Stripping voters' rights: Texas voter I.D. is power struggle for Democrats

By GottaLaff

The naked truth about stripping voters' rights:

But what began as a struggle by Democrats to keep a voter ID bill from coming up for a vote has continued, in part, as a tussle for control.

"This is not a bitter battle. This is a power struggle," said Rep. Myra Crownover, R-Denton.

Democrats have offered to suspend rules to take up major legislation – as long as it doesn't have a thing to do with forcing voters to present IDs at the voting booth.

[...]

Republicans – rightly or wrongly is in the eye of the beholder – don't want to give Democrats control of the House's agenda, which is set by a House committee. [...]

The whole session has been a delicate balancing of House power, and now the fight is nakedly partisan.

And speaking of airing our differences, we all know how Rushpublics feel about nakeditude.

Democrats fear voter ID could cost them at least 1,000 votes every election in each House district – enough to have turned Mesquite Democrat Robert Miklos' 500-vote upset last fall into defeat.

And next year's House elections will decide whether Republicans next session get to dominate redistricting again. A Democratic House majority, especially if the party could win a couple of statewide races next year, would deny the GOP its huge map-making advantage.

The finer points of election rules make a huge difference in who gets to rule.

The tension is clearly unbare-able.

Colorado's Katherine Harris threatens the '08 Election

By GottaLaff

David Sirota just scared me:

The story on the left describes [Secretary of State Mike] Coffman's efforts to invalidate roughly 5,000 registrations (depending on which source you ask). Here's the crux of what's going on:

"5,000 Coloradans whose voter status is in limbo because of [a] controversial check box...The registration form asks for a driver's license or state ID number. If applicants don't have that, they're supposed to check a box and then put down at least the last four digits of their Social Security numbers. But thousands of people didn't check the box. According to a policy adopted last year by Secretary of State Mike Coffman, these applications are supposed to be listed as incomplete...National and local voting-rights organizations criticize Coffman's policy, saying it violates other federal laws. They say Coffman is unfairly putting up barriers for people who are eligible to vote and want him to change his policy."

The check box is "controversial" because you are asked to check it on the form if you don't "have" a driver's license or ID card. Here's what it looks like on the form (which you can download and see yourself here):

So, here's the thing - what's the definition of "have?" I may have one at my house or in my car, but not with me at the very moment I am filling out the registration form. [...]

And yet, if you made any of those logical choices - if you gave all the social security information required by law, but simply didn't check the box - Coffman is attempting to use that choice to potentially invalidate your registration and prevent you from voting.

[...] Thus, it isn't surprising that the Rocky Mountain News notes that "the largest number [of registrations affected by Coffman's edict] are Democrats, followed closely by unaffiliated voters," and "hundreds live in predominately minority neighborhoods in Denver and Aurora" (ie. traditionally Democratic constituencies).

Remember, Coffman is an up-and-coming Republican "star" - he's simultaneously Secretary of State and running to replace Colorado U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo (R). So he's not some nonpartisan election observer - as I said before, he's positioning himself to be Katherine Harris, who also went on to use her notoriety as an election thief to win a seat in Congress.

[...] But what we're seeing here in Colorado is a very public attempt to use Republican-controlled offices to potentially disenfranchise thousands and rig the election. Indeed, the Denver Post now reports that Coffman has asked his fellow Republican crony, state Attorney General John Suthers (R), to validate his moves with an official legal opinion so as to trip up potential pre- and post-election legal challenges to the disenfranchisement. This isn't a conspiracy theory - it's happening all right out in the open for everyone to see.

It all adds up to the kind of coordinated Republican scheme we've seen in the last two elections. And once again, that scheme could throw a national election.

Wisconsin judge throws out voter ID lawsuit

By GottaLaff

First Ohio, now Wisconsin. Maybe the Republicans should take a hint: Elections should be fair. Voter suppression is so 2004:

A judge on Thursday threw out a lawsuit by Wisconsin's attorney general demanding that state elections officials confirm hundreds of thousands of voters' identities before election day.

Dane County Circuit Judge Maryann Sumi ruled that neither federal nor state law makes the checks that Atty. Gen. J.B. Van Hollen seeks a condition for voting. She said Van Hollen had no standing to sue and should have made a complaint to the state Government Accountability Board rather than going to court.

Van Hollen spokesman Kevin St. John said the state Department of Justice would appeal, perhaps directly to the state Supreme Court. The agency will continue to pursue the case beyond election day if it must because an accurate list of registered voters is crucial to future elections, he said.

Van Hollen, a Republican and co-chairman of GOP presidential candidate John McCain's Wisconsin campaign, argued that the federal Help America Vote Act requires the accountability board to check the names of everyone registered to vote since Jan. 1, 2006, against driver's license and Social Security data and remove any ineligible voters from the rolls. [...]

Sumi said only the U.S. attorney general could bring a court order to enforce the federal voting act.

A similar case in Ohio resulted in the U.S. Supreme Court's rebuffing Ohio Republicans' efforts to force Ohio's election overseer -- a Democrat -- to give local election boards lists of 200,000 voters whose names didn't match other databases.

Rebuffed at every turn.

