Voter Registration/Fraud
Getting voters registered and to the polls on election day are critical to success during any election. In recent years complaints have been raised against both major political parties regarding inappropriate and even fraudulent registration and poll activities. The hottest registration issue revolves around voter ID. The left says there is no such thing as voter fraud … and if you disagree, you’re a racist. It is discriminatory and depresses minority turnout. They attack those who dare to support voter ID laws as “anti-voting rights activists and voter fraud hucksters”. The right says voter fraud is real. Indeed, Its practically a tradition in this country to do things the Daley way in Chicago, or the Philadelphia way, or voting control as with Tammany Hall in New York City. The right says we need to verify that each voter is legal and besides it is nonsense not to have to show an ID in this country to vote ... we do it for much less critical activities (such as, cash a check, drive a car, board an airplane, buy medicine, visit a doctor, get government assistance, etc). So, what is the real issue? Voter registration got a lot of attention during the 2008, 2012, 2014 & 2016 election season. We expect it will get a lot of attention before and during the 2018 mid term election season.

The ‘Punt’ That Wasn’t

6/19/18
from The Wall Street Journal,
6/18/18:

In a gerrymandering case, the Supreme Court holds plaintiffs to a nearly impossible standard.

The U.S. Supreme Court declined on Monday to pass judgment on a pair of challenges to partisan gerrymandering. In Gill v. Whitford, the justices held unanimously that the plaintiffs had failed to show that their individual votes had been impaired. “This Court is not responsible for vindicating generalized partisan preferences,” Chief Justice John Roberts wrote in an opinion all his colleagues joined, which returned the case to a lower court to consider whether the Wisconsin plaintiffs could show their individual votes had been burdened. This was not the “punt” news outlets suggest. It presses plaintiffs to make a near-impossible showing. The high court has consistently declined to review claims of partisan gerrymandering because other restraints exist, courts have no manageable standard to apply, and gerrymandering is a self-limiting exercise—a party can only add so many supporters to one district before endangering its majority in another.

More From The Wall Street Journal (subscription required):



365 Days Page
Comment ( 0 )
Leave a Reply
Name*
E-mail*
Comment