later
READ LATERAvailable only to subscribers. SUBSCRIBE TODAY
-
Listen
ARTICLE AUDIO
- Font Size
It must’ve been a full moon this past weekend. Missouri Rep. Todd Akin, a Republican challenging the no-longer-vulnerable Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill, offered his medical view that only sluts get pregnant after their daddies rape them. If there’d been no furor about that we’d be hearing more about Akin’s Friday comment that it was time to get rid of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Meanwhile, in Ohio, Franklin County Republican Chairman Doug Preisse was e-mailing to the Columbus Dispatch his views about shutting down weekend voting. Weekend voting is important for African-American turnout because black churches have “souls to polls” programs in which they bus parishioners to polling places after Sunday services. As TNR’s Alec MacGillis explained yesterday, Ohio’s Republican Secretary of State, Jon Husted, initially was going to allow weekend voting in rural areas (which lean Republican) but not in urban areas (which lean Democratic). When that provoked howls of outrage, Husted said fine, then we’ll have no weekend voting at all (except for the military), a superficially even-handed decision that similarly favors Republicans by blocking “souls to polls.” When asked whether that was fair, Preisse (who is also a member of his county election board, and had voted against weekend hours—Franklin County includes Columbus, Ohio’s most populous city) allowed that “I guess I really actually feel we shouldn’t contort the voting process to accommodate the urban—read African-American—voter-turnout machine.”
This was an even-more-naked admission of motive than Pennsylvania House Republican Leader Mike Turzai’s telling a GOP crowd, “Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor [Mitt] Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania? Done.” Turzai’s comment, amazingly, was deemed insufficient evidence to throw out Pennsylvania's Voter ID law. “I declined to infer that other members of the General Assembly shared the boastful views of Representative Turzai,” concluded Judge Robert Simpson, a Republican, “without proof that other members were present at the time the statements were made. Also, the statements were made away from the chamber floor.” Could Preisse’s more blatantly anti-black comment be used more successfully to challenge Husted’s decision on Sunday voting?
Probably not, according to the voting-rights experts I canvassed. The relevant statute is Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, which states: “No voting qualification or prerequisite to voting or standard, practice, or procedure shall be imposed or applied by any State or political subdivision in a manner which results in a denial or abridgement of the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color.” Sounds like a slam dunk, right? Plus, you don’t even have to prove intent. But “almost all successful Section 2 cases are redistricting-related,” according to Nathaniel Persily of Columbia Law School. “So-called vote denial lawsuits are rare and the legal standard is unclear.” Preisse, even though he had a hand in the decision-making process, is just one person, and that’s “probably not enough,” according to Richard Hasen of University of California Irvine Law School. A couple of experts told me it would be worth a shot bringing a case under the 14th amendment. But it would be a long shot.
All the experts I surveyed agreed that it would be a slam-dunk if Ohio were a “pre-clearance” state under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act—that is, one of the nine states (nearly all in the South) with a demonstrated past tradition of discriminatory voter suppression. These states are subject to review by the Justice department, and if one of them challenges the Justice department’s adverse findings in court the burden of proof lies with the state to prove that its procedures aren’t discriminatory. Ohio would have a very hard time doing that. But Ohio isn’t a pre-clearance state, and it doesn’t have any counties or townships that require pre-clearance, either. So perhaps Rep. Akin is right, though not in the way he intended. Perhaps we do need to revisit the Voting Rights Act, and make every state of the union a pre-clearance state, in recognition of the fact that many northern states (Pennsylvania and Ohio among them) have lately gotten busy creating new traditions of discriminatory voter suppression. Unfortunately, there’s no political support for that outcome, even though it would achieve something the South has long sought—removal of its unique stigma under federal voting law. A likelier outcome, when the Supreme Court takes up the Voting Rights Act, as it’s expected to do soon, is that Section Five will be abolished altogether. The Court, remember, is majority Republican.
(Click here for my TRB column summarizing the main avenues by which the GOP hopes to suppress Democratic votes in 2012.)
