Racism alleged in voter ID campaign

Posted at 1:37 PM on February 20, 2012 by Tim Pugmire (30 Comments)
Filed under: Campaign 2012, MN Legislature

The debate over a proposed voter ID constitutional amendment took a new twist today when opponents accused supporters of using racial imagery to push their agenda.

TakeAction Minnesota and other anti-amendment groups accused the pro-amendment group Minnesota Majority of using its web site for "race baiting." Minnesota Majority is leading the effort to require citizens to show a photo identification in order to vote. An image on the group's website shows people lined up at a voting booth, including three in what appear to be Halloween costumes, along with an African-American man dressed in a striped prison uniform and another person in a mariachi costume. During a news conference, state Rep. Rita Rena Moran, DFL-St. Paul, said she was sickened by what she views as racial stereotypes.

"They presume to call out certain groups of voting constituencies -- African Americans, Latinos in particular -- and compare them to the fearful characters of Halloween," Moran said. "This is wrong."

But Dan McGrath, executive director of Minnesota Majority, rejected the claims as "ridiculous." He said the images are a political cartoon, and he described it as "coincidental" that the felon attempting to vote is an African American. McGrath explained the person in the mariachi costume is "supposed to be an illegal immigrant, and it's kind of difficult to convey that."

McGrath also rejected TakeAction Minnesota's request that Minnesota Majority remove the images from its web site. He said the message is about ineligible voters and has nothing to do with race.

"These kind of groups use that tactic all the time," McGrath said. "When they don't have an intellectually valid argument to make, they resort to ad hominem attacks and accuse their opponent of being a racist. I think it's wearing thin, and I think the public doesn't buy that kind of stuff anymore."

UPDATE
The pro-amendment group changed the impage on its web site.

---

Comments (30)

McGrath obviously does not know what an ad hominem logical fallacy is. I suppose this is understandable considering his group is the most egregious twister of logic in this regard. He makes a good Thracymachus - might makes right!

Posted by Michael Farnham | February 20, 2012 2:42 PM

---

After watching the short documentary The Barber of Birmingham over the weekend and hearing about the obstacles people had to overcome in order to vote, I'd have to agree with TakeAction Minnesota. I noticed on the MN Majority website they took down the cartoons but left up a "race card" with an explanation of their side of the argument. I haven't seen any evidence to convince me that there is election fraud going on that would merit requiring a constitutional amendment to require IDs to vote.

Posted by Loretta | February 20, 2012 3:01 PM

---

McGrath and his play organization, the "Moral Majority" are neither moral nor the majority. And the tactics he uses are simply for inciting fear and hatred to gain followers of his insanity. This is all he has to work with because the facts and honest, ethical debate are beyond them.

Thank you to Rep. Moran (and MPR for covering it) for calling out this madness!

Posted by LisaT | February 20, 2012 3:13 PM

---

I've got 4 MAJOR POINTS HERE. 1) McGrath knows that he needs non-racist whites to be duped by his own group's racism in order to pass this voter ID bill; 2) but there's no mistake about it, he, and his supporters, clearly DO NOT want Blacks, Hispanics, and anybody else he does not like to vote based on these pictures because, let's face it, nobody white is targeted in this ad at all. 3) The term MAJORITY is itself a euphemism for white only, because Blacks, Latinos, and Asians are all classified as minorities. 4) But, worse, while his group claims to be uphold the American constitution, he's advocating disenfranchising people's American and Minnesotan constitutional right to vote, which that action, in itself, should make us all pause and wonder aloud if this group is a Nazi group clandestinely working against all Americans.

Posted by lawrence | February 20, 2012 3:16 PM

---

Looks like a pretty weak argument of racism to me; just the lunatic suggestion that illegal immigrants are all mariachis.

On the other hand, the MN Majority argument that photo ID is not a barrier to voting is also manifestly false. It is a poll tax since it costs money to get even a free id: time off work, acquiring required documents, transportation to the ID facility, etc. These costs will disenfranchise some poor voters. Others will decide that voting is not worth that time, money, and effort even if they can afford it.

Also, if ID is not required for absentee voting how does this reduce the potential for fraud in any way?

Posted by Matthew Fry | February 20, 2012 3:18 PM

---

Poor Minnesota Majority. Caught stacking the deck with racist images, it now whines about its opponents "playing the race card."

What silly projection on the part of those who started the photoID game, opened their deck, and laid their cards on the table for all to see.

Posted by Sally Jo Sorensen | February 20, 2012 3:21 PM

---

Using racialized images unmasks the reality behind this "campaign" for the Voter ID referendum. There is no evidence of Voter Fraud in MN--that has been proved over and over again. Instigating fear of some kind of "other" to disenfranchise people is the lowest political form and has no place in a civilized public debate.

