High court rejects GOP bid in Ohio voting dispute

Discussion in 'Politics' started by kckndrgn, Oct 17, 2008.

  1. kckndrgn

    kckndrgn Monkey+++ Moderator Emeritus Founding Member


    WASHINGTON (AP) - The Supreme Court sided Friday with Ohio's top elections official in a dispute with the state Republican Party over voter registrations. The justices overruled a federal appeals court that had ordered Ohio's top elections official to do more to help counties verify voter eligibility.
    Secretary of State Jennifer Brunner, a Democrat, faced a deadline of Friday to set up a system to provide local officials with names of newly registered voters whose driver's license numbers or Social Security numbers on voter registration forms don't match records in other government databases.
    Ohio Republicans contended the information for counties would help prevent fraud. Brunner said the GOP is trying to disenfranchise voters.
    In a brief unsigned opinion, the justices said they were not commenting on whether Ohio is complying with a provision of the Help America Vote Act of 2002 that lays out requirements for verifying voter eligibility.
    Instead, they said they were granting Brunner's request because it appears that the law does not allow private entities, like the Ohio GOP, to file suit to enforce the provision of the law at issue.
    About 200,000 of 666,000 voters who have registered in Ohio since Jan. 1 have records that don't match. Brunner has said the discrepancies most likely stem from innocent clerical errors rather than fraud but has set up a verification plan.
    McCain campaign manager Rick Davis said lower court rulings have clearly said the HAVA regulations require the secretary of state to match against the list, find where there's been fraud and inconsistencies and report them to counties.
    "Why in the world would that not happen? We have the technology, the budget, the means and the manpower to make that happen. Do we really want to have to find out after the fact that we had counties that would have been decided one way or another because the secretary of state didn't bother doing the job the HAVA required?" Davis told reporters on a conference call. "I think the secretary of state ought to do her job," he added.


    This is NOT good! The supreme court has just OK'd voter fraud. Not good at all!!
  2. Tracy

    Tracy Insatiably Curious Moderator Founding Member

    This has been on my mind, too.

    Registration is one thing... Voting is another.

    I'll admit my ignorance as to how the rest of the states votes are run (we all have to vote by mail, here). Are there still ID verification at the polls? If so; wouldn't that catch any false voters?
  3. kckndrgn

    kckndrgn Monkey+++ Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    HMM, yup, last time I voted had to show my ID. But now riddle me this, how are the dead voting?[gone] We seem to have that problem her in TN with the demons, er democrRATS.
    I would assume most of the voter fraud is done by mail, but that's just a wild guess on my part.
  4. Tracy

    Tracy Insatiably Curious Moderator Founding Member

    Some issues are just too important to take lying down. :lol:

    I must've missed the part where dead people were voting. That's really happening?

    I was always under the assumption that no matter how many times I registered, that I would only receive one ballot in the mail because their database would cross-reference and update my record. Since I've only registered once, my assumption hasn't been tested. Hmmmm.
  5. kckndrgn

    kckndrgn Monkey+++ Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    Dead people, cats, dogs, you name it.

    I think it says in the article that the person in charge of the election commision didn't want to take the necessary steps to do the cross reference checks, pure lazyness, just like a DEM
  6. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    The ruling didn't rule out forcing the state to carry out the requirements for checking registrations. What it did, slippery or not, was rule that the GOP (as a private entity) has no standing to institute the suit. I do not have a clue what entity would be allowed to sue other than the AG or some other civic organization. Like that will happen in a donkey state.
  7. E.L.

    E.L. Moderator of Lead Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    Imagine that, requiring someone to show proof before voting. That kind of makes it more difficult for all of the dead, the felons, the illegals, and the fictitious characters to have a say in our electons. It would be ashamed to put ACORN out of business wouldn't it?

    Thankfully here in my voting district, you are required to show proof before you are allowed to vote. Hell, they want picture ID and your voting card. That's the way it should be.
  8. Seacowboys

    Seacowboys Senior Member Founding Member

    I think you should have even a stricter criteria to vote:
    1. you must be a land owner
    2. you must pass a civics exam
    These idiots don't even realize what they are voting for.
  9. ghrit

    ghrit Bad company Administrator Founding Member

    Echos rather closely the original definition of "citizen" established rather early in the Republic.

  10. Tango3

    Tango3 Aimless wanderer

    +1 Dems are encouraging their "cadre" to "vote early" then go back home and drag others to the polls.I'm sure the dragees' considered all the issues before voting.[BSf][lolol]
  11. Tracy

    Tracy Insatiably Curious Moderator Founding Member

    Agreed. I really enjoyed going to the polls and handing my card to the little lady. Now; I get an envelope in the mail with a reply envelope inside. Sadly, it seems more like junk mail than a privilege.
  12. E.L.

    E.L. Moderator of Lead Moderator Emeritus Founding Member

    Bring back the poll tax!
  13. FalconDance

    FalconDance Neighborhood Witch

    Could be like our 21 yr old son who registered to vote at 18 but who has yet to get his voter's card. We've called, gone to the office in person, everything, repeatedly. The only time we've got any sort of answer was when a friend inquired!!! The voter's office then said it was because the post office had returned his card to them as undeliverable. Now, we've/he's lived at the same exact address for over eight years and had the same PO box for longer than that (town is only 6 square blocks). Seems to me someone dropped the ball and no one wants to 'fess up and make ammends.

    Oh, and by the way, we found all this out this past spring at local election times. He requested his voter's card ..... and has yet to see it. *sigh* Pretty bad when a dead dog can vote but a born-and-bred American can't get the damned verification needed to!
  14. BAT1

    BAT1 Cowboys know no fear

    There needs to be a total investigation here and the whole election process has to be contested. There are thousands of elligible voters being turned away through a rigged process that is registering felons and stolen identities. I will not follow the sheeple off the cliff into Communism. The news media and the courts are covering for traitorist criminals.
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary