No further questions, your honor…
Kirk Watson just demonstrated why it’s a bad idea to tangle with a trial lawyer. Tommy Williams has spent the last two hours arguing that he wants the Voter ID vetted in a Committee of the Whole so that all senators — not just those on, say, Senate State Affairs — get to weigh in on the issue. He’s all about inclusiveness.
Question from Watson: Couldn’t the lieutenant governor under the old rules just refer the Voter ID bill to the Committee of the Whole?
Williams: Yes.
Watson: So only difference in this new process is, instead of requiring support of two-thirds of the Senate, it would only take a simple majority (to pass Voter ID)?
Williams: That would be correct.
Dewhurst has sent his driver home. This is not going to be over anytime soon.
Anonymous says:
But if it’s in the Committee of the Whole, doesn’t it still have to go before the full Senate again when it is not acting as a committee but as the full Senate?
I genuinely don’t know the Senate Rules or answer to this question and I hope someone will answer.
My take on it is if my assumption is correct, you would still need 21.
Reply »
Spiro Eagleton says:
Sounds like Watson did better than his bombing on Hardball.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Dewhurst could have avoided this whole thing if he would have referred the bill to the committee of the whole, appointed the chairman, and then vote the bill out of committee with a simple majority. The bill only needs a simple majority to reach the floor if it is the first bill referred out of committee. He could have solved this problem rather than letting members cut each other up and offering Tommy Williams up for slaughter.
Reply »
Gritsforbreakfast says:
The won’t be that late, they’re just steamrolling it through along completely partisan lines, Craddick style.
Reply »
Gritsforbreakfast says:
Shapleigh’s point of order, OTOH, may be onto something.
Reply »
Texas Democrat says:
Anon, this Voter ID bill is CRAP and obvious the GOP will try to disenfranchise the elderly and minority voters.
Remember the Ohio disaster in 2004, when then-Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell (R) disenfranchised African American voters during the close Presidential election ?
Folks never forgot what Blackwell did and he paid the price BIG TIME at the polls when he ran for governor in 2006.
Don’t be shocked if Dewhurst falls FLAT on his face, and if he seeks reelection to a 3rd term as Lieutenant Governor, he might face heavy competition in a GOP primary from State AG Greg Abbott (R), who is getting bored in his current job.
Reply »
Burka's Research Assistant says:
That’s a fascinating interpretation that takes some liberty with the facts, Texas Democrat
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Texas Democrat, I get so sick and tired of hearing your ilk say that Voter ID is all about disenfranchisement of elderly and minority voters. No one ever just stands up and says what it’s really all about, and that is Democrats WANT for those in Texas illegally to be able to vote, because they know they are casting ballots for Democrats! Of course no one ever admits that’s what it’s about, because then Democrats would basically be conceding that they are winning elections illegally.
Reply »
Phillip Martin Reply:
January 14th, 2009 at 5:21 pm
Who is in Texas illegally that is voting?
(I didn’t know Rep. Berman posted on this blog…)
Reply »
JUICE says:
Did I fall asleep and wake up in May?
Reply »
Texas Democrat says:
Anon, look at the Minnesota Senate race, it’s a mess up there and Coleman is taking it to court, even though Franken has declared victory.
http://www.ourcampaigns.com/RaceDetail.html?RaceID=6856
Reply »
Patricia Kilday Hart says:
“The Democrats would basically be conceding that they are winning elections illegally.”
The exchange between Royce West and Tommy Williams was particularly interesting this afternoon. West kept asking, where is the empirical evidence that widespread voter fraud exists in Texas? Williams didn’t provide any.
So, anon at 5:16, what should William have answered?
Reply »
blackroseoftexas says:
If the Republicans could produce evidence of illegal voting, they would. They don’t want to admit that Democrats are beating them fair and square because they would have to accept that they have failed at governing the state in a way that is fair to all Texans. As we all try to survive this recession I hope that all legal voters remember this day come 2010 and beyond.
