This article shows how one group is taking advantage of minorities'. The Republicans in Texas, including Rick Perry, are using the new law they created, the SB14, to limit minorities', like Eric Kennie, access to voting for democrats since the minorities have a significant amount of political power. This shows how a dominating group can take advantage of a weak group and get away with it. Furthermore, it reflects on how a lower group considers a law unfair when a ruling group considers it normal.
This relates to what we talked about in lecture with theories of deviance. I think this is a representation of subcultural theory of deviance as the group in power is making these voting laws to benefit themselves and their own political views. Do you think that Rick Perry (and others in the same situation) will rebel against these laws? What kind of action do you think they will take?
I feel like what you described is more of a conflict approach. Those in power (The Republicans) make laws and regulations in order to support themselves and maintain their power. Meanwhile, deviance is more of a departure from traditional social norms.
I agree. It is disgusting how people will use their power to take advantage of people to benefit themselves. And I also agree with Andrew, this is a conflict approach. The republicans are using their power to maintain the power they have by lowering people who don't have much power. I find it very disturbing how people will do that and still feel alright with themselves at the end of the day.
This article plays on the principle of how laws or societal rules are formed. The more fortunate and general more affluential groups tend to control the top rungs of the social ladder and those of lower SES thusly have less of say in the decision making. I would say that this article is biased towards pulling at the heart strings of the readers. It is racially driven and in effect demonizes the supreme court decision without giving enough detail in any form of support for that decision making process. Though this article conveys its intended message of the uneven distribution of power and the voters that are being denied their rights to participate, it does not provide enough background for both sides of the argument to effectively argue for its side of the debate.
This article discusses how a law can discriminate against a particular group, in this case poorer minorities. It is sad that Eric Kennie had to travel far and spend money in order to gain voting rights. This article is very biased toward one view point and i wonder what the potential benefits are for this law. Do they outweigh the consequences?
I was wondering about the same thing. Why is this law necessary, especially for people like Kennie who have lived in the country for so long. What is the government gaining by creating this law? I understand the need for control over non citizens voting, but I think it is important to take the different situations into consideration.
Nicola Konigkramer I completely agree with your statement. Rather than discriminating, legislation is specifically targeting poor minority groups. In an extremely conservative state, this new law completely supports the Republican party, by excluding liberal minorities.
This article focuses on how power and power-wielding members can influence society and the laws surrounding society. It emphasizes how minorities and people who are less influential have no say in what rules are being made to regulate them. In a way, this article highlights the social status and shows how people who are lower in terms of status have less control over what they can do. Throughout the article, one can see how the author uses pathos and statistics to support his argument. However, this does seem a little one-sided to be objective, so it would potentially help to have more information in order to make a more informed decision about the passing of this law.
It is a shame that people still have to go through all this to vote. After all we have came from it's still people in this world who have power that feel the need to control the rights of others of a lower class. I can really relate to this growing up in Baltimore City and knowing people that could go through the same hardships Eric Kennie is going through, Minorities again are getting the lower end of the stick and I do not see any potential benefits because it is clear that minority rights are being taken away. This article may be biased but I still cannot understand why Eric Kennie has to go through so much crap just to vote. IT IS HIS RIGHTS!
Ryan Muscatella From the dawn of time, people have been stripped of their rights and disenfranchised altogether. This article shows racial discrimination along with income discrimination against the people living in poverty and also the African Americans in Texas. By enforcing a new law that disables certain people from voting, it shows that the United States is heading backwards instead of forward. If people are complaining about voter participation, then why would there be a rule that prevents people from voting? The United States is one of the most diverse countries in the world and even though America has come a long way since its birth, there are still a need for improvement. By discriminating against a large population in Texas, United States citizens are not being allowed to vote, and this proves that even in today's, people are still trying to take rights away from other individuals.
Texas is now improvising a new law to prevent the lower class from voting rights. Many cannot afford to either gain access to a valid identification so they can gain back their rights to vote. It's purely a discrimination tactic upon the state of Texas against those who may live in poverty and certain Hispanic and African American groups. Eric Kennie is going through a tremendous hardship, putting a burden on his say in the election in the state he's been living in for the last 45 years. By implementing this new law, it's affecting over 600,000 people in the state of Texas. Over the last hundred years, we've come a long way in many areas of our government. By implementing this new law, the United States is just providing yet another setback for people, enabling discrimination.
This article emphasizes how our "free and democratic" country is not willingly to change. It is engrained in humans to find ways to gain power, and then to find ways to stay in power. In the political system, many politicians find ways to gain the most votes or find ways to prevent certain votes for their competitors. This is why the new law was created. The idea of the law was probably to make sure only US citizens can vote, however by doing this it prevents very poor minorities groups from voting.
This article deals with discrimination among groups within our civilization. A poor man is being discriminated against by not having a license or a passport which the man has never needed because he doesn't travel outside of Texas, and couldn't afford a car. The government is trying to prove their power over the minority groups that don't have control to try and change the law. A mans power to vote is taken away because he doesn't have the money to purchase a passport or even a license, this goes to show that the government can still take away peoples power by making laws to effect the poor that have little money to do anything about it.
I am very shocked at reading this article. The government is preventing people of the United States their right to vote. Wasn't that problem resolved many years ago? I was under that impression, but not I realize that is not the case. This law is insulting to many people in America. It discriminates directly against the low income and minorities. The man discussed in the article is just one of thousands the law affects. An entire population is taken out from the voting polls.
After reading this article, I am stunned and disgusted. Hearing stories of US citizens being denied one of the most basic rights given brings into question the effectiveness of democracy in America. Voter participation in this nation is embarrassingly low as is, and it is because of these restrictive voter ID laws, such as SB14. I know that some people prefer see voting as a duty rather than a right, but when it comes down to it this is just simply not the case. No matter what political affiliation, all people should be given the opportunity to exercise their right to vote. Hearing Rick Perry and the Republican-heavy Texas put forth this law to hinder the Democratic hispanic and african-american voter population is sickening, and it violates the democratic nature of America, thus, bringing into question it's legitimacy.
Every democracy has elections as means of political change. In case of the United States, these elections mean alot for the people who want their issued to be raised and solved. Casting votes and choosing leaders that they think can fulfill their aspirations is one way to do so. As a result, poor people look forward to the election as a means of letting their voices heard. But, unfortunately Texas Government has made it mandatory for the voters to have voting cards such as SB14. There are stringent laws regarding how to issue one and many people are finding it a difficult task to issue the same in time. As a result, they would be denied their voting rights in these elections. Thus the Democratic hispanics and African-American majority has been denied a vote. This seems to advantage the Republicans which is not fair according to the democratic nature of the elections.
This article shows racial discrimination among the people, more specific, the African American citizens who live in poverty. This is very unfortunate due to the rules that we posses in this country here even though people meet all the standards for voting. This is just one man among many who has been affected by this law. Elections would be very different if this was changed.
This article makes me wonder what else in the world might be changed if minorities weren't discriminated against, and they were given all of the rights that any United States citizen should have. Not only might elections be different, but other things might be too. Colleen Snitzer
Kiana Smith This article talks about the government minimizing and taking away voting rights, mainly from minorities. This further shows how people in power further oppress those without. a federal district judge, Nelva Gonzales Ramos slammed the law as a cynical ploy on the part of Republicans to fend off the growing strength of the minority electorate in Texas by “suppressing the overwhelmingly Democratic votes of African Americans and Latinos." The law was created to make it harder for people to express their right and "duty" to vote, which can be seen as a tactic to curve the votes in the favor of Republicans.
This article shows how the majority can surpass the minority; making it easier for them to discriminate against people of color. Because the majority group has more say about what goes on and what doesn't go on. Republicans knew that the minority groups, like hispanics or african americans would vote for the republicans, this being the reason they set this law in place. Sarah Sakkhi
this article talks about a law that is made and somehow justified even though it takes away the rights of a large part of the population it affects. the law that is passed for political party benefits but the people it affects most is the poor population who are defenseless to it. Society needs to watch out for laws like this that sneakily take away citizens rights and find a way to justify it. -Christina Asare
This article is voiced with a definite bias, favoring the perspective of the minority population in Texas that is so greatly affected by this very subtle law. I agree with the author in the sense that the implications of this law was not appropriately voiced to the entire general public population, especially to the minority population who it would be effecting the most. Considering the fact that voting fraudulence is not as significant of an issue in Texas, the passing of this law seemed to be a bit excessive. Texas's minority population lacked a true voice, or any voice at all which is unjust.
I agree with you on the idea that the author was definitely expressing a biased opinion on the article, however given the situation, I would agree that the law is unjust and unfair for the minority population in Texas. I think that the minority population and their voices should have been taken into account before passing the law. Because the court failed to acknowledge the minority's voices, it seemed that the court was also favoring bias towards one side.
In my opinion, the SB-14 law itself is not bad. There should be a required photo ID that proves you are a citizen. Hey, if America wants to have a law that restricts voting to citizens only, then they should enforce that law.
However, obtaining that identification should not be so expensive, and should not be slanted against poor minorities. The law's application is the issue here. It shows how the group in power, comfortably-off Republicans, bias the system in their own favor. Poor minorities cannot afford to ride around all day and spend endless money to jump through loopholes reserved for them.
