If there’s anything that’s predictable, it’s that the DFL’s fearmongering campaign will result in some outlandish statements. This article is proof of that. Here’s what Dan McGrath of TakeAction Minnesota recently said:
Dan McGrath, Executive Director of TakeAction Minnesota told reporters that “over the past week, we’ve learned a lot about who would lose if photo ID becomes law, over 700,000 eligible Minnesota voters, including seniors, low-income persons, students, people of color, disabled and rural Minnesotans. What hasn’t been discussed is who WINS when people can’t vote. That’s what this report outlines.”
The report’s key findings were reduced to two large charts that shows how banking executives put members of ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Council) in the House leadership with marching orders to push Voter ID legislation. ALEC member Rep. Mary Kiffmeyer dutifully agreed and introduced a measure as soon as the new majority took office.
The first chart showcased an extensive network of money flowing from banks down to bank-led political entities including Minnesota Forward, the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, the Minnesota Business Partnership, the Bankers’ Association, and the Coalition of Minnesota Businesses, who then financed independent expenditure campaigns instrumental in electing the new Republican majorities. Jon Campbell, Wells Fargo Executive Vice-President, chairs the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce. Richard Davis, President of U.S. Bank, serves as President of the Minnesota Business Partnership.
That spin is dizzying. It’s filled with Minnesota progressives’ biggest boogeymen. It’s devoid of facts. For what seems like the 8,322nd time, let’s review reality, starting with the alleged 700,000 Minnesotans who’ll be disenfranchised as a result of Photo ID. Here’s what Judge Barker ruled in the Crawford v. Marion County Board of Elections case:
After discovery, District Judge Barker prepared a comprehensive 70-page opinion explaining her decision to grant defendants’ motion for summary judgment. 458 F. Supp. 2d 775 (SD Ind. 2006). She found that petitioners had “not introduced evidence of a single, individual Indiana resident who will be unable to vote as a result of SEA 483 or who will have his or her right to vote unduly burdened by its requirements.” Id., at 783.
She rejected “as utterly incredible and unreliable” an expert’s report that up to 989,000 registered voters in Indiana did not possess either a driver’s license or other acceptable photo identification. Id., at 803. She estimated that as of 2005, when the statute was enacted, around 43,000 Indiana residents lacked a state-issued driver’s license or identification card.
The Democratic Party of Indiana said that 989,000 people in Indiana didn’t have Photo ID. The judge said that their statement was “utterly incredible and unreliable” before ruling that the total was 43,000.
Judge Barker then stated that petitioners had “not introduced evidence of a single, individual Indiana resident who will be unable to vote as a result of SEA 483 or who will have his or her right to vote unduly burdened by its requirements.”
In short, Judge Barker said that the Democratic Party of Indiana a) didn’t present proof that anyone would be denied the right to vote and b) dramatically inflated the number of people who didn’t have proper ID.
With the validity of voter suppression accusations in question, the rest of TAM’s statement is fantasy mixed with hilarity. According to TAM’s logic, if it can be called that, a cabal of bankers gave money to GOP politicians for the express purpose of suppressing the vote. That, in turn, would lead to GOP majorities in the Legislature, which, in turn, would lead to these banks unfairly profiting on the backs of the so-called 99%.
That logic is filled with more holes than Swiss cheese. This shows that the DFL and their special interest allies won’t hesitate in creating boogeymen to peddle their propaganda.
TAM’s statement doesn’t explain how banks would profit from having a GOP legislature and a DFL governor. The only explanation that fits is if Gov. Dayton agreed with allegedly greedy legislators in helping banks make obsene profits.
That isn’t just foolish. It’s preposterous.