By Benjamin Gaul
“The Feds could not produce one single person, or provide the name of a single person, who will legitimately be unable to vote due to voter I.D.”
Witness and Expert Testimonies have concluded the trial of Texas “Voter I.D.” law where attorneys for the State of Texas have effectively destroyed the main arguments raised against the law by the Obama Administration. On cross examination, the key witness for the Justice Department even admitted he obtained his “information” from Wikipedia.
The Justice Department produced a list of 1.5 million Texans who “don’t have the government-issued photo I.D. required to vote.” But Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott proved that, of the people on that roll, 50,000 are dead, 330,000 are over the age of 65 and can vote by mail –where a photo i.d. is not required– and more than 800,000 people on the list had all the I.D. They needed.
Among the people who the DOJ listed as “lacking the required documentation needed to vote” are Former President George W. Bush, San Antonio State Senator Leticia Van de Putte, and Licia Ellis –who’s husband, Houston State Senator Rodney Ellis, last Wednesday blasted the voter I.D. law is “just like the racist murder of James Byrd,” The African-American who was dragged to death in an obviously racially motivated hate crime back in 1998.
University of Texas students had conducted a telephone survey of thousands of random people on the DOJ’s list — who allegedly don’t have the documents required to vote– and found that more than 90 percent of them, including 93 percent of African Americans and 92 percent of Hispanics on the list, actually have a photo I.D.
Which brings us to Victoria Rodriguez. The San Antonio teenager was the only individual in the parade of “experts” who the Department of Justice called to the stand, who was supposed to be representative of the 1.5 million allegedly “destined to be disenfranchised voters” under the Texas law.
Rodriguez testified that she not only lacks a photo I.D. but also lacks the documentation needed to obtain one. (Poor thing. One must wonder how she obtained tickets to travel from San Antonio to Washing DC, her not having I.D. and all.) State Rep. Trey Martinez Fischer said requiring her to pay to obtain those documents would amount to an illegal “poll tax.”
Unfortunately for the USDOJ, under cross examination, Rodriguez admitted that she has a birth certificate, a voter registration card and a Social Security Card. Only two of those three forms of I.D. are required to obtain a free voter I.D. Card as offered by the DPS.
Rodriguez responded under oath that she “doesn’t have time” to go the DPS office to obtain the voter I.D. Card. However, she also testified she had plenty of time to fly more than 1500 miles to Baltimore, catch a train to Washington DC, and sit for hours in a Federal courtroom to testify about how unfair the Texas voter I.D. law is.
Perhaps the most embarrassing point in the case for Obama’s Justice Department was the testimony of its alleged expert witness, Harvard Professor Stephen Ansolabehere. Professor Ansolabehere testified that his research indicates that the law is “more likely to affect black and Hispanic voters worse than white voters.” As if anyone expected him to say anything to the contrary.
Then, under cross examination, Ansolabehere testified that, in fact, “almost no one is excluded” by the requirement to provide I.D. in order vote.
Another Obama Department of Justice expert testified that the Legislature “intended to discriminate against minorities” when it passed the Voter I.D. bill. But J. Morgan Kousser’s comments under cross examination prove that he knows little to nothing about the Texas Legislature (he referred to State Sen. Leticia Van De Putte as the “Senate Minority Leader,” a position which doesn’t even exist in the Texas Legislature). Lawyers for the State also pointed out that he said the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, which upheld a similar voter I.D. law in Indiana, a decision that was written by Justices O’Connor, Kennedy, Scalia, Rehnquist and Thomas, was written so the five, laughably, could “promote white supremacy.” Justice Thomas is black.
Kousser has gone so far –in his race-baiting rhetoric– as to claim, in a book he authored, that republicans are “not legitimate representatives” of minority communities, and that any African American or Hispanic who supports voter I.D. “has been manipulated and misled by republicans.” In fact, Kousser admitted that he ALSO obtained many of the “facts” he used to buttress his bizarre claims from Wikipedia, an on line encyclopedia which anyone, including Kousser himself, can upload information to.
The three judge federal appeals court panel, which includes two Democrats and one Republican, will issue its ruling on the case in the coming weeks. The ruling will undoubtedly be appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.