Just as CouchPotato was saying, the law doesn't seem so bad at first. It could help reduce election fraud. But as many have pointed out, that is not the real motive of this law. Conflict theory tells us that this is an attempt by those in power (Republicans in Texas) to sustain the limited power of minority groups in Texas by inhibiting their right to vote. The people that would vote against those in power are not able to, which will keep them in power. -- Drew Brees
It's quite sad that in order to get ID you need ID. If you already have ID why do you need ID? The Texan legislatures noticed that there was a discrepancy known as voter fraud. Voter fraud is such a problem that in a span of 10 years and 20 million votes cast only 2 prosecutions resulted in convictions. Incidentally, that a is conviction rate of .0000001%. Either voter fraud is really a problem or their is simply to many people voting for the wrong candidates. Let's do some real math. http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/oct/27/texas-vote-id-proof-certificate-minority-law
Voting "rights" are sometimes not rights at all. Driving is a privilege, not a right. The rules about bringing an ID to a voting place even if registered to vote prevents poor individuals and those who cannot drive from voting. Also, we do not get a day off to go vote so those who must work long hours and cannot take off are not accounted for by polls. This is another way the government can control and skew how votes turn out.
The idea of voting rights are very skewed in America. The Texan legislation is taking control over the voting process by not providing equal right to the minorities. The fact that the Republicans in Texans are limiting the minorities for voting for the Democratic party due to the power that they have is ludicrous. This demonstrates the idea of subculture theory of deviance by controlling the voting rights of certain subcultures. it is a shame that some political parties have to go to this extent. There is an unfair advantage in legislation and it must end.
I agree with Rebecca. I think it is unfair that there are so many things preventing every single individual with a desire to vote from exercising their right to vote. By not giving both workers and students the day off on election day, there are many people who want their voice heard but do not have the opportunity.
I believe that everyone deserves the right to vote and be heard, and most importantly the people that need to be heard are people like Eric. For a person who has lived in America his whole life and been legally able to vote in every election he has been alive for, it does not make sense that all of a sudden he cannot vote. While I understand that necessity to prevent fraud at the voting polls, the government is actually hurting themselves more with these laws because a large percentage of voters are not being accounted for now. There should be a type of grandfather-clause so that everyone who has been able to vote in in the past, such as people like Eric, can still vote.
While I do believe in Voter ID laws, I also believe that valid identification should be easily accessible to every citizen. I find the Republican's efforts in Texas appalling, because it it skews the idea of Voter ID laws to only inhibit minorities from voting. Voter ID laws apply to both parties, but it becomes a problem when one party uses these laws to limit the participation of the other.
To me, this is a sad and messed up effort by Republicans in Texas to prevent groups of poor social class and racial minorities from voting. This voting law requiring different forms of identification is not fair to people who have certain circumstances that prevent them from obtaining things like passports and driver's licenses. This law is simply taking away the right to vote from American citizens. Also, the fact that there were only two instances of voter impersonation that have led to conviction makes this law obviously unnecessary. Eric Kennie is a Texan who more than qualifies to be a citizen of the United States and has held voting to a great degree of importance since he turned eighteen. I believe that Eric, along with hundreds of thousands of other Texans like him, should definitely be allowed to continue to vote. -Simon Chang
I feel as though that they are doing all of the voter's of Texas a disservice. It is not fair to the 600,000 people who will not be able to vote this year. I find the republic efforts in Texas to be very messed up because it takes away the minorities from voting. I believe everyone has the right to vote and I feel as though they should not have to go to such strenuous efforts just to cast their vote.
According to conflict model of crime, individuals as social creatures bond together in groups because their needs are best served through collective action. Individuals constantly clash as they try to advance the interests of their group over those of the other. Lawmaking is a direct reflection of conflict between interest groups, all trying to get laws passed in their favor. According to this theory, laws do not exist for the collective good.they represent the interest of groups that have the power to get them enacted. As we can see in this article, Republican political leadership has the political control in Texas over the democrats. As the group with power, they advanced their needs/interests and suppressed the minorities, by legislating a law that do not allow 600,000 people to vote - mostly those who support the democrats. And these people can not change their situation because of lack in means.
I think this is stupid. This poor guy is just trying to do the right thing and be a good citizen. If a man can prove his address I think that he should be able to vote. He doesn't need to go out of his way and spend money that he may or may not have just to get an id. Let them vote and make the situation fair across the board.
First of all, it's important to have identification when you are going to vote but they should just show at least one identification card. This man has voted in 2008, 2012 and now Rick Perry and the Republicans decided in sign a law that restrict the minorities from voting. The point of Voting Rights Act is African Americans and other racial and ethnicity minority are guaranteed the right to vote.
This article shows how people in power can easily bend the laws to their advantage. The article states "black voters are three times more likely than whites to lack the identification requirements". That's not a coincidence. Eric Kennie has just as much a right to vote as any other Texas citizen. He's lived in Texas all his life and he's voted in multiple elections. But he's a minority, and if a minority is given any type of voice or power the power the majority has is in danger. This isn't the first time prejudice parties have created laws to ensure their power, and it won't be the last time. -Celia Reilly
Inevitable economic and societal inequality in the US as a whole leads to discrimination, and this situation just reaches to a staggering level in Texas. Apparently for the 2014 election, the state of Texas has passed what is considered the strictest voting ID law called the new voter-ID law, SB14. This requires the voters to have a ridiculous amount of information that they can only obtain through multiple procedures (thus it’s time-consuming) such as US military ID card, passport and driver license. Please note that not every Texan either serves or has been in the military, travels abroad or owns a car. In addition, Texans must also now pay a voting fee, which means nothing more than they have to spend money for their basic American citizen right. Just like what Mrs. Nelva Gonzales Ramos commented, this is plain discrimination, and they simply cannot defend the law by saying it prevents fraud when in the past 10 years there are “only two cases of voter impersonation have been prosecuted to conviction”.
This is a great example of subcultural theory of deviance. The people in power, in this case Rick Perry and the predominate amount of republicans in Texas, are making laws that will favor them in order for them to stay in power. Requiring that all potential voters have with them a valid picture-ID instead of simply showing a voter registration card posted to their home address makes the process of voting much more difficult. Acquiring what SB14 considers a valid picture-ID is very difficult and expensive for people like Eric Kennie. Though he was born and raised in Texas, his right to vote is in jeopardy if he is unable to come up with the adequate amount of money and time to attain the ID. This is silencing the voices of many poor minorities in Texas, people whom probably need to vote the most. This law was most likely put in place because minorities are more likely to vote for the democratic party. So in order for the Republicans to stay in power, they want to make the process for minorities to vote that much more difficuly. They are suppressing Eric Kennie's right to vote and that is simply not fair. -Tita
It is more than evident that those who have a higher socio-economic status and have a hand in the decision making process of this new law are motivated by the ability to control the rights of citizens. Although many have said that this article is from a biased viewpoint, what other viewpoint could this be taken from? “Breaking News, Texas passed a new law inhibiting citizens not qualified to vote?” The Texas Voter ID law does not seem to be benefiting anyone. The prison industrial complex has already made it so that those who have had a felony once in their lifetime are unable to vote for their rest of their life. In both the Texas Voter ID law and the prison industrial complex, those impacted by these laws that are tantamount to disenfranchisement in the past are minorities. In the article, Hemmer writes, “Black voters are three times more likely than whites to lack the identification requirements obligated under the new law.” If this is not evidence that indicates that the law is targeted in minimizing the ability of those who have lower socio-economic status and in the case of Texas, minorities than what is? Additionally, this article maybe “racially driven,” however there is evidence that indicates that the motive of legislators with this law is racially driven. Moreover, the author of the article is a historian of conservatism and this makes it difficult to believe that this is a article of bias as those who would be against this law would more than likely be moderate to liberal individuals. Nonetheless, this does not mean that every conservative would not disagree with this law. Furthermore, every argument does not need to identify both sides if: the first side identifies the issue and the solution that someone has taken, and whether or not there were successes and/or failures. In this case, the law does not seem to have any successes in terms of a democratic nation. However, it does have success for the power-hungry legislators who want to suppress minorities through disenfranchisement.
It's really unfortunate that Eric Kennie had to go through all of this trouble just to be able to vote, when voting s something that he has been able to do in the past years without needing his photo ID. However, I do think that it is a good idea to have someone be able to identify themselves with a photo ID when they're voting to make sure they're not taking anyone else's identity. But there was not much thought when making this rule about the minorities, who may not have any photo ID and may not even be able to afford one. I think it's clearly hard enough to feel apart of society when there is little you can afford, such as a house or a car that seem to be "typical" items to own in society. Now not everyone is able to even vote without a photo ID present, which makes people feel even more excluded from society. It's someone's right to be able to vote and it doesn't seem right to deny their privilege just because they cannot afford a photo ID of themselves.
this is definitely a form of inequality. A man with no forms of Id, and no means of acquiring an ID any time soon is being denied his basic right to vote due to a new law that clearly benefits everyone but low income members of society. it also states in the article of the estimated 600,000 texans that will probably not be able to vote in the upcoming election that the majority are blacks, hispanics and low income citizens. All of these minorities have the basic right to vote but this new law that they can not adhere to is taking that basic right away and that is unjust. Bryce Young
The voter ID law in Texas is an enormous step backward for the federal court. This law is designed to discriminate, as it serves no other purpose. I have tried to find an "unbiased" article about this issue, although most media forums deem this law "unconstitutional" and "discriminatory". The prejudice grounds for this law are evident by the lack of explanation for the law by the Texas court. The story of Kennie is an extremely sad one, especially because America should be rewarding its most patriotic and involved citizens. Kennie is willing to go through great lengths to vote. Most Americans are not willing to do so. This law does nothing besides cut out the minorities. If there are 600,000 other citizens like Kennie in texas, they deserve to have their voices heard in government. This is an example of subcultural theory of deviance because the leaders create laws the ensure their party will stay in power.
This article is an example of how the poor struggle to accommodate new policy changes. Although the motives are unclear, Texas has passed a new policy mandating photo identification in order to vote. Some think it is a political move because most people affected are low income citizen like, Kennie from the article, that would most likely vote Democratically. The purpose of the policy is to reduce vote impersonation, however Texas only has had 2 cases of voter impersonation in the past 10 years. Although most American citizen have some form photo identification, around 600,000 citizens in Texas have been inhibited from voting because of this policy. Politicians should see this as a major problem and make adjustments to this policy because their job is to serve all their constituents, not just most of them.