Reply »
anon says:
Has everyone already forgotten about the Acorn scandal just a few months ago??
Oh,yeah, no widespread voter fraud there–only because they happened to get caught in that instance.
Reply »
Patricia Kilday Hart says:
That involved repeat voter registrations….not multiple or illegal voting. Are there large number of illegal voters showing up at polling places? Where? Where are the district attorneys in those counties?
Reply »
synonymous says:
anon@6:20pm: the Acorn “scandal” was nothing more than fake attempts at registration.
Acorn is required to turn in all voter’s registration cards, no matter how dubious. After that, it’s up to registrars to verify that the registrations are real. If I recall, Acorn brought attention to the questionable ballots.
Do you really think someone would have been able to be approved as Mickey Mouse, be mailed a registration card AND vote without anyone questioning?
Reply »
Tom says:
I made this point in another topic, but how many have heard of the use of politiqueras in South Texas. They do their share of manipulating the electoral system. Requiring a photo id at the polling place is not enough, reform should also include verification of identity for mail-in ballot requests.
Reply »
anon says:
Seriously? “Nothing more than fake attempts at registration” Is not registration the step one generally takes before voting. The bottom line is voter ID would have prevented these types of fraud in the first place.
I am baffled that when voter fraud has demonstrably taken place, it is dismissed by the enablers as “so what, that’s just registration.”
Sadly, a good chunk of the other side thinks it makes perfect sense that illegal (that’s right they are breaking the law) immigrants and felons should be able to vote. Why? of course we all know why.
Reply »
Dexter says:
Anon,
Again, “where is the empirical evidence that widespread voter fraud exists in Texas? Williams didn’t provide any.
So, anon at 5:16, what should William have answered?”
Please cite any evidence in Texas. Also,
_____________________________________________
Texas Election Code Sec. 11.002
(4) has not been finally convicted of a felony or, if so convicted, has:
(A) fully discharged the person’s sentence, including any term of incarceration, parole, or supervision, or completed a period of probation ordered by any court; or
______________________________
Know existing law be for you comment on proposed law.
P.S. Watch less Fox News
Reply »
synonymous says:
anon, why can’t you understand that filling out a fake registration form isn’t voter fraud? It takes the act of voting in a fraudulent manner to commit voter fraud.
Voter ID won’t work when you’re filling out a form since it only pertains to the actual act of voting.
For the record, I think that only people who are legally allowed to vote in the United States should be allowed to vote. Honestly, why would someone who is here illegally get themselves on the government’s radar by doing something like voting? Your argument makes no sense.
Reply »
anon Reply:
January 14th, 2009 at 9:42 pm
Why the hell do you think they fill out a fake registration form in the first place?? For the adrenaline rush? kinda like stealing a snickers bar as a kid?? It’s so you can vote under that fake name–which, when no ID is required, is exceedingly easy.
Seriously, in 2009, who doesn’t have an ID?? And for that miniscule portion of society that doesn’t, we will give them a free one–as long as ACORN, doesn’t procure it for them.
Reply »
Dexter says:
Anon,
Obviously you don’t know any indigent, homeless people or nuns..
10 Nuns denied right to vote for lacking ID in Indiana
http://bulletin.aarp.org/yourworld/politics/articles/voter_id_law_thwarts.html
Reply »
synonymous says:
First off, no need to curse, please.
The Acorn registrars filled them out for cash. Did you not read the story all the way through?
Reply »
txasslm says:
ms. hart and others here,
all the “empirical” evidence that the good senator from dallas needs is that 70% of surveyed texans want a voter ID bill, as shown in texaspolitics’ survey last summer: http://texaspolitics.laits.utexas.edu/11_2_3.html
empirical evidence has never been a good litmus test for passing a bill. otherwise, for example, we would not have seen the DWI threshold reduced a few years ago. asking for legislation to be passed based on empirical evidence is like asking us to elect legislators based on intelligence — it just ain’t gonna happen. instead we elect people based on emotions and emotional appeal, AKA human nature.
as the late houston rep. hawkins menefee said, it all depends on whose ox is getting gored.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
My 5 year old son says the other day “You know, there has never been a break in our neighborhood in all the time we have lived here. Why should we lock our doors? It sends a bad message that we do not trust our neighbors”.
