Michael Waldman, president of the Brennan Center, has this article in Politico on the U.S. Supreme Court and its apparent indifference to voting rights, particularly in relation to Texas. Thanks to HowAppealing for the link.
Michael Waldman, president of the Brennan Center, has this article in Politico on the U.S. Supreme Court and its apparent indifference to voting rights, particularly in relation to Texas. Thanks to HowAppealing for the link.
Alabama Independent –
You’re worried about what one illegally cast vote might do to our democracy.
From the article:
“In 2011, my organization, the Brennan Center for Justice, calculated that the first wave of these new laws, if implemented, could have made it far harder for five million citizens to vote.”
Shall we now cavil about how hard is “harder?” Or perhaps how much larger a number five million is than one?
TruFoe:
I’m not worried about what one illegally cast vote might do to our “republic.”
It’s just that it is wrong for anyone to be allowed to vote if it is illegal for them to vote. I don’t see how anyone – liberal or conservative – or whatever – could disagree with this.
Just imagine how many illegal votes would be cast in an election – especially where the poll workers do not personally know the voters – as they would, say in a small hamlet government, if anyone could walk into their polling precinct and say “I am John Smith, and I want to vote” and no identification, no voter list, or anything required to identify the voter except his/her proclamation of their right to vote.
You know as well as I, if the above were permitted, people would be paid by unscrupulous partisans to go from polling place to polling place and cast illegal votes. Elections would become a farce.
So we have to have some rules to keep such from happening. Alabama allows several types of identification to be used to prove you are who you say you are. Again, what is wrong with a reasonable amount of proof?