Group warns some states may be unprepared for election

By GottaLaff

Oy:

As the ranks of new voters swell, a nonpartisan watchdog group predicted Tuesday that voters in three Southeastern states may face problems voting on Election Day.

Common Cause, a citizen’s lobbying group, examined voting preparedness in 10 states where the presidential race is expected to be tight and was most concerned about Florida, Georgia and Virginia.

Inadequate state voter databases, strict voter registration and identification rules that could disenfranchise voters as well as too few voting machines are among the biggest problems, the group said in a report.

The group looked at likely swing states, including Colorado, Michigan, Missouri, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

With a record turnout likely throughout the country, inadequate preparation for the election could be particularly problematic, said Bob Edgar, president of Common Cause. [...]

In Florida, Common Cause pointed to strict voter registration and voter identification laws that have the potential to prevent thousands of voters from registering to vote.

People registering to vote in Florida must provide an exact match of their identifying information to existing state databases or risk having their voter registration denied, Common Cause said. The group said the policy results in the rejection of thousands of valid voters because of minor clerical errors. [...]

Jennifer Krell Davis, a spokeswoman for the Florida Department of State, said the state has taken steps to prevent problems. She said the state also informs voters of any errors, and they can present election officials with information verifying their identity in person, by mail, fax or e-mail.

State law also allows voters to verify the information up to two days after Election Day, Davis said.

Common Cause cited Georgia’s state voter identification law as “harsh” because it requires a government-issued photo identification card.

In Virginia, Wang was critical of laws about student voting and the state’s strict residency requirements.

“Virginia has a history of making voting more difficult for students,” Wang said.

Valarie Jones, a deputy secretary for the Virginia State Board of Elections, said the board has clarified its policies for students in the past week and provided the information on its Web site. [...]

Wang said there is time before Election Day to make some improvements, but more long-term changes are needed.

“I think [election officials] are trying,” she said. “But I don’t think they’ll have the laws or policies in place to ensure they’ll be ready.”

Read the report

State-by-state breakdown

Why, after 8 years, are we still grappling with this? It's almost as if there's a reluctance to rectify all these... Never mind.

Attorney General Mukasey: “One of my highest priorities ... November elections are fair and smoothly run"

By GottaLaff

And I'm the Easter Bunny:

At a gathering of over 300 United States prosecutors and F.B.I. agents, Attorney General Michael B. Mukasey said that “one of my highest priorities” would be to ensure that the November elections are fair and smoothly run.

His entire speech here. Some excerpts:

Whatever the exact numbers, even the prospect of vote fraud may undermine the integrity of the voting process. In a democratic society, even the perception of corruption or fraud has a damaging effect because it corrodes people’s faith in the democratic system.

Gee, ya think?

• Scoop: Diebold Memos Disclose Florida 2000 E-Voting Fraud
• 2000 Presidential Election Fraud Index Page
• Was the 2004 Election Stolen? : Rolling Stone
• The 2004 US Elections: The Mother of all Vote Frauds
• Clear Evidence 2006 Congressional Elections Hacked

He goes on:

In recent years, some have tried to suggest that these goals — protecting voting rights and protecting the integrity of elections — are somehow at odds. But they are really two sides of the same coin. [...]

Take voter identification laws, for example. Earlier this year, the Supreme Court adopted the Department’s view that voter ID laws are not facially unconstitutional. [...] At the same time, the Court acknowledged the undeniable fact that voter ID laws can burden some citizens’ right to vote. It is important for states to implement and administer such laws in a way that minimizes that possibility. And it is important for the Department to do its part to guard against that possibility. We will not hesitate to use the tools available to us — including the Voting Rights Act — if these laws, important though they may be, are used improperly to deny the right to vote.

New drinking game: Every time the DoJ prevents the Voter ID law from denying someone's right to vote, we throw one back. I'm willing to bet that none of us will get so much as a mild buzz.

She's 97, she's an American citizen, she moved, she can no longer vote

By GottaLaff

Shirley Preiss has been voting since 1932. She made the mistake of moving to Arizona, where she has become a casualty of the Voter I.D. law.

In 2004, Arizona passed one of the nation's strictest voter ID laws, requiring proof of citizenship to vote. Now a 97 year old woman who recently moved to the Phoenix area finds she is no longer eligible to cast a ballot.

"It's my constitutional right to be able to vote," insists Shirley Preiss. Decked out in a US flag hat and shirt, Preiss told News 5, "I'm a legal American. I'm born here."

Welcome to Bush's America, Shirley.

According to Art Levine at the Huffington Post, "She was born at home in Clinton, Kentucky in 1910, before women had the right to vote, and never had a birth certificate. Shirley has voted in every presidential election since FDR first ran in 1932, and proudly describes herself as a 'died-in-the-wool Democrat.' [...] But lacking a birth certificate or even elementary school records to prove she's a native-born American citizen, the state of Arizona's bureaucrats determined that this former school-teacher who taught generations of Americans shouldn't be allowed to vote."

Preiss's son, Nathan "Joey" Nemnich, tried to get her an Arizona ID on the basis of her three Texas driver's licenses and her Social Security and Medicare cards, but was rejected. Now the 78-year-old veteran says, "I'm pissed. She's an American citizen who worked her whole life and I want her to vote. ... The sons of bitches are taking away our Constitution."

They certainly are.