Ohio Narrows Voting Rights

The GOP-controlled Ohio House voted yesterday on a party-line vote to narrow the rights of voters in this state. These efforts are part of a nation-wide plan by the Republican Party to marginalize the old, young, poor and inner city voters prior to the 2012 presidential election. ‘Let Freedom Ring’ is not one of their favorite phrases. This action reminds me of the current unrest that we see in Egypt, Syria, Yemen and other places in that region of the world.  People yearning to be free, but their rights withheld. Yesterday’s actions by the Ohio House makes a mockery of that statement on the Statue of Liberty in the New York Harbor.

The Toledo Blade says, “The bill is aimed at reducing the number of provisional ballots cast, shortening absentee and in-person early voting periods, and restricting circulation of ballot issue petitions. It would prohibit the practice of Lucas and other mostly urban counties of mass-mailing absentee ballot applications to registered voters.”

A local House Democrat said of this bill, “It would suppress the vote, especially the early vote to gain a political advantage and consolidate political power,” he said. “This bill is bare-knuckled, in-your-face, political hardball, and has absolutely no place in Ohio law.”

The GOP likes to disenfranchise voters who they know will not vote for their candidates. That’s why I see an alarming parallel between the suppression of civil rights in Muslim countries through the Middle East and the efforts nationwide of the Republican Party to do the same in our nation. The pertinent question arises:  Will The People stand for this manipulation of rights, roll over and play dead, or will they fight this at that very same ballot box?


18 thoughts on “Ohio Narrows Voting Rights

  1. I don’t want to get UTF all defensive again, but it seems that the US really needs to work at introducing democracy at home.

    As my dad said, Constitutions are lovely things. The Soviets have a constitution that sounds really wonderful, but they are still a dictatorship.

  2. t took a long time to struggle to guarantee the right of all citizens to vote. It’s taken a very short time for the teabag agenda to set it back 100 years.
    The way these new restrictions are going to be enforced is the key. The wording is one thing, the method of enforcement is an entirely different matter.
    Again, we are manipulated by fear to subvert our own interests

  3. We are not a democracy, Laci and we never were! For someone who claims to be so intelligent you can come up with some ignorant statements! We are republic where people are represented by their congressmen and senators and not by mob rule, which is democracy.

  4. Why would anyone vote absentee if he or she is going to be home and able to get to the polls? Plenty of union buses and other democratic operations will pick them up and even help them vote if need be.

    I once took a woman who couldn’t walk to vote. They brought a machine out to my car and let her cast her ballot there. So why is requiring able-bodied people to show up on election day such a hardship? I have voted absentee only once and was really afraid my ballot would be lost. I guess the democrats can’t go to the graveyards and bring in their ballots now. Unless the dearly departed was just put into the ground and they can prop him up and speak for him by saying he has a problem staying awake.

    Why don’t you look at the stuff going on outside your own town and state and find some good going on? I’ll admit Obama has pretty much mucked up the world but there has to be a good story out there someplace, or do you just like to be negative all the time.

    Open your eyes old man and own up to what’s really going on and what you really see instead of blaming just one side. Neither party is clean and the old saying is “To the victor go the spoils”. You don’t like it? Then vote to change it. And bring your dead buddies with you.

  5. Maybe the U.S. has already gone too far “at introducing democracy at home.”

    Should people who pay no taxes have the right to vote?

    Since the Supreme Court case establishing corporations as “people”, should corporations have any standing in the electoral process when they pay no taxes?

  6. It’s been a long time since my philosophy course in logic. Do you remember the syllogism? Let’s try this one:

    The right to participate in the electoral process is given to taxpayers only..
    (major premise)
    Corporations pay no taxes…
    (minor premise)
    Therefore, corporations who pay no taxes are not entitled to participate in the electoral process.

    LOL, M_R, what do you think…Is this a proper or improper syllogism?

  7. There is a movement in Congress for a Constitutional Amendment to circumvent the United case. It would say a corporation is not a “person”.

    Is this the way to go?

  8. England is not a democracy either, Laci. England elects representatives to the House of Commons from electoral districts, much the same as the United States does. What the beauty of the English government system is, it makes any law that the House passes constitutional as England has no written constitution. The “will” of the people cannot be thwarted by an upper house, the House of Lords, by any Supreme Court, or by an executive(the Queen/King.

    Unfortunately, for the United States federal government structure the English
    governmental structure did not finalize until the twentieth century. This was too late for eighteenth U.S. offspring to adopt Mother’s good government, but Canada, India, and Australia were “good” children and adopted her prime minister form of governmental ways…..

  9. What is the number of angels that can dance on the head of a pin? Recall that one, gentlemen? It is just as obtuse as reminding us that we live in a republic rather than a democracy.

    Cal- After reading your comments, I do not yet get whether you support the new voting proposals set up by the GOP-led House in Ohio. Could you nail your views for me?

    UptheFlag- regarding any further action by the SCOTUS- you are living in the past, my friend, if you really believe that the SCOTUS will rescind its landmark ruling making corporations ‘people.’ The days when SCOTUS was a neutral body are gone.

  10. Cal, You obviously aren’t very smart since you miss that I am being sarcastic.

    Democracy obviously does not exist in the US.

    And you, Cal, are a follower of one of the biggest pieces of astroturf on the planet: the Tea Party movement. If you want an example of extreme anti-democratic, corporocracy–It’s the tea party.

    Viva Citizens United!

