A voting-rights veteran talks about the liberal campaign to expand the electoral rolls—and why Obama is on board.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323452204578290613701758092.html?mod=rss_opinion_main
Topic: In President Obama's upcoming State of the Union he is expected to call on congress to enact on new voting legislation that has already been proposed by several liberal democrats that is entitled as the Voter Empowerment Act of 2013. according to election lawyer Hans von Spakovsky. In December, some "three dozen of the most powerful liberal advocacy groups, including union organizations," held a strategy session, he says, citing a report from the liberal magazine Mother Jones. They agreed to "oppose all voter integrity efforts, things like voter ID," to push for federal legislation requiring states to permit voter registration on Election Day, and to institute "automatic" voter registration. Because of the social context of this voting legislation, it is labeled as a partisan effort because it most directly makes the voting process for democrats and liberals much easier as was determined by the liberal advocacy groups mentioned earlier. The executive has mentioned a number of times that the problem lies in the amount of time that voters must wait at the polls and that when we remove things that the advocates for this bill have deemed unnecessary, particular voter ID and registration, the process will be much quicker and thus see a larger voter turnout. The issue reintroduces racial discrimrimination in the Americna election system. The legislation obviously benefits minority groups, and because republicans oppose it, they have been labeled as an opposition to equal rights, something that I discussed my last blog.
Opinion: Democrats suggest the Republicans are in contention of the legislation because it prevent some voters from practicing their voting rights. "They keep trying to scare African American voters into thinking that these voter ID laws are an attempt to take away the right to vote," Mr. von Spakovsky says. "We know that's not true. The experience of states that have had voter ID laws in place for [several] years, like Georgia and Indiana, shows that it does not suppress the vote of black voters; it doesn't in any way keep them out of the polls." This is an opinion in which I must agree. By requiring voters to provide voter ID, it is less likely that their votes will succumb to fraud. The turnout would primarly consist of liberal democrats and those who benefit from government assistance. Democratic institutions are basically attempting to force the federal government to perform voter outreach for them, under the belief that this practice is enforcing voter equality. There are also many other large scale issues at hand. While the new voting legislation will change the entire election process, gerrymandering (particularly in virginia) will effect voter turnout, and subsequently, the outcome of the election. Yes, this voting legislation is important and is not something to be understated, but it should distract from larger injustices that are blatantly devaluing some votes, as is the case in the readjustment of electoral votes in Virginia.
Conclusion: Voter ID is just a basic measure to protect the integrity of the voter-registration process. According the the author of the article, the victims of voter fraud are in fact black voters and people in poor communities. They are the ones who often are taken advantage of, particularly by some Democrats, because they are less likely to complain or find out that their vote has been stolen."All this to solve what he argues is a nonexistent problem. " It is also important to recognize that the proportion of people that this legislation will affect is an insignificant percentage that will not sway any major elections. However, it does provide these voters with much needed efficacy and reinforce the American perception of liberty.
No comments:
Post a Comment