Voter ID: The real stakes (updated)
In a phone interview earlier today, Craig Eiland told me that the Carter-Baker commission testified that Voter I.D. would result in 150,000 voters being disenfranchised statewide. That is an average of 1,000 per legislative district. If this average held true, based on the electoral numbers, Democrats would lose 7 seats in the House.
* * * *
After I posted this information, I received an off-the-record call from a representative of a prominent public official. The representative was calling for himself, not for the official. He said that he had researched the witnesses on the Voter I.D. bill and that he could not find any witnesses from the Carter-Baker commission. In a response to a comment about this post, I said that I would contact Eiland for further information. Here is his source, sent by his office:
“Toby Moore was one of the witnesses at the House Voter ID testimony. He worked with Carter-Baker, and he testified that the low end number of affected voters in Texas would be 150,000.”
“Here’s some quick math to demonstrate that Voter ID would cost Democrats net votes in Texas:
“Texas has 13.5 million voters. Carter-Baker in 2004 and Carter-Ford in 2001 have said that anyway between 5% and 12% of voters won’t have the necessary ID. Meanwhile, Carter-Baker in 2008 said that African Americans are twice as likely as whites NOT to have the necessary ID. Given that 85% to 90% of African Americans support Democrats, it is easy to extrapolate a clear net-loss of votes to Democrats of somewhere between 150,000 and 500,000 net votes.”
Nopers says:
Paul,
Didn’t you just ask the question yesterday about why Democrats are picking battles they cannot win? I guess now you see why.
Reply »
~K Reply:
May 25th, 2009 at 11:02 pm
SB 362 does not include any funding for educating voters on a change in voter law, nor does it allow for any time to educate voters and poll workers on the details of the new law. Without time and funding, SB 362 is voter suppression. Also, keep in mind that the photo i.d. is only available at DPS. DPS stations are few and far between and are often on the outskirts of town.
What makes me sick is that SB 362 has kept the Lege from moving forward on important legislation: access to healthcare for children, benefits for our Iraqi Veterans, college tuition assitance, and wind insurance for farmers — to name a few. All to fix a problem (voter fraud) that has not been proven to exist with in-person voting. Election fraud by election officials has been proven, as has a handful of cases of vote-by-mail fraud where friends and family members aided elderly voters by helping them fill out their mail-in-ballots.
In the case in Pena’s district where there is a pending case on in person voting fraud, how do we know somebody didn’t pay them to say they were told to vote in another person’s name? This case amounted to just handful of votes, and nothing that warrants delaying moving forward on important legislation.
Reply »
theshadow says:
So this is sort of a “prequel” to the redistricting fights.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
As an election judge and former poll watcher, these numbers are hard to imagine. Very hard. Is this study online anywhere?
Reply »
Anon says:
And Dems may lose 3-4 House seats for obstructing the business of the People of Texas, if the Rs use this correctly in the Nov 2010 election in swing districts.
Reply »
Tellnitlikeitis Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 6:38 pm
Anon at 6:19…
Oh, come on. This is nonsense. We heard the same silly garbage in 2003 when Democrats headed for Oklahoma to break a quorum.
House Republicans then held an 88-62 seat advantage. Now, they are clinging to a 76-74 advantage.
Looks like the People of Texas have spoken.
Reply »
B/CS Observer says:
So the D’s average 1,000 illegal voters per house district?
Sorry, these numbers sound alarmist, just like the GOP claims of widespread fraud in every district.
Fraud only matters in high competitive/very close races like Talmage Heflin’s. Talmadge’s days were numbered, but it was pretty clear that there were enough folks who voted illegally, whether intentionally or by accident, to swing the outcome of the election.
Reply »
Tellnitlikeitis Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 6:47 pm
Talmadge screamed fraud…but it wasn’t there. Those ballots were scrutinized every which way.
Same thing happened last fall in the Linda Harper-Brown race up in Irving. Linda, an incumbent GOPer, won by a small handful of votes, triggering a recount.