  11. NO, UTF, they wanted separation of powers.

    The parliamentary system is called reponsible government for a reason. There are better checks and balances. A rogue justice can’t rewrite the Constitution with spurious interpretations.

    Of course, think of how long US governments would last if there were votes of no confidence. US Democracy would be like Italy’s.

    Probably far more changes of government.

  12. Actually, UTF, there is an English Constitutional Structure, but it is not written in such a way that it becomes “Gospel”. The British constitution is embodied in the written form, within statutes, court judgments, and treaties. The constitution has other unwritten sources, including parliamentary constitutional conventions and royal prerogatives.

    There is the rule of law that no person is above the law, that no one can be punished by the state except for a breach of the law, and that no one can be convicted of breaching the law except in the manner set forth by the law itself.

    “Mother” England has learned from its history, while the foolish child continues to make the same mistakes.

    1. That is why you’re a subject and we’re citizens. Maybe you should fix GB Laci instead of trying to “fix” America? Last time I was in the UK everyone was ranting that your govt was granting sharia law equal footing and seperate courts as British law in your own country!
      Don’t bother preaching to us when you’re government is ceding your rights to foreigners who are sucking you dry while shitting on your culture!
      …while you let it happen!

      1. Sepp, of course, states half-truths.

        Lord Phillips, the most senior judge in England and Wales, has said that principles of sharia law could play a role in some parts of the legal system. Western law confines itself largely to matters relating to crime, contract, civil relationships and individual rights.

        Sharia is however concerned with more. Sharia rulings have been developed to help Muslims understand how they should lead every aspect of their lives according to God’s wishes. All sorts of things in daily life. For example, many young Muslims ask themselves what they should do if colleagues invite them to the pub after work or college.

        Many people would of course make up their own mind about the appropriate course of action. But others may turn to a Sharia scholar for advice.

        Muslim Arbitration Tribunal runs sharia courts in the UK taking advantage of a clause in the Arbitration Act 1996. Under the act, the sharia courts are classified as arbitration tribunals. The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case.

        Since Sepp says he is for minimal government intrusion< I don't see why he isn't applauding the fact that Muslims are exercising their choice to use sharia courts for arbitration.

        But, we know that sepp is an ignorant racist. We don't need to paint him as a racist we can just read his blog to see his is a xenophobic dickhead.

        I hate telling you, sepp, but the US also has sharia courts. Like the US, they also act as arbitration panels. Unless you are a muslim, or do business with muslims, the likelihood of being hauled before a Sharia court is nil.

        Too bad you can't move to Nazi Germany where you would be a whole lot happier than the US if it followed its Constitution.

        Of course, we know you would like to see the US become a facist state, sepp.

  13. I feel like I’m coming lately to the party of this discussion.

    I have written extensively over on Penigma about the myth of voter fraud, particularly the myth that it has contributed in even the most minute way to altering any election much less so in favor of Democrats.

    It is a myth as insane and as disproven as the birther hysteria over Obama not being a natural born American citizen.

    There is a clear pattern of which voters are affected by these so-called anti-voter fraud changes; they consistently make it more difficult, and disenfranchise, legal voters who are more likely to vote Democratic.

    They NEVER EVER address any genuine problem. They are cumbersome, and they cost a lot of money – A LOT of money that could and should be better spent in other ways.

    I’ve made a hobby out of busting false stories of voter fraud in my own state of MN – and what a kick it has been doing so. The most recent one was that disabled voters in Crow Wing County MN were not voting but rather their aides were voting for them.

    It got a lot of coverage on Fox Nuissance and other right wing propaganda outlets. What didn’t get coverage was the finding by the REPUBLICAN County attorney that there was no such voter fraud as what had been alleged.

    In fact, the person making the claim to have witnessed voter fraud wasn’t even in the court house when the people in question voted.

    But hey – don’t let little details like that stop a great right wing myth!

    1. Voter fraud like the ACORN chapter in Cleveland paying people with crack to fill out fake voter registrations and the idiot from Defiance who got caught?
      Mythical voter fraud where interest groups keep getting nailed buying votes? Or, providing free lunches in exchange?

      Yeah dog, it would be a great Fox news “myth” if your sloppy leftist friends didn’t keep getting nailed doing it!

      It isn’t the GOP who has earned the reputation for dead voters voting nor, the “vote early vote often” slogan.

  14. Speaking of the Constitution – and those who are clueless but get a lot of mileage promoting their false view of the U.S. Constitution gentlemen may I direct your attention briefly here:


    for your entertainment and ……enlightenment? Nah. Just entertainment.

    However, I do think that this event in MN, relating to the U.S. Constitution and the wacko positions on the Right towards it, WILL be very significant in the 2012 elections and in all of the campaigns between now and election day.

    Enjoy! (and comment if you like it, please!)

  15. M_R:

    ” UptheFlag- regarding any further action by the SCOTUS- you are living in the past, my friend, if you really believe that the SCOTUS will rescind its landmark ruling making corporations ‘people.’ The days when SCOTUS was a neutral body are gone.”

    I don’t believe that I wrote that SCOTUS would change the United decision…What I said is that there is a movement to pass an amendment to the Constitution to declare corporations is not a person.

    However, SCOTUS does reverse decisions. E.G., Plessy vs. Ferguson by Brown vs. The School Board of Topeka, Kansas. It does happen! It appears this can be accomplished with just one conservative vacancy on the Court.
    Wouldn’t that fight be a hoot in the Senate?

Comments are closed.