Wednesday editorial: Pure meanness
It’s nice to get some recognition, you know? You toil in obscurity, year after year, passing one rotten, lousy, no-good, special-interest bill after another. And all you hear about how bad the Texas Legislature is, or the Florida one or the corruption in Illinois.
What is the Missouri Legislature, chopped liver? We dare you to find any other legislature that’s passed a bill more blatantly anti-consumer as Missouri House Bill 1970, now awaiting Gov. Matt Blunt’s signature. It would allow auto wholesalers to unload wrecked cars and trucks without fear of lawsuits by the saps who wind up owning them.
And then there’s HB 2279, a total surrender to Aquila, a Kansas City utility company that built a power plant in Cass County even though a court said it couldn’t. Actual Senate debate:
Sen. Joan Bray, D-University City: “It’s OK to have broken the law, that’s what we’re saying?”
Sen. Kevin Engler, R-Farmington: “Correct.”
But at last, our Missouri Legislature is getting its due. The issue that did it is voter ID, the proposed constitutional amendment to require would-be voters to present a photo identification. As we’ve said until we’re blue in the face, there is no — none, zero, nada — evidence that any voter impersonation ever has taken place in Missouri. This law merely is an attempt to suppress the votes of poor, elderly and disabled Missourians who don’t have drivers licenses or state ID cards.
This week, Art Levine, a columnist for The HuffingtonPost.com called Missouri’s proposed law “one of the country’s most draconian voter ID requirements.” The New York Times editorial board called the bill a solution to a “made-up problem” and said the bill could “pose a serious threat to democracy and should be stopped.”
Rep. Stan Cox, R-Sedalia, the sponsor of the voter ID resolution, is getting some national press. So is Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, a Democrat who is leading the opposition. The voter ID debate may even lead to a meltdown (we can only hope) in the state Senate if Republicans move to close off debate.
All of this, remember, over a bill that solves a problem that doesn’t exist and will deny the vote to many of the state’s least advantaged citizens. It’s the political equivalent of deliberately swerving a car to run over squirrels and turtles. Pure meanness.
Holy cow, you would think that something so basic as how to register and count votes would not be a big deal in a country that presents itself as a beacon of democracy. But here we are living in a country where the two main parties don’t trust each other about anything. Richard Daley probably stole the election of 1960 for JFK, and the Supreme Court probably stole the election of 2000 for W, and we can’t get a fair system together that everybody agrees will be accurate and fair.
Unless BOTH sides are reasonably satisfied that the election was fair, you will continue to have problems in governing. Here is how you fix it:
1- Make sure that enough election judges of both parties are at every polling place. If there are any irregularities- fix them!!
2- For votes taken on a computer- paper backup is essential for any recounts. Without it it is easy to question the validity of the election.
3- I have no problem with picture ID, as long as it does not disenfranchise voters. As much as Republicans hate to admit it, there is a large number of underclass people who move frequently, are poor or illiterate, and who shun such ID’s. Many of them don’t vote anyhow. The few that do should not be shut out. Stop the fraud if you want, but keep the system fair and open.
This is democracy people- not rocket science. It shouldn’t be this hard….
Purple Dude…. How is it that the party that seeks to disenfranchise qualified citizens from their Second Amendment rights is so concerned about requiring voters to prove they are qualified to vote? Is the integrity of our election process less important than buying a six pack or cashing a check? You are right about one thing. It does not require rocket science to ensure that all qualified voters are able to prove their identity and allowed to vote. It simply requires overcoming the transparently self serving and unfounded objections.
Missouri’s SJR 34 trumped the Voter ID bill by a week: http://www.senate.mo.gov/08info/pdf-bill/perf/SJR34.pdf
National coverage? Check: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-05-05-Retroregistry_N.htm
Sponsor quoted? Check.
Opposition quoted? Check.
Draconian? Check.
Serious threat to democracy? Check.
Unconstitutional? Check.
Post editorial?
Post editorial?
The State of Missouri has accepted, for decades, the identity of voters utilizing current voter identification requirements. Since there has been no voter fraud (see: http://www.truthaboutfraud.org/case_studies_by_state/ ) it stands to reason the State of Missouri’s registered voters database contains only citizens/voters who are validated citizens of the United States, and who have already proven and met the identification criteria required by Missouri Law.
Since we know the above to be true, (the State of Missouri has already accepted the votes of these voters in past elections), and if citizens of the State of Missouri MUST have a Voter Photo ID, I suggest the following:
The State of Missouri create and mail a valid photo ID, (less photo), to each of the validated registered voters appearing in the State of Missouri’s registered voter database(s). Provide a copy of the validated registered voter database(s), sorted and distributed by appropriate county, to each of Missouri’s Department of Motor Vehicles’ field offices (electronically provided would be best). The registered voter citizen then need only to go to the local Department of Motor Vehicles, present their “photo-less” Voter Photo ID card, have their name ‘checked’ on the registered voter database, then have their picture taken and permanently adhered to the card, and they are done. There is not one cent of cost attached to any citizen for this service.
This suggested process provides adherence to the Voter Photo ID Law (proposed) in that it provides a valid identification for the voter; it does not disenfranchise any voter who has already voted in the past regardless of age or physical limitations or those who are unable to produce certificates of birth due to no fault or cause of their own; and it leaves open the door for future would be voter registrants to obtain Voter Photo IDs through “normal” processing methods.
If this suggestion, or a similar one someone else may provide, is rejected it will NOT be because there’s no Voter Photo ID card, but rather because it doesn’t disenfranchise voters – which has been the real motivation and intent of the HJR 48 bill all along.
While there may be an over-simplification in my description of the process, it is most probably the least expensive, yet most protective of voter rights and processes. There are, no doubt, details to the procurement process that must be produced, but in general terms and concept this suggestion would work.
Now all that remains is to wait and hear/read/watch the excuses the supporters and representatives of the HJR 48 bill within Missouri’s Legislature which will be designed to “shoot down” this suggestion, or any suggestion that does not comply with their proposed Voter Photo ID Law (HJR 48).
Here is my confusion over the alleged “voter fraud” (yes I remember the drunken rant by Kit Bond when the newly deceased Mel Carnahan beat Jim Talent), everytime I go to my polling place I bring my polling ploace card, my voter id card and my driver license. My name is then checked against the printed roll sheet, I am given my ballot, I vote, then I leave. Since all of these items match, there can be no fraud.
If the state of Missouri wants to have a progressive and effective electoral system then it needs to do several things:
1. Turn over apportionment to a non-partisan indenpendent board who will draw district lines based on population and geography, and, keep the infamous GerryMander away.
2. Have bona fide election officials be made available to nursing homes, retirement homes, senior citizen centers, churches, etc. who in the year prior to any election will duly register any and all citizens wishing to vote. At this time appropriate documents can be verified in advance of any election season. And any possible irregularities can also be handled.
3. Set the implementation date of any law to occur in an odd year, preferably a non-election year.
Lastly, it is time for the state of Missouri to do away with any county with fewer than 5,000 people. Do you realize that Missouri has 110 counties with a state population around 6 million (the majority of which reside in the greater St Louis, Kansas City and Springfield areas), while the state of California with 35+ million people has 58 counties?