I think my kid is just as qualified to serve in the Texas Senate as a Dem against Voter ID.
Reply »
txasslm says:
anon at 11:06 p.m. — z.i.n.g.!
Reply »
Gritsforbreakfast says:
11:06, your five year old is a very sensitive child and wise beyond his years.
But your analogy overall doesn’t quite work. In the case of voter ID, the relevant comparison would be your kid saying, accurately, “there’s no documented record in the entire state of a single break-in during the memory of anyone living.”
Tommy Williams went back 50 years to research exceptions to the 2/3 rule, but apparently his research dug up ZERO examples of documented voter fraud. Maybe you ought to trust your neighbors a little more.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Maybe the Senate could teach another lesson to children. When you can’t win, just change the rules. Why shouldn’t we apply this to high school football, SAT tests, etc.? Follow the history of this issue. Dewhurst spent millions last fall on TV commercials about voter ID. This was all about him pandering to the right to prepare for his next campaign…whatever it turns out to be. I agree with voter ID as a good policy, but this was a BAD day for the Texas Senate. Tommy Williams was offered up as a sacrificial lamb by Dewhurst because he didn’t want to get his hands bloody in the Senate’s history books. Follow the money/history of this issue. Of course Dewhurst was behind this.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Grits–
You’re joking right?
The point behind the “keep your doors locked” analogy is that, while we may wish for a world in which we could keep our doors unlocked, the reality of the world is that there are millions of dishonest people who will try very hard to get something though illegal means that they might not be able to get other wise. This is why we lock the doors to our house. Trust is nice, but I open up my doors to those I know I can trust.
Voter fraud is a reality. If not, you can bet it is on the way. Ten years ago almost nobody gave a moments thought to indentity theft. Now it is rampant and often very hard to stop. Texas has a rich history of voter irregularities used by party bosses to bring about a desired candidate’s election (particular in Democratic strongholds in South Texas– read Robert Caro’s Means of Ascent). Voter fraud is a tool that is too tempting to those who are determined to use any means necessary to win elections. The time to do something about it is now. The idea that any person who cares about the integrity of elections would be against this is hard to fathom. This is why this issue has such a high level of suppport among the voting public.
Reply »
Gritsforbreakfast says:
“Voter fraud is a reality. If not …”
So it’s a reality that cannot be documented, only speculated about? That’s not exactly my definition of “reality.”
I understood your “keep your doors locked” analogy, I just pointed out its invalid. Your comparison with identity theft is particularly telling, because ID theft is an actual, documentable problem. If you could show 1/1000 the amount of voter fraud as we see of identity theft, I’d be right there with you on voter ID. But it’s just not a big problem – in fact, supporters can’t show it’s any problem at all.
BTW, my front door pretty much stays unlocked except when I leave the house. I like my neighbors. I’m not afraid of them.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Yes, Grits, lets just wait for some unscrupulous scum to manipulate an election in Texas through voter fraud before we do anything about it. You are either a naive person or a disingenous person. My suspiscion is the latter, since you know full well that Voter ID would ruin the opportunities for you Dems to rig elections, an art that your party has become quite expert in over the course of the history of Texas politics.
Reply »
Gritsforbreakfast says:
12:29 – Yours is a typical response on this topic: Lose an argument, attack the messenger. It’s kind of pitiful, really.
Bottom line: You’re ignoring the unintended (or perhaps intended?) consequences concerning people who don’t have a photo ID, discussed by many others on these strings.
