Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
September 23, 2012
A number of The
Indianapolis Star readers have written letters to the editor extoling the
virtues of why asking potential voters for photo identification is tantamount
to murdering their cat. In doing so, these readers have proven themselves
ignorant not just to the dangers of voter fraud, but the dilution of the very
own votes cast by legal voters.
And while the Star
has printed an abundance of anti-photo ID letters, supporting letters, such as
this, although altered for this site, have been shunned.
Andy Pike of Indianapolis (“Make it convenient for people
to exercise right,” www.indystar.com) is
among the myriad readers and writers who still don’t understand the paramount
importance of requiring photo ID of legitimate voters.
Such a requirement preserves and protects the sanctity of
the votes of those who cast them. If ever there was a case to be made
protecting the rights of the honest voter it’s this case documented in
Maryland.
Wendy Rosen, a Democrat running in the first
congressional district of Maryland, withdrew her candidacy less than two weeks
ago when it was discovered she had committed voter fraud. Rosen, registered to
vote in both Maryland and Florida, cast ballots in both states since 2006. (www.washingtonpost.com) While the
matter is under investigation, Rosen’s withdrawal speaks volumes.
Photo ID is required for so many of life’s daily
activities from entering a government building, boarding an airplane, writing a
check, using a credit card, purchasing alcohol, tobacco or firearms, opening a
bank account, signing a lease to rent a home or property, signing mortgage
documents to buy a home or a business, and yes, even attending this month’s
Democratic National Convention in Charlotte. Where were the cries of hypocrisy
in Charlotte from the Democrats’ rank and file or the so-called mainstream
liberal media demanding photo ID of its delegations, but eschewing it at
polling places across the country?
Millard Tyrone Sprinkles of Fishers is also wrong to say
that while is it perfectly OK to expect a photo ID requirement in order to
enter the DNC because this is “an age where vigilance is needed against those
who would do harm,” when he cannot see the harm being perpetrated by those
committing or attempting to commit voter fraud. (“Voter ID laws curtail
fundamental freedom,” www.indystar.com)
Sprinkles then compounds his fallacious argument saying
“There has been only a small number of documented cases of voter fraud related
to identification.” [Sic] (www.indystar.com)
That there is even one case of voter fraud is enough to warrant a strictly
enforced photo ID law in all 50 states to preserve the integrity of the votes
cast by honest, law abiding voters. Should there not be such a provision until
there are a dozen documented cases of voter fraud, Mr. Sprinkles? How about
waiting until there are 100? Or 1,000? How many diluted legitimate votes should
be weakened before common sense comes in to play? Likewise, should the Centers
for Disease Control only work on a cure for a life-threatening disease only
after 10, 100, or 1,000 people have contracted or died from it?
Indianapolis Star
op-ed columnist Dan Carpenter wrote, in opposing voter ID photo requirements as
a form of voter suppression, “Given that most eligible voters who lack IDs tend
to be poor, elderly or minority, this hurts Democrats.” (“ID facts and false
pictures,” September 5, 2012, www.indystar.org)
The Supreme Court of the United States disagrees with Mr.
Carpenter as it ruled there is no hardship in expecting voters to show up to
their polling places with appropriate photo ID according to a six to three High
Court verdict in April 2008, specifically citing Indiana’s law.
“The universally applicable requirements of Indiana
voter-identification law are eminently reasonable. The burden of acquiring,
possessing and showing a free photo identification is simply not severe,
because it does not ‘even represent a significant increase over the usual
burdens of voting,’” wrote Justice Scalia, also for the majority. (“A Picture
Worth A Thousand Votes,” 12/25/11, www.sanfordspeaksout.blogspot.com)
And with all due respect to Frank H. Werker of Carmel,
that he is a veteran possessing a “DD Form 214” (military service record) that
is government issue, albeit one lacking a photo, the photo is what protects the
integrity of his vote. All other information about being a retiree, a taxpayer
and a native of Vincennes is superfluous. (“We served for right to vote without
ID,” Sept. 23, 2012, www.indystar.com) On
the other hand, thank you, Mr. Werker, for serving the United States in the
Army for three years, including your year-long tour of duty in Vietnam.
Mr. Pike is wrong about voting being a Constitutional
right. Despite Amendments XV, XIX, and XXVI, states still have the legal
authority to deny the vote to felons and non-citizens attempting or committing
voter fraud. The vote is a privilege and a responsibility not to be diminished
by fraudulent actors attempting to sully the democratic-republican process.
Mr. Pike is right about one thing – it should be
convenient for legal voters to cast their ballots – geographically convenient.
All voters should live within walking distance of their polling site – school,
church, synagogue, fire station, etc. Polling places should be staffed by
volunteers who live in those neighborhoods and recognize most voters.
Sanford D. Horn is
a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.
No comments:
Post a Comment