stats for wordpress
<% unless FeatureFlag.disable_quantcast? %> <% end %>
 







Are you on Facebook?

Would you please click "like" in the box to your right, or

Visit us on Facebook!


Texas Republicans Find A Way To Disenfranchise Women Voters

by Jean Ann Esselink on October 17, 2013

in Elections,Jean Ann Esselink,News,War on Women

Post image for Texas Republicans Find A Way To Disenfranchise Women Voters

They’ve targeted Blacks, Latinos and college students. Now Texas has come up with a Voter ID law that will disproportionately affect women – the constituency they most fear will support Wendy Davis.

Women are Wendy Davis’ natural base. Her eleven-hour filibuster of an abortion bill that closed family planning clinics in Texas is the reason she has the name recognition and the political capital to make a run for governor. Anti-choice groups who have never before had to spend money opposing a pro-choice candidate are scrambling to form political action groups to run ads against her. Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott, the man who is most likely to be her opponent, has been touting himself as the real pro-woman candidate for his success at collecting back child support from deadbeat dads. Now, Republicans have found what they hope will be a more reliable plan than trying to persuade women that Republicans have their best interest at heart:

Don’t let women vote.

wendy davis fb2Think Progress reports that as of November 5, Texans must show a photo ID with their up-to-date legal name. It sounds like such a small thing, but according to the Brennan Center for Justice, only 66% of voting age women have ready access to a photo document that will attest to proof of citizenship. This is largely because young women have not updated their documents with their married names, a circumstance that doesn’t affect male voters in any significant way. Suddenly 34% of women voters are scrambling for an acceptable ID, while 99% of men are home free.

As of November 5, a birth certificate is not enough. Women voters will have to show legal proof of a name change: a marriage license, a divorce decree, or court ordered change; and they have to be the original documents. No photocopies allowed. This means thousands of women face the hassle of figuring out what they need and how to get it. Then they face at least a $20 fee, more if a woman doesn’t have the time to stand in line and wants it mailed. As a result, many women who are eligible to vote, won’t.

You have to hand it to Texas. Abortion politics threaten to drive the election for governor, so they have figured out a way to discourage a large group of women who are likely have a personal interest in the issue of choice: married women of child-bearing age. Women who might favor Wendy Davis.

But don’t worry. There is no war on women. I have heard Rick Perry say so, so it must be true.

 

Photos: Texas Women’s Coalition Facebook

 

 

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Friends:

We invite you to sign up for our new mailing list, and subscribe to The New Civil Rights Movement via email or RSS.

Also, please like us on Facebook, and follow us on Twitter!

{ 45 comments }

barbonine October 17, 2013 at 4:57 pm

Why the hell are women, a majority everywhere, LETTING TEXAS GET AWAY WITH THIS TRAVESTY???

Ladies, cut 'em off, quit making their beds and meals and make some damn noise! Yes, I know you have, but clearly not loudly enough to scare the fat ol' boiz of the Gee Oh Pee.

ascanius001 October 17, 2013 at 8:28 pm

about half of women are republican and anti-abortion. they are cheering this move.

barbonine October 17, 2013 at 11:31 pm

What is the source of this assertion?

Southern55 October 18, 2013 at 6:09 pm

REALLY? Care to prove that assertion?

YannosB October 22, 2013 at 7:54 am

You get that out of the TP manual, page 104, sec. 5, para. 2?
Yeah, well throw that away son, go read a sports illistrated, will do you lots better.

smileynh October 22, 2013 at 11:33 am

He's telling the truth. Down vote all you want. "56 percent said they would vote for Romney, and only 37 percent for Obama" The finally tally was 56 to 42. Instead of asking the source you could have found it on google 3,630,000 results (0.36 seconds) in .36 seconds
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/put-ring-obam

Southern55 October 18, 2013 at 6:09 pm

Thats okay I know how to cook, clean and do laundry and I do the grocery shopping for the family.

YannosB October 22, 2013 at 7:52 am

Here Here!