This article really touched me. It made me realize that we take even the simplest things for granted. Poor Eric Kennie can't even vote because with the new voter ID law in Texas, he has to show one of the six identification methods but unfortunately he cannot obtain one of those. This new law really just discriminates against the minorities that are less fortunate and do not have the money to obtain a photo ID. There are 600,000 citizens of Texas on the same boat as Eric Kennie and they deserve the right to vote! At the end of the day, all they want is their voices heard and to just simply vote. Voting is nothing to be extremely strict about, in my opinion. The government should focus on other pressing issues like the economy.
The controversial voting restrictions that were frequently in the news and now being more or less ignored by the media are one of the newest forms of discrimination. Actually, not new. Old. Quite old. Not allowing minorities to vote is one of the many things that sparked the need for a civil rights movement. The difference here is that those who are doing the oppressing are pretending that that oppression is not the intent. They claim it’s to prevent fraud, but because that problem is virtually non-existent, it is clearly to disenfranchise the minorities that would be voting for the opponents of those that wrote and passed the law. It’s all just another example of those in power taking what little power the minorities have away for their own benefit. -Matthew Glazer
It seems a little ridiculous to me that the Texan government can change this law with absolutely no warning to their citizens. It does make sense that state governments all over our country should want to cut down on voter fraud to make our democracy as fair as possible. However, they cannot just change the rules without giving people ample amount of time to obtain proper photo identification. I also believe that obtaining these ids should cost little to no money because as Americans, we have the free right to vote. This right is no longer free if it costs people large amounts of time and money to be able to vote.
The article talks about how individuals are in position of power and hierarchy are capable of altering social norms and rules. This is shown in the Texan government where they implemented to voting rules where voters are required are to show identification in order to vote. It is unfair for these laws to pass especially for minorities like Kennie who don't use identification cards in the past in order to be politically active. These rules purposely rule out minorities to lower political impact on voter's polls especially since minorities tend to vote for the democrats. This article displays how money and power are huge factors for political manipulation. It is not even considered a "right to vote" if voters are given requirements just to express their political opinions and votes.
This article is similar to what we discussed in class today about non-explicit exclusion. The law requiring a photo ID to vote greatly discriminated against 600,000 registered voters who now will be unable to vote, most of whom are democratic minorities.This was a clear ploy by the republican party (supported by Rick Perry) to decrease democratic votes in the state of texas. The claim to enact this law said that it would help prevent voter fraud even though there have only been two cases of such an incident which is trivial in the grand scheme of elections and definitely not a just enough cause to prevent 600,000 voters from voting. -Shannon Healy
The republican party has tactically put voting into their favor by preventing thousands of minorities (primarily African Americans and Hispanics). Demographically, both of these minority groups are predominantly Democratic and thus, Democratic votes take a toll due to the inability of many supporters to cast their votes. -12keys
The United States of America. The United States of a bunch of immigrants who faught for their freedom. The United States of a bunch of immigrants who band together and faught off an evil together. This country was build off the backs of a bunch of people from different places all over the world that has come together to become one united nation. I understand that immigration is something that is an issue. I really like how the US is cracking down on people that don’t have proper forms of identification and they aren’t allowed to perform and vote for the country itself. But since everyone is different in this country and everyone comes from a different case, this situation should be taken into a case-by-case basis. Erin Kennie has been an American for a very long time and feel and knows that voting is extremely important. The guy is glorified recycle-men that goes home everyday and minds his own business, but knows his duty as an AMERICAN that voting is important. How can that be taken away from someone because he doesn’t have “thirty-five” forms of identification?
Although I think it is important to be able to better identify people trying to vote for others, making people pay to get that identification brings us back to the absurd laws that were enacted by some states to prevent African Americans from voting after the civil war. It is the right of all Americans to be able to vote without money being a factor. I think that there should be some way for people who cannot afford to pay the $23 for an id card to be identified some other way to protect their rights as an American citizen.
I was really shocked to learn about the effects of the law SB14- even though this country has many states which pass their own laws; I would never have thought that something so blatantly unjust could actually get passed and signed into a law. I guess I was being naïve, but I just can’t even understand the justification for passing such a hypocritical, confusing, and complicated law. Although the purpose of voter identification is not a bad idea, the way that they are implementing this purpose is the issue. Either they need to make more resources (people) available to evaluate individual cases like Eric Kennie, or they need to revise the law and make it simpler perhaps requiring not as much identification. With the nonsensical wording of this law, I am inclined to believe that there were political motivations- prejudiced people who hold power in society hoping to intimidate certain groups of people that are discriminated against (ex. minorities) form voting in elections. Actually, in this case, the two cases of voter fraud might be preferable to preventing so many people who should have the right to vote. SW 0601
I definitely understand that immigration problems have begun to affect who can vote and how these people are identified correctly but I do not think we need to be taking such drastic measures to allow people to vote. Because the United States is such a conglomeration of different people from different backgrounds, it has come to be understood that so many different people from all over the world are going to vote in the United States regardless of where they are from. Forcing people to pay a fee to vote seems a little unnecessary since all the people that already have the right to vote in the United States come from an array of different backgrounds and beliefs.
I'm going to be incredibly frank and pull up a controversial thought regarding voting. There are a number of people who don't particularly know what a candidate's platform is, but vote for one or another due to affiliations with race, gender, ideology, religion, political party, etc. For the 2008 election of President Obama, I had a couple of friends that voted for him just because he would then become the first black president. And then they did it again for his re-election. The covert denial of voting rights to certain minority groups is unconstitutional and appalling, but if they were going to vote without thinking more deeply, I'm not sure I would be okay with them voting at all. As another example, my parents voted for the re-election of President Obama simply because they did not like the fact that Romney was Mormon. I chose not to vote because I didn't know much about the candidates' political stances and didn't want to influence the vote without that knowledge. Song Yun
I agree with some of the above comments that it is not a bad idea to require additional ID (such as photo) in order for people to vote. And while I believe the author wrote this article with some bias, I do agree with most, strictly looking at the law and its requirements, that the law presents an unfair and unequal opportunity to many people. In the case of Kennie, he exhausted every one of his resources in order to obtain the proper identification, each of which as denied. The law to require a photo ID, or one of the other options outlined in this law, is not necessarily a bad thing when it comes to preventing voting fraud, however the stipulations and requirements listed in order to obtain these IDs is what presents an unequal opportunity. By having these requirements, there is a select number of people who are singled out because they do not have the means and resources to meet these requirements, therefore singling them out when it comes to the voting process and community involvement. While the number of people who are in the same position as Kennie is certainly smaller than those who are not, the requirements needed in order to obtain these new forms of ID, if you do not already have one, are far too tailored to a specific population, rather than the whole. By not addressing the entire population, like laws should do, it ultimately appears to benefit those who can further politicians beliefs. By passing laws like this, it also sends a message that it is fair and constitutional, which singling out people is definitely not.
This article was written with a clear bias. I feel that having to require voter ID is not that bad of an idea, even though voter fraud in Texas is a small phenomenon. Although I do not agree with the multiple stipulations voters have to go through in order to be able to vote. The prevention of a portion of the population from voting creates unequal opportunities in Texas. Having to pay money to receive an identification card is absurd. Every American has the constitutional right to vote. This is like back in the day when there were voter tests, which singled out people as well. Kennie, like other poor Americans, should not have to go through such trouble to vote. The law needs to be revised in order to include the whole populations and not single out the lower class. -Foofie
The new Texas law of SB14 seems to coincide with the nation's initiatives to go along with other advances the US government has made as far as national regulation is concerned. The country has made such laws to discourage foreigners from entering the country through border control and other rights reserved for citizens, but in the process limits long-time voters such as Eric Kennie from participating in democracy. This is a problem Texas governor Rick Perry and the US government need to combat on the road ahead.
I do not think it is ridiculous to require people to show photo identification at a voting booth. The two opening paragraphs do not use good logic. At a voting booth, you cannot just ask someone to tell you their life story as proof of identification or citizenship. As long as it is somewhat easy for anybody to get a form of photo identification, I don't think that it is in any way discriminating.
Although this law seems like it has good intentions by limiting the number of cases of voting fraud, it essentially has the same outcome as the laws put into place after the civil war. These laws indirectly prohibited blacks from voting by making requirements that were impossible for recently freed slaves to meet. This new law makes it next to impossible for people in poverty, mostly minorities, to vote because they have to pay for something before they can vote. I understand and agree with the goal of reducing the cases of voter fraud, but there should be another option for people like Eric Kennie who cannot meet the requirements because they do not have the same resources as the average American.
This article demonstrates how a law can discriminate against the lower class and preventing many from voting. Although I think the law has good intentions when it comes to voter fraud, I do think this law needs to be revised. Although I generally agree, I do think the author is very biased and does not provide great points to support the argument.
SB14 is an egregious and obvious attempt by the Republican ruling majority of Texas to mitigate votes that would be for the Democratic party. SB14 is a new voting law, passed surreptitiously by the United States Supreme Court, that requires potential voters to verify who they are using six different types of identification. For many like Kennie, who lack one or more of these identifications and most likely will not be able obtain them, that have been avid voters in previous elections, this law comes as a serious controversy and heartbreaking termination of their ability to do what citizens are usually reserved to do.
This article is completely biased. It is trying to pull at the strings of our hearts with the pathos presented in Kennie's story, and I think it is a little bit of an exaggeration. Yes, the law may not be completely fair and it might be strict, but it is demonizing the supreme court. I really don't think their ONLY reasoning for passing the law was to keep minorities from voting. That actually probably wasn't even a reason at all. I also don't see why it is so hard for someone to simply acquire photo ID. Everyone should have it. Even though there haven't been very many cases of voter fraud caught, I think it is good that we are preventing it anyway. I'm not saying this article is completely wrong, but there are two sides to every story and it is ignoring the other side.
