In the beginning there was the Civil Rights Movement. That transformed into the Civil Rights Concerto for Left Hand Percussion instruments. That transformed into the Civil Rights Business (For Profit). This business has one product and one mantra – victimization.
Like the Phoenix it seems that the incarnations this business has are infinite. That is because if you can attribute racism to anything that exists or anything anyone does, you have a never ending amount of material with which to work.
The state of North Carolina offers us a case in point with their passage of changes to their voting law requirements. No sooner was the law signed by the governor than the NAACP and ACLU filed suit to get it overturned. The premise is that the law is intended to “restrict” those who will be allowed to vote in that state’s elections. The presumption, if we are to believe those in the Civil Right Business who have already spoken out against the law is that “restrict” means disenfranchising qualified voters who happen to be black.
One of the premiere objections to the North Carolina law is that the state will require every voter to provide a valid picture ID in order to receive a ballot. “Valid” includes a variety of options: a North Carolina Driver’s License, a student ID issued by a state college or university, a current United States Passport or a North Carolina issued ID. The law, incidentally, does not go into effect until 2016 – three years from now.
A reasonable person might say that a three year time span should allow almost anyone the opportunity to obtain a valid ID so that he or she could exercise the right to vote. In that time period a woman could bear four children and a man could father a lot more. Isn’t that passionately concerned voter able to find the time to get a (free) North Carolina ID card? The card, incidentally is available at over 180 different locations throughout the state – and North Carolina isn’t one of our geographically larger states. But if a short ride is too long for that concerned voter, the entire process can be accomplished through the U. S. mail.
So taking this one portion of the law, what reasonable objection can opponents have to it? Frankly, I’m a bit mystified. But I am empathetic to their concern about voter suppression. My concern takes the reverse side of their argument – and it centers around those voters who have a legitimate right to vote and who exercise that right.
You see, every vote which is cast illegally disenfranchises the voter who actually has that right.