NO matter beliefs, or opinions. I've always seen where women help men in ways men cannot naturally help themselves. And conversely it is true; but only when both see, treasure, value the other side for what She, or he really means to life of Humanity itself.
And you are absolutely correct, the fastest way to make man know woman's presence.. is to stop helping him in all those amazing ways! (besides it really did have a rather rapid effect back in teh late fifties, then again in the mid to late sixties, right?)

barbonine October 17, 2013 at 4:57 pm

PUT SOME VAGINA DENTATA INTO IT LADIES!

SeanLiberty13 October 17, 2013 at 5:13 pm

But you know "don't" compare the Reichpublicans to Nazis while they are actively trying to stop people from voting. Hitler would be so proud of them.

Southern55 October 18, 2013 at 6:08 pm

The Democrats REQUIRED photo ID at their last convention. Are they Nazis too? Unless you have lived through it stop tossing out accusations that have NO meaning.

SeanLiberty13 October 18, 2013 at 6:19 pm

Go f@#k a confederate flag, troglodyte.

Southern55 October 18, 2013 at 9:24 pm

When confronted with the Truth, the TYPICAL mindless reply from a liberal lemming is to attack someone's character. How droll…how predictable. Hey how is your insurance premiums bub?

SeanLiberty13 October 18, 2013 at 10:55 pm

When confronted with reality, the TYPICAL mindless reply from a parasitic Reich-wing or Tea Taliban Troglodyte is evidence that those deluded worthless pieces of barbaric trash think that they are worth anything more than exactly what they got. How droll…how predictable.

theotherbob56 October 19, 2013 at 4:52 pm

A convention is a private event. Voting, despite Republican efforts in a number of states, is not.

laurel1977 October 19, 2013 at 6:35 pm

That's funny because I worked that convention and never had to show my id once to get in and I worked in a department that gave me access to everything. The only time you were asked for id was to get your credentials that allowed access to events and that was so they could make sure the right person was getting the credential. If you were just walking through, you didn't have to show id at all.

c0mplexbits October 19, 2013 at 9:30 pm

Requiring "Photo ID", and requring "Photo ID with complete current name and proof" are totally different things.

I am one such woman who doesn't have any actual valid document with both my photo and my complete current name on it, so if I was a Texan, they'd be counting me out. This is despite the fact that I DO have a valid passport, with my original name on it, a document that verifies citizenship and therefore verifies voter eligibility (absent any felonies, notwithstanding residency requirements).

Stephanie Watson October 17, 2013 at 7:15 pm

Women need to quit changing their legal names to that of their husband. That will solve that problem.

SparksinKY October 18, 2013 at 7:09 am

You said it! Perhaps if men and women both had the same expectations to share a name, I'd be more on board, but currently the onus is on women. I do know of a few couples where the man took the woman's name, but they're certainly outliers. So many times I'll scroll through my Facebook, not recognize a name, and then realize it was yet another woman who changed her identity for marriage. I'm so glad my fiancee doesn't want me to change my name. His mom raised a family of 6 who all took the dad's name except her, and they turned out perfectly fine.

splashy79 October 18, 2013 at 9:55 pm

Yes, that IS the solution, and make sure to blame it on the Republicans.

deleted7973892 October 18, 2013 at 6:07 pm

Hmm…so all they want is a photo ID…Something you usually need to get a library book, etc.

Wait…didn't the DEMOCRATS require photo ID at their Elect Obama King convention? Thats right they DID. So get off your hypocritical high horses!

rubellapox October 19, 2013 at 4:38 pm

convention? how does that compare to making only women get new id's or not get to vote? you're comparing oranges to pears….

laurel1977 October 19, 2013 at 6:40 pm

You only had to show id to get credentials if you were not a delegate. No one else did. I worked the convention and had a blast and once I got my credentials I never had to pull out my id again. You should really know what you are talking about before you open your trap.

YannosB October 22, 2013 at 7:58 am

Awe 'deleted' wa'zzz wrong… you guys not having fun no more after the NATION spanked you?
Well, how about you just try to behave like an American for a bit? Put that hateful, racial, unAmerican garbage out with the trash next pick up.
Try to figure out why on earth you are accepting things from a bunch of greed dripping snobs who once they realize they lost are gonna slam those penthouse doors right in ya'll's faces!

splashy79 October 18, 2013 at 9:53 pm

So, women, the solution is simple. Stop changing your name when you get married. Throw that back in the faces of the Republicans, who have forced you to not do the "traditional" thing when you get married. Blame it on them, the supposed "family" party if anyone asks.

