In the flurry of news thrown our way regarding low information voters, early voting, mail-in ballots, voting via internet, the Supreme Court vacating parts of the Voting Rights Act and the George Soros produced touch screen voting machines famous for programming glitches that produce 100% precincts for the Democratic candidate, it seems that there are states that have laws on the books that do not invite as much in the way of cheating and fraud, are stringent on voter ID and the Justice Department sues any state that tries to emulate them.
Early voting without a legitimate excuse like travel or scheduled surgery, is one of those topics that should put everyone on edge – especially of a person registers to vote on the same day as the vote is cast. Â Installing this rule in states where red is a more than just a primary color is one of the efforts in the current movement to undermine honest elections. Â There are just too many red flags. The states that don’t allow early voting are: Alabama, Connecticut, Delaware, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Virginia, and Washington. Â Note that many of those states are reliable vote producers for one party. Â At the same time, no one seems to complain about this on a national level.
Oregon may not allow early voting, but they are the first state to conduct elections via the U.S. Mail. Â No polling places, time off from work to vote – just mail it in since 1998. Â The method is popular in Oregon and no mention of forwarding address issues that may send a ballot to another state.
Requiring a photo ID to vote is another topic that pits “progressives” against those if us who care more about conducting fair and honest elections Â than “disenfranchising” people who for whatever reason cannot produce a driver’s license, passport or state issued photo ID card. Â (There is never a mention of the obvious compromise that election boards will welcome Â the same identification necessary to register for welfare.) Â At any rate, among a spate of lawsuits against states that have recently passed stringent voter photo ID laws, the following already have them with New Hampshire due to join the ranks in 2015, and Pennsylvania after the 2014 general election: Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, andÂ Virginia. Â The courts are allowing Arkansas and Texas to implement their legislatively passed photo ID laws for 2014 while the cases are tied up in the legal system. Â That’s ten out of 50 – and the most populous state in the nation is not on the list.
None of this touches purging the voter rolls of all 50 states of people who have moved or died which should be a matter of simple database comparison, but few states have the apparatus or incentive other than integrity to complete this task. Â Instead, Judicial Watch and a number of other private groups are initiating this process to at least facilitate more honest elections. Â Florida did try to purge its voter rolls of the dead, at least, and the Holder Justice Department told them to stop.
While it is true that each of the 50 states controls its own election procedures, this sort of dichotomy and lack of strictures is an open invitation for voting fraud. Â For hundreds of years, showing up to vote and marking a paper ballot worked just fine. Â Even the Vote-O-Matic worked until the 2000 election when a bunch of people couldn’t figure out how to punch a hole through a pre-perforated piece of card stock. Â (Seriously, if it was that hard for them, such people probably should not be voting.) Â Now, any state that tries to tighten up its rules in order to ensure some sort of honesty is pursued by the federal government (okay, Eric Holder and the inJustice Department) and are told they cannot do that.
If there is any doubt at all that voter fraud happens, they should be laid to rest by the stories that surfaced after the 2012 general election and admissions from citizens that they voted multiple times. Â Voter fraud is one of those things that is only pursued when there is a complaint. Â The Obama Administration’s assertion that this crime does not exist is absurd on its face. Â That they are actively stopping the states from fulfilling their solemn duty to ensure honest elections should tell any thinking person that our hunches on the last election are correct.