Please get it straight: the concern is about “polling place Photo ID restrictions” not “Voter ID”.
I’ve tried to warn progressives about this for years, to little avail, but discussing concerns about “Voter ID” is akin (pun intended?) to talking about “Legitimate Rape”.
After all, everyone is against “legitimate rape”! But using that phrase, as most instinctively seem to understand, allows for the misleading subconscious notion idea that there is some other kind of rape that is less “legitimate”.
In the same way, “Voter ID” is quite reasonable sounding — after all, who could be against the reasonable sounding idea of identifying oneself before voting? — but Republican-enacted polling place Photo ID restrictions are a different matter all together. Republicans know that very well, even if Democrats still can’t seem to get it.
Both phrases, “Legitimate Rape” and “Voter ID”, each reasonable sounding enough, miss the point and are tremendously misleading. Republican vote suppressors know that, so they love it when Democrats and progressives and voting rights advocates use the phrase “Voter ID” instead of “polling place Photo ID restrictions.”
The fact is, the majority of states already require some form of reasonable identification of voters before voting, at least at the polling place. For that matter, federal law — the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) of 2002 — already requires “Voter ID” in all 50 states when voting for the first time at the polling place, if the voter did not register in person and present ID at that time…
So long as there are plenty of ways to identify oneself — bank statement, utility bill, paycheck stub, driver’s license, signature matching, even a signed affidavit (or, if the vote suppressors weren’t just pulling a scam here, they’d suggest a cell phone photo taken of voters who can’t present any ID at the time of voting) etc. — “Voter ID” in and of itself isn’t really a problem.
It is the restrictive, narrowly tailored state-issued Photo ID requirement restrictions at the polling place which are a problem, since some 22 million — disproportionately Democratic-leaning — legal voters in America, simply do not possess the type of ID required to vote under these new, GOP-enacted disenfranchising restrictions. And Republicans know it.
Here’s just one example. In South Carolina, it has already been the law, for years, that voters present Voter ID before voting at the polling place. The state’s already very strict law had required one of three types of ID be presented: 1) A state-issued drivers license, 2) A state-issued photo ID card, or 3) A voter registration card as sent to each voter by the county. The state’s new Republican-enacted polling place Photo ID restriction law simply attempted to take away that third option, the voter registration card. (And, thankfully, that new restriction has been blocked, for now, as it was found to violate the federal Voting Rights Act, since it disproportionately disenfranchises African-American voters, according to the state’s own data.)
When Democrats and progressives talk about concerns about “Voter ID”, they are simply giving a gift to the Republican vote suppressors.
It took years of our banging the drum here to make clear the difference between “Voter Fraud” and “Election Fraud”. While voter fraud is incredibly rare, and virtually non-existent at the polling place (the only place where polling place Photo ID restrictions could possibly deter it), election fraud, on the other hand, as usually carried out by campaigns and/or election insiders remains a very serious threat to elections. The voters are doing just fine. Leave them alone! A single election insider, however, thanks to privatized, untransparent registration and tabulation systems, have the ability to flip the results of an entire election in a matter of seconds with very little probability of detection.
Though it’s taken years, most Election Integrity advocates and good progressives now finally understand the vast difference between “voter fraud” and “election fraud” and usually use the correct terms to discuss the correct thing, even as the Republican vote suppressors continue to opportunistically conflate those two terms to make their fake case for polling place Photo ID restrictions. But, when it comes to the fight against disenfranchising polling place Photo ID restrictions, too many Democrats, progressives and even Election Integrity and voting rights advocates fall into the GOP trap of referring to harmless sounding “Voter ID”.
Is it any wonder then that polls consistently show that a majority of Americans believe “Voter ID” laws are just fine, a fact that the GOP vote suppressors and “voter fraud” fraudsters are all too happy to trumpet when arguing how “reasonable” it is to simply “require voters to identify themselves before voting”?
That’s been the long con trap that has been set by the Republican vote suppressors, and it’s maddening to see so many good progressives still falling for it, even today, by playing into the bad guys hands and using that completely misleading phrase.