13 comments
Are there any Republicans offended by efforts to minimize left leaning voter turnout, or do they all have a superstitious belief in voter fraud?
- Nusholtz
August 21, 2012 at 3:23pm
Republicans don't really believe in democracy, the right-wing masters of the party are proud inheritors of the Know-Nothing, Confederate, and Anti-Federalist traditions and bear no goodwill toward the majority of the people. This is demonstrated in the traditional tactic of vote suppression of minority citizens as Noah details above in OH, but some is of a weird and old variety, such as Rep. Flake (R-AZ) and other Tea Partiers calling for the abolition of the 17th Amendment and the direct election of Senators. The GOP goal isn't simply some revival of the Gilded Age but rather a return to the Articles of Confederation with a dash of John C. Calhoun style feudal democracy and old fashioned oligarchy.
- Pnaut
August 21, 2012 at 3:36pm
I'd like to see Democrats in Congress propose a constitutional amendment guaranteeing the right to vote, with only limited, explicit exceptions (such as for those under age 18 and, yes, for felons). Of course, it would only be for the enjoyment of watching Republicans vote against it. In addition, in every court case relating to voting qualifications, the protagonists should argue that Bush v. Gore necessarily federalized the issue of voting qualifications. Of course, that too would only be for the enjoyment of watching Republican appointees to the courts pretend that Bush v. Gore never happened. A day without an act of hypocrisy by a Republican is a day without sunshine. "Woe to you, . . . you hypocrites" applies to Gentiles as well as Jews. Doesn't it? Let the theocons parse that one. I'm an Episcopalean, and in our tradition everybody gets to partake of the Lord's Supper and everybody gets to vote.
- rayward
August 21, 2012 at 4:14pm
Good thing I had a fresh cup of coffee with which to catch my tears of shame at being an American.
- GSpinks
August 21, 2012 at 4:30pm
Yeah, what we need is an explicit right to vote that can't be taken away without triggering strict scrutiny review. It would get rid of the canard that you need to register first.
- chaitless
August 21, 2012 at 4:39pm
Mr. Noah, I believe you may have unfairly combined Pennsylvania's efforts to impose new voter id standards with Ohio's efforts to eliminate certain voting privileges. Indeed, Pennsylvania did not save any money by requiring that voters demonstrate they are not somebody else. On the other hand, Ohio probably saved a few dollars by telling poll workers to stay home. States have some authority when it comes to voting standards. Maybe the voting rights act should be reexamined on the basis of the statewide conduct of Pennsylvania but Ohio's conduct probably left some money in the treasury for someone's retirement party.
- Doug12
August 21, 2012 at 6:00pm
The core challenge of liberalism is to recognize, in those seemingly not like us, our own vulnerabilities and potential -- and to comport ourselves accordingly. Protecting minority voter rights is, therefore, a foundational liberal principal, and a well-written & researched article, like this one, about how our nation still falls short in this regard is the essence of excellence in left-leaning journalism. I get that online magazines need clicks. Hopefully TNR will not try to gin these up via columnists who manufacture outrage by the inch. After all, last I checked, commenting is still free on Slate.....
- Wonderland
August 21, 2012 at 7:12pm
Rigging the vote in favor of Republicans by redistricting and voter suppression was something Karl Rove dreamed up years ago. He's made it clear that he only wants one party having major power in America, and now the whole GOP is marching behind him. Some of the GOP's tactics mentioned here remind me of the Nazi Party's shenanigans while Hitler was coming to power. E.g., people in Jewish districts in Germany were discouraged from going to the polls by gangs of Brownshirt thugs. This behavior by the GOP is an assault on democracy itself. We haven't witnessed this stuff in America since the KKK South. Oddly, it was the Republicans who stood up for blacks in that police state. Karl Rove is not an extremist in most of his political beliefs. He has disdain for Sarah Palin and the Tea Partiers, for instance. But he does have one fanatic political belief--that only one party should have significant power in our country. And in that respect he's very close to Hitler and Lenin. Can a democratic America stop him and his GOP thugs? I hope so.
