Reason #1 NOT to vote for President Barack Obama: President Obama’s opposition to voter identification is a reason not to vote for him. In every other sphere of our lives, ID cards are considered not just okay, but desirable and even necessary. The Obama Administration would have us believe that voter identification is inherently discriminatory when in every other sphere of life identification is ...not discriminatory: They check identification at the pharmacy, the doctor’s office, courthouses, Federal buildings, military bases, when picking up mail at the post office, at colleges, at the gym, etc. Are we to conclude that this is discrimination as well?
The “Obamacare” plan includes a national health identification card which is also not deemed to be discriminatory.
So why the opposition to voter ID?
The state of Indiana has been criticized by the Obama Administration for having a voter identification law, although the State of Indiana offers voter identification cards free-of-charge to citizens who don’t already have a state driver’s license or a state-issued identification card. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled on Indiana’s law April 28, 2008 (Crawford v. Marion County Election Board) and 6 out of the 9 justices said voter ID was not discriminatory: “Because Indiana’s cards are free, the inconvenience of going to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, gathering required documents, and posing for a photograph does not qualify as a substantial burden on most voters’ right to vote, or represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting.”
I repeat: The Supreme Court already ruled on the legality and non-discriminatory nature of the Indiana law. It was a non-partisan 6:3 vote. The Obama Admin doesn't like the ruling so is acting as though it didn't happen in opposing similar plans elsewhere.
The Supreme Court’s non-partisan, 6 to 3 ruling is common sense. Cross-referencing a form of ID w/ names on the voter list is no different than what the NAACP did the other day to those entering its convention.
P.S. The Texas Secretary of State's website outlines the voter registration process which is pretty much on par with other state's procedures except at the end of the process you receive a voter registration card which actually gets cross-referenced when you show up to vote. How easy is that?
The “Obamacare” plan includes a national health identification card which is also not deemed to be discriminatory.
So why the opposition to voter ID?
The state of Indiana has been criticized by the Obama Administration for having a voter identification law, although the State of Indiana offers voter identification cards free-of-charge to citizens who don’t already have a state driver’s license or a state-issued identification card. The Supreme Court of the United States ruled on Indiana’s law April 28, 2008 (Crawford v. Marion County Election Board) and 6 out of the 9 justices said voter ID was not discriminatory: “Because Indiana’s cards are free, the inconvenience of going to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, gathering required documents, and posing for a photograph does not qualify as a substantial burden on most voters’ right to vote, or represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting.”
I repeat: The Supreme Court already ruled on the legality and non-discriminatory nature of the Indiana law. It was a non-partisan 6:3 vote. The Obama Admin doesn't like the ruling so is acting as though it didn't happen in opposing similar plans elsewhere.
The Supreme Court’s non-partisan, 6 to 3 ruling is common sense. Cross-referencing a form of ID w/ names on the voter list is no different than what the NAACP did the other day to those entering its convention.
P.S. The Texas Secretary of State's website outlines the voter registration process which is pretty much on par with other state's procedures except at the end of the process you receive a voter registration card which actually gets cross-referenced when you show up to vote. How easy is that?
No comments:
Post a Comment