Earlier today I taped a segment on the David Pakman Show where this issue came up, so I thought I’d expand a bit more upon it here, once and for all. Not to single out David, since the problem comes up in virtually every interview I do on these matters, and every time I see any segment on TV or in the newspaper that deals with this. [Update: Here’s my video conversation with David.]
Yes, words do matter in the fight for voting rights. The bad guys know that. So, how long will it take — how many perfectly legal voters must lose their fundamental right to vote — until the good guys finally figure it out?
Yes, the words you use do matter. Just ask Frank Luntz.
I feel the same way about “Entitlements”. I could just scream when I hear a Democrat utter this focus-grouped word. One term we should use is Social Welfare program. Or choose your own, just stop using the term Conservatives use because they specifically chose those words for their negative connotations.
And on that same topic, Dan, they are not “Conservatives”! Stop doing them the favor of using that word they use, completely inaccurately, for it’s positive connotations!
🙂
While I agree wholeheartedly with your advice on framing the issue, there is something to said for taking back words, or phrases, that conservatives have turned into pejoratives. The trick, obviously, is knowing when to take each tack. VoterID is one where we must reframe the issue to make it clear what conservatives are up to. On the other hand, there is nothing wrong with being “liberal” or championing “entitlements”.
We must embrace the good that has come from liberals, entitlements, and the like. Don’t let a good thing become a derogatory term.
I’m not sure how many women would agree that “legitimate rape” sounds reasonable enough…you’re dead on about “voter ID,” though.
Point well taken Brad, and funny you should print this today…oh wait a few minutes Jon’s on, but do I have an interesting story about my phone call from the dems today! Later.
What is your preferred term instead of “conservative”? I HATE that they’ve succeeded in establishing “conservative” for themselves. They have no right to it, they’ve just usurped it because it provides such good shelter for their real agenda.
In my local Move to Amend group we have experimented with “corporatist”, which works in the sense that the person you’re talking to seems to get it without having to ask what you mean, but it can seem awkward, and as a plural it feels even more awkward. Maybe if we managed to keep using it a lot it would stop feeling awkward? (Obviously, we can’t say “Republicans” because a lot of the people we’re trying to convince have called themselves Republicans all their lives.)
One man I know is using “neo-conservative” (shortened to “neo-con” when repeated in later sentences). I like it because it’s a sort of fake-sounding word and seems to subtly push the idea of their fakeness, and also sets up an easy contrast with the idea of “traditional American conservative” who was honest and decent and realistically careful in finacial matters.
I hadn’t ever thought about “voterID” vs “polling place photoID restrictions”. You’re right, and I will try to say that every time now.
I also agree with Dan about “entitlements” and have been saying “earned benefits” instead. (I have sympathy with DVH’s feelings since “entitlements” is a good word with a proud history, but, at least for now, where I live, you can’t use it in a conversation where you’re trying to attract someone towards changing their mind and their vote. It has been successfully poisoned by the corporatist propaganda machine to signify something that you want but haven’t done anything to deserve.)(Incredible what they can do with constant repetition.)
So anyway, now that co bear is over, and I know that’s phonetic spelling…I get this call today from the Democratic party. Well, for once they were polite(even though the guy asked me four times for money after I had told him my kid had just called me for money and I hadn’t started my new job yet) but as these calls go… he was relatively polite (cuz he actually listened and responded directly to what I said.) So anyway Brad, I told him I would consider them if they (the Democratic partee) would do something about electronic voting machines. Seriously, I asked him if they are not complicite in election fraud becuz they don’t do anything about the easily manipulated electronic voting system. Maybe more people should bark back as I did at these numbskull party hacks! Did my civic duty for the day and took my friend’s great grand niece swimming in the river. There are party Creeps on both sides of the fence, but the other side smells far worse! 🙂 But still, to heal this this joint is gonna take both. You should have seen the son-of-a bitch that was riding my ass on the way home. Pulled over and got his license plate though!
