Voter ID and the War on Women: follow-up

Our February 13 post on the Missouri voter ID proposals and the war on women generated this comment:

U show me the no. of voter fraud cases in Mo. and around the country. It is far less than 1%. Be honest now. U know this is nothing but an attempt to curtail democratic votes. Shame on YOU.

We appreciate this opportunity to enlarge on our views and to respond at some length.

It is not by accident that our highest public officials are elected, not appointed. This is because the foundation of our representative government is the will of the people as revealed in free elections. Thus there is a long history of guarding the integrity of the American electoral process. Even so, voting irregularities, cheating, and fraud are not uncommon. There is ample documentation of this, including voting in more than one jurisdiction, voting by unregistered people, by felons, by non-citizens, by the recently deceased, and in St Louis, by dogs. Claims to the contrary lack any credibility. Good government is dependent on clean, fraud-free elections. There is no evidence of ulterior motives among those of us in favor of voter ID.  


Voter ID: war on women edition

Yesterday the Elections Committee of the Missouri House of Representatives reported out a proposed constitutional amendment enabling a photo identification requirement for voters, as well as a bill implementing the requirement. A current Missouri or Federal photo ID would be required. The reaction has been as expected: condemnation by Democrats and approval by Republicans. Indeed the amendment and implementing bill were reported out on strictly party-line votes.

Our reaction is also as expected. We continue to be appalled at the willingness of Democrats to do whatever it might take to win an election. There may be some similarly bloody-minded Republicans, but our belief is that this issue is owned by Democrats. It reminds us of the slogan of the Oakland Raider’s Al Davis’s: “Just win, baby.”

For good introductions to the issue we suggest searching Google or Bing for the writings of Hans von Spakovsky and John Fund. An illuminating review of their recent book here is a good place to start. They and others show – convincingly – that without fradulent voting by felons the comedian Al Franken would not have been elected to the Senate in 2008. By the by, Franken was the sixtieth vote, which permitted ObamaCare to pass the Senate. Elections do indeed have consequences. Many of us would prefer that these consequences reflect legitimate votes only.

The left has always opposed even reasonable means to help guarantee electoral integrity. The old spin was based on the race card. The current spin has now shifted to the invented Republican war on women. A St-Louis Post Dispatch article reporting on the measures goes to great pains to cite reasons for disapproval of the bills. These largely depend on the argument that voter ID unfairly burdens women. Here is Rep. Stacey Newman, Democrat, according to the Post:

Newman said this would disproportionately affect women who have married, divorced or remarried and changed their names.

In an article the Columbia Daily Tribune rushed to interview Wendy Noren, pictured on the front page, the Boone County clerk in charge of elections, who opined:

I have a serious problem that this does not protect women from unequal treatment.

Now it is true that women commonly change their surnames upon marriage and men do not. This is a custom happily not yet subject to government control and regulation. The proposed legislation allows Missouri driver licenses to be used for voter ID purposes. Now do the ladies Newman and Noren find that the state of Missouri is subjecting women seeking to drive to unequal treatment? Where have we heard their objections to this unequal treatment of women drivers?

The voter ID debate has now gone beyond the ludicrous. It is clear that liberal objections to voter ID are largely offered in bad faith solely in order to preserve some kind of electoral advantage, even if fraudulent. We are saddened at the tawdriness many in our political system apparently now find acceptable.Troglo


All you need to know about the farm bill

Debbie Stabenow, Chariman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said this about the farm bill that recently passed Congress and now awaits the President’s pen:

We worked long and hard to make sure that policies worked for every region of the country, for all the different kinds of agricultural production we do in our country.

It might help to remove the political obfuscation and translate this into plain English:

We worked long and hard to buy the votes needed for passage by sending pork, payoffs, and subsidies to all the major agricultural interest groups throughout the country.Troglo