Obama Campaign Sues to Restrict Military Voting

[OutHouse]

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog...oting_by_military_comments.html#disqus_thread

President Barack Obama, along with many Democrats, likes to say that, while they may disagree with the GOP on many issues related to national security, they absolutely share their admiration and dedication to members of our armed forces. Obama, in particular, enjoys being seen visiting troops and having photos taken with members of our military. So, why is his campaign and the Democrat party suing to restrict their ability to vote in the upcoming election?

On July 17th, the Obama for America Campaign, the Democratic National Committee, and the Ohio Democratic Party filed suit in OH to strike down part of that state's law governing voting by members of the military. Their suit said that part of the law is "arbitrary" with "no discernible rational basis."

Currently, Ohio allows the public to vote early in-person up until the Friday before the election. Members of the military are given three extra days to do so. While the Democrats may see this as "arbitrary" and having "no discernible rational basis," I think it is entirely reasonable given the demands on servicemen and women's time and their obligations to their sworn duty.

The National Defense Committee reports:


[f]or each of the last three years, the Department of Defense’s Federal Voting Assistance Program has reported to the President and the Congress that the number one reason for military voter disenfranchisement is inadequate time to successfully vote.

I think it's unconscionable that we as a nation wouldn't make it as easy as possible for members of the military to vote. They arguably have more right to vote than the rest of us, since it is their service and sacrifice that ensures we have the right to vote in the first place.

If anyone proposes legislation to combat voter fraud, Democrats will loudly scream that the proposal could "disenfranchise" some voter, somewhere. We must ensure, they argue, that voting is easy and accessible to every single voter. Every voter, that is, except the men and women of our military.

Make no mistake, the Democrat lawsuit is intended to disenfranchise some unknown number of military voters. The judge should reject it with prejudice.

 

[techs]

Post from a blog is a just a blog.


Ignore this thread until the OP shows us a valid link.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Post from a blog is a just a blog.


Ignore this thread until the OP shows us a valid link.

Do you see this thread as "arbitrary" and having "no discernible rational basis"?

 

[dmcowen674]

Obama Campaign Sues to Restrict Military Voting

Make no mistake, the Democrat lawsuit is intended to disenfranchise some unknown number of military voters. The judge should reject it with prejudice.

If the Obama Campaign found a way to knock out brainwashed Republicans from the Military more power to them.

 

[First]

lol American Thinker.

 

[woolfe9999]

I read the OP's blog. Let me see if I understand this. I'll assume, for the sake of argument, that what the blog discusses is factually true. The administration opposes a law that provides special voting preferences to members of the military, one which gives them more days to vote, a preference which can only be intended to give the GOP an advantage in the Ohio vote.

This isn't disrespecting the military. It's asking that they obey the same rules as everyone else.

And the author's attempt at arguing hypocrisy with voter ID laws is a joke. The administration is not trying to disenfranchise people in the military. It's asking that they have the exact same set of rules applied to them as everyone else. This is not inconsistent with opposing voter ID laws.

 

[Matt1970]

Anyone remember the Florida recount hearings? Al Gore was on TV saying count every vote while his lawyers were doing everything they can to get Millitary Absentee Ballots taken out of the recount. Dems have a history of trying to supress the Military vote.

 

[techs]

Anyone remember the Florida recount hearings? Al Gore was on TV saying count every vote while his lawyers were doing everything they can to get Millitary Absentee Ballots taken out of the recount.

Shens.

There is still no evidence of any of this happening.

Useless thread is useless.

 

[Matt1970]

Shens.

There is still no evidence of any of this happening.

Useless thread is useless.

