Friday, February 5, 2016

Despite What the Left Would Lead You to Believe, the Boogeyman Does Not Exist

The North Carolina voter ID law is in the process of being challenged in court by leftist opponents from all over the state and beyond. They continue to contest voter ID laws with everything they can due to their stated belief that it will disenfranchise voters or more cynically, as a strategy to turn out their base. 

Let’s get something really clear; the argument that voters are turned away from the polls by lack of an ID is a flat out falsehood. Look back to 2014, when the NY Times noted that the arguments fall flat on their face. Yet, they continue their attack, dreaming up exaggerated numbers of those "potentially" affected, fear mongering, and encouraging racial divide and for what?

For now their focus is on NC as they continue to waste taxpayer money and judicial resources, all the while claiming that laws drafted and passed by state legislators to ensure the integrity of our election process are disenfranchising voters. As Opposing Views points out, here comes the boogeyman.

To hear those who oppose IDs tell it, voter ID laws are designed by malicious Republicans in back rooms, cackling as they take entire Democrat-leaning neighborhoods and cities out of play. According to the same people, poor and minority voters will be turned away by the hundreds or thousands as they try to vote, resulting in mass disenfranchisement.

That's a fantasy, or more appropriately, a boogeyman. Out of 36 states that have passed some form of voter ID law, there have been no instances of people turned away from the voting booth en masse. Sixteen of those states request IDs, but don't require them if voters can prove their identity by other means. Another 17 states don't require any form of identification.

In North Carolina, where officials are readying for the first year ballots are cast under a new voter-protection law, people without IDs can still vote if they can prove their identity by other means. They don't need driver's licenses to prove their identity -- they can vote with state-issued ID cards, military IDs or passports. Most states offer free help to voters who don't have photo IDs. All they have to do is reach out ahead of time.

Stopping vote fraud ensures a fair election system that both sides of the aisle should be vigorously pursuing. Citizens are "carded" for various reasons every single day in this country. The list is expansive and continuing to grow: the bank, the grocery store, flights, driving, and even work. 
Requiring voter ID is something so basic that it should have been put in place a long time ago.

Wednesday, February 3, 2016

Democrat Vote Fraud Allegations in Iowa Show Need for Partisian Observers

Following up on yesterday’s post, we have to again point out the hypocrisy of liberals on the issue of vote fraud.  As this story headlines, Iowa: Sanders Calls For Raw Vote Count Amid Reports Of Voter Fraud And Missing Votes:
Bernie Sanders has asked the Democratic Party to release a raw vote count from the Iowa caucuses due to concerns of voter fraud and missing votes.
Briefly, the details are:
Campaign aides for Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont said Monday night that the Democratic Party did not collect the results of 90 Iowa precincts, which is about 5 percent of all votes cast in the state, because the party had failed to properly staff the precincts.
Rania Batrice, a spokeswoman for the campaign based in Iowa, said that the party reached out to the campaigns of Mr. Sanders and Hillary Clinton and asked them to help tally the results. “It’s just offensive that they dropped the ball like this,” she said. “It’s ridiculous.”
While we do not know the merit of these allegations, it does point out the need for sunshine on the election process.  One of the best ways to guarantee sunshine is observers from both parties overseeing supposedly impartial election officials.  Often, poll watchers can help election officials.  While denying Sanders' allegations, the party needs exactly this sort of help as it is allegedly turning to the campaigns for answers:
"We have reached out to the campaigns for help in contacting the chairs for our outstanding precincts," the official said in a statement.
"We are not taking results from the campaigns. We are taking them from the chairs who are in these precincts."
The Iowa Democrats did not elaborate as to why the campaigns may have a better handle on where the party's precinct chairs are than the party itself.
While caucuses are a unique election system, elections generally are often messy affairs and the presence of trained observer, even a partisan one, can help with the process.

Tuesday, February 2, 2016

Vote Fraud Allegations Surface in Iowa

The Iowa caucuses have drawn to a close and the winners were announced. Yet, while the spotlight should be shifting on to New Hampshire, some continue to wonder if the vote was accurate. The alleged issue - vote fraud. The allegations are coming out of the Sanders camp after an extremely tight race with Clinton which she ultimately won by a small margin. The video of the event was initially recorded and broadcast by CSPAN2 and can be viewed here.  
Regardless of the merits of this particular case, we find it interesting that some on the left are claiming vote fraud, a problem they deny in general elections.  This shows the importance of open elections and monitors to ensure an honest election.  

Monday, February 1, 2016

Buckley. Defender of First Amendment Rights, Slayer of Political Equality Ideology.

Buckley v. Valeo has recently turned forty. This case may not be as recognizable as others in our lifetime, but its imperfect yet continuing role of protecting our rights under the First Amendment is unquestioned. One key but often forgotten aspect of Buckley is how it protects us from forced equality of speech. Former RNLA campaign finance blogger Paul Jossey points out that without it, the absurd idea of political equality in this country would have continued to proliferate.

On the positive side Buckley’s wending opinion cemented its place in First Amendment lore with a single line: “[T]he concept that government may restrict the speech of some elements of our society in order to enhance the relative voice of others is wholly foreign to the First Amendment.” Buckley thus rejected “political equality”—equity being decided by those in power—as a legitimate reason to subjugate individual speech rights. Instead government could only curtail speech in order to combat “corruption” or its “appearance.”

By forbidding government from rationing speech through equality, Buckley unshackled the political marketplace that has since flourished with competing and diverse voices. Contrarily the Court’s stance provided perpetual heartburn for a generation of would-be speech policers. Politicians who abhor criticism cite equality as a rationale to abate individual First Amendment rights. Academics—particularly the Harvard law faculty—have supplied intellectual support for their fight. 

