Respectfully submitted by Lawrence E. Rafferty (rafflaw)-Weekend Contributor
I can still remember the first time I voted in a National election. I was a young, 18-year-old student and I could finally have a say in who was going to run the country. It was a proud day for me and the countless other 18 year olds who were also voting for the first time. I can honestly say that I have not missed voting in any election since. That includes both primary and general elections. There wasn’t always a lot to vote for in some of those primaries over the years, but I consider voting a duty, so I made sure that I made it to the polls.
It hasn’t always been easy for all citizens to cast their vote. Even in my lifetime, the Jim Crow laws of the South made it difficult, at best for African-Americans citizens to register and to cast their ballots. After years of protests and legal battles, I thought the Jim Crow style of voter suppression was a thing of the past. It turns out I was wrong. Very wrong.
Over the last several years, attempts have been made, some successfully, to suppress votes and strike legal voters from the registered voter lists, all in an attempt to prevent certain voters from casting their votes. We all remember the infamous measures taken by the Florida Secretary of State to attempt to turn the result of the Presidential election between Al Gore and George W. Bush. At least from that point forward, numerous legislative and executive actions on the State level have been brought, all in an attempt to make it difficult for people to register and to vote.
The most recent attempts at voter suppression revolve around the so-called Voter ID laws that have been put into place in several states allegedly to prevent the unproven concern of voter fraud. The fact that these voter ID laws have been promoted by one political party, even caught the idea of a prominent Republican appointed Federal Appellate Court judge.
I am talking about Justice Richard Posner, who is an appellate court judge appointed by Ronald Reagan to the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals. This very same Judge Posner was responsible for the seminal case approving the country’s first Voter ID law.
“It is a dissent, released on Friday, written by Judge Richard Posner, the Reagan-appointed 7th Circuit Court of Appeals judge who was the one who approved the first such Photo ID law in the country (Indiana’s) back in 2008, in the landmark Crawford v. Marion County case which went all the way to the Supreme Court, where Posner’s ruling was affirmed.
If there was ever evidence that a jurist could change their mind upon review of additional subsequent evidence, this is it. If there was ever a concise and airtight case made against Photo ID laws and the threat they pose to our most basic right to vote, this is it. If there was ever a treatise revealing such laws for the blatantly partisan shell games that they are, this is it.
His dissent includes a devastating response to virtually every false and/or disingenuous rightwing argument/talking point ever put forth in support of Photo ID voting restrictions, describing them as “a mere fig leaf for efforts to disenfranchise voters likely to vote for the political party that does not control the state government.” ‘ Salon
While I do not always agree with Judge Posner’s decisions, this dissent is even more important knowing it was written by a Judge who had recently approved of a similar Voter/Photo ID law. Not to mention that at least one organization considers Judge Posner the most widely cited legal scholar of out time. Just how did Judge Posner attack the underpinnings of the Photo/Voter ID laws in the linked dissent?
“But it was written, largely, in response to the Appellate Court ruling last week by rightwing Judge Frank Easterbrook which contained one embarrassing falsehood and error after another, including the canards about Photo ID being required to board airplanes, open bank accounts, buy beer and guns, etc. We took apart just that one paragraph of Easterbrook’s ruling last week here, but Posner takes apart his colleague’s entire, error-riddled mess of a ruling in this response.
Amongst my favorite passages (and there are so many), this one [emphasis added]…
According to an Al-Jazeera report, it’s a sentiment that the staffers at Third Sector Development are expressing. The nonprofit organization was on a mission to register as many black and Hispanic people in the state of Georgia as possible so that voter turnout for the upcoming midterm elections in November would be high. And they were successful at it, until they received word that about half of the applications they submitted for processing have gone missing in action.
“Over the last few months, the group submitted some 80,000 voter-registration forms to the Georgia secretary of state’s office—but as of last week, about half those new registrants, more than 40,000 Georgians, were still not listed on preliminary voter rolls. And there is no public record of those 40,000-plus applications, according to state Rep. Stacey Adams, a Democrat,” Al-Jazeera explained.” Crooks and Liars
The word Whoops comes to mind when I read about 40,000 “lost” registration forms. But the loss couldn’t be related to politics, could it? However, Georgia isn’t the only recent example of voter suppression that might make Judge Posner even more upset at voter suppression measures.