She deserved to win – and did. They sanitized every ballot among tens of thousands. Its when you put those ballots under the microspope that you would find illegal voters and fraud.
Didn’t happen.
Claims of widespread fraud is nothing but delusion.
And here’s a clue for the kooks: Illegal immigrants stay in the shadows; they don’t expose themselves by emerging to cast a ballot in American democracy.
Reply »
cow droppings Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 7:19 pm
what if they get paid to vote under the name of someone legally registered? Affidavits too such in Pena’s district.
Reply »
Edward's brain Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 7:40 pm
A study of the 2004 presidential election by scholars at Rutgers and Ohio State Universities for the bipartisan Federal Election Assistance Commission found that states with voter ID laws had an overall turnout reduction of 3%, a figure that reached 5.7% among African Americans and 10% among Hispanics. The Texas Conservative Coalition Research Institute states that 37% of Texas residents over the age of 80 do not have driver’s licenses.
In 2008, 8,077,795 people voted for president in Texas. 3% of that is 242,333 people statewide that would be disenfranchised. Broken out over 150 house districts, it’s an averaeg of 1,615 voters per district.
Reply »
Tellnitlikeitis Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:50 pm
Texas has one of the most pathetic voter turnouts in the country…..consistently ranking between 45th and 49th among the 50 states.
The real problem is low turnouts….it certainly isn’t a matter of masses of illegals and others impersonating folks at the polls.
Is there fraud and/or improper handling of absentee ballots?
Yup.
Reply »
el_longhorn says:
Puh-leez. Step out of the shoes of a BurkaBlog reader and into the shoes of the average low-information voter (not dumb, just doesn’t follow the blow by blow action in the lege). What were the D’s doing – asking 10 minutes worth of questions of every bill that was before the House? The horror! I thought the walkout way back when was a mistake, and I think breaking quorum right now would be bad because those things are easy to convey to the public – D’s are afraid to fight, shirking their duties, etc. But when you try to spin this as obstruction, to the low-info voter it sounds like the D’s were just doing their job asking some questions about the bills they were about to vote on.
How are you going to explain the Local and Consent calendar in your mail piece? I just don’t see this playing out as a major issue, especially since it is happening over Memorial Day weekend.
Reply »
chuck Norris redux says:
BS. It is shocking – SHOCKING – that researchers can start with a predetermined conclusion and full in with data. Here is the bottom line – I have been an election judge multiple times and right now you can vote with nothing that provides any assurance at all that you are who you say you are. There is less validation to who you are to pick the ruling elite than there is to get into anyone’s. The rational solution is to need up the provisional voting process if you are afraid that voters with photo I’d for some reason will fall through the cracks. Provisional voting right now is also a complete travesty and deserves a more meaningful role
Reply »
Mike M says:
B/CS Observer, surely you understand. There are not an average of 1,000 of “1,000 illegal voters per house district.” There are no illegal voters in any house districts. However, there are about 1,000 legal voters who will be either deterred or unable to vote if the law passes.
And for those interested in the Carter Baker Report, it is at the following URL:
http://www1.american.edu/ia/cfer/report/full_report.pdf
Reply »
chuck Norris redux says:
For the above post substitute antone’s for anyone’s, and Id for i’d.
Reply »
paulburka says:
Note to readers: I received a call from a staffer who went through the testimony from the Voter I.D. bill and said that he could not find any testimony that supports this post. I will check again with Eiland and provide an update. He’s a little busy right now.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 6:56 pm
Hmmm, he wasn’t too busy to call you in the first place with bad information that you blindly posted without verification.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 6:58 pm
not to mention the only empirical data we have on voter id and its effect on turnout is from georgia and indiana where voter turnout increased after voter id legislation passed.
Reply »
Paul Burka Reply:
May 24th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
To anonymous May 23 @ 6:56 p.m. –
(1) The call came while the House was at recess.
(2) The information was not bad.
(3) Verification was published earlier today.
Reply »
theshadow says:
Maybe the entire 150,000 voters in Texas without an ID all live in one neighborhood.
