We already know about Rick Scott's recent attempt to purge potential Democrats from voting rolls. Ordered by the DOJ to cease his efforts, and with all
67 county Supervisors of Elections refusing to conduct the purge, Scott has steadfastly refused to
stop.
Gov. Rick Scott's elections chief on Wednesday defiantly refused a federal demand to stop purging noncitizens from Florida's voter rolls, intensifying an election-year confrontation with President Barack Obama's administration as each side accuses the other of breaking federal law.
In a sharply worded letter, Scott's administration claimed the Department of Justice doesn't understand two federal voting laws at the heart of the dispute and was protecting potentially illegal voters more than legal ones.
Florida also accused another federal agency, the Department of Homeland Security, of violating the law by denying Florida access to a federal citizenship database.
Democrat Rep. Alcee Hastings has claimed the voter purge also results in a
"backdoor poll tax".
Democratic U.S. Rep. Alcee Hastings recently appeared at a news conference bashing Gov. Rick Scott's noncitizen voter purge with Bill Internicola, a Brooklyn-born World War II vet who appeared on a list of potential noncitizens.
Before it started, Hastings asked Internicola if the Broward Supervisor of Elections had mailed him a stamped envelope to send back his proof of citizenship.
Internicola, who had voted for decades and is a Democrat from Davie, answered no.
Hastings responded, "There is also a backdoor poll tax. In the letter that he (Internicola) received I asked him a moment ago he did not have a prepaid envelope to send it back meaning he had to buy a stamp. Don’t tell me how little it is -- that stamp is a cost. And the state should not be about the business of emaciating voter rights. They should be in the business of causing people to participate."
Is he right? PolitiFact Florida looked into the claim and ruled it
"Half True". In support of Hasting's claim, they contacted experts who said the following:
• Both disproportionately affected minorities: The poll tax reduced the number of blacks who could vote. Florida’s potential noncitizen voter list was 58 percent Hispanic, 14 percent black and 13 percent white.
"Thus, Rep. Hastings' term, ‘a backdoor poll tax,’ is accurate as it applies to blacks as a group, because still today blacks have a lower median income than whites. Granted, it is not as onerous monetarily as the tax was back in the sixties, but it is still a tax that imposes a heavier burden, proportionally, on blacks than whites," said Chandler Davidson, a sociology professor at Rice University.
• Requiring extra steps for voters is a burden: Voters often had to show their receipt to vote under the poll tax which is analogous to the potential noncitizens having to present documents at elections’ offices in advance of voting.
• Both require at least some voters to pay to vote: In the case of the poll tax, it applied to all men but in reality was a burden for poor blacks and whites. Florida’s recent noncitizen voter purge required some residents to provide proof of citizenship which meant a cost for many to mail in documentation, make copies or drive and possibly pay to park at an elections office. Note this category also includes a difference: The poll tax applied to all while the recent purge applied to few.
But...to determine the differences between a poll tax and the voter purge, concentration was centered around cost:
• Right to vote: Poor blacks and whites should have had a right to vote. In the current Florida case, noncitizens don’t have the right to vote -- it’s a felony. We haven’t heard anyone argue that noncitizens should get to cast a ballot -- the controversy is that there were errors on the list -- many were citizens. And some critics say that some voters simply didn’t get the letter or would be discouraged from responding. Since the many of those who received the letters didn’t respond to elections officials and the state was working with outdated information, it’s unclear if the majority on the list are citizens or not.
• Every expense associated with voting isn’t a poll tax: Many voters drive to the polls to vote -- the cost of gas isn’t a poll tax. In the noncitizen case, a stamp isn’t the only way to deliver the form -- someone might get a ride from a friend and drop it off.
In conclusion, PolitiFact stated:
After Broward residents received letters asking them to submit documentation proving their citizenship in order to vote, Hastings described it as a "backdoor poll tax" because they had to buy a stamp to mail in the documents.
Hastings is correct that there are some similarities between the poll tax and Florida’s recent search for noncitizen voters. The most important similarity is that minorities in both cases were disproportionately affected. And in both cases, it added costs and burdens to vote.
"Any effort to introduce an election procedure that requires some voters to incur financial costs could be thought of as a metaphoric or perhaps real poll tax," Keyssar said.
But there are some important differences including that the poll tax had a far more widespread effect than Florida’s search for noncitizen voters. While poor black sharecroppers couldn’t afford the poll tax, the issue for some of the Florida voters may be more of the inconvenience than the expense.
We rate this claim Half True.
According to the article, PolitiFact forwarded their decision to Rep. Hasting's office and didn't receive a reply.
Well. Here's mine.
There’s an important issue missing in your review of Alcee Hasting’s claim that Rick Scott’s voter purge is a poll tax. An alarming number of older Floridians, many black and hispanic, don’t have
birth certificates. For those born at home or through a mid-wife, proving birth is nearly impossible and expensive. For those, estimated to be
7% of the population; who just don’t have a birth certificate, including the poor, students and others who have just lost theirs through the years, the cost is still involved and can be anywhere from
$10 - $30, which is a big chunk for many poor - not just the elderly. Then there's the time factor. Many states take up to three months to provide a Certificate of Live Birth; so therefore the requirement is, in fact, excessive, expensive, and in violation of the Voter’s Rights Act.
Taking this in context, your ruling should have been "Mostly True".