This law is very highly discriminatory and the reasoning for its passage does not justify the negative consequences effects individuals are experiencing with the law. Voting is the natural born right of every American citizen and the fact that people are prevented from exercising that right should be frowned upon. I commend Eric Kennie in his efforts to obtain the necessary identification and exercise his right. However, he should not have to go through this; it is unjust and unfair. The law is affecting minorities more than anything else, which reinforces inequality in the United States. The reasoning for the passage of the law is to combat electoral fraud but in the past 10 years, about “20 million votes have been cast, yet only two cases of voter impersonation have been prosecuted to conviction.” To me, this seems like a way to discourage minority and student votes which have been influential in the recent years of elections and goes to highlight non-explicit exclusion.
There are many Americans saying they want to help minorities, but it seems that they are just being torn down. There are some low-income minorities who cannot afford to get a license or photo identification. This causes them to not be in category to vote, which is not fair for them as citizens of the United States. Although Eric Kennie was able to do what he can to get identification, what about the others? This limits people's right. I believe there is another way to reduce voting fraud.
Under the new law, many minorities lost their voting rights. However, I don't think the law is purposely addressed to limit their voting rights, since the six photo IDs are relatively easy to acquire. Only a very small percent of minorities like Kennie does not have any of the IDs. In addition to that, the law can affect non-minorities as well. It's not Kennies skin color or race that leads to him not owning any of the IDs, therefore, a white person can also lost his/her voting rights because he/she does not have any of the IDs.
It makes me pretty sick to see that someone who was about to vote in Texas for 40 years cannot vote there anymore. I'm assuming that what this law is trying to do is to keep illegal immigrants from voting, but I'm sure there was a law in place before SB14 that was able to do so. This law seems very tyrannical, since is disproportionately affects people who come from poor backgrounds, mostly minorities, that are likely to vote democrat. This is a great example of conflict theory, how the people in power are the ones that set the standard. They set laws that will keep them in power, this creates a struggle for the people who aren't in power. This is exactly what is happening here, the people in power of Texas (Republicans) are trying to keep the others (Democrats) out of power by any means necessary, even ones that go against what this whole country is about, freedom and liberty.
There is nothing more upsetting than seeing an American citizen unable to practice one of his granted freedoms his ancestors have so greatly fought for just decades ago. I find it sickening that after 40 years of being an active part of the election process, Kennie was denied the freedom the vote because he personally could not afford it. It is unfair for minorities who were essentially forced into poverty on an unequal terrain as their more privileged counterparts to live in such a way that their voices, opinions, necessities, and desires cannot and will not be heard.
It's interesting to read about a new law enacted for the 2014 midterm elections that have actually kept people from voting; for Eric Kennie, to be a contributing member to a community and a state for over 20 years and to have his voting privileges revoked is a shame and a step back for our society. I do understand the new photo-identification laws posted by the state; however, similar to when the country raised the drinking age to 18, I believe there should be a cut-off point for which people can be grandfathered in under a rule. I can understand how a man in his 50s would lack six forms of photo identification, especially one who has been prior registered to vote for over 40 years.
Nicola Konigkramer This article is proof that our policy and policy-makers are taking a step backwards in progress for this country. Throughout history we have prevented specific groups from exercising their right to vote, and this new legislation is no different. Another interesting fact to add to this is that the state of Texas allows citizens to vote using their gun license, although student identification cards are not accepted.
This article is about how Texas new state voter law and how it requires everybody who votes to present a photo identification. This is just another way to prevent minorities from voting in elections and to suppress Democratic votes of African Americans and Latinos. This is a really dirty tricked that they pulled and to prevent not just someone, but a whole group of people to vote. Americans have the RIGHT to vote and this is like taking away their rights. IT is also unjust to put this sort of strain on them because they too are people who just want to express and practice their rights.
This article discusses how Texas now requires a photo identification in order to vote. I actually have mixed feelings about this decision, because on one hand it does prevent voter fraud and it also prevents illegal immigrants from voting. I think having the law with the intention to prevent either from occurring is acceptable, however, I do feel there is another side to it that tries to prevent minorities from having a say against the party in favor in Texas. I think this is one tactic that has secured the Republican vote for so long and requiring this ID makes it more difficult for minorities to vote. Seeing this aspect, it really seems despicable and goes against practically everything our country has fought against for through the course of history. -Lakshmi Subramanian
Honestly there isn't even much to say about this article. As a society, I feel the need that we should require certain kinds of proof for everything these days. I.E. for welfare, show proof of need, proof of actively seeking a job, etc. I can understand this man's frustration but at the same time, big deal. It is a personal policy that to me to be a functioning member of society you should always have a form of ID on you, or at least accessible. Regardless of whether one owns a car, havaing a driver's license is a necessity. Just have that and another form of ID regardless of what it is. In my case it is license and military ID. -Kenny Perez
This article is definitely an eye opener, but doesn't come to me as a surprise - especially with all of the talk on the news now of whether or not we are still living in a racist society. I have experienced racial discrimination myself and it doesn't shock most people when I say that it doesn't make anyone feel better or further benefit anyone or anything. The fact that Texans in this country are now forced to prove their identities under the new voter ID law is a sad to say the least. As most of my classmates have expressed, voting is a right and should be exercised by all of those who are eligible. This article expresses the fact that because of this law, an estimated 600,000 texans won't be able to vote in the upcoming election. Every year, more people are encouraged through advertisements and political campaigns to do their "duty" and vote. However, I believe our lawmakers are clearly sending the opposite message with their racist-driven laws. Like the article simply put- this law overwhelmingly suppresses the democratic votes of african americans and latinos. I believe the people of this nation should continue to fight for equality and equal rights for all - including voting rights.
Racial inequality is still occurring in the modern day. SB14 shows the exclusion of many of the lower class to rights that should be inherent as an American. By not allowing many of these lower class persons to be able to cast their votes (which could in turn possibly help them to eventually have a shot at making their way out of poverty), they are stuck in the lower class and unable to even vote. SB14 makes it so that the privileged are able to vote and make decisions, but they already underprivileged are denied such options. This is a classic example of racial and class inequality in America. -Glen coco
I think this article exemplifies the conflict theory approach to sociology. The political party in control currently has the goal of maintaining power and position. One method of ensuring they retain this power is by limiting the number of opposing voters. The article is centered around a new law that has been passed in Texas which severely limits the ability of some minority groups to vote. However, it is no coincidence that these minority groups are mostly in favor of the Democratic party, as opposed to the Republican majority in Texas.
This article goes to illustrate how racial inequality still exists in multiple aspects of our society that may have previously been overlooked. I feel as if this article needs no further explanation. Nothing was said in language that was difficult to understand and I'm sure no one was shocked by the info presented.
I think this article shows the inequality of racial is still exist, some people in lower classes don't even have right to vote and it is pretty sad right? --Qiao Mi
This article paints racial inequality using aspects of our society which many of us take for granted. Those in control will strive to maintain control, and this includes the potential for oppressing groups which may conflict with said group's central ideology. Discussing Texas, a highly stigmatized state when it comes to equality, this article provides a perspective on a law which directly oppresses disadvantaged individuals. Many individuals in lower classes continue to be oppressed, even when there are supposed "efforts" to champion this issue, and allow voter equality. Unfortunately, when political interests are held above the greater interests of the people as a whole, this problem will persist.
Clearly, racial inequality still exists. I think that it is ridiculous that minorities and lower class Americans continued to be oppressed. I think that voting rights should be equal to citizens of the United States.
Once ruled unconstitutional, I can't believe the act was reinstated. This just shows the ability those in power have the suppress the rights of minorities. Events where a dominant population would enforce rules to increase their power and suppress minorities have been executed throughout history. I find it unfortunate that this these men and women were allowed to vote before, but now many do not qualify because of the sudden changes so close to election. All in all, if an act like SB14 is constitutional,then it should be put in effect at an appropriate, fair time. -Brandon Chambers
I think this article demonstrates that racial inequality does still exist today. There is no reason that a man who has been born and raised in a town no longer has the right to vote anymore. Yes, the photo identification law does prevent voting fraud, however, it prevents long time citizens from voting.
This is such a classic case of inequality it's ridiculous. Those in power do not want the voices of others to be heard because it could cause them to lose their grip on power. There can't truly be equality unless every voice is being heard. Silencing minority group only ensures that the stat quo will not be changed.
This article touches on how this law has the potential to help racists turn away minorities at polling places, and how racial inequality is not just a thing of the past. It shows how voter discrimination is affecting would be voters and possibly entire elections by preventing citizens from voting.
This article talks about people with power anise it in order to control voting. Personally feel this is very unfair and everybody should be entitled to vote and every vote should count
This article shows how one group is taking advantage of minorities'. The Republicans in Texas, including Rick Perry, are using the new law they created, the SB14, to limit minorities', like Eric Kennie, access to voting for democrats since the minorities have a significant amount of political power. This shows how a dominating group can take advantage of a weak group and get away with it. Furthermore, it reflects on how a lower group considers a law unfair when a ruling group considers it normal.
ReplyDeleteAlanna Rothman:
DeleteThis relates to what we talked about in lecture with theories of deviance. I think this is a representation of subcultural theory of deviance as the group in power is making these voting laws to benefit themselves and their own political views.
Do you think that Rick Perry (and others in the same situation) will rebel against these laws? What kind of action do you think they will take?
I feel like what you described is more of a conflict approach. Those in power (The Republicans) make laws and regulations in order to support themselves and maintain their power. Meanwhile, deviance is more of a departure from traditional social norms.
