And naturally the media finds fault. Texas Democratic House Leader Jim Dunnam, whose caucus work this session was instrumental in forcing down this attempt to suppress votes, puts it neatly:

But Representative Jim Dunnam, the leader of the House Democrats, said stopping the voter ID legislation was worth the collateral damage to other bills. In the Democrats’ eyes, the voter bill was aimed at suppressing the votes of minorities, the elderly and the poor.Democrats,

“Anytime you have a bill that is going to suppress turnout of legal voters, if you are not willing to stand up to that you shouldn’t be a legislator,” Mr. Dunnam said. The Republicans are to blame, he said, for important reforms’ failure to pass: “They threw this partisan issue right in the middle at the forefront of the session.”

_{Jim Dunnam, left, says the fight to stop Voter ID was worth it. Photo by Laura Skelding, Austin American Statesman}

National Conference of State Legislatures spokesperson Jennie Bowser told the New York Times, which followed the Main$tream Media Party Line that the Democrats' action had imperiled important measures such as CHIP, hurricane insurance, and clean air, that such bills as this usually fall on party lines. The GOP has introduced them in 18 states this year; the Republican take is there's a need to stop voter fraud, while the Democratic stance is that such requirements intimidate and suppress votes among the poor, minorities, and the elderly -- groups which have historically turned out for Democratic candidates and policies.

This year alone, Ms. Bowser said, legislation has been introduced in 18 states either to establish new identification requirements for voters or to toughen such standards by requiring a photo ID. None have passed yet All told, 24 states already have laws requiring voters to show some sort of identification.

In Texas, the battle has been going on for years. But until this year the Republicans could never get the bill out of the Senate, because of a rule requiring a two-thirds majority to bring legislation to the floor.

This year the Republican leadership in the Senate suspended that rule for the voter identification bill and passed the measure over Democrats’ objections. The bill landed in the House like a tar baby, presenting a sticky problem for the newly elected speaker, Joe Straus, a moderate Republican who had come to power with bipartisan support.

In an interview with The Associated Press in late April, Mr. Straus likened the bill to “a hand grenade” and said his chamber was not inclined to “pull the pin.” He pledged to try to find a compromise.

But after two months of haggling, conservatives prevailed: the bill came out of committee with no major changes and was slated for a vote. Led by Mr. Dunnam, the Democrats dug in their heels and vowed to talk it to death.

I hate to lose Waco their State Rep, but while the rest of the Texas progressive blogosphere wants to push such candidates against Cornyn as Leticia Van De Putte (and I really have no problem with her, I just think Dunnam's shown a gutsier stubbornness this session) should Kay Bailey Hutchison go after Rick Perry's job (and good luck to her, although honestly I can't imagine anybody being a worse TxGov than Perry, now that w the wonderdummy has retired and Clusterfuck Dick's got his Halliburton / kbr/ blackwater/ xe high-dollar job back in his sights) -- why not Jim Dunnam for US Senator from Texas?

'Cause, as VirgoTex has pointed out over at First Draft this evening, this is how Democrats behave -- like legislators.