Cover photo from National Review
Continuing the liberal canard that poor and disadvantaged are disenfranchised when it comes to voting in national elections (okay, just the one since there is only one and then it’s 50 little elections, to be honest), Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton wants to see the United States’ voting laws changed.
Clinton’s campaign said she intends to denounce voting restrictions in North Carolina, Texas, Florida and Wisconsin and encourage states to adopt a new national standard of no fewer than 20 days of early in-person voting, including weekend and evening voting.
The voting “restrictions” in question, of course, are the Voter ID laws that have been passed in those states which are withstanding challenges in the courts. Earlier this week, Rassmussen Reports released the results of a study that overwhelmingly demonstrated that Americans actually WANT stronger voter ID laws.
- 76% of Americans support photo ID laws is currently , similar to the 78% support registered in 2006 when the latest movement to change the laws was put into motion.
- 58% of Democrats believe a photo ID must be shown before voting.
- 92% of Republicans and 78% of voters with no major party affiliation support photo ID rules.
As for early voting, that is a concession in the states that have it to accommodate those who are unavailable to vote on the actual election day, not a way to get more people to vote. At least, it isn’t supposed to be. With a three week period, there would be no deadline for campaigning and endless exit polling that would effect the outcome. It is also a lot more time for the Democrats to adjust their strategy if results are “leaked” early.
Early voting fostering cheating in the battleground states where challenges to voting legislation happens all the time…well, no need to expound on that here.
What Democrats like Hillary Clinton seem to forget is that there is no one national law or standard for voting other than the Constitutional requirement that presidential elections be held on the first Tuesday following the first Monday in November every four years. The popular election itself is not required, but a courtesy to the people from the states. All other election decisions are local by the wording of our founding document. If there is national consensus that the actual date of elections needs to be changed for matters of culture and convenience, it can be done, but in the end, it’s up to the states to do it. It would be helpful if the states could be uniform in election laws, but that just may not be possible.
In her campaign rhetoric of wanting to change the way American elections are run, Mrs. Clinton gives yet another glimpse of her leftism. Going national with election law tears at the federalism that defines the United States. And she doesn’t care.