DeleteAndrew Cheng
I agree. It is disgusting how people will use their power to take advantage of people to benefit themselves. And I also agree with Andrew, this is a conflict approach. The republicans are using their power to maintain the power they have by lowering people who don't have much power. I find it very disturbing how people will do that and still feel alright with themselves at the end of the day.
DeleteThis article plays on the principle of how laws or societal rules are formed. The more fortunate and general more affluential groups tend to control the top rungs of the social ladder and those of lower SES thusly have less of say in the decision making.
ReplyDeleteI would say that this article is biased towards pulling at the heart strings of the readers. It is racially driven and in effect demonizes the supreme court decision without giving enough detail in any form of support for that decision making process. Though this article conveys its intended message of the uneven distribution of power and the voters that are being denied their rights to participate, it does not provide enough background for both sides of the argument to effectively argue for its side of the debate.
This article discusses how a law can discriminate against a particular group, in this case poorer minorities. It is sad that Eric Kennie had to travel far and spend money in order to gain voting rights. This article is very biased toward one view point and i wonder what the potential benefits are for this law. Do they outweigh the consequences?
ReplyDeleteI was wondering about the same thing. Why is this law necessary, especially for people like Kennie who have lived in the country for so long. What is the government gaining by creating this law? I understand the need for control over non citizens voting, but I think it is important to take the different situations into consideration.
DeleteNicola Konigkramer
DeleteI completely agree with your statement. Rather than discriminating, legislation is specifically targeting poor minority groups. In an extremely conservative state, this new law completely supports the Republican party, by excluding liberal minorities.
This article focuses on how power and power-wielding members can influence society and the laws surrounding society. It emphasizes how minorities and people who are less influential have no say in what rules are being made to regulate them. In a way, this article highlights the social status and shows how people who are lower in terms of status have less control over what they can do. Throughout the article, one can see how the author uses pathos and statistics to support his argument. However, this does seem a little one-sided to be objective, so it would potentially help to have more information in order to make a more informed decision about the passing of this law.
ReplyDeleteIt is a shame that people still have to go through all this to vote. After all we have came from it's still people in this world who have power that feel the need to control the rights of others of a lower class. I can really relate to this growing up in Baltimore City and knowing people that could go through the same hardships Eric Kennie is going through, Minorities again are getting the lower end of the stick and I do not see any potential benefits because it is clear that minority rights are being taken away. This article may be biased but I still cannot understand why Eric Kennie has to go through so much crap just to vote. IT IS HIS RIGHTS!
ReplyDeleteRyan Muscatella
ReplyDeleteFrom the dawn of time, people have been stripped of their rights and disenfranchised altogether. This article shows racial discrimination along with income discrimination against the people living in poverty and also the African Americans in Texas. By enforcing a new law that disables certain people from voting, it shows that the United States is heading backwards instead of forward. If people are complaining about voter participation, then why would there be a rule that prevents people from voting? The United States is one of the most diverse countries in the world and even though America has come a long way since its birth, there are still a need for improvement. By discriminating against a large population in Texas, United States citizens are not being allowed to vote, and this proves that even in today's, people are still trying to take rights away from other individuals.
Texas is now improvising a new law to prevent the lower class from voting rights. Many cannot afford to either gain access to a valid identification so they can gain back their rights to vote. It's purely a discrimination tactic upon the state of Texas against those who may live in poverty and certain Hispanic and African American groups. Eric Kennie is going through a tremendous hardship, putting a burden on his say in the election in the state he's been living in for the last 45 years. By implementing this new law, it's affecting over 600,000 people in the state of Texas. Over the last hundred years, we've come a long way in many areas of our government. By implementing this new law, the United States is just providing yet another setback for people, enabling discrimination.
ReplyDeleteThis article emphasizes how our "free and democratic" country is not willingly to change. It is engrained in humans to find ways to gain power, and then to find ways to stay in power. In the political system, many politicians find ways to gain the most votes or find ways to prevent certain votes for their competitors. This is why the new law was created. The idea of the law was probably to make sure only US citizens can vote, however by doing this it prevents very poor minorities groups from voting.
ReplyDeleteAakash Patel
This article deals with discrimination among groups within our civilization. A poor man is being discriminated against by not having a license or a passport which the man has never needed because he doesn't travel outside of Texas, and couldn't afford a car. The government is trying to prove their power over the minority groups that don't have control to try and change the law. A mans power to vote is taken away because he doesn't have the money to purchase a passport or even a license, this goes to show that the government can still take away peoples power by making laws to effect the poor that have little money to do anything about it.
ReplyDeleteI am very shocked at reading this article. The government is preventing people of the United States their right to vote. Wasn't that problem resolved many years ago? I was under that impression, but not I realize that is not the case. This law is insulting to many people in America. It discriminates directly against the low income and minorities. The man discussed in the article is just one of thousands the law affects. An entire population is taken out from the voting polls.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading this article, I am stunned and disgusted. Hearing stories of US citizens being denied one of the most basic rights given brings into question the effectiveness of democracy in America. Voter participation in this nation is embarrassingly low as is, and it is because of these restrictive voter ID laws, such as SB14. I know that some people prefer see voting as a duty rather than a right, but when it comes down to it this is just simply not the case. No matter what political affiliation, all people should be given the opportunity to exercise their right to vote. Hearing Rick Perry and the Republican-heavy Texas put forth this law to hinder the Democratic hispanic and african-american voter population is sickening, and it violates the democratic nature of America, thus, bringing into question it's legitimacy.
ReplyDeleteEvery democracy has elections as means of political change. In case of the United States, these elections mean alot for the people who want their issued to be raised and solved. Casting votes and choosing leaders that they think can fulfill their aspirations is one way to do so. As a result, poor people look forward to the election as a means of letting their voices heard. But, unfortunately Texas Government has made it mandatory for the voters to have voting cards such as SB14. There are stringent laws regarding how to issue one and many people are finding it a difficult task to issue the same in time. As a result, they would be denied their voting rights in these elections. Thus the Democratic hispanics and African-American majority has been denied a vote. This seems to advantage the Republicans which is not fair according to the democratic nature of the elections.
ReplyDeleteThis article shows racial discrimination among the people, more specific, the African American citizens who live in poverty. This is very unfortunate due to the rules that we posses in this country here even though people meet all the standards for voting. This is just one man among many who has been affected by this law. Elections would be very different if this was changed.
ReplyDeleteThis article makes me wonder what else in the world might be changed if minorities weren't discriminated against, and they were given all of the rights that any United States citizen should have. Not only might elections be different, but other things might be too.
DeleteColleen Snitzer
Kiana Smith
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about the government minimizing and taking away voting rights, mainly from minorities. This further shows how people in power further oppress those without. a federal district judge, Nelva Gonzales Ramos slammed the law as a cynical ploy on the part of Republicans to fend off the growing strength of the minority electorate in Texas by “suppressing the overwhelmingly Democratic votes of African Americans and Latinos." The law was created to make it harder for people to express their right and "duty" to vote, which can be seen as a tactic to curve the votes in the favor of Republicans.
This article shows how the majority can surpass the minority; making it easier for them to discriminate against people of color. Because the majority group has more say about what goes on and what doesn't go on. Republicans knew that the minority groups, like hispanics or african americans would vote for the republicans, this being the reason they set this law in place.
ReplyDeleteSarah Sakkhi
this article talks about a law that is made and somehow justified even though it takes away the rights of a large part of the population it affects. the law that is passed for political party benefits but the people it affects most is the poor population who are defenseless to it. Society needs to watch out for laws like this that sneakily take away citizens rights and find a way to justify it.
ReplyDelete-Christina Asare
This article is voiced with a definite bias, favoring the perspective of the minority population in Texas that is so greatly affected by this very subtle law. I agree with the author in the sense that the implications of this law was not appropriately voiced to the entire general public population, especially to the minority population who it would be effecting the most. Considering the fact that voting fraudulence is not as significant of an issue in Texas, the passing of this law seemed to be a bit excessive. Texas's minority population lacked a true voice, or any voice at all which is unjust.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on the idea that the author was definitely expressing a biased opinion on the article, however given the situation, I would agree that the law is unjust and unfair for the minority population in Texas. I think that the minority population and their voices should have been taken into account before passing the law. Because the court failed to acknowledge the minority's voices, it seemed that the court was also favoring bias towards one side.
DeleteIn my opinion, the SB-14 law itself is not bad. There should be a required photo ID that proves you are a citizen. Hey, if America wants to have a law that restricts voting to citizens only, then they should enforce that law.
ReplyDeleteHowever, obtaining that identification should not be so expensive, and should not be slanted against poor minorities. The law's application is the issue here. It shows how the group in power, comfortably-off Republicans, bias the system in their own favor. Poor minorities cannot afford to ride around all day and spend endless money to jump through loopholes reserved for them.
-CouchPotato
Just as CouchPotato was saying, the law doesn't seem so bad at first. It could help reduce election fraud. But as many have pointed out, that is not the real motive of this law. Conflict theory tells us that this is an attempt by those in power (Republicans in Texas) to sustain the limited power of minority groups in Texas by inhibiting their right to vote. The people that would vote against those in power are not able to, which will keep them in power.
ReplyDelete-- Drew Brees
It's quite sad that in order to get ID you need ID. If you already have ID why do you need ID? The Texan legislatures noticed that there was a discrepancy known as voter fraud. Voter fraud is such a problem that in a span of 10 years and 20 million votes cast only 2 prosecutions resulted in convictions. Incidentally, that a is conviction rate of .0000001%. Either voter fraud is really a problem or their is simply to many people voting for the wrong candidates. Let's do some real math. http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2014/oct/27/texas-vote-id-proof-certificate-minority-law
ReplyDelete---Bl@ck Thought---
Voting "rights" are sometimes not rights at all. Driving is a privilege, not a right. The rules about bringing an ID to a voting place even if registered to vote prevents poor individuals and those who cannot drive from voting. Also, we do not get a day off to go vote so those who must work long hours and cannot take off are not accounted for by polls. This is another way the government can control and skew how votes turn out.
