The real intent behind voter I.D. laws…

When the voter identification argument hit the mainstream, I didn’t necessarily see it as a problem.  Supporters pointed out that most things in everyday life require a photo I.D.—getting a library card, renting a car, making certain purchases, buying alcohol. So, why not require I.D. at one of our more sacred activities in a democratic society?

But there is more to it than that—something which became quite apparent to me as I read an article in our local paper one day.  The story featured the daily routine of some of Greensboro’s homeless families, including the use of a day center. They used the day center to get out of the weather, access computers, and even have an address to put on a job application.  An address. Well, there’s someone who might not have an I.D.  Without an address, getting proper photo identification can be quite difficult. And what if you’re one of the many seniors who no longer drive? You may not have a current photo I.D., either. The argument that  “everyone needs an I.D. for daily life” quickly deteriorates at that point.

And then I saw it.  Something that liberal commentators had been saying all along. Something I brushed off as mere conspiracy theory: those behind the legislation don’t want everyone to be able to vote. Paul Weyrich, founder of the conservative Heritage Foundation, said:

“Now many of our Christians have what I call the goo-goo syndrome — good government. They want everybody to vote. I don’t want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of people; they never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.”

The people most likely to be impacted by strict voter identification laws, voter roll purging, and other creative tactics are minorities, the elderly, and younger voters.  In others words, Democrats.  For example, in Ohio, Republican Secretary of State Jon Husted shortened the early voting period by 3 days.  In 2008, nearly 30% of the total ballots cast in Ohio came during early voting.  Obama won Ohio in ’08, and naturally, the state is in play this election cycle. The only way to “beat” those who’d rather not see us at the polls is to be there—no matter what laws they pass to block us from exercising our right to vote.

Enough already...

Enough is enough. I’m tired of being accused of being a thief, anti-American, and intolerant just because I care about others and gasp!—I’m a liberal.  In the last few weeks, I’ve heard several accusations that have really disturbed me. The first was a remark made be Sean Hannity on his radio show.  He was discussing the Obama tax policy when he led into a story about Obama’s family members that live in Kenya.  His guest commented that they live in abject poverty, and that Obama, who clearly is not poor, has done nothing to elevate his family from that situation. Hannity’s response left me fuming: “Liberals don’t give their own money—they take from you and me and give that away”. In other words, liberals don’t donate financially from their own “coffers’, but instead rob the wealthy via taxes and then wrongly give that money to the poor through government programs (which then keeps the poor wanting “free handouts”). I don’t know what the situation is with Obama’s family—that’s not really my concern.  What I can say is that his assertion is false and does nothing but widen the divide that already exists between Americans who do not share the same views.  I am a liberal, and I give a minimum 10% of my income to charities and my Quaker Meeting. I donate to cause after cause—and while I support the notion that those who make more should pay more, I have never thought that I should not have to give of my resources simply because the government does that in certain cases.

In another instance, a guest on the Glenn Beck Radio Program was discussing the resent success of Beck’s Restoring Love Event and the community projects that were done as part of the weekend celebration.  Beck’s guest remarked, perhaps off-handedly, but still dishonestly, that liberals “would never pitch in to help their community”. Really? I happen to know many a liberal that donates time to the local food bank, feeding the homeless, tutoring kids to read, walking dogs in the shelter, and many more community-improving activities—all with no pay.

We’re now being accused of being intolerant because many of us no longer wish to buy our heart-attack inducing fast food at a certain chicken establishment. Yet, the owner of said establishment is being just as “intolerant”—he doesn’t support equality.  So we don’t want to give our money to a company that doesn’t support equal rights for all Americans—who is really the intolerant one in this situation?

Finally, liberals are constantly being bashed over the head for not being swept off our feet by America.  Last week, I heard a conservative commentator say that maybe now Michelle Obama can be proud of her country since we did a pretty good job at the Olympics.  What a way to take a comment (from fours years ago, no less) out of context. To be honest about our past and ourselves is, in the eyes of the Conservative, to be hateful of our country.  To suggest that America is anything less than exceptional (or that it even needs to be) is heresy.  But why?  To improve things, one must be honest.  Let’s look at some facts.

Among industrialized nations, the U.S. has the:

• Highest poverty rate
• Lowest spending on social safety net programs by the federal government
• Worst score on the U.N. gender inequality index
• Lowest social mobility
• Highest healthcare costs
• Highest infant mortality rate
• Highest number of people who go without healthcare due to cost
• Highest carbon foot print
• Highest rate of failure to ratify international agreements
• Third lowest scores for math performance
• Highest homicide rate
• Most people in prison   

 I cannot look at the above and be “proud” of our country.  Who could?  But that doesn’t mean I’m anti-American or hate the U.S. No, I love my home, and want to see the above change.  As a liberal, I happen to think that a compassionate, earth-friendly, community-centered approach is more helpful than the no-holds-barred free market, small government (except in the case of intimate matters like reproductive rights or marriage), pro-big corporation ideas promoted by some on the Right. But that doesn’t make me a thieving, intolerant, anti-American.  It makes me a thinking American.

[Above stats taken from the book, "Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt"]