Cutting through AG Holder’s rhetoric on state voting laws

Liberals like AG Holder didn't appear concerned about securing members of the military's right to vote. [US Army photo, Nov., 2010]Attorney General Eric Holder and other liberals are up in arms because some states are asking voters for a photo ID and in some cases retooling early vote schedules.

Liberals have accused various states—my home state of Florida is among them—of wanting to disenfranchise minority votes.

In comments about a recent column I wrote for Examiner about state voting laws, one reader said such laws are motivated by “implicit racism.”

It’s likely Holder and the progressives  haven’t read Florida’s law, HR 1355.

Here are a few of Holder and other progressives’ accusations followed by the facts:

*Changes in early voting will keep people from voting.
NOT. The elections supervisors simply have more options—they can lengthen the time frame for each early vote day. This change is aimed at saving money in cash strapped cities. I’ve always voted early and there is never a line. As a matter of fact I have at times been the only person (other than my husband) voting. In my county, libraries are often used and some branches are closed on Sunday. These changes simply allow a county to set up the procedures with costs and resources in mind.

*Third Party voter registration organizations will be obstructed.
NOT. As a matter of fact, the law “requires that division or supervisor of elections make voter registration forms available to third-party voter registration organizations; requires that such forms contain certain information, etc.”

*Creates a hardship for people who move.
NOT. People who move from one county to another can even change their address by telephone or email.

It’s possible that Sen. Bill Nelson threw a fit over the changes to Florida’s law because he is concerned about turnout in 2012. Nelson trotted out a teacher who had basically done an in-school voter registration drive but didn’t follow the new procedure to register as a third party. She could have been fined. We can only imagine which Party that particular teacher favors.

Photo ID laws were already in place in some states, by the way. Newsmax reported what one expert said:

“Hans von Spakovsky of the Heritage Foundation told the Post that Holder’s stance is based on ‘ideology and politics,’ saying that courts have found voter ID laws in both Georgia and Indiana to be nondiscriminatory.

“Georgia’s law has been in place for five years,’ said von Spakovsky, a Justice Department official in the George W. Bush administration. ‘Not only did the turnout for African Americans not go down, it went up.’”

Holder may be worried about turnout for the 2012 General Election, but other matters like making sure those who serve in the military get to vote haven’t inspired any passionate speeches in the AG.

As a matter of fact, DOJ set up a waiver (sound familiar?) system for certain states struggling to comply with the MOVE Act that ensured members of the military could be sure their votes counted.  Can you guess which Party most of those states who asked for MOVE waivers lean towards?

~To read more about efforts to secure voting rights for members of the military, visit the Military Voter Protection Project.

(Op-Ed by Kay B. Day/Dec. 15, 2011)