ReplyDeleteThe idea of voting rights are very skewed in America. The Texan legislation is taking control over the voting process by not providing equal right to the minorities. The fact that the Republicans in Texans are limiting the minorities for voting for the Democratic party due to the power that they have is ludicrous. This demonstrates the idea of subculture theory of deviance by controlling the voting rights of certain subcultures. it is a shame that some political parties have to go to this extent. There is an unfair advantage in legislation and it must end.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Rebecca. I think it is unfair that there are so many things preventing every single individual with a desire to vote from exercising their right to vote. By not giving both workers and students the day off on election day, there are many people who want their voice heard but do not have the opportunity.
ReplyDeleteI believe that everyone deserves the right to vote and be heard, and most importantly the people that need to be heard are people like Eric. For a person who has lived in America his whole life and been legally able to vote in every election he has been alive for, it does not make sense that all of a sudden he cannot vote. While I understand that necessity to prevent fraud at the voting polls, the government is actually hurting themselves more with these laws because a large percentage of voters are not being accounted for now. There should be a type of grandfather-clause so that everyone who has been able to vote in in the past, such as people like Eric, can still vote.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do believe in Voter ID laws, I also believe that valid identification should be easily accessible to every citizen. I find the Republican's efforts in Texas appalling, because it it skews the idea of Voter ID laws to only inhibit minorities from voting. Voter ID laws apply to both parties, but it becomes a problem when one party uses these laws to limit the participation of the other.
ReplyDeleteTo me, this is a sad and messed up effort by Republicans in Texas to prevent groups of poor social class and racial minorities from voting. This voting law requiring different forms of identification is not fair to people who have certain circumstances that prevent them from obtaining things like passports and driver's licenses. This law is simply taking away the right to vote from American citizens. Also, the fact that there were only two instances of voter impersonation that have led to conviction makes this law obviously unnecessary. Eric Kennie is a Texan who more than qualifies to be a citizen of the United States and has held voting to a great degree of importance since he turned eighteen. I believe that Eric, along with hundreds of thousands of other Texans like him, should definitely be allowed to continue to vote.
ReplyDelete-Simon Chang
I feel as though that they are doing all of the voter's of Texas a disservice. It is not fair to the 600,000 people who will not be able to vote this year. I find the republic efforts in Texas to be very messed up because it takes away the minorities from voting. I believe everyone has the right to vote and I feel as though they should not have to go to such strenuous efforts just to cast their vote.
ReplyDeleteAccording to conflict model of crime, individuals as social creatures bond together in groups because their needs are best served through collective action. Individuals constantly clash as they try to advance the interests of their group over those of the other. Lawmaking is a direct reflection of conflict between interest groups, all trying to get laws passed in their favor. According to this theory, laws do not exist for the collective good.they represent the interest of groups that have the power to get them enacted. As we can see in this article, Republican political leadership has the political control in Texas over the democrats. As the group with power, they advanced their needs/interests and suppressed the minorities, by legislating a law that do not allow 600,000 people to vote - mostly those who support the democrats. And these people can not change their situation because of lack in means.
ReplyDeleteI think this is stupid. This poor guy is just trying to do the right thing and be a good citizen. If a man can prove his address I think that he should be able to vote. He doesn't need to go out of his way and spend money that he may or may not have just to get an id. Let them vote and make the situation fair across the board.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all, it's important to have identification when you are going to vote but they should just show at least one identification card. This man has voted in 2008, 2012 and now Rick Perry and the Republicans decided in sign a law that restrict the minorities from voting. The point of Voting Rights Act is African Americans and other racial and ethnicity minority are guaranteed the right to vote.
ReplyDeleteAmeerat Olatunde
This article shows how people in power can easily bend the laws to their advantage. The article states "black voters are three times more likely than whites to lack the identification requirements". That's not a coincidence. Eric Kennie has just as much a right to vote as any other Texas citizen. He's lived in Texas all his life and he's voted in multiple elections. But he's a minority, and if a minority is given any type of voice or power the power the majority has is in danger. This isn't the first time prejudice parties have created laws to ensure their power, and it won't be the last time.
ReplyDelete-Celia Reilly
Inevitable economic and societal inequality in the US as a whole leads to discrimination, and this situation just reaches to a staggering level in Texas. Apparently for the 2014 election, the state of Texas has passed what is considered the strictest voting ID law called the new voter-ID law, SB14. This requires the voters to have a ridiculous amount of information that they can only obtain through multiple procedures (thus it’s time-consuming) such as US military ID card, passport and driver license. Please note that not every Texan either serves or has been in the military, travels abroad or owns a car. In addition, Texans must also now pay a voting fee, which means nothing more than they have to spend money for their basic American citizen right. Just like what Mrs. Nelva Gonzales Ramos commented, this is plain discrimination, and they simply cannot defend the law by saying it prevents fraud when in the past 10 years there are “only two cases of voter impersonation have been prosecuted to conviction”.
ReplyDeleteThis is a great example of subcultural theory of deviance. The people in power, in this case Rick Perry and the predominate amount of republicans in Texas, are making laws that will favor them in order for them to stay in power. Requiring that all potential voters have with them a valid picture-ID instead of simply showing a voter registration card posted to their home address makes the process of voting much more difficult. Acquiring what SB14 considers a valid picture-ID is very difficult and expensive for people like Eric Kennie. Though he was born and raised in Texas, his right to vote is in jeopardy if he is unable to come up with the adequate amount of money and time to attain the ID. This is silencing the voices of many poor minorities in Texas, people whom probably need to vote the most. This law was most likely put in place because minorities are more likely to vote for the democratic party. So in order for the Republicans to stay in power, they want to make the process for minorities to vote that much more difficuly. They are suppressing Eric Kennie's right to vote and that is simply not fair.
ReplyDelete-Tita
Saron Bizuayehu
ReplyDeleteIt is more than evident that those who have a higher socio-economic status and have a hand in the decision making process of this new law are motivated by the ability to control the rights of citizens. Although many have said that this article is from a biased viewpoint, what other viewpoint could this be taken from? “Breaking News, Texas passed a new law inhibiting citizens not qualified to vote?” The Texas Voter ID law does not seem to be benefiting anyone. The prison industrial complex has already made it so that those who have had a felony once in their lifetime are unable to vote for their rest of their life. In both the Texas Voter ID law and the prison industrial complex, those impacted by these laws that are tantamount to disenfranchisement in the past are minorities. In the article, Hemmer writes, “Black voters are three times more likely than whites to lack the identification requirements obligated under the new law.” If this is not evidence that indicates that the law is targeted in minimizing the ability of those who have lower socio-economic status and in the case of Texas, minorities than what is? Additionally, this article maybe “racially driven,” however there is evidence that indicates that the motive of legislators with this law is racially driven. Moreover, the author of the article is a historian of conservatism and this makes it difficult to believe that this is a article of bias as those who would be against this law would more than likely be moderate to liberal individuals. Nonetheless, this does not mean that every conservative would not disagree with this law. Furthermore, every argument does not need to identify both sides if: the first side identifies the issue and the solution that someone has taken, and whether or not there were successes and/or failures. In this case, the law does not seem to have any successes in terms of a democratic nation. However, it does have success for the power-hungry legislators who want to suppress minorities through disenfranchisement.
It's really unfortunate that Eric Kennie had to go through all of this trouble just to be able to vote, when voting s something that he has been able to do in the past years without needing his photo ID. However, I do think that it is a good idea to have someone be able to identify themselves with a photo ID when they're voting to make sure they're not taking anyone else's identity. But there was not much thought when making this rule about the minorities, who may not have any photo ID and may not even be able to afford one. I think it's clearly hard enough to feel apart of society when there is little you can afford, such as a house or a car that seem to be "typical" items to own in society. Now not everyone is able to even vote without a photo ID present, which makes people feel even more excluded from society. It's someone's right to be able to vote and it doesn't seem right to deny their privilege just because they cannot afford a photo ID of themselves.
ReplyDeletethis is definitely a form of inequality. A man with no forms of Id, and no means of acquiring an ID any time soon is being denied his basic right to vote due to a new law that clearly benefits everyone but low income members of society. it also states in the article of the estimated 600,000 texans that will probably not be able to vote in the upcoming election that the majority are blacks, hispanics and low income citizens. All of these minorities have the basic right to vote but this new law that they can not adhere to is taking that basic right away and that is unjust.
ReplyDeleteBryce Young
The voter ID law in Texas is an enormous step backward for the federal court. This law is designed to discriminate, as it serves no other purpose. I have tried to find an "unbiased" article about this issue, although most media forums deem this law "unconstitutional" and "discriminatory". The prejudice grounds for this law are evident by the lack of explanation for the law by the Texas court. The story of Kennie is an extremely sad one, especially because America should be rewarding its most patriotic and involved citizens. Kennie is willing to go through great lengths to vote. Most Americans are not willing to do so. This law does nothing besides cut out the minorities.
ReplyDeleteIf there are 600,000 other citizens like Kennie in texas, they deserve to have their voices heard in government. This is an example of subcultural theory of deviance because the leaders create laws the ensure their party will stay in power.
This article is an example of how the poor struggle to accommodate new policy changes. Although the motives are unclear, Texas has passed a new policy mandating photo identification in order to vote. Some think it is a political move because most people affected are low income citizen like, Kennie from the article, that would most likely vote Democratically. The purpose of the policy is to reduce vote impersonation, however Texas only has had 2 cases of voter impersonation in the past 10 years. Although most American citizen have some form photo identification, around 600,000 citizens in Texas have been inhibited from voting because of this policy. Politicians should see this as a major problem and make adjustments to this policy because their job is to serve all their constituents, not just most of them.