Recently we heard about a Koch Brothers sponsored or supported group sending out intentionally false voting information designed to confuse voters in North Carolina. Well it seems that the Americans For Prosperity have now set their voter suppression sights on my home state of Illinois.
“First it was North Carolina, now it’s Illinois. Same pattern of voter suppression by fraudulent mailing, too.
Joan McCarter at Daily Kos:
The Kochs’ Americans for Prosperity must have decided they need to do some “voter information” in what’s an awfully tight race for governor in Illinois. According to the Daily Kos Elections Outlook, there’s about a 4-point spread between Democratic incumbent Pat Quinn and Republican Bruce Rauner. Enter AFP to try to create a little chaos in the election. And like in North Carolina, where they sent hundreds of thousands of fraudulent mailers, they’re upsetting people by sending mailers to their dead loved ones.
DECATUR – It’s not uncommon for residents such as Maryilynn Baer to receive political mail before the general election.
But when recent letter came to her home that asked for her husband, Edgar, to re-register to vote before the November election, Baer was overwhelmed and upset.
Her husband had been dead since May.
“It was upsetting,” she said. “His name had already been taken off the voter registration list, and I sent the letter to (Macon County Clerk) Steve Bean and told him I had already notified him that Edgar had passed away.”
See, the mailer made it seem like it had one from County Clerk Bean. All over the state, people have been calling their county clerks to find out if they really do have to re-register, because all of the mailings from AFP are meant to look like they’re coming from elections officials. They’re also wondering why their dead relatives are getting these letters, because they’re going to a lot of deceased people. Which means elections officials are having to make a lot of apologies, even though they’re not responsible for the confusion. Says Shelby County Clerk Jessica Fox, “[w]e would never do anything, for lack of a better term, as tacky as to open up these old wounds.” ‘ Crooks and Liars
Whether it is done by legislatures under the guise of alleged, and as Judge Posner suggests, non-existent voter fraud, or by State executive branch officials as in the case of Georgia, or by partisan organizations funded by conservative billionaires, the result is the same. Legal citizens with the right to vote are being denied that right.
When will the mass media wake up to the canard of voter fraud being foisted upon the American public? Judge Posner’s stick in the eye approach just might even convince the Roberts Court. Then again, we just may be in the throes of a high-tech Jim Crow, Part Two campaign that impacts not only minorities, but also WASP voters who just happen to register as a Democrat or with a Democratic leaning organization. If these photo ID’s are so important, why do some of the states using them, outlaw student ID cards from local universities and colleges, but accept gun license cards that do not have a photo?
If they believe in their principles and ideas, why are these illegal and immoral tactics necessary? What do you think?
“The views expressed in this posting are the author’s alone and not those of the blog, the host, or other weekend bloggers. As an open forum, weekend bloggers post independently without pre-approval or review. Content and any displays or art are solely their decision and responsibility.”
leejcaroll, Yes, no other system truly is fair or makes sense. If you are living off of others, you should not be able to vote for how much you get to live off of them. You benefit from your local fire dept. why don’t you get a vote in their next election?
“So the haves get to decide for the have nots and whatever we who have decide, which seems to be to cut food stamps and safety nets even further, is perfectly fine???”
You are proving my point with this statement. You are basically stating that the have nots would not have any of these programs if they weren’t allowed to vote to take other peoples property.
Jim 22 so seniors who worked all their lives but now are on pensions and don’t get enough income to pay taxes shouldn’t vote? Those who are disabled and incomes below the poverty level shouldn’t vote (although many decisions intimately affect their lives), those who make minimum wage or less and don’t have income sufficient to pay taxes should not vote? Really??? So the haves get to decide for the have nots and whatever we who have decide, which seems to be to cut food stamps and safety nets even further, is perfectly fine???
rafflaw – “Every American citizen is eligible to vote, no matter
if you own property or not. If they are of age and not a felon(in some states) you are eligible to vote. What you are suggesting
is unconstitutional.”
