If the sole standard of proof is adding a new qualification, there is absolutely no doubt that it did.

But I'm betting there are other issues the State will cite to keep the law on the books.

Abdul, do the plaintiff's cert filings include any other alleged improprieties? And isn't the scope of argument rather limited to prior court data/pleadings/arguments?

What's the explanation for needing extra identification at the polls for security when you don't need them absentee? Would be cheaters can't use the mail? Or maybe people feel more comfortable committing fraud up close and in person than they do at a distance?

Age, residency & citizenship are a matter of law. Voter ID is a critical matter of enforcement.

If ID is a burden of “additional qualification,” why did the League of Women Voters bother to claim standing under their organizational name, or why bother to name the SOS as a defendant? After all, what's in a name? If they invited the public over for a cup of obscuri-tea, surely it would all make sense…

If voter ID is so critical, how can we even permit absentee voting?

The absentee question is very valid.

Doug–and Dave–I say this again: the fraud you claim in voting, simply does not exist. I've worked polls since 1968 in this county and not seen it once. Ever.

If you know of any, Mr. Rokita begged for specific examples as he pressed for this law. He begged in ads, letters and public apeparances. Please, get him the specific examples. Otherwise, lay off the wild accusations, huh? Re-stating internet rumors may suffice for a Tea Party rally, but could we try to stick to specific things about which you're very familiar? Prosecutors wait with baited breath.

I think there's a little control-envy involved here. Republicans have controlled the voting process in this county forever and a day. Until 2006. Now we have a new sheriff in town, and after a stumble-start, the elections have been very well-done.

My poll experience also tells me: with very, very rare exception, the dedicated folks who work at the polls leave their party labels at the front door, and work hard and cooperatively. They would not permit fraud.

Now if you wanna talk about shenanigans, not fraud: I can give you chapter and verse of the Faye and Bud show, which carried over slightly to Clerk Doris Ann Sadler. They tried mightily–and too often successfully–to rig the election structure unfairly. Let's jump all over that with equal vigor, huh? Ms. Sadler's last two challenges to voting statutes were soundly defeated in court, at a cost of hundreds of thousands of tax dollars to defend defenseless positions.

But for God's sake let's do everything we can immediately to take care of this rampant voter fraud at the polls. Lest Democracy fall off a cliff.

My Kingdom for some proper perspective.

Thus endeth my epistle.

So, let me get this straight, since you've never personally witnessed a case of voter fraud there's no need for the law? Is that your contention?

Just once I'd like someone on your side of the argument to actually make the case that an ID requirement is an undue burden on the voter. And since you can't possibly make that case, what are your true reasons for arguing against the law?

“….with very, very rare exception, the dedicated folks who work at the polls leave their party labels at the door….”????? You apparently have never been at a Center Township precinct on election day with a Carson on the ballot.

Yes, I have been at such a precinct, Rico. Here's a challenge:

Put up or shut up. Cite the exact precinct and the exact circumstance where this “fraud” happened.

Don't you get tired repeating the same old drivel day after day, without supporting evidence? Or do you hobble through life repeating glittering generalities, hoping no one will call you on it?

And, if you are aware of specifics–why did you not march straight over to the office of the Honorable Prosecutor and swear out a complaint?

All hat and no cattle.

FWIW, I did not say there was no fraud because I'd not seen it. Don't put words into my mouth. I haven't seen any. But, in addition to my pollworker duties, I've aggressively sought out examples of fraud. I've asked all over the county, people from both parties.

From some Republicans, I usually get a brainless response like yours. From some Dems, I usually geet a response that removes “Carson” and inserts one of the following names: Cottey or McAtee. My definition of “some” is less than 6.

But not one credible recollection of fraud.

I gave you vey specific examples of ballot-setup tampering, including two lawsuits, in recent years. It's not voter fraud–it was just rampant arrogance. Kindly live up to the same standard of proof or **poof** be gone.

In case my posts were confusing, I agree that voting fraud – and specifically, in-person voting fraud – is a ginned up issue. My thoughts on Voter ID over the years, if anyone cares:
http://www.masson.us/blog/?s=%22voter+id%22

“So, let me get this straight, since you've never personally witnessed a case of voter fraud there's no need for the law? Is that your contention?” Where in that statement did I claim that you said fraud did not exist. Your reading comprehension is really lacking for such a self-proclaimed intellect.

