Holder to push against voter-ID laws

posted at 11:05 am on December 13, 2011 by Ed Morrissey

To no one’s great shock, Attorney General will take time away from trying to cover up figure out why his own department sent thousands of weapons across the US-Mexico border to go after a real problem in our country.  I refer, of course, to the plague of people trying to prevent voter fraud and ensure the credibility of our elections.  Dare we say that Holder will get on this issue fast and furiously?

The Obama administration on Tuesday will wade into the increasingly divisive national debate over new voting laws in several states that could depress turnout among minorities and others who helped elect the president in 2008. …

With the presidential campaign heating up,Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. will deliver a speech Tuesday expressing concerns about the voter-identification laws, along with a Texas redistricting plan before the Supreme Court that fails to take into account the state’s burgeoning Hispanic population, he said in an interview Monday.

Holder will speak at the Lyndon Baines Johnson Presidential Libary and Museum in Austin, Tex., which honors the president who shepherded the 1965 Voting Rights Act into law. …

When it comes to voting fraud, some conservatives have long argued that it is a serious problem, although others say the number of such cases is relatively low. Studies of the issue have reached different conclusions on the extent of the problem.

“You constantly hear about voter fraud . . . but you don’t see huge amounts of vote fraud out there,’’ Holder said.

You know what else you don’t see?  Huge amounts of gun-sale fraud that sends massive numbers of military-style weapons across the border.  In order to see that, one has to keep an eye on the ATF … but mostly watch the State Department.  That hasn’t kept Holder and this administration from pushing guns across the border in a threadbare attempt to make it look as though gun retailers were the real problem, an effort that has so far resulted in the death of one Border Patrol agent in the US and perhaps hundreds of others in Mexico.

This, of course, follows the efforts of the White House to force Boeing into a concessionary agreement with its machinist union through the threat of NLRB legal action.  That ended this week, as the machinists voted to approve their new contract with Boeing, and the NLRB withdrew its lawsuit.  However, if the administration is really interested in voter access, perhaps Holder should be investigating the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers:

Newsbusters found this picture on Politico’s report over the end of the battle between Boeing and the NLRB:

You’re not seeing things.

The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM) has given 99% of its campaign money to Democrats (according to ElectionLawCenter.com, citing OpenSecrets.org). Democrats, including Obama administration Attorney General Eric Holder, who will be in Austin, Texas tomorrow supporting the rejection of voter-ID laws and, according to the Texas GOP, “NAACP plans to involve the United Nations on (sic) US elections,” abhor the idea of making voters bring some form of photo identification to the polls.

Yet the IAM in the instance photographed required a photo ID of all who wished to vote in a contract ratification election. From the looks of the professionally made sign, the photo-ID requirement in the union’s elections would appear to be far from an isolated instance. Gosh, I wonder why?

Doug Ross’s reaction: “Needle on Hypocrisy-Meter Breaks Off.”

Well, that happens a lot in this administration.

So why isn’t Holder acting to void the results of the balloting for the IAM? After all, workers have the right to vote in union elections, just as eligible citizens (and only eligible citizens) have the right to vote in public elections.  The IAM demanded voter ID in order to ensure that ineligible outsiders didn’t cast ballots and distort the election results, diluting the voting power of legitimately eligible workers.  That’s exactly why voter-ID advocates want states to use the same standard as the IAM.

I expect Holder and the Obama administration to get on this immediately, as they are such staunch defenders of ensuring open-ballot access.  Right?

Tags: , , , , ,

Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

Interesting that Bill Clinton’s little bagboy, Eric Holder, sees only Blacks as incapable of obtaining ID’s that the rest of us in civilized society take for granted.

MNHawk on December 13, 2011 at 11:59 AM

A “black” kid in my daughter’s HS was arrested for selling marijuana, and he had six fake ID’s on him. Maybe he could get a job with local election boards providing ID’s for extra Democrat voters.

Nutstuyu on December 13, 2011 at 3:30 PM

1) Dressed as “Black Panther”
2) Hold “night stick” in hand (or any other bludgening type weapon).
3) Stand outside polling place
4) Intimidate whites into not voting.

Justice Department says “no problem here.”

sdd on December 13, 2011 at 3:34 PM

So, I suppose that requiring photo ID to get on an airplane is intended to keep minorities off of the planes?

