Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

by
Bryan Preston

Bio

January 6, 2014 - 8:23 am
Page 1 of 2  Next ->   View as Single Page

The Dallas Morning News is against voter ID laws. It makes that plain in this editorial, and then relies on a “study” to make its faulty case.

The new research asserts that the tougher laws are part of a GOP strategy aimed at keeping minority and low-income voters away from the polls, despite the fact that widespread voter impersonation is virtually nonexistent.

Research from University of Massachusetts at Boston sociologist Keith Bentele and political scientist Erin O’Brien shows a correlation between restrictive new voting laws and states where Republicans control the legislature or governor’s office.

In fact, the ties are so compelling that the researchers conclude that photo identification, proof of citizenship, tighter voter registration drives, shorter early voting periods, repeal of same-day voter registration and other new voter ID laws “collectively reduce electoral access among the socially marginalized.”

Restricting access to the ballot box is a dangerously slippery legal slope, which is why these measures have generated several lawsuits against Texas and other states.

First, let’s look at those lawsuits. They’re coming mainly from the Department of Justice, which is run by the sharply partisan Eric Holder and his just-as-sharply-partisan boss, Barack Obama. The Morning News neglects to mention this fact. This administration is currently waging lawfare against nuns to force them to support abortion and birth control in violation of their religious consciences. Its use of courts to impose its will and reward its political allies must be taken into account when assessing the worthiness of the legal warfare it wages.

The sociologist and political scientist who conducted the study which the Morning News cites compare voter ID requirements to blatantly racist Jim Crow laws. They put that noxious and emotionally charged comparison into the very title of their paper on the subject. Did they use real voting numbers, before and after voter ID laws have been enacted, to arrive at their conclusions?

No. They admit in their abstract that they started with the premise that voter ID laws are racially motivated, and worked backward from that conclusion.

In an effort to bring empirical clarity and epistemological standards to what has been a deeply-charged, partisan, and frequently anecdotal debate, we use multiple specialized regression approaches to examine factors associated with both the proposal and adoption of restrictive voter access legislation from 2006–2011. Our results indicate that proposal and passage are highly partisan, strategic, and racialized affairs. These findings are consistent with a scenario in which the targeted demobilization of minority voters and African Americans is a central driver of recent legislative developments. We discuss the implications of these results for current partisan and legal debates regarding voter restrictions and our understanding of the conditions incentivizing modern suppression efforts. Further, we situate these policies within developments in social welfare and criminal justice policy that collectively reduce electoral access among the socially marginalized.

Rather than relying on a politically motivated academic study, the Dallas Morning News would better serve its readers if it took the time to look at what actually happened in Texas before and after voter ID took effect. Surely the largest newspaper in Dallas has the resources to dig up numbers on the Texas secretary of state’s website?

The state legislature passed voter ID into law in 2011. The law did not take effect that year, but was in effect during the 2013 elections.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
If a media outlet intentionally suppresses the truth, distorts facts, knowingly uses clearly biased "studies" and withholds evidence that supports dissenting views...and does so, in the same direction each and every time...

Is it fair to say they have an agenda...or is that hyperbole?

Is it fair to say they are involved in a conspiracy to deprive people of the truth and replace it with a preordained narrative...or is that exaggeration?

Is it fair to say that the manner in which they handle facts and evidence is so untruthful...that it is indistinguishable from an outright lie, therefore, they are liars...or must we water it down to them merely being "just wrong"?

And...if we say they are liars, engaged in a propaganda narrative and a conspiracy across this land with leftist agenda media outlets...are we "an hysteric"?

Finally, if we take a firm stand in favor of a connection of the dots...will we be censored on these very pages?
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Well, it keeps people from voting twice. Maybe that's what they mean.

It makes harder to vote when you are dead too.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
The study itself exhibits bias. The academics never countenance the possibility that Democrats oppose voter ID because they want to retain the ability to commit fraud to win elections. The only possibility the study looks at is whether the Republicans are motivated by racism.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (27)
All Comments   (27)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
So you need a government ID including an EBT card which most of the disadvantaged have because they like "Free Stuff". Gee just a swipe of the card and one can vote. I'm surprised they don't get a $10 credit for each vote.

At least with a Drivers license or EBT card, the person can only vote once with each.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Houston Chronicle, Fort Bend Herald, etc, were all whining last summer about how awful the voter suppression would be...then they had the highest off year voter turnout ever. *crickets*
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
The ACLU supports getting rid of voter ID laws but their argument against them is totally bogus. I have sent e-mails and told them so although they don't ever respond. The fact of the matter is that the majority of states have made it relatively easy and inexpensive even free to obtain the necessary ID's unless, of course, a person is in this country illegally. (And, if you are an illegal alien in Chicago, you can still vote.) Such ID's are needed for other purposes as well, particularly if a person doesn't have a valid driver's license. So requiring them when a person votes isn't that big a deal.

By the way Obama knows all about voter fraud. As a community organizer, he knew how to register people to vote who were otherwise ineligible.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
"Research from University of Massachusetts at Boston sociologist Keith Bentele and political scientist Erin O’Brien shows a correlation between restrictive new voting laws and states where Republicans control the legislature or governor’s office."

Correlation is not causation. 100% of people in the US who died last had inhaled massive doses of oxygen over their lifetimes. Did the oxygen kill them? I mean, we have complete correlation there, so it must be the oxygen.

Even if you removed the laws and the states swung Democrat, that wouldn't necessarily mean that any actual voters had been denied the right to vote. It would just mean that the generation of Democrat votes increased, quite possibly through the voter fraud that the laws are intended to prevent.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
The DNC is desperately trying to turn Texas blue, aided and abetted by a media that is nothing more than their personal propagandists. Unfortunately with the influx of immigrants from the failed socialist state of California they have a shot. Socialists never admit defeat. Instead they simply blame a "flawed" law or corporate "greed" as the cause of the disaster that is CA, Detroit, Illinois, NYC, etc. and the low information voter buys it every time.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
To me, this study supports my theory that our electoral process has been stolen by the Democrats. When precincts in the past election had 140% turnout with 100 f**king % voting for Obama...well call me a skeptical cynic but that tells me that Democrats only win when they pervert the integrity of the voting process.
And if this doesn't piss you off as an American, regardless of party, then there is something seriously wrong with you.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Every Sunday I used to buy the Dallas Morning News. However, I stopped (for the same reason I dropped my subscription to the Fort Worth Star Telegram - if I want the liberal/Democratic party position I'll watch ABC, CBS, NBC, or the cable propaganda channels).
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
I quit reading the Dallas Morning News and FW Star Telegram for the same reasons.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Every Sunday the Dallas Morning News litters my neighborhood with free newspapers. Can't get them to stop. Some day I'm going to gather them up and throw them in their yard and see how they like it.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
Don't worry. When the issue comes to a real head, the Republicans will - back down.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
And the DMN execs probably sit around all day having meetings trying to figure out why their circulation continues to decline week by week.
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
"...a correlation between restrictive new voting laws and states where Republicans control the legislature or governor’s office."

Well by golly miss molly.....maybe this means that when the electoral process is honest, most Americans prefer Republicans. And where it is dishonest they, unsurprisingly, seem to pick Democrats. Well, who could've figured? Hmmmmmm?
45 weeks ago
45 weeks ago Link To Comment
1 2 Next View All