The DFL’s phalanx of special interest allies have announced that they’ll be filing a lawsuit to keep a Photo ID constitutional amendment question off this fall’s ballot. When it comes to those lawsuits attempting to keep Photo ID off this fall’s ballot, I’d pay money to watch Common Cause MN attempt to prove voter disenfranchisement:

Dean said his group may also consider a complaint of voter disenfranchisement.

Good luck with that, Mr. Dean. There’s no arguing that requiring a state-issued Photo ID will take extra effort on voters’ behalf. That said, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a) getting Photo ID isn’t unduly burdensome and b) the states have a legitimate interest in preventing voter fraud.

That’s a polite way of saying a) voter fraud is real and b) states have a substantive, legitimate right to take reasonable steps to prevent voter fraud.

The best thing Common Cause MN could decide is to not pursue this. When Common Cause MN and the LWV-MN lose this lawsuit, which they will, they’ll be exposed as political hacks for the DFL. Their reputation, what little is left of it, won’t be worth much.

First, Common Cause MN and the LWV-MN can’t prove that it’s impossible to obtain Photo ID. That’s the first benchmark Common Cause MN and the LWV-MN must meet. If it’s proven that the 715,000 people they’re constantly citing, they will have lost the battle and the war.

The minute that obtaining a state-issued photo ID is deemed possible, it becomes a finding of fact. The minute that finding of fact happens, Common Cause MN’s and the LWV-MN’s reputations will be ruined.

If Photo ID becomes part of Minnesota’s Constitution, voters will have sent the message that the DFL isn’t listening to the will of the people. The DFL will have sent the message that they’ll ignore the will of the people despite verifiable proof that there is a voter fraud problem. Also, the DFL special interests will have said that they don’t take voter fraud seriously.

That’s a terrible message to send in a world riddled with ACORN-caused voter registration fraud. Simply put, it’s a message that says the DFL won’t listen to the will of the people on one of the biggest issues of our time.

I’d wish the DFL good luck defending that on the campaign trail this fall. I’d wish that if I didn’t want them to lose, that is.

Tags: , , , , , ,

9 Responses to “I’d pay to see this”

  • eric z says:

    Yes, but would you pay fifty bucks for your photo, with Newt Gingrich?

  • J. Ewing says:

    OK, let’s make THAT a requirement to vote~! :-)

  • Patrick says:

    Just heard about this on the news: Won’t this disenfranchise some of the test takers? Can’t wait for the left to scream the same battle cry as they do do in the voter photo ID issue.

  • walter hanson says:

    That might be a long trial when they have the 715,000 witnesses testify. Wait a minute I heard in Indiana when they made this claim the side pressing the lawsuit couldn’t find a single voter who couldn’t vote because of their law.

    Walter Hanson
    Minneapolis, MN

  • Kristin says:

    I love the irony of the name of this blog. yeah. Let’s let freedom ring and make sure that every citizen who has the right to vote is allowed to vote instead of putting up costly blocks. Let freedom ring for sure.

  • Gary Gross says:

    Kristin, Let’s prevent illegal voters from voting. Letting illegal votes cancel out legally cast votes isn’t suppression but it is disenfranchisement.

    Taking the rule of law seriously is important. Without the rule of law, it’s anarchy.

  • Jethro says:

    Well stated, Gary!

  • Gary Gross says:

    Thanks Jethro. I’ve been told that I’ve got a wayward way with words once in awhile.

  • Bob J. says:

    “Let’s let freedom ring and make sure that every citizen who has the right to vote is allowed to vote instead of putting up costly blocks.”

    Which is exactly what photo ID does, Kristin. It makes sure that every citizen who has the legal right to vote is able to do so without fear of that vote being cancelled by fraud. And as for costly blocks, what’s costlier — the endless Coleman/Stuart Smalley recount or getting the count right the first time?

    Are you sure you didn’t write your post in crayon?

Leave a Reply