Now that the courts are smacking down the ALEC inspired vote suppression laws, Republicans are test marketing various escape routes. Do they leave vote suppression efforts to the states while denying it is part of the GOP identity? Do they own it? Do they just change their talking points to accommodate the audience they are addressing at the moment?
Rand Paul is using the Mitt Romney approach of flip flopping. During a discussion with David Axelrod he admitted that rampant voter fraud doesn’t exist. On Friday, he pointed out that vote suppression tends to “offend people” especially those believe in popular elections. The comment created a short term impression that maybe Rand was breaking with the vote suppression element within the Republican Party. The Voter Integrity Project got so mad at Paul that it published a scolding to warn him against getting all liberal on voting rights.
By Monday, Rand pivoted back to his earlier position in support of vote suppression laws, just as long as it’s done by the states so the Republican Party doesn’t get blamed for it.
To get more stories like this, subscribe to our newsletter The Daily.
Sure, that’s the perfect solution. Since Republican controlled states have been passing these laws, Paul’s latest pivot amounts to advocating more of the same.
The Republican Party is the only party that has actively sought to suppress and otherwise manipulate the vote through various machinations. Republicans have passed laws to reduce or eliminate absentee and early voting. Republicans choose hard to access vote locations for districts that are predominantly comprised of racial minorities and the working poor. Republicans even tried denying voters access to bathrooms because hey, if you can’t hold it for several hours, maybe you shouldn’t be voting.
It was a Republican law maker who bragged that vote suppression would deliver his state to Mitt Romney. It was low level Republican official who said that if vote suppression laws just happen to hurt “lazy blacks” so what.
Given all these facts who in their right mind would associate vote suppression by Republicans at the state level with the Republican Party as a brand?
Scott Walker remains true to the cause of vote suppression. Walker considered ordering a special session to tweak the Wisconsin vote suppression bill before Judge Adelman’s ruling which frankly is solid on the law in Wisconsin, but can easily be applied to comparable vote suppression laws in other states. In fact, the DOJ amended its complaint in a challenge to the Texas vote suppression law to include it. But hey, even if that ruling spells the death knell of restrictive voter ID requirements, there’s always putting up intimidating billboards in predominantly minority neighborhoods. Unlike Rand Paul, Walker isn’t concerned about offending voters because hey, this is about stopping all that non-existent voter fraud.
Of the GOP’s possible 2016 candidates, Bush proved his vote suppression cred and his brotherly loyalty with his infamously flawed voter purge in 2000. It’s possible that rather than being linked to current vote suppression tactics, he’s hoping the Tea Party will remember that purge and that everyone else will forget.
Then there’s the Ted Cruz approach obviously designed to please those who believe that voting should be restricting to rich white men. No one could be more dedicated to suppressing the vote than Ted Cruz. He applauded the SCOTUS ruling that gutted the Voting Rights Act because federal laws protecting against discrimination just get in the way of a good vote suppression law at the state level.
He remains dedicated to scaring his devoted followers with the debunked talking point of voter fraud. Cruz, who just happens to be a dual citizen of Canada and the United States, tried to insert voter ID requirements in an immigration bill suggesting that he differs with Rand Paul’s view that vote suppression is a state’s right.
Regardless of Rand Paul’s desires, vote suppression is part of the Republican brand. The only difference is whether they own it or whether they use the sneaky approach of “leaving it to the states.”
Image; The Raw Story
Former contributor.
