Skip to main content

Republican legislators in Texas have come up with a new voter ID law meant to block many women from voting in the next election. Like other voter ID laws in Texas and other parts of the country, Republicans have decided that if they can no longer win elections fairly, then they will just find a way to block voters who are likely not to vote for them.

The law that goes into effect November 5 requires women to show a valid form of ID with their legal names without exception for women who are divorced or recently married. It also will effectively block transgender individuals, simply because their ID may be different to some degree from what it shows on their voter registrations.

The reason for the new law probably has to do with state legislator Wendy Davis (D) who is running for governor after she gained popularity from staging an 11-hour filibuster to block an abortion bill Republicans were pushing through the state legislator. Her popularity among women of the state has Republicans worried that she might possibly succeed, handing the governor's seat over to Democrats.

This is only the latest in a series of Voter ID laws and other voter laws across the country since 2010, which shows the desperation that the GOP is suffering from as their politics drifts further away from the mainstream of America. This is all thanks to party extremist who have taken the party far to the right and out of touch with average American voters.

It would seem Republican lawmakers have not learned their lesson from 2012 when several Republican controlled states pushed through voter Id laws and other laws that made it more difficult for likely Democratic voters, such as minorities and college students to vote. What the laws seem to do instead was motivate those same voters to pour out at the polls, even when it meant standing in long lines at the polls in poor urban areas. That motivation also was what helped propel President Obama into a second term in the White House and probably help keep or gain Democratic seats in both the U.S. House and Senate.

Now it is women, which make up more than half the population that Republicans in Texas wish to disenfranchise, just in hopes to keep Wendy Davis from winning the governor seat in Texas. I suppose some lessons are hard to learn and I am hoping that again, this will motivate women to the polls more than it will block them. We all have heard that old saying, "Don't mess with Texas". Well, I have a new saying, "Don't mess with the women of Texas", or for that matter, all of America's women. That's because women are not a minority in this great nation of ours, they're a majority and if they get the feeling their voting rights are being blocked, I would not want to be the male legislators standing in their way.

This is a republish from my website: Fidlerten Place

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Even worse, (9+ / 0-)

    apparently in years past, the Texas government required that a married woman have their maiden name listed as their middle name on their ID, but now women are being turned away because they don't have their birth middle names listed on their ID. Catch 22, by design.

                Furious on behalf of the women of Texas,
                     who have the right to vote,

    Torture is ALWAYS wrong, no matter who is inflicting it on whom.

    by Chacounne on Thu Oct 24, 2013 at 08:31:28 AM PDT

  •  if or when the Dem's win the House, we (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fidlerten, NM Ray

    badly need some national voting rights laws with some teeth.

    gerrymandering laws would be nice too - but that's probably topo much of a stretch.

  •  Would this not be SEX DISCRIMINATION? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    fidlerten, LiberalLoner, NM Ray, splashy
    Because a man does not need to change his name when he marries... Why would this be legal in the US?
    •  My thought exactly! (0+ / 0-)

      Hello, DOJ! Where is the DOJ in this litigation?

      My wife, daughter and granddaughters should have more privacy in their doctor's office than I have buying another rifle or shotgun.

      by NM Ray on Thu Oct 24, 2013 at 11:29:04 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Women don't need to either (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      blue muon

      I'm thinking this will push that "tradition" right out the window in places where the right winger rule.


      Women create the entire labor force.
      Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

      by splashy on Thu Oct 24, 2013 at 12:00:46 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  The Equal Rights Amendment did not get thirty (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        eight states in time, and women's equal rights to a lot of things are less legally protected than the rights of many others who differ from conservative evalgelical white males.

        •  Agreed, but changing their names is not a legal (0+ / 0-)

          Thing. It's just tradition. They don't have to change their names, although some places will do it automatically if a woman gets married if they don't stop them, like Social Security.

          Women create the entire labor force.
          Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

          by splashy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 09:56:46 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  The whole point of female suppression regulations (0+ / 0-)

            is to involve the government, and therefore the old males who run it in most places, in exercising the same rights to act without the necessity of governmental action that men have.