ReplyDeleteThis article really touched me. It made me realize that we take even the simplest things for granted. Poor Eric Kennie can't even vote because with the new voter ID law in Texas, he has to show one of the six identification methods but unfortunately he cannot obtain one of those. This new law really just discriminates against the minorities that are less fortunate and do not have the money to obtain a photo ID. There are 600,000 citizens of Texas on the same boat as Eric Kennie and they deserve the right to vote! At the end of the day, all they want is their voices heard and to just simply vote. Voting is nothing to be extremely strict about, in my opinion. The government should focus on other pressing issues like the economy.
ReplyDeleteThe controversial voting restrictions that were frequently in the news and now being more or less ignored by the media are one of the newest forms of discrimination. Actually, not new. Old. Quite old. Not allowing minorities to vote is one of the many things that sparked the need for a civil rights movement. The difference here is that those who are doing the oppressing are pretending that that oppression is not the intent. They claim it’s to prevent fraud, but because that problem is virtually non-existent, it is clearly to disenfranchise the minorities that would be voting for the opponents of those that wrote and passed the law. It’s all just another example of those in power taking what little power the minorities have away for their own benefit.
ReplyDelete-Matthew Glazer
It seems a little ridiculous to me that the Texan government can change this law with absolutely no warning to their citizens. It does make sense that state governments all over our country should want to cut down on voter fraud to make our democracy as fair as possible. However, they cannot just change the rules without giving people ample amount of time to obtain proper photo identification. I also believe that obtaining these ids should cost little to no money because as Americans, we have the free right to vote. This right is no longer free if it costs people large amounts of time and money to be able to vote.
ReplyDeleteThe article talks about how individuals are in position of power and hierarchy are capable of altering social norms and rules. This is shown in the Texan government where they implemented to voting rules where voters are required are to show identification in order to vote. It is unfair for these laws to pass especially for minorities like Kennie who don't use identification cards in the past in order to be politically active. These rules purposely rule out minorities to lower political impact on voter's polls especially since minorities tend to vote for the democrats. This article displays how money and power are huge factors for political manipulation. It is not even considered a "right to vote" if voters are given requirements just to express their political opinions and votes.
ReplyDeleteThis article is similar to what we discussed in class today about non-explicit exclusion. The law requiring a photo ID to vote greatly discriminated against 600,000 registered voters who now will be unable to vote, most of whom are democratic minorities.This was a clear ploy by the republican party (supported by Rick Perry) to decrease democratic votes in the state of texas. The claim to enact this law said that it would help prevent voter fraud even though there have only been two cases of such an incident which is trivial in the grand scheme of elections and definitely not a just enough cause to prevent 600,000 voters from voting.
ReplyDelete-Shannon Healy
The republican party has tactically put voting into their favor by preventing thousands of minorities (primarily African Americans and Hispanics). Demographically, both of these minority groups are predominantly Democratic and thus, Democratic votes take a toll due to the inability of many supporters to cast their votes.
ReplyDelete-12keys
The United States of America. The United States of a bunch of immigrants who faught for their freedom. The United States of a bunch of immigrants who band together and faught off an evil together. This country was build off the backs of a bunch of people from different places all over the world that has come together to become one united nation. I understand that immigration is something that is an issue. I really like how the US is cracking down on people that don’t have proper forms of identification and they aren’t allowed to perform and vote for the country itself. But since everyone is different in this country and everyone comes from a different case, this situation should be taken into a case-by-case basis. Erin Kennie has been an American for a very long time and feel and knows that voting is extremely important. The guy is glorified recycle-men that goes home everyday and minds his own business, but knows his duty as an AMERICAN that voting is important. How can that be taken away from someone because he doesn’t have “thirty-five” forms of identification?
ReplyDeleteAlthough I think it is important to be able to better identify people trying to vote for others, making people pay to get that identification brings us back to the absurd laws that were enacted by some states to prevent African Americans from voting after the civil war. It is the right of all Americans to be able to vote without money being a factor. I think that there should be some way for people who cannot afford to pay the $23 for an id card to be identified some other way to protect their rights as an American citizen.
ReplyDeleteI was really shocked to learn about the effects of the law SB14- even though this country has many states which pass their own laws; I would never have thought that something so blatantly unjust could actually get passed and signed into a law. I guess I was being naïve, but I just can’t even understand the justification for passing such a hypocritical, confusing, and complicated law. Although the purpose of voter identification is not a bad idea, the way that they are implementing this purpose is the issue. Either they need to make more resources (people) available to evaluate individual cases like Eric Kennie, or they need to revise the law and make it simpler perhaps requiring not as much identification. With the nonsensical wording of this law, I am inclined to believe that there were political motivations- prejudiced people who hold power in society hoping to intimidate certain groups of people that are discriminated against (ex. minorities) form voting in elections. Actually, in this case, the two cases of voter fraud might be preferable to preventing so many people who should have the right to vote.
ReplyDeleteSW 0601
I definitely understand that immigration problems have begun to affect who can vote and how these people are identified correctly but I do not think we need to be taking such drastic measures to allow people to vote. Because the United States is such a conglomeration of different people from different backgrounds, it has come to be understood that so many different people from all over the world are going to vote in the United States regardless of where they are from. Forcing people to pay a fee to vote seems a little unnecessary since all the people that already have the right to vote in the United States come from an array of different backgrounds and beliefs.
ReplyDelete-Chelsea Pudimott
I'm going to be incredibly frank and pull up a controversial thought regarding voting. There are a number of people who don't particularly know what a candidate's platform is, but vote for one or another due to affiliations with race, gender, ideology, religion, political party, etc. For the 2008 election of President Obama, I had a couple of friends that voted for him just because he would then become the first black president. And then they did it again for his re-election. The covert denial of voting rights to certain minority groups is unconstitutional and appalling, but if they were going to vote without thinking more deeply, I'm not sure I would be okay with them voting at all. As another example, my parents voted for the re-election of President Obama simply because they did not like the fact that Romney was Mormon. I chose not to vote because I didn't know much about the candidates' political stances and didn't want to influence the vote without that knowledge.
ReplyDeleteSong Yun
I agree with some of the above comments that it is not a bad idea to require additional ID (such as photo) in order for people to vote. And while I believe the author wrote this article with some bias, I do agree with most, strictly looking at the law and its requirements, that the law presents an unfair and unequal opportunity to many people. In the case of Kennie, he exhausted every one of his resources in order to obtain the proper identification, each of which as denied. The law to require a photo ID, or one of the other options outlined in this law, is not necessarily a bad thing when it comes to preventing voting fraud, however the stipulations and requirements listed in order to obtain these IDs is what presents an unequal opportunity. By having these requirements, there is a select number of people who are singled out because they do not have the means and resources to meet these requirements, therefore singling them out when it comes to the voting process and community involvement. While the number of people who are in the same position as Kennie is certainly smaller than those who are not, the requirements needed in order to obtain these new forms of ID, if you do not already have one, are far too tailored to a specific population, rather than the whole. By not addressing the entire population, like laws should do, it ultimately appears to benefit those who can further politicians beliefs. By passing laws like this, it also sends a message that it is fair and constitutional, which singling out people is definitely not.
ReplyDelete-Cierra Horsting
This article was written with a clear bias. I feel that having to require voter ID is not that bad of an idea, even though voter fraud in Texas is a small phenomenon. Although I do not agree with the multiple stipulations voters have to go through in order to be able to vote. The prevention of a portion of the population from voting creates unequal opportunities in Texas. Having to pay money to receive an identification card is absurd. Every American has the constitutional right to vote. This is like back in the day when there were voter tests, which singled out people as well. Kennie, like other poor Americans, should not have to go through such trouble to vote. The law needs to be revised in order to include the whole populations and not single out the lower class.
ReplyDelete-Foofie
The new Texas law of SB14 seems to coincide with the nation's initiatives to go along with other advances the US government has made as far as national regulation is concerned. The country has made such laws to discourage foreigners from entering the country through border control and other rights reserved for citizens, but in the process limits long-time voters such as Eric Kennie from participating in democracy. This is a problem Texas governor Rick Perry and the US government need to combat on the road ahead.
ReplyDelete-Cameron J. Goins/ 12/6/14
I do not think it is ridiculous to require people to show photo identification at a voting booth. The two opening paragraphs do not use good logic. At a voting booth, you cannot just ask someone to tell you their life story as proof of identification or citizenship. As long as it is somewhat easy for anybody to get a form of photo identification, I don't think that it is in any way discriminating.
ReplyDeleteAlthough this law seems like it has good intentions by limiting the number of cases of voting fraud, it essentially has the same outcome as the laws put into place after the civil war. These laws indirectly prohibited blacks from voting by making requirements that were impossible for recently freed slaves to meet. This new law makes it next to impossible for people in poverty, mostly minorities, to vote because they have to pay for something before they can vote. I understand and agree with the goal of reducing the cases of voter fraud, but there should be another option for people like Eric Kennie who cannot meet the requirements because they do not have the same resources as the average American.
ReplyDeleteThis article demonstrates how a law can discriminate against the lower class and preventing many from voting. Although I think the law has good intentions when it comes to voter fraud, I do think this law needs to be revised. Although I generally agree, I do think the author is very biased and does not provide great points to support the argument.
ReplyDeleteSB14 is an egregious and obvious attempt by the Republican ruling majority of Texas to mitigate votes that would be for the Democratic party. SB14 is a new voting law, passed surreptitiously by the United States Supreme Court, that requires potential voters to verify who they are using six different types of identification. For many like Kennie, who lack one or more of these identifications and most likely will not be able obtain them, that have been avid voters in previous elections, this law comes as a serious controversy and heartbreaking termination of their ability to do what citizens are usually reserved to do.
