Did the U.S. Supreme Court just elect John McCain?
By
Bob
Fitrakis & Harvey Wasserman Read Spanish Version
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.
Taken
from:
http://www.opednews.com/maxwrite/print_friendly.php?p=genera_bob_fitr_080502_did_the_us_supreme_c.htm
Authors
Website: www.bobforohio.com
Authors Bio: www.freepress.org
www.bobforohio.com