Buckley changed the political landscape. In addition, it continues to protect our First Amendment rights by rejecting the irrationality of political equality in the United States political system.

Wednesday, January 27, 2016

Republican Wins in Maryland, Democrats Turn to Murderers, Rapists and Criminals to Prevent It From Happening Again

Maryland is commonly known as the “Free State” and yet many also know it as the “Old Line State”. The latter being a reference to the Maryland line's consistency and unwavering dedication during the American Revolution. As National Review discusses, Governor Larry Hogan is still attempting to “hold the line” in a battle that has been waging over a felon's "right to vote": 

If you aren’t willing to follow the law yourself, then you can’t demand a role in making the law for everyone else, which is what you do when you vote. We don’t let everyone vote — not children, not non-citizens, not the mentally incompetent, and not felons — because we have certain objective, minimum standards of responsibility and commitment to our laws that must be met before someone is given a role in the solemn enterprise of self-government. People who have committed a serious crime against their fellow citizens don’t meet those standards.

The right to vote can be restored to felons, but it should be done carefully, on a case-by-case basis after a person has shown that he or she has really turned over a new leaf, not automatically on the day someone walks out of prison — let alone when parole and probation have not yet been served. After all, the unfortunate truth is that most people who walk out of prison will be walking back in. Deep down, the Left knows all this; that’s why, though it is happy to let felons vote, it is somehow reluctant to restore their Second Amendment rights.
The real reason for this fight is not some noble cause for felons who have served their time.  It is pure crass politics to make it even harder for a Republican like Larry Hogan to win an election.  As a recent study concluded:
[A] study of how criminals vote found that most convicts register Democratic, a key reason in why liberal lawmakers and governors are eager for them to get back into the voting booth after their release.
“Democrats would benefit from additional ex-felon participation,” said the authoritative study in The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science.
As a new legislative session begins, Governor Hogan’s veto of the bill in question is under partisan fire. Democrats have continued their attempt override it. Let us hope that the Governor’s veto holds.   

Tuesday, January 26, 2016

My "Life Experiences" Made Me Vote Five Times

A man who voted as many as five times in an election, Robert D.Monroe, is attempting a unique defense for his likely crime.

Monroe, an insurance professional from Shorewood, may face a real challenge in convincing a judge that his mental condition was to blame for him voting illegally in five elections over the course of two years.

 Monroe 51, was originally charged in 2014 with 13 felony counts and pleaded no contest Monday to six of them.  Each is punishable by up to 18 months in prison.

Monroe blamed the double, and once quintuple, votes in 2011 and 2012 on fugue states, or periods of disassociative disorder. He blamed his disorder on a long series of life events, from watching his father have a heart attack at age 8 and surviving a serious car crash in high school, to witnessing sexual misconduct by a priest in college and the fallout of his brother's murder in 2000.

Mr. Monroe’s vote fraud was only discovered due to his blatant and repeated offenses. Unfortunately all of his illegal votes were counted and as result a number of voters were disenfranchised. Monroe’s case shows the ease with which vote fraud can be committed in a same day registration state such as Wisconsin.

Friday, January 22, 2016

Florida Governor Rick Scott to Speak at the RNLA Washington, D.C. Chapter Luncheon

The RNLA Is pleased to announce that Florida Governor Rick Scott will address our January D.C. Luncheon on January 27 at the Capitol Hill Club.

Governor Rick Scott is the 45th Governor of the great State of Florida.  As promised during his campaign, Scott is focused on creating jobs and turning Florida’s economy around.  After attending high school and community college, Gov. Scott enlisted in the United States Navy, where he served on active duty aboard the USS Glover as a radar man. The G.I. Bill enabled Gov. Scott to attend college and law school. While enrolled at the University of Missouri-Kansas City and working full-time at a local grocery store, Gov. Scott and Ann made their first significant foray into the business world by buying two Kansas City doughnut shops for Gov. Scott’s mother to manage. Following graduation from UMKC with a degree in business administration, Gov. Scott earned a law degree from Southern Methodist University.

Governor Scott is known as an innovator in business, health care, and politics.  His specialization was in health care mergers and acquisitions, and it was during his work on these transactions that he recognized how patients could be better served by improving hospital efficiency, lowering costs, and focusing on better outcomes.  Through his entrepreneurship, Gov. Scott developed a reputation in the health care industry for providing affordable, high quality care to patients.  As Governor, he brings a similar vision for quality and efficiency to benefit the people of Florida.
Governor Scott has been fighting for Florida by creating jobs and fighting to cut taxes. Since December 2010, Florida’s private sector has created more than 1 million jobs

[Last] November, the private sector added 35,600 jobs across Florida, resulting in 1,011,800 new private sector jobs created in the last five years. Florida’s unemployment rate also dropped to 5.0 percent, the lowest in seven years. Florida’s annual private sector job growth rate, now at 3.6 percent, has exceeded that of the nation since April 2012.

In his budget proposal, Governor Scott has included priorities including a $1 billion tax cut, $250 million for economic development, and a health care transparency proposal.

The Florida First budget cuts $1 billion in taxes including permanently eliminating the income tax on manufacturing and retail businesses, permanently eliminating the tax on manufacturing machinery and equipment, cutting the tax on commercial leases, extending the sales tax exemption on college textbooks, and implementing a 10-day back-to-school sales tax holiday and a 9-day disaster preparedness sales tax holiday.

For more information and to purchase tickets for our January D.C. luncheon, please click here