            These things are in fact a matter of regulation in many places. I'm not sure if the Passport office has changed, but when I got married, I had to take my passport in to have it amended to reflect my married name and have had ever since needed to haul that adjusted passport around with me to show when they did that.  Just as women's medical care is regulated tightly when similar care for me is entirely without restriction. It was and is no accident that many of the discrepant names for the same woman in Texas are required by regulations orlaws of various agencies of government, who created this mess but aren't being asked to use a common method of marriage recognition to rectify it.

            •  But, you didn't have to change your name (0+ / 0-)

              When you got married. It's not a law that you have to.

              That is my point. It's just tradition that women change their names when they get married. It's not required by law.

              That being said, this law is heinous, and really the women of Texas should be up in arms about it and mad as hell about it!

              Women create the entire labor force.
              Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

              by splashy on Fri Oct 25, 2013 at 03:23:24 PM PDT

              [ Parent ]

  •  In the defense of the execrable Texas (R)s (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    poleshifter, fidlerten

    The voter ID law was passed before Davis' filibuster.

    We don't want our country back, we want our country FORWARD. --Eclectablog

    by Samer on Thu Oct 24, 2013 at 09:38:32 AM PDT

  •  Women need the ERA to be ratified (0+ / 0-)

    And put into the Constitution.

    This is war! These men want to conquer and subjugate women.

    Women create the entire labor force.
    Sympathy is the strongest instinct in human nature. - Charles Darwin

    by splashy on Thu Oct 24, 2013 at 11:59:53 AM PDT

  •  My wife and I voted this morning. Her voter (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    registration card has her middle initial, but her drivers license has her full middle name.  We were ready for bear.  She walked into the polling place carrying a manila folder that said in large black letters:  Proof that I am still ME after all these years of voting.

    She actually didn't have a valid picture ID with just her initial in it to match the voter registration.  But she did have a passport with the same person pictured on it as her driver license, and the same signature, but her full middle name, not the initial.  In addition to the passport, she had:

    A tax receipt with just her middle initial.
    A utility bill with just her middle initial.
    A patient clinical summary with just her middle initial.
    A pay stub with just her middle initial.
    A social security statement with just her middle initial.
    A nursing license with just her middle initial.
    A COPY of a Board of Nursing testing notice with her FULL middle name and a photograph of the same person appearing on IDs with just her middle initial.
    A receipt from a government agency showing her FULL  middle name, but also notated that she had paid with a check having only her middle initial.
    Her last will and testament with just her middle initial, but the same signature appearing on all the other documents, including the picture IDs.

    She was all prepared for them to tell her she would have to cast a provisional ballot because her voter registration had just her middle initial and the only actual voter ID she had was with her full middle name.

    Her response would have been, so you're telling me that it's more likely I'm NOT who I say I am, than it is that I'm an imposter who just happened to have all these unrelated documents belonging to someone else, who just happens to LOOK like me and who just happens to live at the same address as me, and is married to the same man as me?

    But, it didn't happen.  I think the judge's experience broadcast nationwide yesterday was too much for them.  

    They very politely noted that her voter ID and her registration card did not match, and asked her if she would like to have her voter registration changed to match her voter I.D.  She said yes, filled out a form, and was allowed to vote with no further ado.

    Dammit.  I was all ready for a ruuuuummmmble.  Her nickname isn't TOWANDA for nothing!

    Blue, blue, my world is blue...

    by ZedMont on Thu Oct 24, 2013 at 12:38:37 PM PDT

    •  A rep of the county election body for Dallas was (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      on TV last night, and described a long series of proactive steps being taken there to fix whatever has to be fixed so that  the maximum possible number voters there will at the end be eligible to vote. It apparently started as soon as the law was passed. They said they had checked the voter files to see who might have had issues, and contacted them about fixes, before voters were turned away, and so they would not be.  Not all Texas officials are as crazy as the legislature, who passed a requirement which was automatically violated by the forms they had required in prior times for governmentally issued ID.

  •  Texas is Anti Heterosexual Marriage (0+ / 0-)

    The message from Republicans for women is not to get married if you want the right to vote.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site