Come see the Razorbacks play, my friend said. It will be fun. I can get you in with a student pass -- a photo ID.
This happened enough decades ago that I am sure any applicable statute of limitations has run.
He handed me another student's ID he had borrowed.
The other student -- I lack the nerve and imagination to make this up -- was full-blooded Korean. I will now change the name to protect the innocent, but his name was just as Korean as, say, Ye Sun-Sin.
You have got to be kidding me, I said with a really odd combination of a laugh and a snarl.
No, no, it will work, he assured me.
I agreed to go, largely out of confidence I would be turned away at the gate. That would give me "told you so" rights.
I walked right in, no problem.
So I do not place a whole lot of confidence that requiring a photo ID to vote would accomplish anything good even if such laws were constitutional.
Now that is a mildly funny story. I had a very unfunny thought about it, though, as I reflected on Pulaski County Circuit Judge Alice Gray's ruling Thursday. Once again, a judge overturned yet another attempt to make it harder to vote for no good reason.
It is ridiculous to require voter ID so somebody can go push buttons on a machine still running on Windows XP, which has had exactly one security patch from Microsoft since April 2014. That patch came in the wake of the"WannaCry" malware attacks of 2017.
Where your treasures are, your heart will be also. Therefore, I tend to doubt those who declare their devotion to the sanctity of our elections while insisting on a cheap, ineffective solution that would not fix the problem even if that particular problem existed, all while ignoring big, glaring and real vulnerabilities.
And I still think pushing voter ID laws causes a serious backlash. Republicans like to push it -- setting up the Democrats as the "we let you vote" party. I earnestly believe that continuing to harp on this costs the GOP far, far more real votes than it prevents fraudulent ones for their opposition.
As I remembered that Razorback game all those decades ago, another, sad thought struck me. That photo ID worked because I am a white guy.
What chance would I have had sneaking in on that ID if I were Mexican? And I would have had zero chance if I had been black. But I am a white guy. I may yet try sneaking in again with the student ID card of a Polynesian princess. I bet if I stuck a gaudy enough flower in my hair I would get away with it.
Bless poll workers for doing what they do. We could not have elections without them. But any group of folks picked at random -- poll workers or turnstile keepers at ball games -- will tend to stop or question someone with some pigmentation in his skin more often than someone who does not. Anyone who does not believe that should spend more time on this planet.
Two men got arrested in a Philadelphia Starbucks earlier this month for sitting down while black. This is not an isolated incident. I am more than half convinced that Russian election hacking does not get the reaction it deserves because ethnic Russians are European.
Now to be fair, the Arkansas law has not been found unconstitutional again yet. Gray granted an injunction to stop the law from applying just in time for early voting in the state's primary. Still, she called the law unconstitutional in her ruling.
The choice between complying with unconstitutional requirements to vote or not having your vote counted "is not really a choice at all, and ... irreparable harm would result to plaintiff in the absence of a preliminary injunction, as his ballot will not be counted," the judge ruled.
Just a suggestion, but before the law gets to the state Supreme Court its defenders might ought to find some evidence that in-person voter fraud is a real problem. They sure put a lot of effort into stopping people from fraudulently voting in person, considering how much easier, more effective and safer it is to remain in the security of one's own home illegally filling out a stack of absentee ballots.
Commentary on 04/28/2018