The Truth will prevail, But only if we Demand it from Congress!
9-11 Inside Job and Neocons Hacked 2004
Did the US Supreme Court just elect John McCain?
by Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman
April 30, 2008
The US Supreme Court has just dealt a serious blow to voters' rights
that could help put John McCain in the White House by eliminating
tens of thousands of voters who generally vote Democratic.
By 6-3 the Court has upheld an Indiana law that requires citizens to
present a photo identification card in order to vote. Florida,
Michigan, Louisiana, Georgia, Hawaii and South Dakota have similar
laws. Though it's unlikely, as many as two dozen other states could
add them by election day. Other states, like Ohio, have less
stringent ID requirements than Indiana's, but still have certain
restrictions that are strongly opposed by voter rights advocates.
The decision turns back two centuries of jurisprudence that has
accepted a registered voter's signature as sufficient identification
for casting a ballot. By matching that signature against one given
at registration, and with harsh penalties for ballot stuffing, the
Justices confirmed in their lead opinion that there is "no evidence"
for the kind of widespread voter fraud Republican partisans have
used to justify the demand for photo ID.
Voting rights activists have long argued that since photo ID can
cost money, or may demand expensive trips to government agencies,
the requirement constitutes a "poll tax." Taxes on the right to vote
were used for a century to prevent blacks and others from voting in
the south and elsewhere. They were specifically banned by the 24th
Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1964.
But the Court's lead opinion, written by Justice Stevens, normally a
liberal, said that though rare, the "risk of voter fraud" was
nonetheless "real" and that there was "no question about the
legitimacy or importance of the state's interest in counting only
the votes of eligible voters." The burden of obtaining a voter ID,
said the court, was not so difficult as to be deemed
unConstitutional. Ohio election protection Attorney Cliff Arnebeck
believes Stevens joined the decision to divide the Court's
conservative majority, and to leave the door open for further
litigation.
But there is no indication the corporate media or Democratic Party
will be pursuing significant action on this issue any time soon.
Though the Kerry Campaign solicited millions of dollars to "protect
the vote" in 2004, it has not supported independent research into
that election's irregularities. In the King-Lincoln Civil Rights
lawsuit, in which we are attorney and plaintiff, 56 of Ohio's 88
counties destroyed ballot materials, in direct violation of federal
law. There has been no official legal follow-up on this case, no
major media investigation, and no support from the Democratic Party
either to investigate what happened in Ohio 2004, or to make sure it
doesn't happen again in 2008. The issue has yet to be seriously
raised by the major Democratic candidates despite the fact that it
could render their campaigns moot.
This latest Supreme Court decision is yet another serious blow to
voting rights advocates---and probably to the Democratic nominees
for President and other offices. It will clearly make it far more
difficult for poor, minority, elderly and young citizens to vote.
Tens of thousands of normally Democratic voters in key
states---especially Florida, Michigan, Georgia and Louisiana---will
simply be prevented from getting a ballot.
The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University's School of
Law in its "Friend of the Court" brief noted that between 10% and
13% of eligible voters lack the identification now required in
Indiana. People without an official photo ID tend to be
disproportionately minorities and poor, ushering a new Jim Crow era
based on race and class apartheid. One Indiana study, according to
Inter Press Service reporter Jim Lobe, found that 13.3% of
registered Indiana voters lacked the now-required ID, but the
numbers were significantly higher for black voters at 18% and young
voters age 18-34 at more than 20%.
Kathryn Kolbert, President of People for the American Way, put the
number at "millions of eligible voters who don't have the ID these
laws require."
Photo ID has long been a lynchpin of a concerted GOP strategy to
eliminate Democratic voters. In the wake of the theft of the 2004
election in Ohio, Republican activists produced heavily publicized
allegations of massive voter fraud, virtually all of which proved to
be false.
Nonetheless, the drumbeat for restrictive ID requirements has been
steadily rising from GOP strongholds. Other such laws are now
virtually certain to follow in states with Republican-controlled
legislatures, though it's unclear how many more can be put into law
by November.
Nor has the GOP let up in its other campaigns to restrict access to
the polls. Extremely harsh limitations on voter registration
campaigns in Florida have severely restricted attempts by the League
of Women Voters and others to sign up new voters. GOP election
officials also have made it clear they will severely restrict the
franchise of those who have minor irregularities in the registration
forms, such as an errant middle initial or changed address.
It is also unclear how many electronic voting machines will still be
in place come November. Despite a wide range of high-level studies
showing them easily hackable, the elimination of touch screen voting
machines has proceeded at a glacial pace. No significant federal
legislation has been passed to eliminate electronic voting machines
or even to make them more secure. With a few exceptions, most
notably Florida, progress at the state level has been minimal.
Thus the GOP hope that millions of Americans will be voting on
hackable computers this November, and that millions more may be
eliminated from the rolls altogether, seems very close to fruition.
Whether this will swing the election to John McCain remains to be
seen. But this Supreme Court decision allowing the demand for photo
ID makes it much more likely.
--
Bob Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman are co-authors of HOW THE GOP STOLE
AMERICA'S 2004 ELECTION & IS RIGGING 2008 (www.freepress.org) and,
with Steve Rosenfeld, of WHAT HAPPENED IN OHIO? (The New Press). Bob
is publisher of www.freepress.org, where Harvey is Senior Editor.
