I must provide an explanatory disclaimer for this column. It was written in a fugue state triggered by a relentless onslaught of campaign ads, eyes locked in a fixed stare, eerie music in the background, and visions of dark hordes of American-hating terrorists rolling into my carport and opening fire on the laundry room with shoulder-launched rockets. At election time, reality becomes elusive, and words don’t always mean what they say. Oh yeah, and electoral commentary laws require me to include this bit: “I’m Randy Serraglio, and I approve this column.”
This year’s electoral trouble started on primary day, which happened to be my birthday. I thought, Gee, isn’t this great—the gift of democracy—what could be better? Then I choked down the rest of my scotch and tottered over to the polling place….
Wait—did I say “scotch”? I’m sorry, I must have misspoken, or mistyped, or mis-something. I meant “orange juice.” I was definitely drinking OJ that day. Those words sound very similar, so I can see why you might have misinterpreted my position on this issue. Also, that statement was taken out of context—I was probably discussing the butterscotch scone I may have eaten that day. You see, “scotch” without the “butter” means something very different, doesn’t it? No worries, it’s a totally understandable mistake. Yes, clearly it was “milk” that I meant to say all along, because milk makes America strong.
Anyway, at the polling place—fortified by hormone-infused, antibiotic-saturated, bio-engineered, pesticide-flavored, profoundly-unhealthy-but-totally-feel-good all-American animal snot, but not at all under the influence of anything to do with Scotland, or Kentucky, or fermented grains of any kind, other than the ones that rotted in the cow’s stomach—I enthusiastically embraced my duty as a citizen of a democratic society and created the customary troublesome scene.
It’s a consistent pattern: I show my voter identification card and the neon yellow postcard that guides me to the correct voting location, and they tell me I must show a photo ID to vote. Well versed in the law, and not misled or hopelessly confused by the sort of training that results in widespread ignorance of the law among poll workers, I say “No, I don’t need a photo ID to vote.” They insist I do, usually with substantial doses of condescension and suspicion. We go back and forth until I flip over the postcard and point to the truth, right there in neon yellow, which lists a wide range of identification options, at the very bottom of which appear my choices: “voter ID card” and “piece of official election mail.” I firmly repeat, “This is official election mail. This is sufficient ID under the law.”
This time they gave in, but sometimes they continue to argue, which then requires intervention by whoever happens to be managing the polling place at that moment. Inasmuch as voter identification fraud is virtually nonexistent in our country, I daresay the law works better than the bogus poll worker training, but surely the wizards in the elections department must have a good reason for misinforming so many well intentioned poll workers.
The problems I encounter every time I vote may result from simple ignorance and bad training, or they may be fallout from the nationwide push by the Republican Party to attack the chimera of voter fraud, which translates to “suppress turnout among poor, young and minority voters who generally vote for Democrats.” I doubt that it’s a coincidence that my polling place is in an economically depressed section of the south side of town with a majority Latino demographic.
As conspiracies go, this one is pretty transparent. Republicans screw over poor, young and minority citizens at every available opportunity because when those people lose, old rich white guys win and get even richer. Even in these very confused times, two plus two still equals four (for the winners, zero for the losers).
In Ohio, Wisconsin, Georgia, North Carolina, Texas, here in Arizona, and in many other places Republican lawmakers and election officials are endeavoring to implement a diverse array of obstacles to poor, young and minority voters, including cumbersome (and totally unnecessary) ID requirements. The non-partisan Government Accountability Office recently determined that such obstacles disproportionately suppress turnout among young and minority voters, which is not surprising, since that’s exactly what they’re intended to do.
To learn more about this cynical attack on one of the most fundamental of our civil rights, go to http://www.866ourvote.org/ or call (800) OUR-VOTE if you have problems voting. To fight back, sign up as an Election Protection volunteer on the Arizona Advocacy Network web site at bit.ly/AZVoterProtection or call Abby Okrent in Tucson at abby.okrent@gmail.com.
This article appears in Oct 30 – Nov 5, 2014.
This is really facetious and argumentative. Your comments about being under the influence of Scotch make sense. You identify yourself with a photo for nearly everything, everywhere. Travel, banking, purchases of various items…need I go on. What is the downside of identifying yourself to vote with all of the documented fraud taking place in both extreme political camps. Instead of imagining the poor are experiencing discrimination (I say imagining because they, too, need to provide photo ID for almost everything else), just get over it and act like any self respecting American citizen… from either major party. BTW: When you clarified your unusual request, the polling place did comply with your wishes. You obviously went out of your way to NOT provide an ID for the purpose of “stirring the pot”. My guess is that you communicated trouble through body language and demeanor because over 90% of our communication is done that way. Truth is, a photo ID is the BEST way to identify even if your mail combined with card is acceptable.
Your argument might hold a tiny bit of weight, Mr. Watson, if there were such a thing as “all of the documented voter fraud taking place”, but there simply is not. It’s a nonexistent problem trumped up by liars like Rush Limbaugh to provide political cover for the GOP effort to suppress the vote among demographics that are not favorable to them. THAT part is indeed thoroughly documented, not only by the non-partisan GAO, but also by a whole raft of voter protection groups that work hard to protect the rights of everyone–you, me, and the many people who do not have a photo ID with the correct address on it yet are still, BY LAW, not prevented from voting.
“Self-respecting American citizens”–or should we say, those American citizens who respect OTHERS and their rights–do not attempt to subvert the law and justify it with preachy lectures based in ignorance and paranoid fantasies.
One of the reasons people like me become polling place inspectors is because of the problems you pointed out for yourself which are not acceptable to people like me. It seems the polling place you entered was being improperly run and you should report it to the county. There is a process the state requires when such complaints are submitted and I believe F. Ann Rodriguez is still of your favored party.
I feel I’m more interested in the voting process since most else of what you write is a rant and horribly biased. I have worked precincts all around this county and others as well and have never seen what you describe. Well, except one time which was the impetus for me to become an inspector, the guy who runs the polling place.
In the mid~90s, I lived and worked in an adjacent, heavily Democrat county {it still is}. Unfortunately, the aging, racist minority had not yet completely died off and one of them was a bitter old woman, a fellow poll worker. We also had two local, Spanish speaking ladies assigned to help translate any questions; one from each major party. This woman imperiously declared there would be no Spanish spoken that day which rendered these two other women virtually impotent in their Constitutional duties. I indignantly complained and was assigned to another polling place for my diligence. I never knew the result at the other location.
I feel your comments here are as much a disservice to the voting process as those whom you claim obstruct it. Your allusion to alcohol might be more accurate than glib which you might want to reconsider when going about your business as a blogger with certain influence.
Ever wonder why our Legislature thinks its OK for a felon to buy a gun without any form of identification because to require ID would deprive said felon of his constitutional rights but all of us law abiding citizens have to show photo ID at the polls in order to vote, what happened to our rights?
Michael, do you have the provision in the ARS that allows for felons to purchase handguns? If you can find one then I’ll stand with you to help have it repealed but if it’s just another vision in your mirror then go pound sand.