Posted on 04/30/2008 9:38:31 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
The US Supreme Court has just dealt a serious blow to voters' rights that could help put John McCain in the White House by eliminating tens of thousands of voters who generally vote Democratic.
By 6-3 the Court has upheld an Indiana law that requires citizens to present a photo identification card in order to vote. Florida, Michigan, Louisiana, Georgia, Hawaii and South Dakota have similar laws. Though it's unlikely, as many as two dozen other states could add them by election day. Other states, like Ohio, have less stringent ID requirements than Indiana's, but still have certain restrictions that are strongly opposed by voter rights advocates.
The decision turns back two centuries of jurisprudence that has accepted a registered voter's signature as sufficient identification for casting a ballot. By matching that signature against one given at registration, and with harsh penalties for ballot stuffing, the Justices confirmed in their lead opinion that there is "no evidence" for the kind of widespread voter fraud Republican partisans have used to justify the demand for photo ID.
Voting rights activists have long argued that since photo ID can cost money, or may demand expensive trips to government agencies, the requirement constitutes a "poll tax." Taxes on the right to vote were used for a century to prevent blacks and others from voting in the south and elsewhere. They were specifically banned by the 24th Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1964.
But the Court's lead opinion, written by Justice Stevens, normally a liberal, said that though rare, the "risk of voter fraud" was nonetheless "real" and that there was "no question about the legitimacy or importance of the state's interest in counting only the votes of eligible voters." The burden of obtaining a voter ID, said the court, was not so difficult as to be deemed unConstitutional. Ohio election protection Attorney Cliff Arnebeck believes Stevens joined the decision to divide the Court's conservative majority, and to leave the door open for further litigation.
But there is no indication the corporate media or Democratic Party will be pursuing significant action on this issue any time soon. Though the Kerry Campaign solicited millions of dollars to "protect the vote" in 2004, it has not supported independent research into that election's irregularities. In the King-Lincoln Civil Rights lawsuit, in which we are attorney and plaintiff, 56 of Ohio's 88 counties destroyed ballot materials, in direct violation of federal law. There has been no official legal follow-up on this case, no major media investigation, and no support from the Democratic Party either to investigate what happened in Ohio 2004, or to make sure it doesn't happen again in 2008. The issue has yet to be seriously raised by the major Democratic candidates despite the fact that it could render their campaigns moot.
This latest Supreme Court decision is yet another serious blow to voting rights advocates---and probably to the Democratic nominees for President and other offices. It will clearly make it far more difficult for poor, minority, elderly and young citizens to vote. Tens of thousands of normally Democratic voters in key states---especially Florida, Michigan, Georgia and Louisiana---will simply be prevented from getting a ballot.
The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University's School of Law in its "Friend of the Court" brief noted that between 10% and 13% of eligible voters lack the identification now required in Indiana. People without an official photo ID tend to be disproportionately minorities and poor, ushering a new Jim Crow era based on race and class apartheid. One Indiana study, according to Inter Press Service reporter Jim Lobe, found that 13.3% of registered Indiana voters lacked the now-required ID, but the numbers were significantly higher for black voters at 18% and young voters age 18-34 at more than 20%.
Kathryn Kolbert, President of People for the American Way, put the number at "millions of eligible voters who don't have the ID these laws require."
Photo ID has long been a lynchpin of a concerted GOP strategy to eliminate Democratic voters. In the wake of the theft of the 2004 election in Ohio, Republican activists produced heavily publicized allegations of massive voter fraud, virtually all of which proved to be false.
Nonetheless, the drumbeat for restrictive ID requirements has been steadily rising from GOP strongholds. Other such laws are now virtually certain to follow in states with Republican-controlled legislatures, though it's unclear how many more can be put into law by November.
Nor has the GOP let up in its other campaigns to restrict access to the polls. Extremely harsh limitations on voter registration campaigns in Florida have severely restricted attempts by the League of Women Voters and others to sign up new voters. GOP election officials also have made it clear they will severely restrict the franchise of those who have minor irregularities in the registration forms, such as an errant middle initial or changed address.
It is also unclear how many electronic voting machines will still be in place come November. Despite a wide range of high-level studies showing them easily hackable, the elimination of touch screen voting machines has proceeded at a glacial pace. No significant federal legislation has been passed to eliminate electronic voting machines or even to make them more secure. With a few exceptions, most notably Florida, progress at the state level has been minimal.
Thus the GOP hope that millions of Americans will be voting on hackable computers this November, and that millions more may be eliminated from the rolls altogether, seems very close to fruition. Whether this will swing the election to John McCain remains to be seen. But this Supreme Court decision allowing the demand for photo ID makes it much more likely.
When following the rules is required, Democrats are the ones who complain.
How ironic: a Mexican cannot vote in Mexico without a picture ID. But that same Mexican can cross the border illegally, and get away with voting in some states without a picture ID!???
Don’t forget to add that they can and often do vote more than once!
It appears the Commies are getting a little restless now that SCOTUS has shot down their voting scam. LOL!!! All those illegal aliens and professional voters won’t be working out for them come November. I ALMOST feel as though my ONE vote might be worth something again. Thank you SCOTUS.
I live in Columbus along with the co-author of this tripe, Bob Fitrakis.
Let me tell you, Ol' Bob is to the left of Lenin.
I’m sure ACORN can drive these po’ folk to the proper ID office and could probably fork over the cash to get em’ one.