Kinda hard to find crap from 12 years ago.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-campaign-trying-to-block-military-votes.html

Governor George W Bush comfortably won the overseas absentee vote by 1,380 votes to Vice-President Al Gore's 750 but, after vigorous challenges by Gore canvassers, 1,527 of the postal ballots, many of them from soldiers and sailors on active service, were rejected. Democratic tellers were advised to block ballots if there was no clearly legible postmark on the envelope, which is frequently the case when letters are posted from military bases. Normally, these ballots pass unchallenged.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Florida,_2000

Democratic lawyer Mark Herron authored a memo distributed to Democratic election canvassers on how to invalidate military absentee ballots. The Herron Memo stated postmark and "point of origin" criteria Herron maintained could be used to invalidate military ballots. However, the Herron Memo was in line with a letter sent out by Secretary of State Kathryn Harris which stated that if a postmark was not present on the military ballots that the ballots had to be thrown out. Florida Attorney General Bob Butterworth, a Gore backer, later told the counties to go back and reconsider those ballots without a postmark.[13]

 

[techs]

Kinda hard to find crap from 12 years ago.

I was calling shens on the op. Posting a blog and pretending is actual news.
I called shens on the whole thread until there is some evidence this is actually happening.

 

[Bowfinger]

If the Obama Campaign found a way to knock out brainwashed Republicans from the Military more power to them.

No Dave, wrong answer. That just puts you on the same level as the slime on the right working to suppress votes from left-leaning demographics. In America, every adult citizen (with very narrow exceptions) has the right to vote, even if you think they are brainwashed. That's the way democracy is supposed to work, warts and all.


I'm not sure I understand what the issue is here. Why the Obama campaign cares if military members get a few extra days? I agree there's no reason they should be given special treatment in this regard ... but so what? It doesn't seem to warrant legal action to stop it. If anything, I would think they should sue to extend the window for all voters, to treat everyone equally not by restricting voting to the privileged but by extending the privilege to all. Perhaps a less biased source could offer additional insight.

 

[MonkeyK]

it's real. And, as usual, a misinterpretation. The suit seeks equality by offering that all OH voters be allowed to vote early.

http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/ObamaforAmericavHustedcomplaint.pdf

 

[MonkeyK]

OK, worse than a misinterpretation. The suit is a complaint that early voting should not have been selectively removed from non-military voters.

 

[techs]

it's real. And, as usual, a misinterpretation. The suit seeks equality by offering that all OH voters be allowed to vote early.

http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/litigation/documents/ObamaforAmericavHustedcomplaint.pdf

OK, worse than a misinterpretation. The suit is a complaint that early voting should not have been selectively removed from non-military voters.

So basically the OP has been massively pwned for posting a propaganda piece that actually meant the opposite of what was posted.

Shame on the Americanthinker website.
Can we get a ban on that site as a source in P&N?

 

[woolfe9999]

No Dave, wrong answer. That just puts you on the same level as the slime on the right working to suppress votes from left-leaning demographics. In America, every adult citizen (with very narrow exceptions) has the right to vote, even if you think they are brainwashed. That's the way democracy is supposed to work, warts and all.


I'm not sure I understand what the issue is here. Why the Obama campaign cares if military members get a few extra days? I agree there's no reason they should be given special treatment in this regard ... but so what? It doesn't seem to warrant legal action to stop it. If anything, I would think they should sue to extend the window for all voters, to treat everyone equally not by restricting voting to the privileged but by extending the privilege to all. Perhaps a less biased source could offer additional insight.

That's the whole point. There's no reason to have different rules for voters in different occupations. Military overseas can cast their votes by absentee ballot just like any other citizen overseas. Similarly, those not overseas should have the same rules applied as everyone else.

But they can't sue to increase the window for everyone else. They are challenging a law that extends the window only for the military, and trying to enjoin enforcement of that law. They can't ask the court to instead expand the window for other voters because that would be asking them to quite literally legislate from the bench. The courts can throw out a law if it is unconstitutional. They cannot, however, fix a constitutional infirmity by adding new provisions.

 

[EagleKeeper]

The suit is also explicitly stating that it is targeted against Democratic voters

 

[Darwin333]

I read the OP's blog. Let me see if I understand this. I'll assume, for the sake of argument, that what the blog discusses is factually true. The administration opposes a law that provides special voting preferences to members of the military, one which gives them more days to vote, a preference which can only be intended to give the GOP an advantage in the Ohio vote.

