Multiple states have passed laws requiring voters to provide photo identification upon presenting themselves at the polls. These laws differ somewhat by state but can generally be referred to collectively as voter ID requirements. Polls show Americans overwhelmingly support these new rules, by 75% in some cases. Such widespread support is easy to understand. During the 2008 election, for example, scandals erupted involving the now defunct leftist group ACORN and its questionable voter registration tactics. The trend towards tightening voter identification requirements was primarily a red state phenomenon, but that changed this year when the deep blue state of Rhode Island passed its own voter ID law.
This week Attorney General Eric Holder announced his office would be conducting thorough reviews of voter identification laws throughout the country. Holder’s office is currently in the process of reviewing new requirements in Texas and South Carolina. Holder also suggested such laws were not an attempt to protect the integrity of the process, but rather a stealth attempt to bring back the Jim Crow era. This is the same Eric Holder who dismissed the voter intimidation case against the New Black Panther party after they had been found guilty. The New Black Panther Party was standing outside some polling locations in Philadelphia brandishing weapons and were arrested, tried and found guilty when Holder dismissed the charges at sentencing. I suppose we are to infer that Holder supports this type of activity but is opposed to preventing fraudulent voting. It is also telling that the states Holder has singled out for review are also states in which Obama is polling badly.
I find the left’s assumption that somehow minorities are unable or unwilling to acquire a picture ID to be patently false and steeped in what is generally referred to as the “soft racism of low expectations”. In any case, this is the issue upon which the racial grievance racket has chosen to make their stand. I wrote a few weeks ago that Al Sharpton, the NAACP and progressive groups are planning to hold a series of rallies against voter identification requirements during the 2012 election cycle. It is almost laughable to watch the left twist themselves into contortions. No matter what they say, they cannot get around the fact that the gist of their argument is that it should be easier to steal elections. Democrats spent 10 years crying that George W. Bush stole the 2000 election from Al Gore in Florida. I would think they would want to take steps to ensure that would never happen again.
I am in no way suggesting that Obama wants to weaken election law so that he can steal the election. Instead, I think Obama is trying to “rally the troops” by equating his reelection with the civil rights movement. Obama is suffering from a serious enthusiasm gap. Basically his supporters are nowhere near as excited about keeping him, as his opponents are about replacing him. Obama set a trap for himself by literally promising to turn back the tides of the oceans and he failed to deliver. Hope and change is not going to cut it anymore and this entire issue is nothing more than an attempt to convince minorities that Obama is the only thing standing between them and a return to the dark days of segregated lunch counters and poll taxes. If you doubt me, consider that some on the left have already begun comparing voter ID laws to poll taxes by claiming the poor will be unable to afford a picture ID and thus will unable to vote. I guess if you can no longer inspire them, you can always frighten them.
Requiring citizens to fill out a form and have a picture taken is very little to ask given the awesome responsibility involved with voting. These laws generally include provisions allowing for free photo identifications for those who can demonstrate economic hardship and governors of two states have even offered to provide shuttle services to any citizen who claims to be unable to go pick up a photo ID. This will not matter to the left however. They need an issue to excite the base and are betting that they can scare people into voting for Obama. How is that for hope and change?
Comments