Reply »
Edward R. Murrow says:
Remember when Ken Yarbrough had about 50 registered voters (only a slight exaggeration) living in his house?
You got to admit it was funny.
Reply »
Edward's braing Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 7:32 pm
Remember when Phil King had like 50 registered voters (only a slight exaggeration) living in his underground bunker/office?
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 7:54 pm
How are voters “disenfranchised”? Are they disenfranchised when they have to have a driver’s license, a social security number, an ID to open a bank or credit card account, ID to cash a personal check or payroll check, ID to go to the doctor/hospital, etc, etc. And for those who argue that many don’t have any ID the question should be “why not”? Also how is it a civil rights violation when it will be required of every voter and is required in our society now as business as usual. Why would anyone be “deterred or unable to vote”? The DPS will give ID to those who do not drive but are of legal age to vote and other forms of ID will also be accepted. Do these so called disenfranchised voters live in a cave or a bubble away from all society? This bill will protect BOTH parties. This behavior of the D’s in the House is is shocking, immature, and is costing the taxpayers time and money if a special is to be called. I’m appalled and so are my D friends and relatives.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 9:04 pm
Try getting out of the walls in your brain and you might find out that there are people with the right to vote who aren’t just like you. If you want, you can think they shouldn’t vote because they’re not “smart” like you, but doing everything you can to make sure they don’t vote is abominable.
Tellnitlikeitis Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:59 pm
Anon at 9:04:
You ought to think before you speak…or pound away at a keyboard.
My mother-in-law lives with us. She is in her upper 80s. Mentally sharp but physically frail.
She has no driver’s license; she has no utility bills or other home records in her name because she is a permanent guest in this home.
She’s a retired teacher. She’s earned her right to vote without barriers…without being wheel-chaired to some waiting line at an DPS office.
Voting is her right, not a privilege. She already has a government issued voter registration card.
She is as legal and valid as you are. And it does not say much about you that you would make this very senior citizen jump through some arbitary hoops in order to remedy a manufactured problem.
We used to support GOPers.
No mas.
Tellnitlikeitis Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 11:03 pm
Ooops.
I meant anonymous at 7:54.
My apologies for anon. at 9:04
Edward R. Murrow says:
You are a bit testy. Get some rest.
BTW, who is Phil King?
Reply »
Fiftycal says:
Uh, there was this little thing last election about voting for a President. You may note that more people vote during a Presidential election than off year elections. And last year people voted against Bush. Bush won’t be on the ballot next election, but his replacements performance will. And with the coming fallout from the demorat vote buying money giveaway, Texas is likely to be in much worse shape than now. So, please, please, dims, keep on delaying the work in the House.
Reply »
cyrus says:
So what’s the Repub’s problem with same day registration w/ID?
Since voter impersonation has yet to be documented and prosecuted in the remotely recent past, what exactly is the motive behind the GOP’s urgent push for voter ID?
The problem is that voter ID will disallow eligible voters – lots of them – from being able to cast a ballot. Pretty simple.
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 9:31 pm
Why will “voter ID disallow eligible voters–lots of them–from being able to cast a ballot”?
Reply »
cyrus Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:44 pm
Well, you have an eligible voter, right? Suppose this otherwise eligible voter doesn’t have a photo ID – for whatever reason. You’re gonna have election judges – neighbors, temporary poll workers essentially – tell someone who’s voted for years with no photo ID that they can’t vote, unless they cough up something they don’t have (for whatever reason). Thousands of eligible & registered voters don’t have photo IDs.
Like I said, pretty simple. Denying eligible voters – 18+ years old, citizens, non-felons – their right to vote for want of something they have to pay for &/or go to another government office and wait weeks to acquire. That’s bullshit, and completely unnecessary. Republicans haven’t proven the necessity for this – which will, once again, cost the taxpayers more money, and place an extra burden on those who are least equipped to shoulder it. For what, again? What happened to the party of less government?