I wasn’t arguing constitutionality. I am suggesting that that is the way it should be. I’m sure the framers weren’t expecting nearly 50% of the population living off of others. We could call it the fair share amendment.
Actually, EVERY citizen is ineligible until they prove eligibility. At a minimum, you have to reach the age of 18 and register to “legally” participate in the process.
I would like to recommend the Dec.15 Washington Post piece entitled “THE ART OF STEALING ELECTIONS”. I’M going to have to re-read Mr Rafflaw’s post, again. He starts out with the ludicrous comparison of Photo I..D. requirements to Jim Crow laws.
Then he cites alleged voter manipulation/ improprieties on the part of officials to disenfranchise groups of voters.Fair enough, to cite/make those allegations, but the cases he refers to have NOTHING to do with voter I.D. requirements.
Jim22,
Every American citizen is eligible to vote, no matter
if you own property or not. If they are of age and not a felon(in some states) you are eligible to vote. What you are suggesting
is unconstitutional.
Because Jim, they are Americans who have the RIGHT to vote in their own best interests too.
swarthmoremom -”jim 22 Poll tax?”
Call it what you want. If you don’t pay taxes, why should you get to decide who/how/amount those taxes should be spent? In the fire dept i belong to, if you don’t pay your yearly dues, you don’t get to vote on officers.
The compassion from the left for the poor, ignorant and dependent voter would be more compelling if they weren’t so hostile to those that rise out of poverty, ignorance and dependence.
You can read through every thread and every blog and find the same common theme; liberals will have your back as long you remain in your place. If you so much as hint you’re climbing the income ladder, embracing a more independent lifestyle and educating yourself with the knowledge that the current administrative state is a barrier to improving your lot in life, then you are no longer worthy of respect from the left.
The main reason I am for voter ID’s is to prevent the stuffing of ballot boxes. On election day I often tease my more liberal friends about voting earlier and voting often.
Minnesota has both mail in voting and same day registration. Many options to vote are available. Voter participation is the highest in the country. One would think that the goal of a state would be a high level of participation and not suppression of certain segments of the voting population.
“Forget the picture I.D. I would rather voters show up with their previous years tax form(s) to show that they paid at least $1 in taxes before being allowed to vote.” jim 22 Poll tax?
@ Darren
I agree completely. The notarization of mail in ballots would not only be a logistical nightmare it would be a burden on those who “legitimately” use mail in ballots. As a notary, you couldn’t pay me enough to do this chore.
However, the problem WITH mail in ballots IS the inability to confirm that the ballot has been signed by the voter, that the ballot wasn’t just shoved into the hand of Grandma in the Alzheimer ward, and a host of other issues. Also a logistical problem when there are hundreds of thousands of ballots to be confirmed. The time frame to do this chore is monumental. The legitimate vote tally would be not finalized until quite some time AFTER the end of the voting period.
The best solution, I think for mail in ballots, would be to have a deadline….well before the actual voting deadline to have the mail in ballot arrive. This would give time to verify the signatures.
THEN the next problem would be to actually keep secret the tally of mail in ballots so that it can’t be used to sway the “live” votes.
Forget the picture I.D. I would rather voters show up with their previous years tax form(s) to show that they paid at least $1 in taxes before being allowed to vote.
Screw it! Forget the whole ID thingy and the registration thingy as well. Just open the valve and let’s just finish this off now while we still have a majority of the population interested in natural rights; even if they don’t really know what they are.
mespo727272 – “This is a great article, Larry. Much needed, too. The systematic exclusion of minority voters by Republican legislators is a national disgrace. We shouldn’t be too surprised either. Their Southern strategy has failed and the demographics are squarely against them. It’s the last gasp of the dinosaur but the old reptile is still dangerous. I welcome the new world where this type of thing will be called what it is – unAmerican. For now we just fight it and the racists who promote it. Bravo, my hat is permanently off to the best story I’ve seen on the blog in quite a long time.”
mespo, Something tells me you will put on the hypocrite hat if this was an article about I.D. needed for the second amendment.