- magboy47.
August 22, 2012 at 2:40am
Great piece, why isn't this front and center in the MSM? I agree with magboy47 on Rove, etc. I'm worried. The money heavily on their side. I'm praying the people of America will see what's happening and stand up for our democracy, on the state level too. The people are being victimized by centrally written pro money legislation. People object strenuously to drilling, mines, etc, in their neck of the woods - to no avail. Big business wants to do this or that regardless of the impact on the environment or the local economy, they do it. It's one of the issues in Wisconsin, also in Alaska, also with the gas pipeline, fracking; EPA, seeking better air & water, has become the bad guy.
- Sophia
August 22, 2012 at 1:18pm
Also - the sheer racism of the attempts to suppress the vote. Along with the medieval, anti-woman, anti-environment, anti-worker, pro-gun, pro-war, anti-education, anti-poor/middle class agenda, aiming to crush diversity - how on earth did this come about? Dark ages.
- Sophia
August 22, 2012 at 1:20pm
I'd offer three reasons why it came about, Sophia: 1) Demographics -- the Republican Party is caught in a bind formed by two opposing forces, a pull toward inclusiveness (of Hispanic Americans particularly) to compensate for the decline of the white non-college population, and a stronger opposing pull toward a paranoid resentment of immigrants on the part of that white non-college population. This has led to a kind of leap-frog process where everyone has to prove themselves more conservative than they would need to be if this demographic pressure were to vanish. 2) Money -- it's long been proven that rich conservatives spend their $$ more effectively than rich Democrats/Progressives do; with the funding of everything from the Heritage Institute to FOX to the Tea Party being done in such a focused and gimlet-eyed way, a relatively small number of super-wealthy conservatives have managed to put their fringe ideological agenda -- essentially a roll-back of the New Deal -- at the center of the GOP's political profile. This is a problem for the party of course, as they want the money but they have to duck and weave to hide the real import of that agenda for the country. 3) Obama -- the actual presence of a non-white president and first lady in the White House has just been too much for some people; my own impression since 2008 is that a certain segment of Americans feels an irrational and visceral horror at the thought of a black couple having sex in the White House. Certainly the anger and hatred, otherwise difficult to explain, are perceptible to anyone who looks closely.
- ironyroad
August 22, 2012 at 4:49pm
Sophia and irony, you both touched upon racial motives for this ugly, anti-American behavior by the GOP. I have to admit, when Obama first got elected, before he took office, it felt a bit odd to me, too, that a black couple (okay, a half-black guy) would be occupying the White House. I couldn't believe it. It was almost like a dream--a good one. I was happy we broke the color barrier in the Oval Office--it was a long time coming. And I lived in a mostly-black city for over 10 years. Think what people who have had almost no contact with blacks in their lives have thought since the 2008 presidential election. To many of them it's a nightmare. And they want that nightmare over. These people are a minority among Republican voters, but there are enough millions of them to give the GOP the courage to suppress non-white voters (they are also suppressing Latinos big time). And the GOP rationalizes their actions by saying it's about democracy--making sure there are no people voting who don't legally deserve to. They don't even see themselves as racists. But they and the millions who support them are. We are, indeed, sliding back toward the Dark Ages. But the main problem here is not racism--it's voter suppression. In another country and another time, white people might be those who are suppressed at the polls. We need to bring up the fact that those being denied the vote are non-white, but more importantly, we need to emphasize how chilling voter suppression is in itself. It's the first big step toward a police state. And this time it won't be restricted to the KKK South.
- magboy47.
August 22, 2012 at 8:21pm
I think voter suppression is more of a symptom, but I'd agree that the cause is not so much racism itself as the Republicans' desire to exploit any motivation or feeling (including racial horror) among their base to get an edge in the competition.
- ironyroad
August 22, 2012 at 10:19pm