Texas’s Speaker of the House warned representatives in the Texas State House on Thursday night not to use the word “racism” when debating the Republicans’ voter suppression bill..
Speaker Dade Phelan, a Republican, started debate on the bill by saying “the chair would appreciate members not using the word ‘racism’ this afternoon,” according to the Houston Chronicle. He insisted that it was a matter of respect.
Republican legislators in Texas have been objecting to claims that their voter suppression bill, or S.B. 1, is racist. The bill has been slammed by voting rights advocates and Democrats like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-New York) as the “Jim Crow 2.0” for its prohibitive voting requirements and overtly racist voting restrictions.
In April, the Houston Chronicle reported that GOP Lieutenant Governor Dan Patrick said, “you’re in essence calling us racist, and that will not stand,” in response to these Democratic criticisms of the bill’s racist effects.
The chamber advanced the bill 79 to 37, with only one Republican voting no. It is expected to pass in a floor vote on Friday, after which it goes back to the Texas State Senate, where senators can pass the new bill or reconcile differences between a similar bill previously passed by the chamber.
If passed, the bill would ban 24-hour and drive-through voting, voting options that have been championed as expanding access in nonwhite communities. It would make it harder for people with disabilities to vote by restricting the ability of those who help them turn in their ballots. And, among a slate of other restrictions, it would also bar local election officials from sending unsolicited mail-in ballot applications, with the aim of restricting mail-in voting.
Texas Democrats had fled the legislature in July to block a special session in which Texas Republicans planned to pass the voter suppression bill, anti-trans laws, and more. In an effort to force a vote on the voter suppression law, Texas House Republicans earlier this month voted to arrest their Democratic counterparts if they didn’t return to the state.
Democratic lawmakers pointed out the bill’s implicit and explicit racist effects in debate on Thursday night.
“The courts have pointed out over and over and over again: intentional discrimination against African Americans, intentional discrimination against Latinos, intentional discrimination against people of color. These are not my words. These are three federal courts across this country making 10 findings of that intentional discrimination,” said Rep. Gina Hinojosa, a Democrat.
Hinojosa was referencing past court rulings against Texas election law, including a 2012 ruling finding that Texas lawmakers didn’t comply with the Voting Rights Act when drawing district maps that cycle. “Intentional discrimination against people of a different race…” Hinojosa said. “Is that racism?”
Phelan interjected, saying, “we can talk about racial impacts with this legislation without accusing members of this body of being racist.” Hinojosa pointed out that she hadn’t accused any one lawmaker as being racist.
Democrats expressed frustration and anger over Phelan’s attempted ban on discussing racism in the chamber. “Wow. The Speaker just asked us to not use the word ‘racism’ during debate today,” wrote Democratic Rep. Erin Zwiener on Twitter. “SB 1 will harm the freedom to vote for all Texans, but it will disproportionately impact people of color. That’s racist, no matter how you dress it up. Period.”
“One Republican has already filed an amendment to put the ‘Souls to the Polls’ provision that would limit black churches voting on Sunday morning back in the bill. It’s racist,” Zwiener continued. “Coddling R legislators who are uncomfortable about how this bill hurts people of color is not our job.”
We’re not backing down in the face of Trump’s threats.
As Donald Trump is inaugurated a second time, independent media organizations are faced with urgent mandates: Tell the truth more loudly than ever before. Do that work even as our standard modes of distribution (such as social media platforms) are being manipulated and curtailed by forces of fascist repression and ruthless capitalism. Do that work even as journalism and journalists face targeted attacks, including from the government itself. And do that work in community, never forgetting that we’re not shouting into a faceless void – we’re reaching out to real people amid a life-threatening political climate.
Our task is formidable, and it requires us to ground ourselves in our principles, remind ourselves of our utility, dig in and commit.
As a dizzying number of corporate news organizations – either through need or greed – rush to implement new ways to further monetize their content, and others acquiesce to Trump’s wishes, now is a time for movement media-makers to double down on community-first models.
At Truthout, we are reaffirming our commitments on this front: We won’t run ads or have a paywall because we believe that everyone should have access to information, and that access should exist without barriers and free of distractions from craven corporate interests. We recognize the implications for democracy when information-seekers click a link only to find the article trapped behind a paywall or buried on a page with dozens of invasive ads. The laws of capitalism dictate an unending increase in monetization, and much of the media simply follows those laws. Truthout and many of our peers are dedicating ourselves to following other paths – a commitment which feels vital in a moment when corporations are evermore overtly embedded in government.
Over 80 percent of Truthout‘s funding comes from small individual donations from our community of readers, and the remaining 20 percent comes from a handful of social justice-oriented foundations. Over a third of our total budget is supported by recurring monthly donors, many of whom give because they want to help us keep Truthout barrier-free for everyone.
You can help by giving today. Whether you can make a small monthly donation or a larger gift, Truthout only works with your support.