ReplyDeleteThis article is completely biased. It is trying to pull at the strings of our hearts with the pathos presented in Kennie's story, and I think it is a little bit of an exaggeration. Yes, the law may not be completely fair and it might be strict, but it is demonizing the supreme court. I really don't think their ONLY reasoning for passing the law was to keep minorities from voting. That actually probably wasn't even a reason at all. I also don't see why it is so hard for someone to simply acquire photo ID. Everyone should have it. Even though there haven't been very many cases of voter fraud caught, I think it is good that we are preventing it anyway. I'm not saying this article is completely wrong, but there are two sides to every story and it is ignoring the other side.
ReplyDeleteOyin Adedipe, 0601
ReplyDeleteThis law is very highly discriminatory and the reasoning for its passage does not justify the negative consequences effects individuals are experiencing with the law. Voting is the natural born right of every American citizen and the fact that people are prevented from exercising that right should be frowned upon. I commend Eric Kennie in his efforts to obtain the necessary identification and exercise his right. However, he should not have to go through this; it is unjust and unfair. The law is affecting minorities more than anything else, which reinforces inequality in the United States. The reasoning for the passage of the law is to combat electoral fraud but in the past 10 years, about “20 million votes have been cast, yet only two cases of voter impersonation have been prosecuted to conviction.” To me, this seems like a way to discourage minority and student votes which have been influential in the recent years of elections and goes to highlight non-explicit exclusion.
There are many Americans saying they want to help minorities, but it seems that they are just being torn down. There are some low-income minorities who cannot afford to get a license or photo identification. This causes them to not be in category to vote, which is not fair for them as citizens of the United States. Although Eric Kennie was able to do what he can to get identification, what about the others? This limits people's right. I believe there is another way to reduce voting fraud.
ReplyDeleteRuby22
Under the new law, many minorities lost their voting rights. However, I don't think the law is purposely addressed to limit their voting rights, since the six photo IDs are relatively easy to acquire. Only a very small percent of minorities like Kennie does not have any of the IDs. In addition to that, the law can affect non-minorities as well. It's not Kennies skin color or race that leads to him not owning any of the IDs, therefore, a white person can also lost his/her voting rights because he/she does not have any of the IDs.
ReplyDelete- Jialun Lin
It makes me pretty sick to see that someone who was about to vote in Texas for 40 years cannot vote there anymore. I'm assuming that what this law is trying to do is to keep illegal immigrants from voting, but I'm sure there was a law in place before SB14 that was able to do so. This law seems very tyrannical, since is disproportionately affects people who come from poor backgrounds, mostly minorities, that are likely to vote democrat. This is a great example of conflict theory, how the people in power are the ones that set the standard. They set laws that will keep them in power, this creates a struggle for the people who aren't in power. This is exactly what is happening here, the people in power of Texas (Republicans) are trying to keep the others (Democrats) out of power by any means necessary, even ones that go against what this whole country is about, freedom and liberty.
ReplyDeleteThere is nothing more upsetting than seeing an American citizen unable to practice one of his granted freedoms his ancestors have so greatly fought for just decades ago. I find it sickening that after 40 years of being an active part of the election process, Kennie was denied the freedom the vote because he personally could not afford it. It is unfair for minorities who were essentially forced into poverty on an unequal terrain as their more privileged counterparts to live in such a way that their voices, opinions, necessities, and desires cannot and will not be heard.
ReplyDeleteIt's interesting to read about a new law enacted for the 2014 midterm elections that have actually kept people from voting; for Eric Kennie, to be a contributing member to a community and a state for over 20 years and to have his voting privileges revoked is a shame and a step back for our society. I do understand the new photo-identification laws posted by the state; however, similar to when the country raised the drinking age to 18, I believe there should be a cut-off point for which people can be grandfathered in under a rule. I can understand how a man in his 50s would lack six forms of photo identification, especially one who has been prior registered to vote for over 40 years.
ReplyDeleteNicola Konigkramer
ReplyDeleteThis article is proof that our policy and policy-makers are taking a step backwards in progress for this country. Throughout history we have prevented specific groups from exercising their right to vote, and this new legislation is no different. Another interesting fact to add to this is that the state of Texas allows citizens to vote using their gun license, although student identification cards are not accepted.
This article is about how Texas new state voter law and how it requires everybody who votes to present a photo identification. This is just another way to prevent minorities from voting in elections and to suppress Democratic votes of African Americans and Latinos. This is a really dirty tricked that they pulled and to prevent not just someone, but a whole group of people to vote. Americans have the RIGHT to vote and this is like taking away their rights. IT is also unjust to put this sort of strain on them because they too are people who just want to express and practice their rights.
ReplyDeleteThis article discusses how Texas now requires a photo identification in order to vote. I actually have mixed feelings about this decision, because on one hand it does prevent voter fraud and it also prevents illegal immigrants from voting. I think having the law with the intention to prevent either from occurring is acceptable, however, I do feel there is another side to it that tries to prevent minorities from having a say against the party in favor in Texas. I think this is one tactic that has secured the Republican vote for so long and requiring this ID makes it more difficult for minorities to vote. Seeing this aspect, it really seems despicable and goes against practically everything our country has fought against for through the course of history.
ReplyDelete-Lakshmi Subramanian
Honestly there isn't even much to say about this article. As a society, I feel the need that we should require certain kinds of proof for everything these days. I.E. for welfare, show proof of need, proof of actively seeking a job, etc. I can understand this man's frustration but at the same time, big deal. It is a personal policy that to me to be a functioning member of society you should always have a form of ID on you, or at least accessible. Regardless of whether one owns a car, havaing a driver's license is a necessity. Just have that and another form of ID regardless of what it is. In my case it is license and military ID.
ReplyDelete-Kenny Perez
This article is definitely an eye opener, but doesn't come to me as a surprise - especially with all of the talk on the news now of whether or not we are still living in a racist society. I have experienced racial discrimination myself and it doesn't shock most people when I say that it doesn't make anyone feel better or further benefit anyone or anything. The fact that Texans in this country are now forced to prove their identities under the new voter ID law is a sad to say the least. As most of my classmates have expressed, voting is a right and should be exercised by all of those who are eligible. This article expresses the fact that because of this law, an estimated 600,000 texans won't be able to vote in the upcoming election. Every year, more people are encouraged through advertisements and political campaigns to do their "duty" and vote. However, I believe our lawmakers are clearly sending the opposite message with their racist-driven laws. Like the article simply put- this law overwhelmingly suppresses the democratic votes of african americans and latinos. I believe the people of this nation should continue to fight for equality and equal rights for all - including voting rights.
ReplyDelete- Louis Pardo
Racial inequality is still occurring in the modern day. SB14 shows the exclusion of many of the lower class to rights that should be inherent as an American. By not allowing many of these lower class persons to be able to cast their votes (which could in turn possibly help them to eventually have a shot at making their way out of poverty), they are stuck in the lower class and unable to even vote. SB14 makes it so that the privileged are able to vote and make decisions, but they already underprivileged are denied such options. This is a classic example of racial and class inequality in America.
ReplyDelete-Glen coco
I think this article exemplifies the conflict theory approach to sociology. The political party in control currently has the goal of maintaining power and position. One method of ensuring they retain this power is by limiting the number of opposing voters. The article is centered around a new law that has been passed in Texas which severely limits the ability of some minority groups to vote. However, it is no coincidence that these minority groups are mostly in favor of the Democratic party, as opposed to the Republican majority in Texas.
ReplyDeleteAndrew Cheng
This article goes to illustrate how racial inequality still exists in multiple aspects of our society that may have previously been overlooked. I feel as if this article needs no further explanation. Nothing was said in language that was difficult to understand and I'm sure no one was shocked by the info presented.
ReplyDeleteI think this article shows the inequality of racial is still exist, some people in lower classes don't even have right to vote and it is pretty sad right? --Qiao Mi
ReplyDeleteThis article paints racial inequality using aspects of our society which many of us take for granted. Those in control will strive to maintain control, and this includes the potential for oppressing groups which may conflict with said group's central ideology. Discussing Texas, a highly stigmatized state when it comes to equality, this article provides a perspective on a law which directly oppresses disadvantaged individuals. Many individuals in lower classes continue to be oppressed, even when there are supposed "efforts" to champion this issue, and allow voter equality. Unfortunately, when political interests are held above the greater interests of the people as a whole, this problem will persist.
ReplyDeleteClearly, racial inequality still exists. I think that it is ridiculous that minorities and lower class Americans continued to be oppressed. I think that voting rights should be equal to citizens of the United States.
ReplyDeleteOnce ruled unconstitutional, I can't believe the act was reinstated. This just shows the ability those in power have the suppress the rights of minorities. Events where a dominant population would enforce rules to increase their power and suppress minorities have been executed throughout history. I find it unfortunate that this these men and women were allowed to vote before, but now many do not qualify because of the sudden changes so close to election. All in all, if an act like SB14 is constitutional,then it should be put in effect at an appropriate, fair time.
ReplyDelete-Brandon Chambers
I think this article demonstrates that racial inequality does still exist today. There is no reason that a man who has been born and raised in a town no longer has the right to vote anymore. Yes, the photo identification law does prevent voting fraud, however, it prevents long time citizens from voting.
ReplyDeleteThis is such a classic case of inequality it's ridiculous. Those in power do not want the voices of others to be heard because it could cause them to lose their grip on power. There can't truly be equality unless every voice is being heard. Silencing minority group only ensures that the stat quo will not be changed.
ReplyDelete- Malcolm Lawanson
This article touches on how this law has the potential to help racists turn away minorities at polling places, and how racial inequality is not just a thing of the past. It shows how voter discrimination is affecting would be voters and possibly entire elections by preventing citizens from voting.
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about people with power anise it in order to control voting. Personally feel this is very unfair and everybody should be entitled to vote and every vote should count
ReplyDelete