Tell them the Republican made you do it, because they deny you your right to vote if you change your name.

c0mplexbits October 19, 2013 at 9:37 pm

Yes, and women, never change your name for any other reason either.

Neither stalking, nor harassment, nor domestic violence, nor employment lawsuits about these and other creepy scary circumstances should be a good reason to change your name. But if you do anyway, just make sure you are aware that you are choosing between being endlessly harassed, or possibly never voting again.

Because, you know, obviously the *victims* of such crimes deserve the social retribution far more than the perps.

topherky13 October 18, 2013 at 10:20 pm

This story is a flat out lie! Classic example of people reacting emotionally without knowing the facts. Read the bill. It clearly states that a "similar name" (including former names) are excepted provided the voter sign an affidavit stating they are the same person who's name appears on the list of registered voters. Read the bill. All that other stuff this article claims you need is simply B.S. Read the bill. If you don't want to actually read the bill, the state of TX breaks it down for you here http://votetexas.gov/register-to-vote/need-id/ Even in the highly unlikely event that someone is denied this option they may cast a provisional vote that can be verified by public record as well as several other options but by now I'm sure I'm boring you with the FACTS.

gurukalehuru October 19, 2013 at 1:49 pm

There's a difference between excepted and accepted. I'm not sure which you mean. Also, having to sign an affidavit could be a pain in the butt if they require witnesses or, worse, a notary, in which case it also becomes an expense, which is a de facto poll tax. Casting a provisional vote is pretty unsatisfactory since often, the election is over and the winner has been announced before they get around to counting the provisional votes.
There was no need for these new regulations. Therefore, they are obviously political.

Bcoo422 October 19, 2013 at 12:16 am

Here is what the Texas voter site says:

"When a voter arrives at a polling location, the voter will be asked to present one of the seven (7) acceptable forms of photo ID. Election officials will now be required by State law to determine whether the voter’s name on the identification provided matches the name on the official list of registered voters (“OLRV”). After a voter presents their ID, the election worker will compare it to the OLRV. If the name on the ID matches the name on the list of registered voters, the voter will follow the regular procedures for voting.

If the name does not match exactly but is “substantially similar” to the name on the OLRV, the voter will be permitted to vote as long as the voter signs an affidavit stating that the voter is the same person on the list of registered voters.

If a voter does not have proper identification, the voter will still be permitted to vote provisionally. The voter will have (six) 6 days to present proper identification to the county voter registrar, or the voter’s ballot will be rejected."
But what does "substantially similar" mean? Hopefully it is not up to the booth staff. Perhaps all women should reregister on the OLVR. Don't leave any doubt who you are (and who you want for governor).

AwakeinAL October 19, 2013 at 3:28 pm

As in the past, we must avoid "The registrar [as] the sole judge" in the words of Lyndon Johnson as he signed the Voting Right Act. The wording “substantially similar” is not exact enough and the photo requirement too exact. A range of documents accepted, as we used to have in Alabama, is more fair since not everyone has the same life experience.
Voting provisionally means those votes are automatically challenged. So that is not good. Even if someone could get to the office in time with the accepted proof, it will be challenged on other grounds by groups that specialize in that.

marjee123 October 19, 2013 at 12:57 am

Even tho the republican majority on the supreme court ruled on some of the civil rights bill, having to pay to vote is still illegal isn't it. I mean if these women have to pay for original copies of documents to prove they are who they say they are isn't that illegal.

gurukalehuru October 19, 2013 at 2:12 pm

Absolutely.

kristydrums October 19, 2013 at 4:40 pm

Is this the already implemented Voter ID law that was already passed? Or is this a new law? What are folks doing to overturn this injustice?

Iokobos October 19, 2013 at 11:39 pm

Two things folks:

1) Lack of personal responsibility is *NOT* disenfranchisement. They should have handled this issue after they got married.

2) Married women tend to vote conservative/GOP. Look at all the data. Just sayin'

VeryRevLoggins October 20, 2013 at 7:23 pm

You forget there is a lot of time , hassle and expense involved on getting everything changed over. Average wait time at most DPS offices to make a change to a license or ID is over an hour.