Voter Fraud Vigilantes
http://blog.sfgate.com/fiore/2014/10/15/voter-fraud-vigilantes/
Excerpt:
What better way to eliminate the infinitesimal amount of voter fraud in the United States than by disenfranchising hundreds of thousands of people? That is basically what the Republican craze of “voter ID” laws will do. These laws will overwhelmingly impact students, minorities and the poor— interestingly-enough, all reliable Democratic voters.
Funny how the statehouses and governors who back voter ID laws are all Republican. Go figure. They just want to save our Democracy and increase turnout, right? Never mind that a Reagan-appointed judge slammed voter ID laws and made Swiss cheese of the whole charade.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/maria-ehsan/high-turnout-in-states_b_2555890.html “Following my previous article, advocating vote-by-mail, let’s look at the states that ended up with the highest registered voter turnout in 2012:
1. Minnesota
2. Wisconsin
3. Oregon
4. Washington
Same-day registration, a century of tradition in civic engagement, along with a hotly contested U.S. Senate race in Wisconsin, explain high turnout in the top two states. As for Oregon and Washington, they are the only 100 percent vote-by-mail states.
Despite impressive turnouts in these four states, the level of disenfranchisement in the rest of the country is still high. The number of eligible voters is estimated to be 219 million (the U.S. population of 315 million minus children, non-U.S. citizens, and felons; plus overseas voters). In 2012, about 180 million people were registered to vote, of which only 130 million actually voted. With over 40 percent of eligible voters not participating, election officials need to find effective means to increase access to voting.”
@ Darren
I was a notary for about 15 years in California so I can only speak to CA law. I let it drop when I retired from my business.
1. Most notaries are either self employed or work for others like banks. In the case of the bank notary, because the fees and bond are paid for by the employer they can limit the Bank notary to doing bank business only.
2. The notary can charge $10 per signature. When there were a lot of signatures I would often waive part of the fees. When the purpose of the notarization was for my own client’s business I would waive the fees as a free service.
3. The notary must POSITIVELY IDENTIFY the signer. This means that they need to present ID. (Kind of ironic here isn’t it.) Like a driver’s license, passport, military ID and pretty much all of the ID types that everyone is whining about being unfair.
4. The notary must SEE the person sign the document and then sign the notary journal. If not then you need a Subscribing Witness.
5. IF the person doesn’t have an ID or, then the Credible Witness procedure can be used. http://www.123notary.com/credible-witness.asp
To try to have a notary certify mail in ballots when there is NOT a positive ID. The person is NOT in front of the notary to see them. Then the notary would be a complete idiot to perform his/her duties. There are some very stiff penalties and even jail time involved.
You might be able to set up a program of Government funded notaries and waive the fees for those few people who don’t have IDs (using the Credible Witness procedure) or for the notaries to do the standard ID procedures to verify the mail in ballots before they are mailed in. HOWEVER, that completely gets around the whine that people have to present ID to vote. If you have to present ID to be notarized.
Catch 22 isn’t it??
DBQ, the notary laws in your state seem to resemble closely from what you describe those in WA.
It is a catch 22 as far as the ID goes. My issue with the use of notaries public for certification of mail in ballots is that it would create more of a barrier to individuals who then have to schedule an appointment with a notary to certify the document. Plus, in states with more than a million registered voters, there might be a swamping of banks, credit unions, law firms, etc with individuals needing to have their signatures verified and that could also disenfranchise many. Plus, doing this effectively negates the reason for the mail in ballots.
The last time I did any of the following things mentioned by Bill above, I did not need a photo ID: buy booze, take out a library book, get my prescription meds and get a speeding ticket. When they gave me the speeding ticket I did not have a license with a photo on it. Library card from New Orleans (new) does not have my photo, pharmacy wants the doctors prescription only. But, I am in New Orleans and this town got Reconstructed right off the bat.