Posted By Craig
Well, the little sister to the American Civil Liberties Union(ACLU) is causing trouble here in Indiana. The Indiana Civil Liberties Union(ICLU) is preparing to sue due to a Republican backed bill that would make it necessary for voters to show a picture ID at the polling place.
The ICLU says they will file suit on behalf of United Senior Action, the Indianapolis Resource Center of Independent Living, the Indiana Coalition for Housing and Homeless Issues, and the NAACP They hope to have this bill, which has been passed in the Indiana Congress and only awaits Gov. Daniels signature, ruled as unconstitutional. They say that requiring picture ID's only disenfanchises those groups listed above.
Their biggest arguemnet is that many of the people who fall in one of the categories above may not have a driver's license. Mark Miller, an Evansville attorney and ICLU board member stated, "Unlike a driver's license which is a priviledge, voting is a right." Who exactly said it wasn't?
The biggest issue I have with the ICLU and people like Mark Miller is that they don't seem to think for themselves. The bill never states that one must own a driver's license, but simply a state or governemnt issued photo ID, which can be obtained for free for anyone 18 and over under this bill. So is the ICLU stating that the members within this suit are not able to obtain photo IDs? Apparently so. It can't be an issue of cost, because they are free. The ICLU thinks that the people in their suit are unable to gather documents like a bith certificate, another form of ID, and a recent bill and take these items to the bureau of Motor Vehicles to get a free photo ID. Is this the type of message that the ICLU wants to deliver?
Indiana's voting bill would become the most strict in respect to all other states. But even then, voting does not become impossible. It is just a method to guarantee that our time honored tradition of voting is kept in its full integrity. Absentee ballots are not affected by this bill, but there may be a time issue in regards to getting those absentee ballots back in. Provisional ballots will still be taken.
The truth is, liberals can't stand to sit by and watch Republicans find ways to fix problems. They see these changes as ways to prove to America that Republicans are only interested in holding them back. Congratulations to the Indiana Congress for stepping up and telling those people who seek to unfairly alter elections that we won't idly stand by and let them. Shame on you, ICLU, for standing up for cheaters.
April 25, 2005
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Requiring photo IDs for voting is one of the best ideas in years. It's one sure way to be sure dead people and felons don't vote. No truly honest politician would oppose it for a minute. Which, I suspect, tells us who's honest and who isn't.
ReplyDeleteThere are at least five other states that require some sort of id before voting, but not as strict as Indiana.
ReplyDeleteSunnye,
Thank you for reading. You are exactly right, opposing this only shows the nature of the Democrats today, oppose anything the Republicans come up with, regardless of what good it might do.
I actually have to agree with you. I don't know why people are allowed to vote without showing ID anyways, it doesn't make sense. With all the ID theft no adays anyways, a bit more security can't hurt.
ReplyDeleteIn my lovely country, I have to show ID to vote. This is the norm.
Well, at least in BC.
K
I agree with you here Craig. At least more than I disagree :)
ReplyDeleteI haven't read the bill, nor am I completely versed in both the pro's and con's of it. But I do have a slightly twisted view of legal voting measures.
I see nothing wrong with requiring people to show id when they vote. I agree with Sunnye that it would stop most voting fraud with the dead voting and maybe felons. But, it will probably only stop a small number at that. The law would probably do very little with stopping a majority of the fraud that takes place. Fake id's are very easy to come by. Every 18 year old has one.
Now when I say fraud, I mean from both Democrats and Republicans. To think that the dead voting only benefits Democrats is absurd. Republicans also have their own very clever ways of inticing the vote. So I really don't see anything here that would constitute a partisan liberal vs. conservative issue.
I think if we have to cut down on voter fraud, then let's do it all. Including Republican measures that stifle the vote in high minority neighborhoods along with dead people voting numerous times in Chicago.
If it's a simple bill that only requires a voter to present an id, then that bill is probably going to be useless. I would compare it to gun laws, which are unenforceable, unconstitutional and do nothing to keep criminals from having guns.
Good post though.