Posted by Doran Schrantz | February 20, 2012 3:25 PM

---

A thinking person would support any effort to get the disenfranchised to obtain a state id because isn't the lack of proper id, a barrier to employment and benefits?

This effort to keep the poor undocumented and disenfranchised merely confirms the worst suspicions that conservatives have about the soft racism of liberals.

Posted by GregS | February 20, 2012 3:44 PM

---

Please edit: It's Rep. Rena Moran who spoke up against this awful, race-baiting "cartoon."

Posted by atom | February 20, 2012 3:45 PM

---

Does MN Majority have any evidence of voter fraud?
I find it hard to imagine that people in the country illegally would be trying to vote- aren't they just trying to stay under the radar? Thank you Governor Dayton for calling this as it is- a solution without a problem. I hope that the real majority of voters in Minnesota see this for what it is.

Posted by Gabrielle | February 20, 2012 4:06 PM

---

I agree with the above comments, but have any of you gone to see a doctor the last few years? It is impossible to see one without first presenting a photo I.D. Just try it.

Even the poor must have a photo I.D. to see a doctor.

Posted by Mary | February 20, 2012 4:11 PM

---

Mr. McGrath makes an astonishing claim: that racial caricatures have no political content other than the narrow one he imposes after the fact. I have a question. Why not simply apologize? My sense is that McGrath his either tone deaf or cynical. Either way, his argument is unlikely to gain much currency.

Posted by Rick | February 20, 2012 4:22 PM

---

The primary group of voters this is bill is intended to block is college students. Very few will have a voter ID with their current address (most will have just moved within a few weeks of the election). As for undocumented aliens - quite doubtful that any are going out to vote - their name would not be on the registry, and they certainly would not want to do anything to call attention to themselves. A felon with a driver’s license would find it easier to vote under this law. As the MN Majority has said themselves, a fake ID is easy to obtain and impossible to detect at the polls - so what value is there in requiring an ID to vote? If someone is going to vote illegally, wouldn't it be logical to assume that voter has obtained a fake ID. Finally, what would an ID requirement do to prevent fraudulent absentee voting? This whole exercise is a sham, and is intended to "bring out the base", especially when the base hasn't a presidential or senatorial candidate to rally behind.

Posted by David Poretti | February 20, 2012 4:39 PM

---

Mary,
The poor don't go to the doctor. They go to the emergency room where all are treated so there is no need for a photo ID. There are a lot of people that can get by without a photo ID. They use cash, pre-paid debit cards, non-banks, etc.

And my doctors don't ask for a photo ID; they ask for an insurance card to match up with their records and to make sure they get paid.

Posted by James | February 20, 2012 4:49 PM

---

If the portrayed prisoner was white, there would be no discussion!

Posted by Frank Z. | February 20, 2012 5:12 PM

---

"Even the poor must have a photo I.D. to see a doctor." And the effect was predictable: people unable to get photo ID have been denied access to medical care:

http://www.mnprogressiveproject.com/diary/10880/answer-to-fun-with-debunking-the-right-photo-id-s-for-medicaid

Posted by EricF | February 20, 2012 5:13 PM

---

@Frank "If the portrayed prisoner was white, there would be no discussion!"

If the portrayed prisoner were white, Minnesota Majority would have no objection to letting him vote.

Maybe Minnesota Majority would like to explain why they put up threatening billboards in minority neighborhoods, but not in white ones. Only minorities commit voter fraud apparently. How do we know they're committing voter fraud? Well, they aren't white when they vote, and how much more proof does anyone want?

Posted by EricF | February 20, 2012 5:21 PM

---

Nice try Mr. McGrath. Racists invented the "Race Card", and the post-Goldwater Republican Party started playing that "Race Card" with its "Southern Strategy" of racial electoral polarization, a strategy that was first unleashed by Richard Nixon's political team during the 1968 presidential campaign. Over the last four decades, that strategy has evolved such that it now represents an overt effort to either suppress voter turnout by non-Caucasians via voter intimidation, and voter misinformation, or disenfranchise non-Caucasians outright via racially skewed redistricting. It is indeed fitting that your leader's name is, of all things, Jeff(erson) Davis.

Posted by C. David Kearsley | February 20, 2012 6:10 PM

---

Of course, the Caucasian person is dressed as a super hero. This kind of propaganda is so overtly racist that I can't believe Minnesota Majority is still attempting to defend themselves. I appreciate MPR's reporting and only hope that others will begin to realize that this is not a voting issue, it's an issue of race and discrimination.

Posted by AJ | February 20, 2012 6:12 PM

---

After years of defending similar campaign pieces and commercials, Lee Atwater on his deathbed apologized for his behavior and asked forgiveness. Let's hope that Minnesota Majority's Dan McGrath is able to recognize his mistake much earlier than that.