Terochtor October 23, 2013 at 9:38 pm

Every teenager that wants to drive and keep their ID up-to-date in Texas has to get a new license every year until they turn 18, if teenagers in high school can go wait a single hour to keep these things up to date surely a newly married woman can take an hour out of her day to make sure her paperwork and identification is in order. It's a minor inconvenience and should be done anyway. It's basically a stupid law that isn't as big of a deal as it's being made out to be. There's worse things to complain about in my state than voter ID laws.

VeryRevLoggins October 23, 2013 at 10:33 pm

I have news for you, it's MY State also, and has been for nearly 53 years. This new law also disenfranchises people who are of low or fixed income, and perhaps either cannot afford or do not have a way to get to a DPS office to get a new/replacement ID. For some people the nearest DPS office of over 50 miles away, and if you do not have a car, or just don't drive, you are Out-Of-Luck if your ID is expired.

Terochtor October 23, 2013 at 11:08 pm

I agree that it does disenfranchise people with certain income states, I am by no means saying this law isn't stupid and can hurt people. However, there are other things our state does that do more damage to more people, and having no vehicle is an issue with getting to polling places as well, so that's at least non-specific to this law. I do agree with basically everything you mentioned in your post, I certainly didn't mean to address these regulations as anything but a waste, just a waste that isn't as blatantly awful as the article paints it as.

VeryRevLoggins October 20, 2013 at 7:21 pm

Rick Perry and his sidekick Greg Abbot are both stupid, chauvinistic, misogynist men who are a consistent embarrassment to the citizens of Texas THAT ACTUALLY THINK. If they had their way, Civil Rights in Texas would roll back to the 1800's, when women were treated as property, and only Straight While Men had any rights at all.
And I live in the Austin Area!!

YannosB October 22, 2013 at 8:12 am

The real issue is the proven anti-Woman Citizen stand Texan legislation has brought to bear. If, as some have posted here, the story were just skewed to look like another slap in their faces, who in their right mind could blame them one bit?
This is friggin 2013! Why are so many of you men still so lost about the absolute value, necessity of Women!

Bottom line guys… If it weren't for MOMMA… you'd most likely not even be a memory right now!
And that statment goes WAY beyond bearing you through birth, raising, feeding, keeping you alive for some seventeen or so years at least!
Without women, man would have slaughterd itsself long time ago, man would have died off from infectious disese from filthy living a long time ago.. and soooo much more. Jeeeze Wake the flock up already!

smileynh October 22, 2013 at 11:23 am

So, your contention is Republicans want to suppress their own voters? That's the funniest part of your story.

Married women, the people affected, voted 56% to 42% FOR ROMNEY. So, the Republican goal is to suppress OUR own voters? Aren't we geniuses or what? (scratches head)
http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/07/married-voters-

CAProud October 22, 2013 at 8:15 pm

This is discusting for Texas women and shows pure stupidity and treating them as 2nd class citizens. A Texas republican woman is an OXYMORON!!! How can they vote against themselves???!!!!

Terochtor October 23, 2013 at 9:31 pm

In what way is a Texan Republican Woman an oxymoron? No one likes everything one party does so we go with the party that we agree most with. I don't like a lot of what Obama does and I didn't like a lot of what Romney said, but I still voted.

Southern55 October 18, 2013 at 11:38 pm

Typical elitist attitude best represented by the Occupier of the White House.

How copy cat of you. But then liberals dont have a single independent thought…

SeanLiberty13 October 19, 2013 at 12:09 am

Typical barbaric attitude best represented by the Reich-wing and Tea Taliban Troglodytes .

How blah blah blah of you. But then again Reich-wing and Tea Taliban Troglodytes don't have a single thought that hasn't come from illiterate propaganda whores at Faux News, paranoid schizophrenic conspiracy theorists, blood thirsty elitist religious-reich psychopaths with grotesque inhuman control complexes, and uncivilized worthless gun sucking nutjob trash … Nice name change btdubs. NOT 8 /

Comments on this entry are closed.

{ 22 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post:

<% unless FeatureFlag.disable_quantcast? %> <% end %>