Sorry I missed the ice cream yesterday.

The Voter ID thing has always fascinated me. It’s overkill, and it’s pandering at the same time. Let me explain.

There have been almost no documented cases of voter fraud. Rokita tried to find some. His staff aggressively looked. There are a couple.

The judges’ questions clearly demonstrate what we’ve all known for years: the real problem with voter rolls, is duplicates. I move, and re-register INSTEAD of transferring. I’ve done it four or five times in my life. It’s relatively harmless, but it adds up to hundreds of thousands (a million?) dups in Indiana.

Eliminate those, and you eliminate virtually all possibility of voter fraud.

The excuse Rokita offered today: prosecutors don’t have time to address this stuff,if they find fraud (which he couldn’t) and if they do, it’s a lose-lose situation politically.

Well fare thee well and tip my hat. Prosecutors might have to make tough calls. What a revelation. I’d venture a guess that in smaller counties, every day, prosecutors make real hard decisions. They bump into their courtroom opponents daily. They prosecute anyway.

In bigger localities, the job has become too political. Prosecutors are afraid their statistics will be used against them. And frankly, with tens of thousands of cases, you could probably pick apart any statistic and get whatever answer you want.

The entire Voter ID issue was overkill. And Rokita’s GOP pandering to their far-right base. It’s not popular to defend those who have difficulty getting IDs, but they’re out there. I know four in my neighborhood…all older, transplanted European Jews. They’ve become citizens, long ago, but it’s difficult to get other data. Certificate of Citizenship from their classes is not counted by BMV as a valid ID source. Go figure. So they’re stuck, and they wanna vote, and they can’t. They use public transportation and don’t drive. Each has tried to get valid birth certificates, to no avail. You could probably repeat that story thousands of times, for naturalized citizens and many older citizens who come from states whose birth records, particularly for minorities, are thin, at best.

The brilliant lawyers for the Democrats should’ve used one of them as a plaintiff. Instead, we have fat ole Bill Crawford, who has served since 1972. Thirty-four years, soon to be thirty-six, in the Indiana House, and one of the best arguments for term limits you can find. And HE was a plaintiff?

The appeals judges? Posner (Reagan 81 appointee, oft overturned), Sykes (2004, W) and Evans (Clinton, 95). Wanna gamble on their decision?

In the Biblical sense, if it happens to the least of us, it happens to all of us. I mourn for my friends’ inability to vote in a nation they love and to which they emmigrated.

But dontcha feel real warm and fuzzy about advocating, and shilling, for a law that’s considered tougher than the Ga. law which was thrown out?

Prove any kind of pervasive fraud, and I’ll flip on this popsition overnight. I’ve been involved in elections all over this state for 40 years, and it does not occur. Period. The usual Republican argument is, ample laws exist to take care of it. let it alone. No new law.

Except and unless, of course, new voters might see thorugh much of your nonsense. Then, as they’ve always done, do everything possible to limit access to the ballot box.

Prove it has not occured!

It is hard to prove if you do not KNOW who actually did the voting!

I think the issue is this. A law for something that doesn’t exist is silly, but not unconstitutional. That’s what key in the voter ID debate.

“Prove it hasn’t occured” ? Have you any brains at all? That is NOT the nature of laws in our nation. As a matter of fact, quite the opposite.

Abdul, as much as you love the Libertarian view (get govt. out of my life), why do you want them in this debate? THERE IS NOT A PROBLEM. THEY ARE FIXING SOMETHING THAT WASN’T BROKEN. And in fighting for IDs at polls, Rokita and his crowd are attacking a shadow problem, as written by the federal study commisison on which Rokita served. He couldn’t even convice his profesisonal colleagues there’s a problem…they tried to hide the report, but it leaked. And in pushing for the ID Law, they’r epandering to their own right-wing conspiracy theorists.

But this circuit is unlikely to intervene. Pity.
Certiori over/under? Ths case screams for the intellect of Clarence Thomas: you can file the briefs on the back of a McDonald’s wrapper, so he’ll fit right in.

Prove it has not occured? Are you serious?

I doubt there will be ruling on the merits because Crawford doesn’t have standing to sue.

Wrong, voter ID is necessary.

I have first hand knowledge, because they stole votes from me in the past. You would have to know the precincts where this was done. They would not steal in every precinct. I had poll watchers inside the polling places who witnessed this process. One of the reasons I strongly support the use of a voter ID.

The fraud used in passed elections by Julia Carson and her machine. Unethical individuals were hired to do the dirty work, and the Democrat Party condoned it. Precinct committeemen are given a ten day run. This is the list of registered voters ten days before an election. It has the voting history of each voter in a precinct. Voters are identified by party and the frequency they have voted in the past. Specific precincts are selected, and the plan is put together. Of course persons involved will deny any knowledge of the fraud, but they are paid to commit it. Not everyone is willing to break the law, Class D. Felonies. If caught they are told to claim ignorance of any law violations.

They voted people who were listed on the poll books who do not vote on a regular basis. The reason they were not caught. A list of names in specific precincts to give them the margin of win. People were driven to those precincts where the election board clerk would allow them to sign the name of the voter in the book, and vote during the last hour of the day. Most of the workers in polling places do not know the residents in the precincts and would not offer a challenge to their real identity. The main reason they could steal an election and get away with it.

I am sure if certain living registered voters and relatives of deceased registered voters were to check their voting records, they would find that someone has been voting for them in past elections without their knowledge. The voter fraud committed was not just with absentee ballots.

I strongly stand by my statements and myinvestigations.

Oh Jocelyn, you’ve said it for weeks, here and on other blogs…post the damned proof already.

There is no proof of voter fraud in this county or anywhere in Indiana, because it doesn’t not exist. One or two cases in 40 eyars have been prosecuted. Seems to me like the prior law worked. This is just a partisna attempt to allow Rokita to gin up his far-right base. No more.

Post the proof, Jocelyn, here or on your blog. What is the address of your blog? Continuing to say “you’d have to know what precincts” is not proof. Regardles how many times you respond to the voices in your head, it doesn’t make it true. Prove it or be quiet already.

Abdul said…
The problem with the D’s lawsuit is they chose a plaintiff who has an ID. His reason for not wanting to show it was that he was “offended.” I’m offended by BET, but I’m not filing a suit. They should have found someone with no ID, indigent, who tried to vote, cast a provisional ballot and was denied. That was the perfect plaintiff in this case.

10/19/2006

BET is a whole different issue, no law requires you to register to watch and then requires you to show your id after you paid to watch.