Well, thank you for letting me post. Now maybe, you ought to take your message the these filers:
New post on Free and Equal PA
Supreme Court Briefing Schedule and Oral Argument Date Set
by freeandequalpa
The Supreme Court, in this Order, granted Petitioners’ request to expedite the appeal from the Commonwealth Court’s order denying their request to preliminarily enjoin the Photo ID Law. Petitioners’ brief is due August 30. The Commonwealth’s brief is due September 7. According to the session list (see page 4), the Court will hear oral argument on September 13 in Philadelphia.
freeandequalpa | August 23, 2012 at 8:38 pm | Tags: Applewhite, Pennsylvania Supreme Court, Photo ID Law | Categories: Uncategorized | URL: http://wp.me/p2qD6U-3J
I don’t know why often the first time I hit a link it misdirects me…but here’s a better link:
http://freeandequalpa.wordpress.com/2012/08/23/supreme-court-briefing-schedule-and-oral-argument-date-set/
Oh yeah, and then there’s this:
I Ride with Planned Parenthood Action Fund
SPONSORED
by
CHRISTINE
The Women are Watching bus tour arrives in Missouri today to tell Todd Akin what we think about his ignorant comments and dangerous agenda.
Be there with us. Sponsor the Women are Watching bus tour for $10 per mile and help the Planned Parenthood Action Fund protect and promote women’s health this election season and beyond.
Sponsor a Mile
Dear Ancient,
Today, the Women are Watching bus tour arrives in Rep. Todd Akin’s home state of Missouri. We’ve got a message for him:
Listen up! We’ve heard your outrageous and ignorant comments about rape, and we know all about your dangerous agenda for women’s health. We are watching, we are angry, we are fighting back — and in November, we’ll be voting against you and all who think like you.
That’s what the Women are Watching bus tour is all about. Educating voters. Confronting anti-women’s health politicians. Fighting to protect women’s health and rights.
Be there with us by sponsoring the Women are Watching bus tour. Every $10 donation makes you a sponsor of one mile of the bus tour — and will help the Planned Parenthood Action Fund protect and promote women’s health all year long.
The frightening thing about Rep. Akin’s ideology is how common it is among anti-women’s health lawmakers. The Republican Party platform adopted this week calls for a ban on all abortion, with no exceptions for cases of rape or incest. And both Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan have supported constitutional amendments defining “personhood” as beginning at conception, which would also mean a complete ban on abortion with no exceptions.
While the Romney/Ryan campaign has scrambled to distance itself from the firestorm Rep. Akin started, they haven’t changed their mind on personhood. Well, they can run from Todd Akin’s rhetoric. But they can’t hide from their own record. That’s why the Women are Watching bus tour is traveling more than 5,000 miles across 16 states — to reach every single voter we can who cares about women and health care and rights, and make certain that they know just how bad Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan would be for them.
Click here to sponsor a mile (or more!) of the bus tour. Your donation will help the Planned Parenthood Action Fund work day and night to defeat politicians opposed to safe and legal abortion — from Mitt Romney on down. Your support will give us the resources to keep fighting for women’s health long after Election Day.
Thank you for everything you do to support the Planned Parenthood Action Fund and the women, men, and young people who are relying on us to protect their access to health care.
Sincerely,
Cecile Richards
Cecile Richards, President
Planned Parenthood Action Fund
Planned Parenthood Action Fund
visit plannedparenthoodaction.org
I have no doubt but that the words the Rabid Right Wingnuts use have been carefully chosen for maximum impact — real psy-ops stuff.
It’s insidious. I have caught myself using the word “conservatives” because it came to mind and jumped out, not because I agreed with the use of the term.
I agree with you Brad. We should not use those words that seem harmless but are anything but.
However, maybe we can take a page from their playbook and design a clever and memorable term or phrase that would work as well but be easier to remember and say.
(It’s hard, though. I couldn’t come up with one… yet…)
Hey Lora, what’s the difference between a stinking conservative and a real conservative? MONEY 🙂 Thought I might try to help you out there.
Clarification: and how much of it they have! 🙂
Okay, one more clarification: or how much they want to get at other people’s expense. There, now somebody has said it!
Shared sacrifice my ass!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Like I said somewhere else here recently, you want another war, we the people better be damn sure the draft is in place , and get rid of the loop holes for the rich kids. I miss Congressman Murtha!