Voter ID Proponents Launch Counteroffensive Against DOJ

U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder is currently blocking implementation of voter ID laws in South Carolina and Texas. It’s the latest battle in the fight for voter integrity at the ballot box and the reason two supporters of voter ID are launching a robust defense the laws.

“We believe this offensive by the Justice Department must be met with a counteroffensive,” said Ken Blackwell, Ohio’s former secretary of state. He is working on the project with Ken Klukowski, a fellow with the American Civil Rights Union and faculty member at Liberty University’s School of Law. The two will launch their project in the coming days.

Blackwell and Klukowski warn that liberals will stop at nothing in their quest to topple voter ID laws. The NAACP has even brought the issue to the U.N. Human Rights Council, an organization whose members include China, Cuba and Russia. Blackwell previously served as U.S. ambassador to the U.N. Human Rights Commission, the organization’s predecessor.

Listen to the interview with Blackwell and Klukowski on Scribecast

Klukowski believes the Holder’s actions against South Carolina on Texas are driven purely by politics to “gin up an electoral base to drive turnout on Election Day.” He noted that Holder is only blocking laws in states subject to Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, a civil rights-era law that gives the Department of Justice authority over voting changes.

“The Obama-Holder Department of Justice has launched an all-out war on voter ID and other measures,” Blackwell said. “Although Holder’s actions are purported to prevent African-Americans from being disenfranchised, in reality they serve as a crass political attempt to ensure his boss gets re-elected this year.”

In Case You Missed It:  Obama's General Flynn Problem

The U.S. Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s voter ID law in 2008. Klukowski said that decision even had the backing of liberal Justice John Paul Stevens. The laws in South Carolina and Texas are similar to the one in Indiana.

The podcast runs about 10 minutes. It was produced with the help of Hannah Sternberg. Listen to previous interviews on Scribecast or subscribe to future episodes.

Source material can be found at this site.

Posted in Freedoms and tagged , , , , , , .

One Comment

  1. The public policy concept of election law reform is intended for the legislatures of the several state governments to implement and to enforce minimum legal standards that regulate the electoral process and the electoral administration thereof with appropriate security elements. By 2013, at least four states may have their constitutions modified on the topic of election law reform: Arizona (2004), Minnesota (2012), Mississippi (2011), and Missouri (2012). A strict voter photographic identity requirement were adopted by nine states according to the National Counsel of State Legislatures: Georgia, Indiana, Kansas, Mississippi, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, and Wisconsin. Five Democratic state governors have vetoed legislation to impose a strict photographic voter-identity requirements approved by Republican legislatures: Minnesota (Mark Dayton), Missouri (Jay Nixon), Montana (Brian Schweitzer) North Carolina (Beverly Perdue), and New Hampshire (John Lynch). Election law reform should establish a process to verify the identity, eligibility, and residency of voter registrants.

    The legal doctrine of one vote per citizen is a sacred principle that defines and governs the representative republic in elections to reflect the consent of the governed. Voter fraud is an abhorrent criminal offense that devalues the integrity and veracity of the electoral process and should not be condoned criminal conduct that the public should tolerate. A biometric or photographic-identity verification system that conforms to the minimum authentication standard for identity, eligibility, and residency is merited for a uniform voter registration database administered by the state election bureau, which should be enforced and implemented by law. Third party organizations, such as ACORN, have assisted people cast fraudulent and illegitimate votes at polling precincts and with postal absentee ballots under fictitious voter registration submitted to election officials. Many ACORN officials have been charged, indicted, prosecuted, and convicted of criminal voter fraud offenses. In conclusion, this public policy initiative proposed by state legislatures is appropriate and justifiable for the integrity security of the electoral process administered in the several States.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Optionally add an image (JPEG only)


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.