Reply »
Mike M says:
Last night, and again today, Republicans declined a compromise offered by Democrats that included essentially Todd Smith’s voter ID bill with minor changes (permanent signature verification, and a four year instead of two year phase in) plus same day registration.
Why isn’t the capitol media reporting on that? And it is the Cradick R’s and a small number of Cradick D’s that are blocking the compromise (which requires 2/3 vote to take things out of order).
Reply »
eam says:
Not every eligible voter has an ID. In Texas, there is no mandatory ID requirement for residency and in the United States, there is no mandatory ID requirement for citizenship.
In federal elections, part of the problem is having a state-by-state ID requirement in order to be eligible to exercise a federal voting right.
Personally, I think it’s an equal protection violation — but, in various forms, we’ve had that problem going back to 1868, when the 14th Amendment was passed. But what’s the law in politics?
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
May 23rd, 2009 at 10:51 pm
The DPS offers free photo ID’s without a driver’s license. Again–what ’s the big deal? Also-other forms of ID will be accepted without a photo. Cyrus–you are uniformed.
Reply »
cyrus Reply:
May 24th, 2009 at 12:39 am
No, you’re a tool.
The very nerve of ELECTED officials forcing th toose THEY WORK FOR to present a photo id IN ORDER to VOTE is pretty galling in itself. What’s next? They gonna start charging admission to the Capitol to watch them come up with this nonsense? I can hear it now – “it’s free for those over 60 or if you can present proof of indigence…”.
The burden of proof is on the Repubs pushing this bill, to show that it is a necessary remedy to a problem. They haven’t. And since we’re talking about VOTING, ot opening a bank account, cashing a check, or driving a car, I’m all in favor of using whatever procedure is available to stop it. Unnecessary, cumbersome, costly infringement. It shouldn’t cost anyone a dime to vote, nor a trip to DPS or any other government agency, to prove they exist and are entitled to the franchise.
All the caterwauling by the Rs and they still haven’t offered up a reason for it.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
To those who think that only a paid for photo Id will be required for voting–my only question to you is what flavor koolaid would you drink?
Reply »
Anonymous says:
To those who think that only a prepaid photo Id will be required for voting–my only question to you is what flavor koolaid do you drink?
Reply »
eam says:
Currently, Texas IDs are $15 “free” (60 & under). If Cyrus is uniformed, Anonymous @10:51 pm might oughta watch out.
Driver License and ID fees in Texas:
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/driver_licensing_control/dlfees.htm
Reply »
Anonymous says:
that will change under the bill and other id other than photo will be accepted
Reply »
cyrus Reply:
May 24th, 2009 at 12:41 am
We already have the necessary ID. It’s called a voter registration card.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
But how do you know the person with the voter card is the same person voting that belongs to the voter card?—give me a break
Reply »
Anonymous Reply:
May 24th, 2009 at 8:25 am
Give ME a break. How are you gonna feel when your ballot (or the ballot of someone you know) is put in the provisional pile and not counted because your 7-year-old TDL picture is deemed not to look like you by some old geezer at your polling place!?
Reply »
cyrus Reply:
May 24th, 2009 at 4:45 pm
How do you know the person is not the same as that stated on their voter reg. card? With this legislation, you presume guilt up front.
But that’s really not the issue here, and I’m sure you know that. How and why would someone impersonate another voter? Show us a recent incidence of this happening – for instance, a real voter showing up to find that someone has already voted under their name? Perhaps a case of someone ineligible, using a faked name to get registered, and actually voting? Which could be discovered, btw (no record of said person’s existence/residency/ss#/DL#, etc.
If it’s not happening, it’s not a problem we should be trying to rectify with more impediments to voting.
And again, what’s the problem w/ same-day registration w/ ID? I notice Repubs have no answer for that one either.
We all know what this is about, and it’s got squat to do with the “integrity of our elections”.
Reply »
Gritsforbreakfast says:
“how do you know the person with the voter card is the same person voting that belongs to the voter card?”