Having to show ID to write a check is a conspiracy to keep minorities from purchasing from Walmart?

tomlw on December 13, 2011 at 3:36 PM

Holder to push against voter-ID laws

Of course, it’s going to be a tough year for Democrats and unlike the Republicans, the Democrats play to win. Holder isn’t going to do anything that will stop legal or illegal votes for Democrats.

RJL on December 13, 2011 at 3:38 PM

Why don’t liberals also argue that gun registration suppresses 2nd amendment rights among the poor and minorities?

Russ in OR on December 13, 2011 at 1:30 PM

And their answer is “Because guns are bad mmm’kay?”. Especially those racist evil saturday night special ones.

I do love the “too poor argument”. People will stop at a store exit and let security guards go through their purchases to check for theft (or shrinkage from employees) but an ID to vote is unfair…

Here in Oregon it is all vote by mail. For the last several years I drop my ballot off by hand on election day. I used to view it as convenient but with weak ID checks, its not hard to see non elligible voters getting to vote.

oryguncon on December 13, 2011 at 3:51 PM

The Obama administration on Tuesday will wade into the increasingly divisive national debate over new voting laws in several states that could depress turnout among minorities and others who helped elect the president in 2008. …

Leave it to WaPo to mix in a little editorializing. Facts? They’re so old school.

KS Rex on December 13, 2011 at 4:44 PM

Part of my opposition to these laws is that “voter fraud” is a myth. Here are links to a series of studies done on voter fraud in the 2000s…and there’s no evidence to back up any of the movements to pass these laws.

http://www.cohhio.org/alerts/Election%20Reform%20Report.pdf

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud.html?pagewanted=all

As for the casual dismissals that these laws disproportionately target Democratic base voters, studies have also been conducted on that issue. From WaPo

Advancement Project studies show that 11 percent of eligible voters, or about 21 million people, don’t have updated, state-issued photo IDs: 25 percent of African Americans, 15 percent of those earning less than $35,000, 18 percent of citizens age 65 or older and 20 percent of voters age 18 to 29.

So here’s the issue: Virtually no voter fraud actually exists within the current system, despite lots of efforts to discover it. And these targets are much more likely to disfranchise people who are citizens. There may be a host of reasons why folks can’t get an ID, the question is *why should they have to* when there is no need for the new law. Again, there is a major irony here. Conservatives advocating for a regulation that is entirely unnecessary. If anyone has evidence of voter fraud, i.e. more than 1 or 2 cases in a given election then maybe there’s an argument here. As is, every study on the matter demonstrates that voter fraud is a myth.

libfreeordie on December 13, 2011 at 12:04 PM

LOL, your first link is dead, the second is to a joke of a “newspaper” that only endorses Democrats, and your then citing the WaPo just makes things even funnier.

So which college here in NH are you a student at?

Del Dolemonte on December 13, 2011 at 5:18 PM

Holder has got to go.

Either he quits or he gets impeached/removed.

His corruption makes the Nixon Justice Department look like Choirboys.

georgej on December 13, 2011 at 5:47 PM

The IAM demanded voter ID in order to ensure that ineligible outsiders didn’t cast ballots and distort the election results, diluting the voting power of legitimately eligible workers.

-Ed

The IAM likely demanded voter ID so they would know who to punish / intimidate for voting the wrong way.

stvnscott on December 13, 2011 at 6:04 PM

libfreeordie on December 13, 2011 at 12:04 PM:

“Virtually no voter fraud actually exists within the current system, despite lots of efforts to discover it.”

Irrelevant.

US Supreme Court in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 553 U.S. 181 (2008) decided 6-3 that the use of photo IDs:

“is amply justified by the valid interest in protecting ‘the integrity and reliability of the electoral process,’”

The court didn’t buy the voter suppression argument.

There is nothing you libs can about it except whine. man up and accept that this argument you already lost.

georgej on December 13, 2011 at 6:08 PM

How much of a racist do you have to be to think that minorities are so helpless that they can’t go get an ID?

melle1228 on December 13, 2011 at 11:44 AM

Pretty much covers it.

