The fight over early-voting and ID laws, which can play a crucial role
in this year’s election given that many of these laws are in key states
such as Ohio and Pennsylvania, has been in the spotlight over the last
two weeks. link.
“Battle over voter ID intensifies as election approaches”
The fight over early-voting and ID laws, which can play a crucial role
in this year’s election given that many of these laws are in key states
such as Ohio and Pennsylvania, has been in the spotlight over the last
two weeks. link.
Ohio attorney general says he will appeal federal “early voting” ruling
In Ohio, the Plain-Dealer reports that Attorney General Dewine will appeal the federal ruling that restores in-person early voting on eve of Election Day.
DeWine said Ohio has always made exceptions for military personnel.
“Since the time of Civil War we’ve made a distinction in this country between the availability and access for people who are in the military versus the rest of us to vote. And we made that distinction because of the unique situation people in the military are in,” DeWine said. “This (law) is not anything new.” He said he will appeal because “My job as attorney general is to defend the laws of the state of Ohio and to defend the right of the state of Ohio to set its own rules and its own laws.”
As with the provisional ballot ruling last month, this is a blatantly
political decision and judicial activism at its worse. Disregarding
precedent and upending state law, the liberal federal judge, at the stroke of a pen, increased the early voting period for a three day period
across the state, imposing additional duties and an unfunded mandate on local and state election
officials without any authority. Instead of striking down a law that somehow violates the equal protection laws, this federal judge created his own revised Ohio law, his own creation of a early voting period, because it must be a new constitutional right to vote early. For everyone. Every day. All weekend.
According to Wikipedia, Judge Peter C. Economus is a Clinton
appointee and he previously worked at the Ohio Legal Assistance
Association. Therefore, there should be no surprise with the activist ruling. This is what we have all come to expect from Ohio’s federal
judges on a whole range of voting issues.
Ohio attorney general says he will appeal federal “early voting” ruling
In Ohio, the Plain-Dealer reports that Attorney General Dewine will appeal the federal ruling that restores in-person early voting on eve of Election Day.
DeWine said Ohio has always made exceptions for military personnel.
“Since the time of Civil War we’ve made a distinction in this country between the availability and access for people who are in the military versus the rest of us to vote. And we made that distinction because of the unique situation people in the military are in,” DeWine said. “This (law) is not anything new.” He said he will appeal because “My job as attorney general is to defend the laws of the state of Ohio and to defend the right of the state of Ohio to set its own rules and its own laws.”
As with the provisional ballot ruling last month, this is a blatantly
political decision and judicial activism at its worse. Disregarding
precedent and upending state law, the liberal federal judge, at the stroke of a pen, increased the early voting period for a three day period
across the state, imposing additional duties and an unfunded mandate on local and state election
officials without any authority. Instead of striking down a law that somehow violates the equal protection laws, this federal judge created his own revised Ohio law, his own creation of a early voting period, because it must be a new constitutional right to vote early. For everyone. Every day. All weekend.
According to Wikipedia, Judge Peter C. Economus is a Clinton
appointee and he previously worked at the Ohio Legal Assistance
Association. Therefore, there should be no surprise with the activist ruling. This is what we have all come to expect from Ohio’s federal
judges on a whole range of voting issues.
“Military voting likely to hit new low”
“Military voting likely to hit new low”
“Group says it found 30,000 dead North Carolinians registered to vote”
The News Observer reports that a Raleigh-based group devoted to reducing the potential for voter fraud presented the N.C. Board of Elections on Friday with a list of nearly 30,000 names of dead people statewide who are still registered to vote. The Voter Integrity Project compiled the list after obtaining death records from the state Department of Public Health from 2002 to March 31 and comparing them to the voter rolls. “Mainly, what we’re concerned about is the potential [for fraud],” said project director Jay DeLancy. “Since there is no voter ID law in North Carolina, anybody can walk in and claim to be anyone else.”
“Group says it found 30,000 dead North Carolinians registered to vote”
The News Observer reports that a Raleigh-based group devoted to reducing the potential for voter fraud presented the N.C. Board of Elections on Friday with a list of nearly 30,000 names of dead people statewide who are still registered to vote. The Voter Integrity Project compiled the list after obtaining death records from the state Department of Public Health from 2002 to March 31 and comparing them to the voter rolls. “Mainly, what we’re concerned about is the potential [for fraud],” said project director Jay DeLancy. “Since there is no voter ID law in North Carolina, anybody can walk in and claim to be anyone else.”
More Wall Street Journal Coverage on Numbers
Wall Street Journal. “Backers of voter-ID laws say the extent of fraud is beside the point. “We don’t pass laws against fraud to stop election results from changing,” said J. Christian Adams, an election lawyer in Alexandria, Va., and advocate for voter-ID laws who blogs about election law. “We pass laws against voter fraud because the system must be free from corruption.” He rejected the notion that corrupt election officials wouldn’t enforce the laws. “You don’t facilitate criminal activity in any other area of life by saying officials won’t enforce laws against fraud, murder, theft,” Adams added.”
. . .
Hans von Spakovsky, senior legal fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank who has written about voter fraud and backs voter-ID laws, said a voter ID “doesn’t just protect against impersonation fraud. It also deters voting under false voter registrations, including the use of phony names or false addresses. It also protects against voting by illegal aliens. It can also deter voting by those registered in more than one state.” He added, of impersonation fraud, “No one claims this is ‘widespread.’
More Wall Street Journal Coverage on Numbers
Wall Street Journal. “Backers of voter-ID laws say the extent of fraud is beside the point. “We don’t pass laws against fraud to stop election results from changing,” said J. Christian Adams, an election lawyer in Alexandria, Va., and advocate for voter-ID laws who blogs about election law. “We pass laws against voter fraud because the system must be free from corruption.” He rejected the notion that corrupt election officials wouldn’t enforce the laws. “You don’t facilitate criminal activity in any other area of life by saying officials won’t enforce laws against fraud, murder, theft,” Adams added.”
. . .
Hans von Spakovsky, senior legal fellow at the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank who has written about voter fraud and backs voter-ID laws, said a voter ID “doesn’t just protect against impersonation fraud. It also deters voting under false voter registrations, including the use of phony names or false addresses. It also protects against voting by illegal aliens. It can also deter voting by those registered in more than one state.” He added, of impersonation fraud, “No one claims this is ‘widespread.’