And I never wrote that 'fraud' existed at those precincts. Did I? Did anyone else on here read that in my post? What I did refer to was the many instances I witnessed in November 2006 (when working on the Dickerson campaign) of poll workers wearing Carson badges and polling places with Julia Carson posters mere feet away from voting sites. Forgive me for not citing specific precinct numbers. I don't have that map in front of me. I was simply responding to your claim of political bias inside the polls being “…very, very, rare.”

There was also an incident of Tony 'the thug' Duncan throwing one of our worker's campaign materials in the dumpster. Technically, is that fraud? No. I never said it was. It's just typical of the political landscape in Center Township.

Now, why don't you put up or shut up? Make your case that requiring ID places an undue burden on voters. C'mon, Obi Wan! Make your case! And before you respond, perhaps you should bone up on your reading skills.

Rico: “…You apparently have never been at a Center Township precinct on election day with a Carson on the ballot.”

My reading skills are quite succinct. You heavily implied that the Carson folks routinely participated in fraud. I challenged you to name one instance of fraud, and you haven't. All hat…..

Requiring Voter ID which costs anything is a direct violation of the poll tax prohibition. Period. I cited the last election (Hospital Referendum), where I know 4 voters who were charged for License branch photo IDs. Or didn't you read that part?

I am all-for some type of voter ID requirement. Rokita's is overkill.

But thanks for stopping by. Your lameness is refrershingly consistent.

No, TA, you heavily inferred. I was responding to your assertion that poll workers “….leave their party labels at the door..”. I pointed to instances (which you claim are very, very rare) of where that was clearly not the case. Once again, nowhere did I claim that fraud existed at those precincts. The fallacies of logic in your argument are overwhelming. It's like debating my niece. She's eight.

You knew four voters who were charged for state ID? Is it safe to assume these people were Democrats? Don't they need ID to receive their benefits or cash their goverment checks? I asked for an undue burden this law places on voters? Is that the best ya got?

I doubt if even Bob Croddy takes such extreme positions as “Rico” does regularly here !

Anyone with any familarity with newspapers will be aware of voter fraud in Delaware County, Indiana.
Ask the Indiana AG who has spent a bit of time coming to grips with that corruption. I suppose the same could be said of NE Indiana but I don't read their newspapers.
Surely, a dumpster diver would know crooks in Muncie and Gary and Hammond and South Bend? Bob Croddy ought to post here.

Wow, I'd forgotten all about Croddy.

Rico, even your niece would surely understand the heavy inferrence you made.

Did you strain something making the Democrat-government check reach? Pay c-l-o-s-e attention, bobblehead:

I said the election was a Hospital Referendum. I'll translate that, so you can understand, or you could ask your niece: non-partisan. I did not ask nor did these voters tell me their party preference–it was irrelevant. They showed up without photo ID, and we had been instructed to send those folks to the license branch. They went, and returned to vote with state-issued IDs that cost them.

The poll tax issue is, in legal terms, Res Judicata…already decided. Anything that causes a voter to spend one cent to vote is usually considered a poll tax.

It's settled law, Rico. Whether you like it or not. Ask your niece. Sounds as if she's pretty smart.

TA: Because your home hasn't been burglarized doesn't mean you shouldn't lock your doors. The ID requirement elevates the risk.

Government has a Constitutional obligation to insure the integrity of the voting process. That's not too much to expect. I've seen folks at polling places referred to their “new” polling places after an inspector reviewed their ID & verified their “new” address. Prior to any such verification; wanna bet whether these folks could've voted in a district for candidates not of their “new” district?

Your attempts at deflection from the real argument are as simplistic as your attempts at reason. Yes, my niece is smart enough to understand the point of this discussion. Apparently, you aren't.

Yeah, it was a real stretch to assume that voters who don't have their act together enough to have identification are Democrats on the public dime. How dare I make such an assumption! Everyone knows that an ignorant, uneducated voter is the Democrat's best friend. Hell, I guess they could have been Republicans whose wallets or purses were stolen by Democrats.

Stay classy, Rico. Stay classy!

If you suspect fraud, Dave, why the hell didn't you report it?

Whining about it on a blog two years later is wimpy. Don't you take your voting rights seriously? Why do you hate America so much?

Wilson, that battle was lost long ago. LONG ago.

TA: What's whining or wimpy about poll officials redirecting voters to their proper precincts or districts (which matter in terms of candidates, 'n other integrity stuff), based upon their ID verified residency?

Is the expense of transportation also an “undue burden,” or would some further suggest that poll workers be required to coordinate location & schedules with voters to suit their convenience?

Wimpy is an idea that voters shouldn't do their part to insure the integrity of a critical, Constitutional process.