<img height="1" width="1" style="display:none" src="https://www.facebook.com/tr?id=192888919167017&amp;ev=PageView&amp;noscript=1">
Friday,  April 26 , 2024

Linkedin Pinterest
News / Opinion / Letters to the Editor

Letter: Question motive behind mandate

The Columbian
Published: November 19, 2013, 4:00pm

In response to Ron Child’s Nov. 13 letter, “Voting is a legal citizen’s right,” laws aimed at preventing noncitizens from voting should not also disenfranchise legal citizens. When the Supreme Court ruling essentially nullified the Voting Rights Act, Texas enacted two laws previously blocked as discriminatory. These voter-ID laws disproportionately affect registered women voters because when women get married, they typically change their last names.

In 1964, Texas law mandated that married women’s driver’s licenses would list their maiden name as their middle name. For example, your name is Mary Ellen Wisniewski on your voter registration and driver’s license. You marry John Carter, so your state-mandated driver’s license lists you as Mary Wisniewski Carter, a name you don’t use. You change your voter registration and ID to Mary Ellen Carter, a name you actually do use. For years, you vote unchallenged, but in 2013, you are told you can’t vote because your legal driver’s license name does not match your legal voter registration name. Estimates are that 34 percent of Texas women lack the proper voter identification.

When the people in power disenfranchise legal citizens for essentially no reason other than to eliminate them from the voting pool, we have to question their reason for doing so.

Lou Little

Vancouver

We encourage readers to express their views about public issues. Letters to the editor are subject to editing for brevity and clarity. Limit letters to 200 words (100 words if endorsing or opposing a political candidate or ballot measure) and allow 30 days between submissions. Send Us a Letter
Loading...