What’s the Deal With Voter ID?

John Seiler:

Personally, I don’t think there should be any mandatory government ID cards. Roads should be privatized, allowing the private owners to decide what ID, if any, is needed to use them. Minors buying booze should be determined by parents, not government.

But it is reasonable to ask for a government ID in a government election of a government politician for a government office.

Yet U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder now is suing Texas for requiring a government ID in a government election of a government politician for a government office. Supposedly, the right to vote of minorities is being infringed. But how hard is it for minorities — or anyone — to get either a state driver’s license, or (for non-drivers) a state ID card? Not hard at all.

OK, if Texas’ DMV is as slow and incompetent as California’s, maybe he could sue them for long lines. But that’s it.

Question: When Holder’s employees come to work at the U.S. Justice Department, do they have to show a government ID card?

Answer: Of course they do. So maybe he should sue himself.

Approval of voter ID is settled case law. As recently as 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court allowed them in 6-3 vote involving Indiana’s voter ID law. The majority opinion was written by Justice John Paul Stevens, one of the most liberal ever on the court. He wrote, “The state interests identified as justifications for [the law] are both neutral and sufficiently strong to require us to reject” the lawsuit.

Of course, what’s really going on here is a desire to spread massive voter fraud from President Obama’s base in Chicago, where the dead notoriously vote again and again, to the whole country, thus assuring the president’s re-election. As the old Chicagoland saying has it, “Voter early and vote often.”

The country already has had enough questionable elections. Vote fraud still hangs over the Florida “hanging chads” in the 2000 election of Republican President George Bush, and the Ohio vote counting in his 2004 re-election.

Holder and his boss must know that they won’t win these cases. But the can cause enough confusion until Obama’s November re-election possibly to give them an edge.

Democracy depends on honest elections. What we’re getting is a slide into Third World corruption.

March 15, 2012

No comments

Write a comment
  1. Beelzebub
    Beelzebub 15 March, 2012, 10:26

    “Democracy depends on honest elections”

    You’re assuming that we live in a democracy. We don’t. Would the two GOP presidential candidates left standing be Rick Santorum and Mitt Romney in a democracy?

    The one exclusive privilege of citizenship was supposed to be the right to vote. There really is no other incentive to become an American. Now with the government promoting voter fraud our last privilege has been rendered worthless.

    Reply this comment
  2. Parke Bostrom
    Parke Bostrom 15 March, 2012, 12:07

    What is “really going on here” is that Republicans have realized that the majority of voters who don’t have IDs (and who will be disenfranchised for one or more election cycles) vote Democratic. Thus, the result of voter ID laws will be to tilt elections in favor of Republican candidates.

    Just as Republicans cried “WMD” to invade Iraq, they are now crying “voter fraud” to disenfranchise voters.

    “The deal” is that under federal law, “preclearance” areas (such as Texas) must prove that changes to their voting laws will not disenfranchise minorities. As voter ID laws will disproportionately affect minorities, they can be legitimately blocked by the DOJ. (Perhaps the “preclearance” laws should be repealed or overturned, but at present they have not been.)

    Hanging chads have nothing to do with “vote fraud” (fraud committed by voters), nor “election fraud” (fraud committed by the government workers who run elections). Fraud is deliberate. Hanging chads are not.

    You say: “It is reasonable to ask for a government ID in a government election of a government politician for a government office.”

    In other words: You believe it is reasonable to disenfranchise voters who do not have government ID. Perhaps we should amend the Declaration of Independence: “We hold these truths to be self evident, that men are not created equal, but rather become equal when they are issued a government approved ID card.”

    Also: “government election”, “government politician”, “government office”? Are politicians “of the government”, or are they “of the people”? Are we a county of, by and for the people? Or of, by and for the government?

    Here’s a question for you: Is it “reasonable” to let the government count our votes in the first place? After all, the government is hardly a disinterested party. Additionally, most government vote counting happens in secret, ie, the integrity of the count cannot be meaningfully observed.

    More fundamentally, are elections a tool that government uses to control people, or a tool people use to control the government?

    Reply this comment
  3. CalWatchdog
    CalWatchdog Author 15 March, 2012, 12:23

    Mr. Bostrom: I’m not a Republican. And I wrote dozens or editorials at the Orange County Register, where I worked at the time, against the Iraq War, including exposing the phony WMD “evidence” even before the war began.

    So your analogy fails.

    You do bring up good points, though, when you ask: “Is it ‘reasonable’ to let the government count our votes in the first place? After all, the government is hardly a disinterested party. Additionally, most government vote counting happens in secret, ie, the integrity of the count cannot be meaningfully observed.

    “More fundamentally, are elections a tool that government uses to control people, or a tool people use to control the government?”

    The answer to all those questions is the general farce of American elections. To cite just one example, polls show just 10 percent of Californians approve of the jobs done by state legislators, yet almost all legislators easily win re-election.

    — John Seiler

    Reply this comment
  4. JoeS
    JoeS 17 March, 2012, 15:20

    We have to face the fact that the 1960 election was decided by vote fraud… in the most corrupt city in America. This is the headquarters of the reelection campaign. The manager is Richard Daley Jr the son of the mayor who threw the 1960 election.

    We have to insist on the integrity of elections. Heroes have given their lives for our right to self-government.

    Google: ACORN “vote fraud”

    This president started his career as a community agitator with ACORN. ACORN is registering fraudulent voters across the nation.

    Reply this comment
  5. Beelzebub
    Beelzebub 18 March, 2012, 08:37

    “Heroes have given their lives for our right to self-government”

    No, Joe. That’s just the BS line that they fool you with.

    The poor and lower-middle class kids die for corporate profits. You would never find a corporate CEO’s kid fighting in the trenches of Afghanistan. 1% of the politicians on Capital Hill have kids fighting in Afghanistan. The ones who are over there are underclass cannon fodder. Let’s keep it truthful on these boards.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Your e-mail address will not be published.
Required fields are marked*


Related Articles

Prop. 34 latest attempt to abolish Calif. death penalty

Oct. 25, 2012 By Dave Roberts On May 1, 1992, Eric Houston, 20, strode into Lindhurst High School in Yuba County

Meg and Carly should debate

I heard Carly Fiorina on John & Ken on KFI 640 the other day. (Audio here.) She’s running for U.S.

Woohoo! CDCR is blogging!

Anthony Pignataro: Please don’t all rush there at once because we don’t want to jam up anyone’s servers, but I