LETTER: Solutions for non-issues lack senseTo the Telegram: At the time of the Wisconsin recalls, State Courts ruled against the state photo IDs used for voting. However, since the matter had not been completely resolved, my wife and I made sure we had the correct IDs anyway.
To the Telegram:
At the time of the Wisconsin recalls, State Courts ruled against the state photo IDs used for voting. However, since the matter had not been completely resolved, my wife and I made sure we had the correct IDs anyway. I was allowed to use my state driver’s license, and,since my wife had an old Wisconsin photo ID and a social security card, we had few problems meeting the requirements. However, along with the fact that Gov. Scott Walker had ordered Department of Motor Vehicle employees not to divulge the actual card could be obtained free unless specifically asked about it and several shady voter ID requirements were being used in many Republican controlled states, I decided not to believe ID requirements are merely, “common sense.” And wouldn’t you know that, recently State Attorney General Van Hollen has predictably referred this matter to the Wisconsin Supreme Court.
There are a number of reasons why certain voters have been suppressed by these new laws. These include race, age, residential transience — like students — poverty and restriction of early voting accommodations. When all these are considered, they clearly reveal a coordinated partisan suppression strategy. They are all being used to suppress easy access to polling places by demographic minorities.
Last June, Pennsylvania House Majority Leader Mike Turzai read a list of legislative accomplishments and said, “Voter ID, which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the State of Pennsylvania: Done.”
But the fact is these unnecessary laws target a virtually non-existent problem — voter impersonation. In fact the state of Pennsylvania, when defending them in court, admitted there is absolutely, “no evidence of in-person voter fraud” having ever occurred in their state. However, the judge allowed the state ID law anyway.
Consider that when defending voter ID laws, Majority Leader Mike Turzai reveled in the fact these laws would ensure a victory for Romney. Do you suppose he could have been referring to the fact they will prevent significant numbers of Democrats from voting against him? What other explanation will do?
The state of Pennsylvania readily admitted that not one such case has ever existed. Excuse me but — duh. In order to win elections by relying on fraudulent individual voter impersonations, usually tens of thousands of votes would be required. Would that many people be paid off, or ideologically persuaded to risk conviction for committing a felony? As far as methods of fraud go, it would be a really dumb one to try.
Let’s face facts: These laws, which directly violate our Constitutional rights (not just our privileges) are almost exclusively enacted in Republican controlled states, and are meant as remedies for a problem that doesn’t exist.
Try connecting the dots for a while, and please, don’t blindly accept the “common sense” illusion without really looking into this for yourselves.
I would expect Republicans to do the same in a similar situation.
Peter W. Johnson,