I really hope that the Supreme Court surprises me again, like with their recent ruling acknowledging the socio-economic prejudices in crack cocaine versus cocaine penalties, because these new voter ID laws are blatantly anti-Democratic.* Mother Jones has a pretty good summary of the whole deal, but basically a slew of states have new legislation requiring voters to have a government issued ID (like a driver's license). This essentially affects the elderly, the poor, and many city-goers. It also essentially amounts to a voting rights violation akin to poll taxes and literacy tests. The movement's impetus are Oh-Ye-Most-Reliable-Of-Truthiness Karl Rove and fellow Republicans' claims that there is rampant voter fraud that benefits Democrats. Pot calling Kettle, are you there?
Anyhow, check out the Mother Jones article and let's all hope that judicial integrity once again beats out partisan politics in our highest court.
*yes, both meanings
Friday, January 11, 2008
I Like My Eggs with a Side of Easy Voting, Please
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comments:
As much as I hate to say it, the Supreme Court's decision won't make any difference in Indiana, at least not for the presidential election. I came to the realization the other day that I have absolutely no say in who gets elected president in 2008. Our primary isn't until May, and the races will have long since been decided by then. In the general election, Indiana not only always goes red, but, according to my boss, is always the first state to be called for the republican candidate. I haven't felt this disenfranchised since I lived in DC.
The voter ID law probably did have an effect on the recent ousting of Indy's Democratic mayor, though, who only lost by a few points. And if it doesn't get repealed in time, we might lose our Democratic seat in the House as well.
Post a Comment