I don’t know who Peter Huck is, but his propaganda piece on Pennsylvania voting laws beggars belief. It is a sham story.
When Dorothy Cooper applied for a free voter identity card in Chattanooga, Tennessee, she supplied a rent receipt, a copy of her lease, her birth certificate and her voter registration card to prove who she was.
Voter ID is mandatory to prevent fraud under a new state law passed by Republicans, despite scant evidence fraud exists.
But the 96-year-old, who was on the voting roll, left her marriage certificate behind. Cooper was denied the ID.
Boo freaking hoo. Unless you are going to use your maiden name to vote, you need your marriage certificate to get an ID card. Sure, if you’re 96, it’s easy to forget these things, but this is not a draconian requirement. If she left it at home, all she has to do is go and get it, and come back, and they’ll give her her card.
At least this story passes the sniff test. The next one is pure bull:
Wilola Lee in Pennsylvania has a similar story to tell. The 60-year-old has voted in most national elections since the 1970s, worked at her local Philadelphia polling station and is retired from the city’s education department. She has a social security card and a state identity card.
But a new law, passed by a Republican-controlled legislature, says voters must use an ID card issued by the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation.
To get one you need a birth certificate. Lee’s was destroyed by fire. Efforts to get one from Georgia, her birthplace, have been frustrated for the past decade.
Nothing about this crap rings true. First of all, the story says she has a State ID card already. If you check the Pennsylvania State Government website, it says she can use that to vote. It is not true that you can only vote with a card from the PADoT.
Secondly, you do not need a birth certificate to get a PADoT card! If you don’t have your birth certificate, you can swear a declaration and get an ID that way.
So the story is bogus. These people are generally Democratic Party activists attempting to agitate. And Peter Huck has fallen for their crap without doing any proper research.
Huck regurgitates that standard line that there is "scant evidence fraud exists". Which is a bit like holding a rock festival without bothering to put up a fence and then saying there is "scant evidence that some people didn’t pay for admission". How could you possibly tell?! But there is significant conjecture that Al Franken won his Senate seat through Democratic Party activists "bulking up" the vote, and even more to suggest that John F Kennedy won Texas and Illinois by less than legal means. The integrity of the vote is important. What possible reason would you have for not checking if someone is eligible to vote?!
On top of all this nonsense is the lawsuit brought in Pennsylvania against its voter ID laws:
This week a challenge to that [Pennsylvania] law by the American Civil Liberties Union and other plaintiffs, who argued the state had erected "unconstitutional barriers to the fundamental right to vote", failed. "I just can’t believe it," said the chief plaintiff, 93-year-old Viviette Applewhite. "Too many people have fought for the right to vote to have it taken away like this. All is I want is to be able to vote this November like I always have."
Another bizarre case of people not using their heads to ask some obvious questions. In any court in the world, it is standard practice to ask whether a person has standing to bring suit. How do you prove standing? Why, with a form of identification, of course! You can’t sue anybody without some form of ID, so why should you be able to vote without it?
About 11 per cent of Americans – more than 21 million – have no government-approved ID. Pennsylvania says 750,000 registered voters are in this category.
This is just bullshit. The writer is pulling these figures out of his arse. There is no way that there are 21 million eligible voters out there who don’t have a drivers licence or some other form of identification. It is practically impossible to get by in American society without a picture ID. You can’t even get a bank account without one. Are you telling me none of these people drive, or have bank accounts?!
It is one thing to publish blatant propaganda in an American newspaper when there are alternative sources of information, but this was published in the New Zealand Herald. For most New Zealanders, this is the only story they will hear about the voter ID laws, with no right of reply from the other side of the argument. The Herald is not doing its job of giving New Zealanders fair and impartial journalism with this crap.