S. D. on December 13, 2011 at 6:27 PM

There may be a host of reasons why folks can’t get an ID, the question is *why should they have to* when there is no need for the new law. Again, there is a major irony here. Conservatives advocating for a regulation that is entirely unnecessary. If anyone has evidence of voter fraud, i.e. more than 1 or 2 cases in a given election then maybe there’s an argument here. As is, every study on the matter demonstrates that voter fraud is a myth.

libfreeordie on December 13, 2011 at 12:04 PM

What reason would there be that folks can’t get an ID?
Would it be that they can’t prove their citizenship? Perhaps they
aren’t a citizen. I would venture to guess that the folks that can’t get an ID are “VIRTUALLY” non existent.

One of the States actually offered free ID’s and the Democrats were STILL crying about voter disenfranchisement.

Seems to me, the Democrats just want to have a reason to allow illegals and dead people to vote for them.

Zooid on December 13, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Eric Holder!!!

TAKE A LOOK AT MY MIDDLE FINGER!

KOOLAID2 on December 13, 2011 at 8:06 PM

But dead people, illegals and ex-cons always vote Democrat! Come On!

Joanz on December 13, 2011 at 8:09 PM

Taking time out from his impeachment hearings to politicize the Justice Department.

Grunt on December 13, 2011 at 8:09 PM

The only time Democrats lose elections on account of vote fraud, it’s because there simply wasn’t enough of it.

Face it. ALL vote fraud is committed by Democrats for Democrats.

Doug Piranha on December 13, 2011 at 8:15 PM

E) All of the above

Flora Duh

ya think

trickychicken on December 13, 2011 at 10:18 PM

What reason would there be that folks can’t get an ID?
Would it be that they can’t prove their citizenship? Perhaps they
aren’t a citizen. I would venture to guess that the folks that can’t get an ID are “VIRTUALLY” non existent.

One of the States actually offered free ID’s and the Democrats were STILL crying about voter disenfranchisement.

Seems to me, the Democrats just want to have a reason to allow illegals and dead people to vote for them.

Zooid on December 13, 2011 at 7:21 PM

Seems to me that having an ID requirement would create thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, jobs nationwide.

1. Administration of the system

2. Designers of the ID Cards

3. Reviewers of the Designs of the ID Cards

4. Printers of the ID Cards

5. Distributors of the ID Cards

Yep, Democrats don’t want people to have jobs.

Del Dolemonte on December 13, 2011 at 11:11 PM

Seems to me that having an ID requirement would create thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, jobs nationwide.

1. Administration of the system

2. Designers of the ID Cards

3. Reviewers of the Designs of the ID Cards

4. Printers of the ID Cards

5. Distributors of the ID Cards

Yep, Democrats don’t want people to have jobs.

Del Dolemonte on December 13, 2011 at 11:11 PM

D’OH! Left out this one:

6. Creators of False Voter ID Cards

Fixed.

Del Dolemonte on December 13, 2011 at 11:13 PM

Yep, Democrats don’t want people to have jobs.

Del Dolemonte on December 13, 2011 at 11:11 PM

True….Obama’s entire term has shown that….unless, of course, the jobs are non productive and tax money siphoning government jobs.

Zooid on December 14, 2011 at 8:18 AM

I was going to makee a comment – but HS required I type in my ID…
Totally rediculous! Where is Holder when you need him?

Michael73501 on December 14, 2011 at 9:18 AM

More for libfreeordie and the non-existent vote/voter fraud issue, thanks to John at Power Line:

It is universally acknowledged, I believe, that Johnson stole his first Senate election in 1948, and voter fraud carried out under his expert guidance in 1960 helped Kennedy carry Texas.

This country has always had a system of voter registration. Only eligible, registered voters can cast a ballot. Why? This is the most elementary check on voter fraud: you can only vote if the local electoral authorities know who you are and have certified that you are eligible. An attack on this system is astonishingly radical, but that is exactly what Holder has in mind.

The Obama administration needs all the votes it can get, given its unpopularity with the American people. The question is, will the administration get those votes by persuading legitimate, eligible voters, or will it try to make up the deficit by enabling the casting of millions of fraudulent votes by Democratic Party activists? At the moment, it looks as though the latter is the Obama administration’s chosen course.

Some may think this assessment is too harsh. Some may say that the Democrats just want everyone under the Sun to vote; that they may be misguided, goofy liberals, but they just want everyone to participate. How do we know that this perspective is false? Because there is, in fact, one constituency whose votes have been systematically excluded in recent years. They are members of the military. And the Obama administration has actively collaborated in suppressing the military vote–even though many members of the military are minorities–because it doesn’t favor Democrats. The Obama administration, in particular its Department of Justice, is hopelessly corrupt.

