Listening to left-wing commentators’ hysterics, one can only surmise that Nazis have surrounded various state houses, and are fast closing in. They claim, with no evidence whatsoever, that newly enacted state voter identification laws (laws of which the majority is clearly in favor) are designed with only one purpose: to disenfranchise the powerless, making it more difficult for these potential voters to cast their sacred ballots.
But any impartial look at the facts shows how specious are these arguments. The Left’s big-lie approach, referring to voter identification laws as voter suppression laws, is a purposeful attempt to confuse the public. But an honest examination of its views reveals the Left’s actual motives: it does not care in the least about fair voter enfranchisement. Instead, its true concerns rest solely with gaining power and winning elections. Nothing more!
As concerned citizens, each of us should wish for fully informed voters, not just voters who vote only the way we do. Perhaps this view seems overly quixotic in today’s extreme partisan environment. But pausing for a moment of reflection, we all must agree that in the long run having informed voters must be in our common national interest.
Yet which kinds of voting-related measures do the Left wish to enact? Let’s start with the “motor voter” laws, laws which require state agencies to make voter registration forms readily available to those present performing unrelated business. These “motor voter” laws sound oh, so democratic, who could possibly be against them? Well, any thinking person. Why is it in society’s general interest to add to its voter rolls people who, but for the coincidence of having happened to be in a state motor vehicle line, would have otherwise not bothered to register to vote? How fully informed would you rate these new motor voters? Will their addition to the voting rolls increase or decrease the ratio of informed voters to uninformed voters?
Bush 41 rightly vetoed such a law, but one of the first items of business of the Clinton Administration was to ask the Democratic Congress to resubmit the bill, which it did, after which Clinton quickly signed it into law. Clinton and the Democrats knew the stakes. Uninformed voters tend overwhelmingly to vote Democrat. Indeed, ever since the enactment of “Motor Voter,” California, a former Republican stronghold (the home of Reagan), rarely has GOP successes at the state level. Electorally, California has become solidly blue, in large part because of the motor voter law.
And for precisely identical reasons, the Left loves same-day voter registration. With same-day registration it is easy to sway uninformed, Democrat-leaning voters to vote a particular way without the bother of first having them register at an earlier time (apparently, even the “motor voter” easy registration is too much trouble for some potential voters).
And, along similar lines, the Left favors allowing multiple weeks of pre-election-day voting. Consider which kinds of voters are swept in when the only way to get them to vote is, basically, to register them yourself and offer them a smorgasbord of days to vote. These kinds of radically loose voting requirements clearly do not increase voter quality, something that should concern us all.
When the Left piously prattles about how it wishes to protect all voters’ rights, one need only look at one particular counter-example to demonstrate the untruth to such talk. Recall the contested 2000 presidential election. Although every official recount found that Bush had won the election, the Left’s mindless mantra at the time was, “Just count the votes.” The implication was that some power was preventing the fair counting of the votes. (This, by the way, was absurd since each of the local counting centers were controlled by union-backed Democrats!) But what about the military votes, which had arrived somewhat delayed through no fault of the military voters? Shouldn’t all these votes as well be counted? “Not so fast,” said the Left. Since military voters were considered too heavily GOP-oriented, the Left tried as hard as possible to disallow these. So much for the Left’s “just count the votes!” and “sacred voting rights” mantras.
One thing you will never hear in the mass media: a rational debate about voter identification laws. The reason is that the Left will not allow such a debate, a debate it knows it would lose. Instead, members of the Left will quickly devolve any attempt at such a discussion into hysterical name-calling, branding disagreement as racist, and the like. Asking members of the Left simple, basic questions, such as: “We expect to have to identify ourselves in most areas of life, from credit card purchases to driving automobiles. Why would something as important as voting not require at least the same level of identity certainty?” provides back no reasonable answers.
Instead, you will hear bromides about how the elderly and blacks and Hispanics are prevented from voting if voter id laws are in effect. But in response to these bromides, to point out that virtually all the elderly already do have proper ids doesn’t elicit their agreement. And, moreover, to point out that the states enacting these laws have promised to provide easy ways to procure a valid id for those in need of one also doesn’t elicit their agreement. Instead, once again, since the Left has no answers to these observations, it obfuscates and resorts to hysterics.
One could be a cynic and ask a member of the Left, “Do you think blacks and Hispanics are not capable enough to procure a valid id in order to vote? And if you actually believe that, doesn’t that make you a racist.” But, of course, posing such a question and comment would be pointless because it assumes a rational listener, one open to reason. But the entire voter identification discussion has never had a thing to do with reason or fairness or even voter enfranchisement itself. To the Left, it’s all about power and furthering its agenda. The Left knows that stacking the voter rolls with low-information voters is a winning strategy and will surely continue to do so, while continuing to confuse the public about the issues involved. For this reason all attempts at cleaning up the voting rolls, such as enacting sane and needed voter identification laws, will continue to meet stiff left-wing resistance. But it’s a resistance against which we must continue to fight and over which we must ensure we ultimately prevail.