April 29, 2008
Supreme Court Rules on Voter Identification
The New York Times is predicting gloom, doom and lawsuits as far as the eye can see. But anyone who values honest elections is breaking out the champagne to celebrate the U.S. Supreme Court's 6-3 ruling yesterday which upheld Indiana's voter i.d. law, a law which is hopefully coming soon to a polling place near you.
From the Indianapolis Star:
“States should have the ability to implement appropriate and constitutional steps to protect their electoral systems from fraud,” Indiana Attorney General Steve Carter said in response. “We can move forward in Indiana with a process that provides constitutional protections to its citizens protecting their vote from potential fraudulent activity.”
While the ruling creates a precedent for other states to pass similar laws, it will also have an immediate impact specifically in Indiana as it was handed down just in time for that state's presidential primary.
The ruling means the ID requirement will be in effect for next week's presidential primary in Indiana, where a significant number of new voters are expected to turn out for the Democratic contest between Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama.The results could say something about the effect of the law, either because a large number of voters will lack identification and be forced to cast provisional ballots or because the number turns out to be small.
It might be interesting to see a fairly and legally run election in this state someday. One where everybody votes ONCE and in the proper precinct.
I fear that's HIGHLY unlikely, however.
Posted by: Greg at April 29, 2008 7:49 AMGrace Diaz must be getting nervous.
Posted by: joe bernstein at April 30, 2008 2:41 PMYeah, let's prevent fraud that doesn't exist! WOOOO!
Justice Steven's couldn't find any real fraud so he had to create an example from 1868 to prove his point.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/blogs/convictions/archive/2008/04/28/a-solution-in-search-of-a-problem.aspx
I really can't believe that people actually think that working class voters try to vote more than twice. Yes, there are the die-hards in the local parties, on both sides, who try to skew elections. But, hearing all this baloney(sp) from the Republican side crying over poor Democrats trying to vote without an ID, you would think that there are several millions voting without an ID. It is more likely that voters with vacation homes are voting twice. Why is it that every election year, something comes up, new voter registration forms, new voting machines, new ballots, new rules, coloring voting books for kids, but no PSAs for voting adults. Of course I'm not speaking just for your state.
Why is there is a rule that unless there is more than 1.5 to 3% difference in voting totals, only then in most states will a recount be conducted. Everyone wants a voter to have an ID, but why do you wait until heated Presidential Elections to challenge these issues. Why didn't Indiana implement this last year? Why didn't they offer every voter who didn't have an ID on file the chance to get one. It just seems that it is another way to attack poor Democrats from voting. Knowing that they are going to give up getting IDs just to vote. There should be a rule that actions affecting voters should go into effect before a Presidential Election year. It really looks like Republicans are attacking the working poor who don't have the ability (transportation) to get around. When these voters muster enough civic duty to vote, the Republican Party always puts another minor issue infront of the voter.