Posted on 03/17/2005 11:32:52 AM PST by Jean S
Let’s say it’s Election Day 2008. You really, really, really want to vote for the Democratic nominee for president, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.), but you’re not registered to vote. You also don’t have a driver’s license or any sort of official photo identification that would tell the people down at the polling place who you are.
You don’t even have anything to show that you’re an American citizen.
But it’s Election Day, and you still want to vote for Clinton. What do you do?
Well, you go right down to that polling place, tell them you want to register, on the spot, and vote. And if anybody questions you, tell them you don’t need a prior registration, or a photo ID, proof of citizenship or anything else.
Clinton said so.
She really did — just a few weeks ago, in the form of her new bill, the Count Every Vote Act of 2005.
Although Clinton calls the measure “critical to restoring America’s faith in our voting system,” it might more accurately be described as the most wide-ranging assault ever on the idea that there should be minimum enforceable standards for voters. Just look at some of its provisions.
One section says, “Each state shall permit an individual on the day of a Federal election to register to vote in such election at the polling place ... [and] to cast a vote in such election and have that vote counted in the same manner as a vote cast by an eligible voter who properly registered during the regular registration period.”
Another provision says, “Each state and jurisdiction shall accept and process a voter registration application for an election for Federal office unless there is a material omission or information that specifically affects the eligibility of the voter. There shall be a presumption that persons who submit voter registration applications should be registered.”
And a third section adds, “The following shall not constitute a ‘material omission or information that specifically affects the eligibility of the voter’: (1) The failure to provide a Social Security number or driver’s license number. (2) The failure to provide information concerning citizenship or age in a manner other than” a simple statement that one is a citizen.
Put all those together and you have a recipe for chaos. Anyone can show up on Election Day, register and vote, and officials would have no way of knowing whether that person was eligible to vote or not. All Clinton would require is that the person “affirm” that he or she is eligible to vote.
And, as they say, that’s not all.
The Count Every Vote Act of 2005 would also require states to allow anyone to cast a provisional vote anywhere in a state, no questions asked. The number of provisional votes one might cast would be limited only by the number of polling places that could be visited in a day.
The bill would also allow felons to vote after they’ve done their time and are off probation (this is the provision that attracted a lot of criticism from conservatives, although it’s hardly the worst thing in the bill). And it would require that the federal government force states to ensure “an equal waiting time for all voters” at all polling places.
Seriously. The bill actually directs the federal Election Assistance Commission to devise a formula for voting line length.
That formula would be based on “the voting age population; voter turnout in past elections; the number of voters registered; the number of voters who have registered since the most recent federal election; Census data for the population served by such voting site; the educational levels and socio-economic factors of the population served by such voting site; the needs and numbers of disabled voters and voters with limited English proficiency; [and] the type of voting systems used.”
And those are not even the most important parts of the bill, at least according to Clinton. The most crucial provision, she says, is the one requiring that voting machines produce an “individual voter-verifiable paper record” of each vote. That’s a nod to those Democrats who believe that Karl Rove somehow personally hacked the touch-screen voting machines in Ohio to deny Sen. John Kerry his rightful victory.
Making touch-screen machines produce a paper record turns out to be quite complicated, introducing new possibilities for error into the process. But what the hell — Clinton’s entire bill introduces all sorts of new possibilities for error into the process.
In fact, the Count Every Vote Act of 2005 might be viewed as a massive, wholly intentional attempt to introduce new possibilities for error into the system, with the hope that most of the errors will benefit Democrats.
Clinton says her bill will “improve the franchise and truly improve our democracy.”
Even if she has to wreck the system to do it.
York is a White House correspondent for National Review. His column appears in The Hill each week. E-mail: byork@thehill.com
Billary would have lines for miles at the polling places with this piece of crap.
That, along with a MSM that LOVES her and will use every opportunity to promote her, are just two of the ways she probably can and will become POTUS.
|
|
I've mentioned this to my sister (who will relocate on Neptune if Hillary is ever elected POTUS). |
I've told her that given the fact that the MSM is smarting from all their embarrassments from the last two elections, they will stop at nothing to get this cretin elected no matter what damage it does to the country.
Watch the language.
Thanks.
Unbelievable. I can't believe she thinks Americans are so stupid that she would even propose such a bill.
"Seriously. The bill actually directs the federal Election Assistance Commission to devise a formula for voting line length."
Well, while they're at it they might also factor in driving time to polling places for rural voters and maybe even offer to give them a ride since urban voters can just walk a couple blocks to their polling site. I wonder how many rural voters lose their francise because they can't drive or don't have a vehicle available. This is systemic disenfranchisement of a large number of conservative voters.
Agreed! However, the receipt should never be allowed to leave the polling place. Otherwise, it is an invitation to sell votes. People attempting to subvert elections would stand outside polling places and "Buy" receipts showing a vote for their candidate. This has happened in the past!
The paper receipt should identify the machine and should be verified by the voter PRIOR to the registration of the vote by the machine. The receipt should then be retained in a sealed container to be used for recounts.
Finally, a random sample of the machine results should be audited with the paper receipts.
"If we would have cheated like they did, I predict Bush would have won with 75% compared to Kerry's 48%."
Problem is that by nature conservatives are for the most part law-abiding. Liberals will flaunt the law because they self-righteously believe that any action on their part is justified in the "revolution" to take back American from the "fascist" Republicans.
The Republicans will go along with it to show they are not mean.
Idiots.
hillary file ping
Br>Why dont they just call this the "Turn a Blind Eye on Election Fraud Law" ??
Sorry I assumed everyone here was smart enough to see the sarcasm in that post. Next time I will put on a sarcasm tag.
bttt
COUNT EVERY VOTE SOLD ACT
oh yes, she must be the original bobble head doll only she's just a plain bobble head, period.
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.