This isn't disrespecting the military. It's asking that they obey the same rules as everyone else.

And the author's attempt at arguing hypocrisy with voter ID laws is a joke. The administration is not trying to disenfranchise people in the military. It's asking that they have the exact same set of rules applied to them as everyone else. This is not inconsistent with opposing voter ID laws.

How does giving all .mil members 3 extra days to vote be only intended to give the GOP an advantage?

And I don't find it unreasonable to give military members we send to friggen Iraq and Afghanistan a few extra days for their ballots to get here.

 

[mpo]

A little further to the north:

Justice Department Announces Lawsuit to Protect Rights of Military and Overseas Voters in Michigan
WASHINGTON – The Justice Department announced today that it has filed a lawsuit against the state of Michigan and its chief elections officials to help ensure that military service members, their family members and U.S. citizens living overseas have the opportunity to participate fully in Michigan’s Aug. 7, 2012, federal primary election and Sept. 5, 2012, federal special primary election.

 

[MonkeyK]

The bills in question do not give extra days to the military. They remove three days from non-military voters.

 

[Brainonska511]

How does giving all .mil members 3 extra days to vote be only intended to give the GOP an advantage?

And I don't find it unreasonable to give military members we send to friggen Iraq and Afghanistan a few extra days for their ballots to get here.

In person early voting != absentee ballots.

 

[blankslate]

That's the whole point. There's no reason to have different rules for voters in different occupations. Military overseas can cast their votes by absentee ballot just like any other citizen overseas. Similarly, those not overseas should have the same rules applied as everyone else.

I can see an exception for military members who are actually deployed in Afghanistan or somewhere else and not on dwell time at their duty station.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

That's the whole point. There's no reason to have different rules for voters in different occupations. Military overseas can cast their votes by absentee ballot just like any other citizen overseas. Similarly, those not overseas should have the same rules applied as everyone else.

But they can't sue to increase the window for everyone else. They are challenging a law that extends the window only for the military, and trying to enjoin enforcement of that law. They can't ask the court to instead expand the window for other voters because that would be asking them to quite literally legislate from the bench. The courts can throw out a law if it is unconstitutional. They cannot, however, fix a constitutional infirmity by adding new provisions.

People in the military do not have the luxury of changing their schedules as most civilians do. The comment was made that extra time isn't needed. Well most certainly civilians don't need it. Since reality wins the effect is to disenfranchise some in the armed forces, but thats ok. Just don't ask for voter id after having a year to get it.

Not everyone has to be treated equally. There is the concept of reasonable accommodation, well if one is a favored group. Soldiers shouldn't be given consideration because they might vote against Obama.

 

[kage69]

People in the military do not have the luxury of changing their schedules as most civilians do.

I've been mulling this thread over for awhile now, and the more I do it keeps boiling down in my head to that exact point.

While I don't think it's callous or unpatriotic to have ground crew in Bangor abide by the same election laws as civilians, I also think it's only right to extend a little extra effort to the grunt humpin a SAW around the more lovely areas of the Helmand province.
As a few others have suggested already I see, I think there's a good compromise here.
No new provision, but let's throw our war fighters some kind of exemption or allowance - for active duty deployed in war zones only.

 

[micrometers]

The problem is that Republicans are restricting early voting for everyone else while extending it for military members.

Why restrict early voting for everyone else? "voting fraud" honestly makes little sense. There is little profit to be made in it, it requires a lot of work and coordination to pull off.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The problem is that Republicans are restricting early voting for everyone else while extending it for military members.

Why restrict early voting for everyone else? "voting fraud" honestly makes little sense. There is little profit to be made in it, it requires a lot of work and coordination to pull off.

Then sue the state to change the days. Instead this is timed to disenfranchise servicemen. As has been explained those in the armed forces are at times unable to accommodate their schedules. If someone thinks their should be a change then go for it. Until then reasonable accommodation is reasonable.