Del Dolemonte on December 14, 2011 at 10:41 AM

Come on! The disdain this WH has for all that is Texas is obvious. It’s a two-fer as far as this outlaw admin is concerned. Holder and company get to try to use the race card and they get to do it in Texas. That’s what the Dems call a win-win! There’s only one problem with all this. This is TEXAS we are talking about! We don’t take kindly to being told what to do, especially by this bunch. Pass the popcorn this is going to be good.

neyney on December 14, 2011 at 11:46 AM

So, would someone please explain to me how you get through life as an adult in this day and age without an ID. Maybe a street person? Don’t you have to have an ID to get welfare? I’ve no personal experience in this regard, but are you allowed to walk in and sign up for Section 8, for foodstamps, for aid to dependent children without your ID and some ID to prove the children exist?

Remember when Alabama tried to get birth certificates for all school children and Holder had his expected hissy fit? I remember quite well when I registered my children for school in one of the darkest blue of blue states (Steny Hoyer’s district no less), and Virginia had used only one “l” in the spelling of my son’s name (which we spelled with 2 “ll’s”), I was given two weeks to get it corrected and a new birth certificate submitted or he would be kicked out of kindergarten.

I xeroxed both my kid’s birth certificates because they needed a copy to play ball, cheerlead, join the orchestra, go on a field trip.

How do you CASH a welfare check without an ID?

Portia46 on December 14, 2011 at 1:46 PM

Here in the stronghold Libertard land of Washington State, I am obviously over 18 years of age. Lets just say that the neighbors (no kidding) called to let us know the house was on fire when my b-day cake was lit. Went out to get a pack of smokes on the way home from SEATAC airport. Guy asked me for ID. I just looked at him. He thumbed to the cameras behind him. Told me “We just got busted for not getting ID from everyone who gets smokes to ‘make sure’ they are really over 18 years.” I said “Thank you for explaining this, but really?” He was serious and said the owner told the cashiers that the next fine (for one offense found on a sting operation) was going to be 30k for not carding them when purchasing smokes. THIRTY THOUSAND DOLLARS for not carding someone for smokes. How about we apply this to voting? Talk about curbing the national debt overnight. Estimated 11 million by 30k each = 330 billion dollars in one day. Good start in making obamacare a reality.

Molonlabe2004 on December 14, 2011 at 2:21 PM

If American Voters were forced to show a picture ID, ink up their fingers in blue, and pass a citizenship test/english exam before having the honor of voting, the Democratic Party would shrivel up and die.

I would like to see less absentee voting and more, “get your butt to the pols on election day” as well as better counting of the votes of our Military. In Colorado the elections are stolen with provisional votes on the eve of election day which ballots tend to run 98% for Liberals. They just wait until they know how many more votes are needed to take the Dems over the top and then send the minions in to fill out absentee ballots once that number is reported. Sick, I know, but the Democrat Machine in Colorado is a well oiled Computerized System that ensures certain outcomes. Boulder County has it down to a science, they send out mobs of people to steal yard signs and overwhelm local media with so much propaganda that the locals call The Daily Camera Newspaper, The Daily Komrade.

If each state took on the challenge to reform itself, we could wipe away most of the voter fraud in a matter of years.

Jenny Hatch
Tea Party Activist

JennyHatch on December 14, 2011 at 3:15 PM

If you want to drive a car, get a drivers license. If you want to vote, get a picture I.D. So simple even a caveman can do it!

PhySciTech on December 14, 2011 at 3:50 PM

New Haven’s mayor wants illegal immigrants to be able vote in municipal elections.
New Haven Mayor John DeStefano plans to ask the state Legislature to allow illegal immigrants who live in the city to be able vote in municipal elections.

17 years ago, I worked on a job site and stayed at a motel in New Haven for 24 days, maybe I should be able to vote on their municpal elections too.

Wallythedog on December 14, 2011 at 4:44 PM

None of these are fundamental rights of citizenship.

libfreeordie on December 13, 2011 at 11:14 AM

Neither is VOTING in a Federal election you maroon. Voting is NOT a US Constitutional right.

It might be a right protected by your State’s Constitution, but NOT the US Constitution. It protects how a vote is done, if it is allowed. Not voting itself.

Libtards. Unable to read the Constitution for 200+ years….

Lenguado on December 14, 2011 at 7:06 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3