Tuesday, October 24, 2006

How Courts aid and abet vote fraud

The Missouri Supreme Court evidently has only one member who is not aggressively stupid. In a recent decision, that court struck down Missouri's voter ID law. That law contained so many safeguards, that only a Herculean stretch of the legal imagination could find a flaw with it. Brendan Miniter noted its access safeguards: "the IDs were made available at no charge[, the] law was to be implemented over a two-year period, and people who lacked proper identification would be permitted to cast a provisional vote next month."

So how could the law be unconstitutional? Because the POTENTIAL cost of obtaining the official document needed to procure a voter ID (if you don't already have a Missouri driving license or US passport) somehow constitutes a poll tax. That's the only rationale courts have used to kill these laws, and it's historically and legally ignorant.

In other words, the $15 a Missourian would have to pay for a birth certificate (which s/he should already have in his possession anyway) to get the voter ID is somehow a poll tax. This is garbage. As Miniter notes, "Poll taxes . . . required a person to pay a fee every time he voted and were adopted for racially discriminatory purposes."

Who benefits from these moronic court decisions? The Left, and often the radical Left (which has minimal use for honest democracy). As Miniter notes:

. . . there's a reason that Democrat partisans are more interested in raising the specter of Jim Crow than in protecting the integrity of the voting process. And here's a clue: While the Missouri Supreme Court was preparing its decision earlier this month, the Kansas City Star and St. Louis Post-Dispatch ran front-page stories about the thousands of fraudulent voter registrations submitted by Acorn, a national left-wing group financed in part by organized labor.

According to the Star, Acorn's voter registration drive generated some 35,000 applications, "but thousands of them appear to be duplicates or contain dubious data." The report went on to note that "[n]ear the top of the fishy list would be a man named Mark who apparently registered seven times over a three-day period using his mother's home address and phone number." Mom told the paper he hadn't lived there in six years.

Acorn and its affiliates have been among the most active and vocal opponents of voter ID laws in Missouri and nationwide. Now we know why.

No comments: