Tuesday, April 18, 2006
Federal Court Upholds Voter Photo ID's
A while ago, I posted here and here about The Pennsylvania Voter ID Act for "Fraud-Free Voting" that Governor Rendell vetoed, claiming it would place an unfair burden on poor and minority voters. Well, Indiana passed a similar, if not stronger, bill and their Governor signed it. The usual cast of characters sued in Federal Court.The result was just announced - Law upheld: Voters need photo ID: "U.S. District Judge Sarah Evans Barker upheld Indiana's stringent voter-identification law. Barker said plaintiffs, including the Indiana Democratic Party, failed to back up their contention that the ID law is unduly burdensome and would keep many people from casting ballots."
But what about all those horror stories that we heard in Pennsylvania from the ACLU, the LWV, the Governor, and the other Democratics opposed to Fraud-Free Voting? It seems that same song was sung by the same chorus in Indiana, but Judge Barker was unimpressed.
"The Democratic Party and the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, a co-plaintiff, had argued that the law -- passed by the Republican-led legislature in 2005 to prevent voter fraud -- would particularly affect the elderly, minorities and people with disabilities.
They would bear the cost of obtaining the documentation needed to get state-issued ID cards, plaintiffs said, arguing that having to spend money to vote was the modern-day equivalent of the "poll tax" -- the Jim Crow-era method of keeping black people from voting.
But Barker wrote: "Despite apocalyptic assertions of wholesale voter disenfranchisement, plaintiffs have produced not a single piece of evidence of any identifiable registered voter who would be prevented from voting" because of the statute."
Repeat "not a single piece of evidence" . Must be a difference between the standards for court evidence and for political spin. Oh yes, voters can get a free photo ID from the State if they need one.
It also seems Indiana is reputed to have the worst case of bloated voter registration rolls ( i.e., lots more registered voters than warm bodies) in the nation. That shocked me; I thought we held that title with the Philadelphia rolls, as John Fund argued in my first post link above.
Still, we should give Gov. Rendell credit for helping out the poor and disabled Philadelphia voters by keeping open those 600 people-friendly polling places in bars and homes of Democratic functionaries (see photo) . After all, with all those "voters" on the Philly roles, we need as many obscure polling places as possible.
Why would Philadelphia, its roles and polling places, be so important to Gov. Rendell that he would veto bills to improve access for real people and assure honest "fraud-free" voting ?
Consider this bit of electoral history. In the 2004, PA went 'blue' by about 120,000 votes with Kerry winning Philadelphia County by 400,000 votes. In other words, all of PA, except for Philly, went for Bush by a 280,000 vote plurality. Could that be why Gov. Rendell's vetos were far from unexpected in this election year?
Repeat "not a single piece of evidence" . Must be a difference between the standards for court evidence and for political spin. Oh yes, voters can get a free photo ID from the State if they need one.
It also seems Indiana is reputed to have the worst case of bloated voter registration rolls ( i.e., lots more registered voters than warm bodies) in the nation. That shocked me; I thought we held that title with the Philadelphia rolls, as John Fund argued in my first post link above.
Still, we should give Gov. Rendell credit for helping out the poor and disabled Philadelphia voters by keeping open those 600 people-friendly polling places in bars and homes of Democratic functionaries (see photo) . After all, with all those "voters" on the Philly roles, we need as many obscure polling places as possible.
Why would Philadelphia, its roles and polling places, be so important to Gov. Rendell that he would veto bills to improve access for real people and assure honest "fraud-free" voting ?
Consider this bit of electoral history. In the 2004, PA went 'blue' by about 120,000 votes with Kerry winning Philadelphia County by 400,000 votes. In other words, all of PA, except for Philly, went for Bush by a 280,000 vote plurality. Could that be why Gov. Rendell's vetos were far from unexpected in this election year?
Comments:
<< Home
hollister wyxeueuw hollister uk okmxkdnn hollister outlet uk jrbkmupc hollister sale kppgtbut hollister uk sale fsjqdeux hollister sale uk cxofujbd cheap hollister ylyswkax hollister outlet knuazijo hollister london kthzqexd
Post a Comment
# posted by 
: 3:28 PM
: 3:28 PM << Home