Posted by Bob Hulteen | February 20, 2012 7:39 PM

---

I don't think that the Voter ID effort will support the disenfranchised to obtain a state id. Voter ID will not break barriers to employment and benefits for lack of proper id.

Anyone who's ever done GOTV work can tell you that difficulties arise when election day comes around. Raising barriers would make them more difficult.

This effort to disenfranchise the poor confirms the worst suspicions that liberals have about the hard racism of conservatives.

Posted by Jason Samuels | February 20, 2012 7:55 PM

---

GregS suggests a voter ID bill would give free IDs that could be used for employment and benefits. Jason Samuels on the other hand doubts this. The truth? The best guide we have is the bill the legislature passed last year, S.F. 509. It provided for a "voter identification card" distinct from the existing (and retained) "Minnesota identification card." The "voter identification card" would be distinguished not only by the lack of fee, but also by the fact that it "may be used as identification and proof of residence for election day voter registration and for voting on election day, but for no other purpose." (Article 1, Section 3)

Posted by Max Hailperin | February 20, 2012 8:34 PM

---

Max, if I remember correctly there were unresolved questions around how the "voter identification card" mandate in S.F. 509 would be funded.

Posted by Jason Samuels | February 20, 2012 10:59 PM

---

Meanwhile, more kosher "hate speech" is on the Investigative Discovery channel called "The Injustice Files" where those poor innocent blacks who never do any wrong and hell can do no wrong is on TV conditioning nonwhites to hate us and create another Christian/Newsom rape/torture/murder and not one of these hypocrites has a thing to say about that. Focus on the trivial crap and try to turn whites into complete eunichs so that when they're outnumbered slaughtering them will be all the easier.

I *WISH* whites were racist! Things would improve GREATLY. I can
t stress "F*CK YOU" enough, Take Action Minnesota! You miserable hypocrites.

Posted by Nemesis | February 21, 2012 8:19 PM

---

Although the proposed Voter ID would be "free" [if citizen asks if it is free, based on WI incidents], the documents that are required to obtain it are neither free nor easily/speedily obtainable by many poor or elderly or formerly out-of town residents. The proposed time allowed for proof of residence is unrealistic unless documents are in hand; not requiring out-of-town records.

If you are unlucky enough to be dropped from the roster of registered voters, "accidentally by an agent of another party" or after 4 years of not voting, Good Luck! You too will have to re-register and submit a "provisional" ballot --- subject to rejection for many objective and subjective reasons [studies have shown].

Gone also, in the 2011 bill, was a proven registered voter vouching for another voter. So much for a spouse or parent vouching, under oath and risk of felony conviction, for a spouse or first-time voter.

Conclusion: Voter ID, in its implementation, is NOT just Minority Discriminatory, its VOTE Discrimination potentially affecting All Voters!

Posted by Mike C | February 22, 2012 7:38 AM

---

If the Democrats play their card correctly, they will more easily attract many votes of those who have been targeted for the denial of a vote .. to make an extra effort TO VOTE and we know who they will vote AGAINST.

And they should.

Posted by Jerry Buerge | February 23, 2012 4:18 PM

---

Plain and simple, RACIST BULLSHIT! THE CARTOONS ARE SIMPLY "RACIST"!! GET IT!!

Posted by j | February 24, 2012 12:37 PM

---

DO YOU KNOW THE HISTORY OF RACE IN THIS COUNTRY!! WHITE MALES HAVE HAD ALL THE ADVANTAGES-BLACK PEOPLE HERE 5OO YRS, MOST OF THEM IN CHAINS, BLACK PEOPLE, NATIVES ETC HAVE 5O YRS OF VOTING, AND YOU DON'T GET IT! SAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by j | February 24, 2012 12:50 PM

---

DO YOU KNOW THE HISTORY OF RACE IN THIS COUNTRY?!! WHITE MALES HAVE HAD ALL THE ADVANTAGES-BLACK PEOPLE HERE 5OO YRS, MOST OF THEM IN CHAINS, BLACK PEOPLE, NATIVES ETC HAVE 5O YRS OF VOTING, AND YOU DON'T GET IT! SAD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by j | February 24, 2012 12:51 PM

---

If there is enough voter fraud to change the outcome of any election, a view held by supporters of this amendment......why would there be any less voter fraud in the referendum vote ? The argument for a referendum on this issue is built on faulty logic and if you believe voters are fraudulent to begin with, then you must also believe the outcome of the referendum would, as a consequence, be fraudulent. The real voter fraud takes place when thousands of ballots are "lost " while being transported or machine totals are manipulated by operatives.

Posted by R Molenda | February 28, 2012 7:40 AM

---

• E-mail this page
• Print this page
• Tweet this page
• Share this

Services

• Hourly Newscast
• HD Radio
• iPhone App / Mobile
• E-mail newsletters
• RSS feeds
• Podcasts
• Submit your photos
• Videos
• Weather
• Most e-mailed stories