‘Purity’ phrase cut from voting bill
Language used in era of ‘white primaries’
On Thursday night, and into the wee hours of Friday morning, the Texas House fiercely debated a series of voting restrictions championed by the state’s Republican leaders.
Democrats have taken issue with nearly every facet of the bill, which supporters say would prevent ballot fraud and which critics contend would introduce new hardships to voting and disproportionately affect Texans of color.
But when state Rep. Rafael Anchía, a Dallas Democrat, stood to ask questions of the bill’s author, Rep. Briscoe Cain of Deer Park, he zeroed in on the bill’s purpose — stated, in part, to “preserve the purity of the ballot box.”
It’s language plucked straight from the Texas Constitution (Article 6, Section 4). It’s also a phrase that has been used in Texas to justify “white primaries” and other methods to disenfranchise Black, Latino and Asian Texans.
“Are you aware of the history behind that provision of the constitution?” Anchía asked. “I’m not,” Cain replied. “OK,” Anchía nodded and looked down at notes spread before him. “Are you aware that references to the purity of the ballot box used throughout this country’s history have been a justification for states to disenfranchise groups they deem unfit to vote or somehow lacking?”
Anchía was referencing the country’s post-Reconstruction period in the late 19th century, as Civil War tensions died down but
racism thrived. Then, white Southerners set on preserving racist ideals championed a new era of laws that codified discrimination and specifically sought to disenfranchise Black citizens.
The so-called Jim Crow laws, under the banner of offering “separate but equal” accommodations to Black citizens, mandated segregation in public spaces, including schools and transportation. In practice, the laws promoted anything but equality — targeting Black Americans’ livelihoods, economic and social gains, and political influence.
Across the South, state legislatures adopted a multitude of explicit measures to keep Black people from voting, from poll taxes to comprehension tests. At the same time, politicians championed laws to bar felons from casting ballots — measures that would significantly impact Black Americans, who were incarcerated at disproportionately higher rates than white people.
The goal, Southerners said, was to protect “the purity of the ballot box.” The language appeared at political conventions across former Confederate territory and, in some cases, was written into state constitutions — including that of Texas.
“As soon as Southern states were allowed to set their own democratic destiny, they began to limit who could vote, especially voters of color,” said Brandon Rottinghaus, a political science professor at the University of Houston. “That includes African Americans, obviously, but also included Asian Americans and Hispanics as well. It was very broad.”
Later, several Southern states would embrace “white primaries,” which blocked voters of color from casting ballots in primary elections — effectively keeping them out of the democratic process because the winner of the primary would, in most cases, go on to win the general election. Texas passed a law allowing the practice in 1923, which faced legal challenges throughout the early 20th century; the Supreme Court ultimately declared the practice unconstitutional in 1944, though it persisted in some parts of the state years after.
All the while, legislators upheld the idea of “ballot purity.” In 1913, a state representative from Eagle Pass formed the Ballot Purification League, and he filed a bill he intended to disqualify Mexican Americans from participating in elections. ‘Are you aware?’
Back to the present day — and Anchía’s line of questioning.
“Did you know that this purity at the ballot box justification was also used during the Jim Crow era to prevent Black people from voting?” he asked. “Did you know that in states across the country that penal disenfranchisement schemes were put in place including in Texas as far back as 1845 to effectively lock African American people out of the political process? Are you aware of this political history?”
Cain repeatedly said he was not aware of that history, and he called the information “troubling.” He said he had inserted the purity language intending it to mean “not having fraud.”
“I think we’ve said a few times that I wasn’t aware of any kind of malicious intent in the use of that term, and the reason it was used is: I looked at the constitution, because I believe our authority is derived from the people,” he said.
The “purity of the ballot box” phrasing, however, had emerged as a concern in committee hearings on the measure. ‘Damage has been done’
Nina Perales, the vice president of litigation for the Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, testified April 1 that using such language “reveal (s) legislative intent to exclude minority and disfavored populations from voting, and ballot ‘purity’ policies have no place in modern election laws.”
Her testimony included reference to the 1913 Ballot Purification League.
“That is the language that’s always used and has been used historically in association with voter suppression measures,” Perales said in an interview Friday. “It’s like a sign hanging on the bill saying, ‘This is a voter suppression bill.’ ”
Cain agreed to take out the term, and it was later removed through an amendment by state Rep. Jarvis Johnson, a Houston Democrat. The omnibus voting bill, Senate Bill 7, advanced Friday, almost entirely along party lines.
“In today’s society, racism is rooted in ignorance — just ignorance of not understanding that this type of language cuts to the soul of a lot of people, particularly myself,” Johnson said in an interview.
He said his colleagues should “own their ignorance” and recognize that “racist” bills such as SB 7 continue to harm communities of color, even if that is not the express intent of the legislation. And while he gave Cain credit for agreeing to take the language out, he said that “the damage has been done.”
“If you’re going to hide behind ignorance, you don’t need to be in the statehouse,” Johnson concluded.
The measure is just one of several voting restriction bills championed in GOP-led legislatures across the nation, after months of false claims from former President Donald Trump that the 2020 election had been stolen from him.
Cain has said Texas’ voting legislation is not inspired by those assertions — and would protect and secure the state’s elections.
The bill would clamp down on voting expansions piloted in Harris County last fall, including extended early voting hours and drive-thru voting. It would also limit the number of polling places allowed in Texas’ largest counties and would give greater power to partisan poll watchers.
Cain says the bill would not disproportionately affect voters of color, as Democrats claim, though legislators have not conducted a study on the subject.
“This bill is designed to protect all voters,” Cain said. “I don’t think this is voter suppression; I think this is voter enhancement.”