Florida Republicans Admit Voter Suppression Was The Goal Of New Election Laws

[John_Stamos_Left_Ear]

@MaxTheVool

Here’s an interesting question: there are plenty of states with Republican-controlled assemblies, and in many of them these efforts have been afoot. There are also plenty of states with Democrat-controlled assemblies. Why don’t we hear stories about how in (some liberal state) the heavily-Republican areas have had polling locations closed, hours shortened, etc.?

Bricker maintained that Rhode Island was an example that both sides do it. I will

[quote myself from another thread]
(http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15653615&postcount=76):

@John_Stamos_Left_Ear

I am getting sick of Bricker’s “B-b-b-but Rhode Island” response so I did a little search into the single Blue State out of eight passed Vote ID laws in 2011. I found this compelling:

Voter ID bills are nominally designed to safeguard against voter impersonation, but this argument is generally considered dubious, since there is scant evidence of such fraud. (Ari Berman in Rolling Stone and Ryan Reilly in TPM have done an admirable job outlining the problems with voter ID justifications.) Rhode Island, where voter impersonation has never been proven, is no exception. But anxiety over voter fraud carries particular weight in the Ocean State, which has a long legacy of political corruption. The author of the bill, Rhode Island Secretary of State Ralph Mollis (a Democrat), told me he introduced it not in response to specific charges of impersonation, but to “address the perception of voter fraud.” Local journalist Ted Nesi echoed the sentiment, telling me, “People in Rhode Island assume everyone’s on the take.”

The New Republic

So to recap:
[ul]
[li]Rhode Island is an anomaly. It is disingenuous to scream and point to one state out of many more and scream “both sides do it.”[/li][li]The law was brought about by the same unproven accusations as it was in every other non-Blue State. Bad legislation can come from both sides of the aisle, but again, it is disingenuous to scream “both sides do it.”[/li][li]The law in Rhode Island came about from people scared of a minority group wielding more electoral power. It is just as reprehensible when Black Liberals want to disenfranchise Hispanic voters as it is when white conservatives want to disenfranchise other voting groups. Many decried when black liberals voted against gay marriage in California. It’s still wrong no matter who does it. But again, it’s disingenuous to scream that “both sides do it.”[/li][li]The Rhode Island law was not jammed through to cause chaos in the current election cycle. It has until 2014 to be implemented. This is a huge distinction from the laws in Pennsylvania and other states where court challenges and appeals from the state kept things in limbo right up to the cusp of the vote.[/li][/ul]

So please, enough false equivalencies, Bricker. Rhode Island is not evidence that Voter ID laws do not discriminate. Rhode Island is evidence that sometimes the discrimination comes from unexpected sources, but it’s still discrimination and it happens considerably less from them than the usual suspects.