Because they swear the information on the card is true when they file it and are subject to criminal penalties if anyone ever proves someone has committed the sin that this bill supposedly aims to prevent. There are ways to check eligibility after the fact, which is why it’s relevant that nobody has identified this ever happening (in recent times, anyway) in the real world.
Reply »
Anonymous says:
After the fact is too late…..
Reply »
B/CS Observer says:
Grits, you can check eligibility after the fact, after which point doing so is worthless because we use secret ballots.
If you find someone who voted in person who voted when they shouldn’t have (don’t live in the district anymore, is a felon, not a citizen, etc) how do you know which candidate should lose a vote? Ask the person who has already ignored the part where they swear the info they provide is true?
Reply »
Tim says:
Being an illegal alien isn’t the only reason you wouldn’t have a driver’s license. And I can’t imagine that very many illegal aliens are voting. I had a friend who didn’t get her driver’s license until 22. Other people always drove her around. And she votes.
Since I can’t imagine this not being passed, I’m just hopeful that this will lead to Democrats helping to get ID cards for people who can’t afford them. That could be a positive outcome of this whole situation.
Reply »
Tex says:
The African American population isn’t distributed evenly among legislative districts. The outcome of VID could be that a few urban districts with a large Af-Am population see fewer voters, but no change in the election results. (Any real impact may be in statewide races.) Are there 7 House swing districts with a large Af-Am population? I don’t think so.
Reply »
Gritsforbreakfast says:
Why is after the fact too late, exactly, 8:12? Too late for what? Not too late to prosecute, certainly. Since this is a problem that’s never come up in the real world (that anyone can identify), what is there, precisely to prevent prospectively?
As for BCS/Observers comment about “secret ballots”, that’s pure siliness – you can tell IF someone voted, it doesn’t matter WHO they voted for as far as whether a crime was committed. Very weak response.
Reply »
John Cobarruvias says:
stopping 150,000 from voting is worth it as long as we keep one illegal Irishman from voting in our elections.
Reply »
HoustonKat says:
Can nobody think of an instance where they themselves do not have a photo ID handy? My wallet was stolen… or lost… or I left my driver’s license in the bank envelope – AGAIN – or it is in the laundry, in the back pocket of those nice jeans I wore last week – or it is expired…. I can remember a time, albeit years ago, when I went for years without carrying around my TDL, because it was not needed. All I ever needed was the TDL number, which has long been committed to memory. Perhaps I am the only one who can imagine being separated from my TDL, and the rest of you can only imagine that it might happen to someone else.
Bottom line is – there is no need for this proposed legislation. It certainly was not necessary before, when Texas was more decidedly Red. But, now that Dallas County has turned blue, and Harris County appears to be on the same track, we have a state emergency that necessitates the taking away of someone else’s constitutionally guaranteed right….. what happens, though, if you – like me – turn out to be human, and it is your constitutional right that gets lost?
Reply »
where demand meets supply says:
Look at what R’s have won…first voter id dead, well ok? The UI bill dies, the governor doesn’t want any stimulus money from the government. That UI bill could help many rural/urban Texans, yet its just a stubborness that resembles R’s strategy. TDI sunset with its 200 amendments. This may help or hurt many Texans, yet the issue is being blindsided by voter id. Its very convenient….avoids a veto and kills a good bill (Eltife’s bill).
TWIA may be dead. These issues involve the governor’s argument against stimulus money, especially when unemployment is on the rise but you also had the convenient lack of TTC to attract more anger. People are pissed all around, the public is left puzzled by whats going on now. This sunday I heard the entire House debate. It was a trainwreck, everyone looks bad. R’s win, D’s do not…they lose by not bringing in that stimulus money….They can’t help their constitutents, what then for the election?…UI, TDI and TWIA affect a lot of folks, people need that money. Who ever delivers the final blow wins but still loses. Its a horrible version of a Mexican standoff…goofy…MUD bills, come on guys…disposal of sewage by certain boats, i mean really? D’s need to get federal money in a red state…Perhaps voter id was a great trojan horse…went all in and lost a lot.
Reply »