On March 12, the Civil Rights division of Attorney General Eric Holder’s Department of Justice halted the implementation of Texas’ new voter identification laws. The battle over voter identification is quickly becoming a national controversy, but Democrats might soon find that what seems like a slam-dunk issue to motivate the liberal base could soon drive a wedge between the party and its most loyal voting blocs – minority voters.

Texas is one of many states that are introducing or already have on the books laws that require voters to identify themselves as residents of their particular district prior to casting their ballots. This and other voter ID laws have become the subject of much political bickering and partisan rancor of late. Now, the DOJ’s halting of this and a similar law in South Carolina elevates this matter to national prominence and, in an election year, it will become yet another presidential-level controversy. But as partisans on both sides of the aisle get lost in the weeds of an issue and become mired in talking points and positioning statements, the common sense of the thing can become confused or lost entirely. This is one such issue – for those outside of the Beltway, voter ID requirements are simply not the hot-button many in the D.C. political complex seem to think it is. Common sense will win this day; as of this writing, it is those who favor voter ID laws who are on the winning end of the argument.

The argument for voter identification laws centers on fraud at the polls. Those who favor ID laws say that any election fraud is a crime and should be deterred with whatever means possible – requiring identification being the most logical first step to address this concern. Opponents of voter identification say that voter fraud is not an endemic problem. Even if it was, requiring people have identification is an onerous requirement that disproportionally dissuades low income and minority voters (who just happen to vote Democratic in large numbers) from heading to their polling place on election day.

The opposition to voter ID laws is largely Democratic; even MSNBC host Rev. Al Sharpton led a demonstration against voter ID laws on his network last week – castigating those who advocate for voter identification as actually being motivated by base racist sentiments against President Obama. “We’re living in a time where officials can complain about voter fraud and it’s less than 1 percent,” said Sharpton. “They can complain because it’s a black president and that’s their real complaint.”

But here is where common sense crashes head on with the chosen Democratic talking point of the day – wait for it… most minority voters have identification.

To hear those who oppose voter ID laws, you would think that getting an ID amounts to a Jim Crowe-era poll tax. Indeed, if residents were charged for state-issued identification cards, this may amount to a poll tax. They do not.

Those millions of minority voters who loyally punch the ticket for Democrats every two-to-four years do, in fact, have identification. They need it to enter many commercial buildings, get on an airplane, purchase alcohol or cigarettes, receive government assistance, apply for a job, check into a hotel, fill a prescription, rent a car or even walk into a night club or bar. These voters do not see having an identification card as an overtly onerous requirement and do not feel that their local bodega is engaging in hateful discrimination when they request their customers produce ID for them.

Furthermore, in the 17 states where there were photo ID requirements for voters in 2008, black and Hispanic turnout was up to historic levels. If voter ID laws are intended to suppress minority turnout, they fail spectacularly.

Some may be swayed by the fiery rhetorical chords struck by those who evoke the passionate arguments strongly voiced by the bygone Civil Rights-era fighters who use the same language when talking about requiring voter identification as they would about the crowds of freedom fighters that braved the onslaught of canine units and fire hoses in the 1960s. That emotional argument is persuasive, but the deliberative minority voter is plagued by questions about the legitimacy of this fight; particularly as they thumb the identification cards in their own pockets.

They must think you’re stupid. Why else would those who advocate for less control over voting suggest erroneously that voter ID requirements are a burden for a yet-undefined class of voters? No one wants to suggest that opponents of voter ID are actively protecting the instances of voter fraud where they exist (Yes, Virginia, there is voter fraud). By suggesting, however, that those who advocate for vote ID are trying to marginalize minority voters, that would provoke many a responsible and deliberative minatory voter to ask ‘why the Democratic party believes that I and so many of my friends, family and acquaintances are unable to secure identification for ourselves?’ The end point of that Socratic line of thought would not be favorable to Democrats.

The Democratic party has enjoyed the legacy support of black and, to a lesser extent, Hispanic voters for generations. They won their support amidst the battle for equal protection in an era when that was relevant. But they risk overplaying their hand – there is no such thing as static voting blocs. Allegiances change, priorities evolve and voters can and do think for themselves. By attempting to create racially divisive battles where they do not exist, they risk this loyalty by making this constituency truly question the logic behind their reflexive opposition to so many procedural political battles. Not every issue can be continually elevated to the gravity of the battle for civil rights – at some point, minority voters will tune this overused argument out completely.

There will always be those minority advocates who tow the Democratic line and never dare express a contrarian thought. Their voices are routinely augmented by the media megaphone, so it would be easy to forget that there are an ever increasing number of dissenting minorities. The Democratic party risks their advantage with minorities as more and more black and Hispanic voters ask why the party they love and are loyal too seems to view them as incapable of even procuring an ID.

‘Do they think we’re stupid,’ asks the loyally Democratic minority voter. The Democratic party better not hope that in those quiet, introspective moments, they determine the answer to be ‘yes.’

---

Follow Noah Rothman @Noah_C_Rothman

Comments (0)

ALSO IN...

2012 Election