In God We Trust. Everyone else must show an I.D.
The article goes on and on about the percentage of people without IDs that now can’t vote....so why didn’t the Democrats priduce just one of them in pleading their case? Answer: because they couldn’t find one. It’s all theoretical, and this article’s numbers are bogus, just like the lawsuit.
So far most of the voter fraud going on (at least that I’ve heard of) has been by the Dems. Anyway, they should be thrilled that we’re going to make elections more accurate.
Without an ID, who couldn’t?
I threw one of "them" off my front porch in October, 2004. For my efforts, I was called a "honky, racist cracker."
I just had to laugh.
When the Free Press or the rest of the left media squeals you can bet the SCOTUS made the correct decision.
God is that ever the truth! These people really do feel that they have a holy right to commit election fraud.
OH BULLS**T!!!!
In MO, there was a bill that was on the ballot that would have required an official state issued photo ID in order to vote:
Included in that bill was:
a) A provision for free ID to anyone who couldn’t afford it.
b) A number of vans and personnel with the equipment needed to create the photo ID for people who couldn’t get to a state agency.
c) funding for a and b.
The dems fought it tooth and nail, saying that just the act of “demanding” to see photo ID would discourage voting.
The only reason that the dems and other leftists oppose requiring photo ID in order to vote is because it makes the voter fraud a bit more difficult.
Mark
All they did is protect our civil liberties by burbing vote fraud; except for those 3 modern day Roland Frieselers.
Ramirez Rocks!
AGREE!!! He is the best at what he does!!!
You already made my response 2nd.
Mine was going to be, " What? Dead people?
On other words, their Caucuses are important enough to protect against voter fraud, but public elections are not important enough warrant such measures.
Go figure.
Complete hypocrisy.
And passing a law that 7 other states already have and dozens more are heading towards enacting is a bad thing?
The Democrats are worried. They're going to have to figure out how to cheat some other way now, and time is short.
I guess there's always the tried and true practice of busing in homeless and “helping” the bed ridden and comatose in nursing homes to vote.
And in cities like Philadelphia, the Dems and their union thugs will have hundreds of votes on the machines before the polls even open.
Good for the USSC for doing the right thing!
Forgot to mention this - yesterday, a GOP spokesman on CNN countered a question from a hostile reporter by noting that CNN required him [the spokesman] to show ID before they would let him in the CNN building!
Well, honey, they have from now until November to get one. No reason they can't figure out how to do that before then. That is, unless YOU, Ms. Kolbert, and your lib buddies think that those folks are just too STOOPID to figure it out. But then, that's how you've always thought of those voters, isn't it?
Yet the Rats expect us all to believe there are thousands of people roaming around the country without ID and the only disadvantage they have is not being allowed to vote. Give me a break, there is no way there are that many Democrats that are legally able to vote that don't have ID's because without their ID's they wouldn't be able to cash their welfare checks or fill their lithium prescriptions.
The US Supreme Court has just dealt a serious blow to voters' rights Democrat vote fraud that could help put John McCain in the White House by eliminating tens of thousands of voters who generally vote Democratic.
Even they don't want to be associated with you wackos.
That’s right. And how can any voter who is too mentally incompetent to obtain valid photo ID at any time and place of his or her choosing over the next seven months possibly be expected to show up at the right polling location on election day, anyway?
Wondering how any traffic gets through any underpass in the state.
Haha! The rats are beside themselves that vote fraud won’t be quite as easy from now on.
I ALMOST feel as though my ONE vote might be worth something again. Thank you SCOTUS.
“Amen”
The article at least got that right. It'll cost them millions to make fake IDs for the illegals and disenfranchised felons to vote, and that'll cut into their funds for disingenuous attack ads and push polls.
All that RAT ‘walking around’ money can be used to pay for an ID card instead of using it to buy smokes & booze!!
Just a small offset, Kathyrn Honey, to the 15 million illegals with phony ID's that can, and probably will, vote Democrat.
Quit your bitch'in....
“or may demand expensive trips to government agencies,”
I just got my drivers license renewed at the Seattle DMV. It was a massively finanically devestating 15 dollars.
The only thing the dems are fearing is not being able to use the dead and illegal immigrants as part of their voting base.
That’s a good start. At least 2 pieces of ID would be even better.
I’d also like to see 100% paper ballots, but that’s another story...
Yep. No concerns about “disenfranchising” all those poor elderly and minority voters at the Demos’ events.
My dog can’t vote this time. Boo Friggin Hoo!
Good Lord, this is just so blatantly obvious. We’ve been showing ID’s to vote (in some cases two pieces required)up in Canada for years. In fact, older Canadian citizens seem to have so successfully adapted to the requirement that the gap in voter turnout between elderly and the “mobile” young is more than 27 percentage points. Get a grip down there, will ya? You’re beginning to look stupid.
Now we need SCOTUS to rule out absentee ballots except for those in the military. Wouldn’t that just frost the libs.
Too afraid that certain "irregularities" that they already knew about would be uncovered no doubt.
These are the same people that won't let the Military vote by mail, unless the mail is postmarked, which much military mail is not. They won't let them vote via email, despite the fact that every serviceman, every DoD civilian and most if not all contractors operating in the war zone, have the ability to digitally sign (and encrypt if they wanted!) their email, with their ID card and their PIN, which is tied to the CAC card.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.