April 29, 2008
-
Voter ID
Let me vent for a moment......
SCOTUS decided yesterday in Crawford v. Marion County Board of Election that the state of Indiana can legally put the overwhelming burden of proof on voting citizens when they cast their ballot in the Indiana primary. The case was decided as a proactive measure to reduce voter fraud at the polls and without proof of any incidents of such fraud.
Problem.
Big Problem.
This opens the door to many many issues that have been repeatedly ignored or swept under the rug.
Many Conservative pundits will have you believe that there is a plethora of voter fraud incidents occurring at the polls. Ask them to show you proof. They will tell you that many criminals, dead people, and crooks are casting fake ballots to stuff the ballot box. HELLO? Most 'criminals,' or at least the ones they are referring to, don't really care about the electoral process.....there are other things they are worried about - like staying on the run. **Funny, but not really** There is no overwhelming proof that incidents of voter fraud are rampant at the polls.
The forms of ID that are necessary really exclude certain sectors of the population from voting, mainly the elderly, students, and the homeless. Many make the argument that you have to have a picture ID on you no matter what. While this is true, many of the elderly who no longer drive or have a need for ID do not have one, this includes those who are in nursing homes.
The suggestion of using 'free' ID is false. Most of the documents required to fulfill the ID requirement cost money. Birth certificates and State ID's, and driver's licenses all have fees attached to them. While the fee seems nominal, tell that to a college student or senior citizen who is just barely making ends meet.
While I do understand the premise that you need ID for everything else, this argument is not about requiring ID, it's about the hoops voters have to jump through to cast a ballot. Other states who have Voter ID laws do not have as strict requirements as the requirements of the Indiana law. For instance, Georgia allows voters to apply for a free Voter ID form and other states allow household bills with the correct name and address to compare to the voter rolls.
The case also relies heavily on the use of provisional ballots for those who do not have sufficient ID. It has been proven time and again that provisional ballots are not effective. A provisional ballot allows a person to vote at the poll if they do not have proper ID. They have to sign an affidavit at the polling location affirming they are the voter listed and their vote is not counted until they return to their county Board of Elections office (or other designated office) within 10 days (usually) to show valid proof of ID. In one county (Philly, I think), of 33 provisional ballots administered at the polls, only 2 people returned in the time frame with the proper documentation. For those without transportation (hence, no driver's license), this can be a problem, not to mention those who have a job that requires them to work 9-5 or hours in conflict with government office hours.
-----------------------------------------------------
WAKE UP PEOPLE.........Courts Matter
Comments (2)
Shoot, there's an even more basic element of the law that proves your point on criminals: felons can't vote. Unless you were talking about those who haven't been caught yet.
Like you, I find the prospect of voter fraud ridiculous - especially considering the fact that conservatives are usually on the fraudulent side (I doubt I need to list examples for you).
After my time at BBHC I certainly understand the particular plight of homeless people. Many of them actually fit into the felon/criminal category, so they have a lot more to go through than "your average poor person".
As you said, though, the problem certainly is the process of enfranchisement. It's almost like instituting a modern-day poll tax. Actually, it is a tax on effort. Provisional ballots make no sense other than to accentuate the point discussed previously.
But what's more American than restricting rights to the wealthy? The DOI and Constitution were written with that idea in mind. I think one of the biggest misconceptions surrounding American society and government is the idea that equality was a goal or standard. America was always meant to be a "classist" society that favored certain groups. Government structure, capitalism...it doesn't fit into what we all dream of. It never was supposed to. Hypocrisy of our democracy? Not exactly, simply because it was never meant to be fair in the first place.
RYC (before I go on forever)...the bill relates to title protection for social workers. Basically, one would have to possess a SW degree to be held out as a social worker.
i don't really get into court rulings because I have never been of the position that judges are in anyway impartial because most of them have ambitions of reaching high courts and order to get these appointments they have to cater to whoever is in power..
personally, I equate voter fraud to someone wanting to steal a book.. the mess just doesn't happen.. but i suppose if one wanted to make a case for such a thing they would do better to cite instances of identity theft.
honestly more time would be better spent dealing with the possibility of voting machines and prospect of tampering but again we see where the focus of this country lies..
Comments are closed.