(Author's Note: Original content appeared on author's blog at www.bangthebuckets.com)
Well, the news is several hours old now, so perhaps this is late in coming, but the Republican-dominated Wisconsin State Assembly has passed a bill which requires voters in Wisconsin to show photo identification before they are allowed to actually cast a vote. From here, of course it will move to the State Senate, which is Republican-dominated, and as a result it will pass. From there, it will move to the Governor, who is a Republican, who will sign it into law. From there, it will move to the courts, like so much of recent Wisconsin legislation, because there will of course be some question as to its overall legality. From there, it will no doubt ultimately pass, since the U.S. Supreme Court has allowed Voter I.D. laws in other states such as Indiana to take effect.
What will Wisconsin's Voter I.D. law do? Well, of course, it depends who you ask. If you ask the Democrats, it will make it much harder for groups that tend to vote Democrat (namely the elderly, students, and minorities) to actually cast a vote. If, however, you choose to ask any number of Republicans, it will combat the outrageous number of cases in which fraudulent voting occurred here in Wisconsin. Heck, according to a recent article for Forbes, the 2008 election cycle alone accounted for 20 such cases. (Read http://blogs.forbes.com/...)
Twenty cases. How many millions of votes were cast in the 2008 election? Did 20 cases (half of which were already on the voter denial list, according to the Forbes article) really constitute significant fraud?
Or, is it more likely that the Walker-led Radical Republicans have decided to invent a crisis that does not exist in order to pass legislation that aligns with their radical agenda? I mean, there really wasn't a budget crisis until Governor Walker gave tax breaks to corporations, but that alleged "crisis" meant that the real enemy -- you know, public employees -- could be shafted for the greater good of the state. Now, another seemingly invented "crisis" means that any number of people in Wisconsin will be denied their right to vote. I really don't care what the Republicans in the State Legislature call this -- I call it disenfranchisement, and so do others, like our old pal Wikipedia:
Disenfranchisement . . . is the revocation of the right of suffrage (the right to vote) of a person or group of people, or rendering a person's vote less effective, or ineffective. Disfranchisement may occur explicitly through law, or implicitly by intimidation or by placing unreasonable registration or identification impediments in the path of voters. (http://en.wikipedia.org/...)
Now of course, the most notable examples of direct disenfranchisement occurred in the southern states after the U.S. Civil War. Then, such things as poll taxes and literacy tests kept black people from voting, because at the time, of course, black people voted overwhelmingly Republican (the party of Lincoln). Such laws fell under the broad label of Jim Crow laws, which lasted until the Civil Rights Act of 1965, signed into law by U.S. President Lyndon Johnson (a Democrat; by that point, the South had overwhelmingly moved into the Republican camp, because Democrats kept calling for things like equal rights).
Apparently, as far as Wisconsin Republicans are concerned, Jim Crow has moved into the 21st century. Now, Republicans don't wish to restrict your Constitutional right to vote because you're black; instead, they wish to restrict your Constitutional right to vote because you're a Democrat.
The Walker Regime (that word fits much better than the word "Administration," which implies an actual attempt to administer) seems to wish to cram as much GOP-based legislation down the throats of Wisconsinites as possible in the time that remains before the governor is up for recall. And of course, a number of Wisconsin Republicans will support him no matter what.
So when I call for outrage, I am speaking to Wisconsin Democrats. I am also speaking, however, to Wisconsin Moderates and Wisconsin Undecideds. If you vote, or even think of voting, I would ask of you to ask yourselves: Is it right that the duly-elected governor of Wisconsin supports measures that restricts the rights of citizens to vote? Is it right that legislation be passed which targets specific members of voting public (like blacks were targeted after the Civil War)?
If this man and his Radical Republican agenda truly reflect the interests of the State of Wisconsin, then it is only logical that all Wisconsinites be allowed to vote on such matters. If all Wisconsinites vote, and Governor Walker's agenda is upheld, I will say no more. Heck, I'll shut this blog down and recognize at long last that the spirit of Bob LaFollette and the Progressive Movement is dead, and Wisconsin has in fact become a red state.
The thing is, Governor Walker does not wish to hear from all of the people. In fact, Governor Walker actually seems afraid to hear from all of the people, or there would be no need to pass a law that denies certain people the right to vote. Governor Walker's so-called Budget Repair Bill could be law tomorrow, if he and his Radical Republican friends actually chose to once again bring it before the legislature. In fact, Governor Walker actually seems afraid to allow it to once again come before a vote, because if he tried, it is possible that the will of the people would be heard. Our state icon, Robert La Follette, Sr., once said, "The will of the people shall be the law of the land." Governor Walker seems to want to change that so that "The will of the people who agree with the Radical GOP Agenda shall be the law of the state."
Time to pay attention, Wisconsin. The future of your state is at risk.A common bumper sticker that began during the George W. Bush Administration said that "If you're not outraged you're not paying attention." I can only bang the buckets so loudly and so often, but honestly, Wisconsin, I don't know what you're waiting for. The Governor of your state is abusing his elected power to pass laws that may in fact be unconstitutional. At the very least, that would seem to be an abuse of power. At the very most, that would seem to be treason, from a man who swore an Oath an Office that said he would protect the Constitution of the State of Wisconsin and the Constitution of the United States of America.
At the heart of this issue, and at the heart of the idea of justice in America, is the concept of fairness. Are the actions of the Radical Republicans, when it comes right down to it, fair? Are all people being represented? If they are, and it so happens that the majority comes down in favor of the Walker Agenda, then I have nothing further to say. But if all people are not being represented -- if all voices risk losing a chance to be heard -- then it seems to me that government has failed. What do we do when government fails? Maybe it's the history teacher in me, but I think we go back to the ideas that made us a nation in the first place:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
(http://www.archives.gov/...)
I really don't think there's much more to say beyond that.