The Voter I.D. Controversy

This entry is part 5 of 47 in the series Blog1

April 10, 2012

If there’s any controversial issue that has the majority support of the American people it is that of Voter I.D. In December of 2011 a Rasmussen poll revealed that about 70% of Likely U.S. voters believe we should be required to show photo identification, such as a driver’s license, before being allowed to cast our vote.  Only 22% were against it. Then in March, 2012 the support of this increased to 72%.  Some polls in the past have met with over 80% approval.

In being against this process of eliminating voter fraud Obama, Holder and the Democrats have certainly picked a losing issue – that is unless they believe that their people can easily commit so much fraud that it doesn’t matter how the people really vote.

Opponents of Voter I.D. have assured us that all our concerns are in our imagination. There’s nothing to worry about.

On the other hand, the new video by James O’Keefe certainly did nothing to assuage those fears.  If anything they verified them and inflamed them to the highest possible degree.

And why is this?

Because O’Keefe brilliantly demonstrated that voter fraud can be committed by using the name of the highest ranking law enforcement officer in the country – none other than Eric Holder himself.

Most of those reading this will be aware that an agent of O’Keefe proved he could enter Holder’s voting precinct and just hint that he was Holder and then be given permission to vote in Holder’s name. It is amazing as well as amusing that we have a white man being given permission to vote as a famous black man – something voter I.D. would have quickly identified. If you haven’t seen the video yet check it out here.

With the amazing majority support for Voter I.D. one has to wonder what the motive of the Democrats is in opposing it if their intent is not to commit fraud.  They give several reasons.  Let us list two.

(1) It is not necessary because there is a very small amount of actual fraud.

The first thing to note in this point is that every vote counts and many elections have come down to a handful of votes.  In many cases fraud has been suspected.

In one obvious case of voter fraud the entire course of the nation was altered by just a few fraudulent votes.

In 1948 LBJ pinned all, his political hopes in an election against the popular Coke Stevenson. His biographer Robert Caro gives a great deal of evidence that the Johnson camp basically tied the election through considerable voter fraud, but they needed to find of few extra votes to swing the deal. Then they just happened to discover 200 allegedly uncounted ballots in Box 13, in Alice, Texas. These 200 “voters” cast their ballots 198 to 2 for Johnson, putting him over the top. Caro concludes: “the election of course was stolen.”

This box of obviously stolen votes changed the course of history.  Who knows, maybe without this voter fraud we wouldn’t have had the Vietnam War and Goldwater would have become president.

The election between Kennedy and Nixon was extremely close and many historians believe that the election was swung toward Kennedy because of voter fraud in Illinois.

On election day, 2004, in the State of Washington it looked like Republican Dino Rossi had won by about 3000 votes over Democrat, Christine Gregoire in the race for governor. Then just two days before the election was to be certified the Democrats found mysterious  provisional ballots along with 10,000 absentee ballots that leaned suspiciously democratic in voter tally. Then they counted 710 more ballots that had been rejected by machines. All this maneuvering reduced Rossi’s lead from 3000 to a mere 42 votes, which of course called for a recount.

During the recount the Democrats, by shear luck of course, found 561 ballots that were somehow just overlooked before. Thus swung the election from Republican Rossi to Democrat Gregoire, causing  her to win by 129 votes.

After the election mysterious evidence of fraud surfaced such as dead people voting and 400 ballots all made out in the same handwriting.

In November 5, 2008 it appeared that Republican Norm Coleman beat Comedian Al Franken by 726 votes. Then by the time the official tally was added new ballots for Franken mysteriously appeared bringing Coleman’s lead  down to 215.

This led to a hand recount.  During this process 133 ballots, all contained in a single envelope, had gone missing. After days of searching, the State Canvassing Board decided to use that precinct’s election day totals, which included the missing 133 votes. The 133 missing ballots contributed a 46 vote gain for Franken.

During the recount both sides were allowed to challenge the validity of ballots and this resulted in a gain of 319 for Coleman and 758 for Franken. Again, we have numbers which are extremely suspicious.

When the recount was done it appeared Franken won by 49 votes which was amazing since he was behind on election day by 726. But this was not the end for by the time the election was certified more votes were found for Franken and the final victory was 215 votes and later revised to 312.

You’d think that if they had recounted a couple more times Franken would have been declared the winner by a landslide.

Then after Franken was securely ensconced in his Senate seat it was discovered that in two counties alone 393 felons illegally voted, most of which went to Franken.

When you look at elections that have been apparently decided by voter fraud, and it is mostly Democrats that benefit, then it is no wonder that they insist that voter I.D. is not necessary, and that concerns over fraud are just in our heads.

(2) Requiring Voter I.D. is racist and discriminates against minorities, the elderly and the poor.

The reasoning behind this convoluted objection is that a large number of blacks and minorities are poor  and the poor and elderly are most likely to not have sufficient I.D.

This reasoning seems silly when one realizes that we must have photo I.D. to do the following: Obtain a drivers’ license, passports, hunting and fishing licenses, concealed-carry permits, buy an alcoholic beverage, buy cigarettes, get on a plane, get a prescription, rent a video, rent equipment, enter government buildings for meetings, cash a check, use a credit card (in many cases), get food stamps and drive a car.

If it is racist and discriminating to requite an I.D. to vote then this would also apply to all these other areas where an I.D. is required. Have you heard anyone complaining that it is racist to have to show an I.D. to get a fishing license or to buy a beer?  Of Course not.


Because a photo I.D. is easy to get.  Anyone can get an I.D. that wants one, poor or not. Most Voter I.D. laws include the means for anyone who is poor to obtain an I.D. free of charge.

Anyone too lazy to get an I.D. in this age would probably have to be paid or forced to vote and most likely would not have a clue what any candidate thinks anyway.

Support for a Voter I.D. to reduce fraud is an important step to insure honest voting and a no-brainer as to where the majority will is in this area.

Copyright 2012 by J J Dewey

Register at The Majority Speaks Here

(You do not have to log in to add comments)

Log on to The Majority Speaks  Here

Series Navigation<< Why It Is Ethical To Eat MeatWho are the Socialists? >>

Speak Your Mind


Blue Captcha Image