Texas doesn't like the constitution apparently.

[lordlundar]

A funny thing is happening in Texas. Remember Wendy Davis? The Democratic representative who successfully filibustered Rick Perry's anti-abortion law in what has to be the most filibuster unfriendly state in the country? Well, she wants to make a go at it in Perry's chair, and could make a good run for it, given the republican's largely anti-anything not white male stance as of late.

Well, it's made Perry nervous. So much so that he passed a new law that circumvents both the 19th and the 24th amendments int he constitution. How? The law is a Voter ID law.

So how does this do an end run around those amendments? Well, lets look at the Amendments. The 19th Amendment is the women's suffrage amendment while the 24th is the banning of a poll tax. Now we've talked to death about the poll tax issue, but this law is specifically targeted as it clearly requires up to date last name, which traditionally is changed for women. To add to this, the law requires that women show original documentation of the name change, with copies not being allowed. This is expensive to do, often prohibitively so and the law is written to target women, who has polled lately to overwhelmingly support Davis over Perry after the Filibuster.

I would say this is surprising but it would be a lie. Perry tried to cheat the system to prevent Davis from pulling off the filibuster. I would imagine for him it's just one more cheat in the normal course of the day.

War on women? What war on women? [/sarcasm]

[HYHYBT]

I'm just surprised it took them this long to come up with the idea.

[Panacea]

The idea was in the works long before Wendy Davis.

The DOJ is suing Texas over their Voter ID law (and North Carolina as well). Texas's law will probably be thrown out; the 19th Amendment implications are pretty clear. I think North Carolina's will go as well. I expect that if the proceedings take too long, an injunction will be asked for and granted, as was the case in Pennsylvania.

[Cia]

And here I thought South Dakota requiring people who's birth certificates show a different last name than their drivers license to bring their certified marriage certificates, divorce docs, change of name court docs or a gov't issued passport to renew their driver's license was sexist and stupid. Still is but Texas takes the cake.

[Lady_Foxfire]

I actually heard somewhere that Texas' law might affect more Republican women than Democratic women, since older and/or married women tend to vote Republican, and younger, unmarried women tend to lean left. Talk about shooting yourself in the foot.

[Kaylyn]

I don't live in Texas (one state to the right, actually) but this makes me kind of glad I didn't change my name when I got married (I only go by my husband's last name socially).

[AccountingDrone]

Now we've talked to death about the poll tax issue, but this law is specifically targeted as it clearly requires up to date last name, which traditionally is changed for women. To add to this, the law requires that women show original documentation of the name change, with copies not being allowed. This is expensive to do, often prohibitively so and the law is written to target women, who has polled lately to overwhelmingly support Davis over Perry after the Filibuster.

Boo to them - I have my original birth certificate, original 1961 social security card and letter, wedding license, drivers license and military ID all with the same name. If I put my mind to it, I can even dig up a couple federal level security clearances to boot ranging from one I got from the CIA back in 1980 to one from last time I badged in on a nuke contract.