Author Archives: ELECTIONLAWCENTER.COM

“Secretary Aichele — Please don’t play Holder’s game”

Pittsburgh Tribune Review:

“Holder’s Pennsylvania actions are just plays out of a well-established political playbook. Play One — ignore that voter fraud exists; Play Two — file numerous, expensive legal actions; and Play Three — call anyone in favor of an open election a racist. Play Three conjures the worst of our history just to foreclose mature debate.

If the commonwealth complies with Holder’s demands, DOJ will certainly institute yet another costly Voter ID legal action. The DOJ, the ACLU and the NAACP have a well-timed, well-coordinated, multicourt strategy designed to burden each state brazen enough to ask for validation that a purported voter is, in fact, who he says he is.


In Holder’s game, only those who need the votes of the dead or of fictional characters are winners. Secretary Aichele — you don’t have to play, so please don’t.”

Salon writer claims DOJ is trying to block Ohio law providing early voting to vets

At the link, Salon writer Joan Walsh claims that Romney is willfully misreading the Justice Department’s efforts to block an Ohio law that limits early voting to vets.  What in the world is she talking about?

Note to Salon Editor:  I know it is difficult to discern the difference between the Obama campaign and the Obama Department of Justice, but it is doubtful there is any truth that DOJ is actually involved in the lawsuit (except behind the scenes).  Waiting for the correction or simply removing the article altogether. 

“Getting It Wrong on Voter ID”



Calling out yet another of the “many poorly researched articles written about voter-ID laws,” Hans von Spakovsky notes “there is no evidence to support the claim, as expressed in the title of the article, that ‘Voter ID Laws Could Swing States’ — unless what is meant is that these laws could prevent the casting of fraudulent votes that could steal an election.”


 


In the Politico article, Emily Schultheis repeats the left-wing, anti-voter ID Brennan Center’s claim that “at least 5 million voters could be affected by” new voter-ID laws, but von Spakovsky’s research reveals “that 5 million figure is completely speculative and not based on any substantive evidence.”


 


“Schultheis also says, as if it is a proven fact, that these ‘laws tend to disproportionately affect young voters and minorities.’  Really? Based on what evidence?  The actual turnout of Democratic and minority voters went up, not down, in Georgia and Indiana after their voter-ID laws went into effect.”


 


More voter-ID fact vs. fiction here.