If there was zero evidence of voter fraud but also zero evidence of harm from requiring voter ID, you’d have a valid point. But in this case the damage from voter suppression is concrete while the harm you’re supposedly preventing has never occurred (that you or other proponents can demonstrate) in the real world.
Not every eligible voter has a photo ID so the requirement will prevent some of them from voting. That’s for certain. What’s uncertain is why you think this is so urgent given the complete lack of evidence this has ever been a problem.
To turn the tables, I think many, MANY supporters of voter ID are disingenuous: They back this because they think the voters mostly affected – the elderly, disabled, etc. – are predominantly Democrats. I don’t know for sure that’s true, but I don’t hear that obvious motivation admitted to very often by proponents, even though we all know that’s what this debate, at its root, is really about.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
The consequence of “voter suppression” is a favorite liberal canard when common sense, widely supported Voter ID laws are considered. If you had bothered to research Voter ID laws that have been implemented, you would find that such laws are carefully tailored to allow all eligible voters plenty of opportunity to exercise their voting rights by availing themselves of several different options to obtain proper ID to meet the requirments of the law. The so-called “concrete” harm is occasioned by those who do not take responsibility.
Zero evidence of voter fraud? Guess again.
“Backing this up in 2005, the bi-partisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, led by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State Jim Baker, reported that the U.S. Department of Justice had conducted more than 180 investigations into election fraud since 2002. Federal prosecutors had charged 89 individuals and convicted 52 for election-fraud offenses, including falsifying voter-registration information and vote buying. That is why this bi-partisan commission supported laws that require voters to show a photo ID before voting using the Federal Real ID law.”
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=23731
This is just what has been discovered. Wake up pal and start living in the real world.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
txsslm gets it!!
It quite frankly doesn’t make a damn bit of difference how much, if any, empirical evidence there is. In this world we live in, perception is reality.
The perception in this case is that voter fraud is a problem, whether or not that is a reality is not the issue. Since that is the perception for an overwhelming majority of Texans, for the Texas Legislature, it is reality, and it must be addressed sooner rather than later.
Reply »
Don't Mess w/Pink Reply:
January 15th, 2009 at 4:33 pm
“The perception in this case is that voter fraud is a problem, whether or not that is a reality is not the issue. Since that is the perception for an overwhelming majority of Texans, for the Texas Legislature, it is reality, and it must be addressed sooner rather than later.”
Two sentences beautifully illustrating that statesmanship is dead, at least with respect to the Republican leadership in the Senate. True leaders, instead of inflaming and exploiting the public’s faulty perception and twisting it for political gain, would convince their constiuents of the faulty basis of their perception and take action (or not) accordingly.
It’s a sad day.
Reply »
larrydvd says:
the Democrats make you show a photo ID to vote at their convention. sounds like they are suppressing the vote.
by the way, everyone knows women, minorities and the elderly don’t have ID’s. only young white males have photo ID’s so they can cash their welfare checks, apply for social services, rent apartments, turn on their electricity, drive, get a library card, etc…
Reply »
Anonymous says:
Everyone is still missing the point. This issue is bigger than voter id. This issue has to do with how the Senate fundamentally operates.
The GOP senators took the Newt Gingrich approach to leadership by assuming they will be the majority party forever, therefore not thinking about the downside of going around the 2/3rds vote. Most of the GOP senators weren’t in the Senate when they had 8-11 members and were protected by the 2/3rds rule. They are operating in the here and now. History is doomed to repeat itself with this kind of vision.
Whitmire had the most profound statement in the whole debate when he told Williams “You have just shown the party activists that you can go around the 2/3rds rule whenever you want and the pressure to do it again for other issues will be intense….I hope you can take the heat.” What’s next?
Any of you who think this issue is as simple as voter id are naive. You probably don’t think Dewhurst had anything to do with this too. He is a micro-manager and he knew every word of Williams’ resolution before it was drafted. Bet on it, this story isn’t over as far as Dewhurst’s involvement.
Reply »