And a Good Reason To Vote For Democrats This Fall
Once Neil Gorsuch was in place filling the SCOTUS chair that was stolen from Merrick Garland in 2016, Radical Republicans were now fully in charge of all branches of the federal government. Now was the time for radical policies to be put in place that would be upheld by a court system that has been radicalized threw appointment manipulation over the past two decades.
Of the many things on the Republican agenda one of the most pressing is to suppress the vote. As seen in this clip from 1980, Paul Weyrich loudly and proudly states what has become the rallying cry for Republicans at every level:
They don’t want everybody to vote. In fact the fewer that vote, the higher the percentage of Republicans within the pool of those that did vote will be. Since Weyrich issued that clarion call, voter suppression has been one of the focuses of Republicans. Republicans in every branch at every level have been working hard to keep the turnout down.
Last June the Supreme Court with new Justice Neil Gorsuch upheld an Ohio law aimed at suppressing the vote on a 5-4 partisan vote. From Vox:
“Ohio uses a multi-step approach to do this: First, it waits for someone to not vote for two years. Then it mails them a prepaid return card to make sure the would-be voter still lives at the same address. If the state does not get the card back and the person does not vote in any election for four more years, the state assumes the person has moved and removes the person’s voter registration from the rolls, citing a change of residence.
Opponents of the system argue that it violates the federal National Voter Registration Act and Help America Vote Act, which restrict a state from removing someone from the rolls just because the person failed to vote. Opponents also claim that the system is unreasonable, in part because many people who received the return cards simply threw them away without responding — not because they no longer live at the residences, but because they may not have known what the cards were for.
The Supreme Court’s Husted v. A. Philip Randolph Institute ruling concluded, however, that Ohio’s voter purge system did not violate federal laws. The Court found that Ohio’s system uses a lack of voting as just one piece of evidence, along with the lack of response to the prepaid return card, to trigger a person’s removal from the rolls. Since a person not voting is not the sole basis for removal from the rolls, the Court said, it’s legal under federal law.”
The reasoning behind all of the various Republican voter suppression laws is “voter fraud.” Voter fraud is in reality nearly non-existent problem. You may remember that a woman in the Des Moines area was caught trying to vote twice in 2016. Despite Republicans’ fervid imagination of hordes of non-citizens making our elections jokes, voter fraud almost never happens.
Again from Vox:
“There have been multiple investigations — by academics, journalists, and nonpartisan think tanks — into voter fraud. None have found evidence of widespread fraud or anything close to it.
Loyola Law School professor Justin Levitt studied voter impersonation, the major type of fraud that strict voter ID laws and voter purges in part aim to curtail. Levitt found 35 total credible accusations between 2000 and 2014, constituting a few hundred ballots at most. During this 15-year period, more than 800 million ballots were cast in national general elections and hundreds of millions more were cast in primary, municipal, special, and other elections. “
That calculates to .000004375%.
Fortunately, since the Supreme Court made this decision after many state legislatures had already disbanded for the year installing and implementing them in other states will have to be delayed until the legislatures reconvene. You can bet that implementing some type of system that emulates Ohio’s voter purging system will be high on many Republican agendas next winter.
Which brings us to this fall’s election in Iowa. Considering the kind of laws the Iowa legislature has passed the past two years it is certainly very reasonable to expect that a majority Republican legislature in both houses of the Iowa legislature would pass some form Ohio’s law.
If a Republican legislature passes a bill similar to Ohio’s and the governor’s seat is held by a Republican (Reynolds) you can almost bet that the Republican governor will sign that bill into law in a New York second.
Also consider that the Ohio law is only a guide. Iowa, for instance, could tighten up those rules to include anyone who misses one election no matter what level.
So think when you vote this fall that by voting for Republicans especially for legislature or governor you may be making it much harder for yourself to vote in the future.