Keith Ellison’s op-ed in the Strib shows how radical he is. In it, he says that the Supreme Court was wrong in upholding Indiana’s law that mandates a photo ID be shown for a person to vote. In other words, Ellison is against legislation that’d prevent voter fraud. Here’s what Rep. Ellison said:

Eight years after Bush vs. Gore, the U.S. Supreme Court has delivered another blow to the rights of American citizens by upholding the most restrictive voter law in decades. The court’s recent ruling effectively bars thousands of eligible voters from the franchise.

The decision in Crawford vs. Marion County Board upholds Indiana’s requirement that voters in the state of Indiana present a state-issued photo ID if they wish to cast a ballot. The court upheld a statute that it admits:

• Does not prevent the fraud it was intended to prevent.
• Is designed to prevent a type of fraud that does not exist.
• Does not prevent the fraud that is a documented problem in the state.
• Places an extra burden on the poor, minority, elderly and college voters in Indiana.

Rep. Ellison says that Indiana didn’t prove that this legislation will prevent fraud. He doesn’t offer any proof, though, that the “court’s recent ruling effectively bars thousands of eligible voters.” What proof does Ellison have that this law will disenfranchise voters?

I’d further suggest that the litigants should have to prove that the legislation can’t prevent voter fraud. Ellison says that the statute doesn’t prevent the fraud it was intended to prevent, which refers to the possible voter fraud on absentee ballots. If that’s true, then it’s time to tighten that up. It shouldn’t be used to argue against preventing voter fraud.

Indiana did not present any evidence that in-person voter fraud exists. There is no evidence of this type of fraud in Indiana history. Furthermore, this requirement does nothing to address the documented fraud issue Indiana has with absentee ballots, nor does it address the serious concerns of vote buying, ballot-stuffing, ballot miscounting, voter intimidation and other documented types of fraud.

Legislatures pass ‘reforms’ all the time that don’t fix the problems. If this legislation doesn’t fix other problems, then it’s the Indiana legislature’s responsibility to pass legislation fixing other problems, too.

The Indiana law and others like it will disenfranchise mostly young, low-income and elderly voters who disproportionately do not have or need photo IDs, equating to thousands of lost votes. According to a June 2005 University of Wisconsin study, an estimated 23 percent of people aged 65 and over did not have a valid photo ID.

If this report is accurate, which I’m not convinced of, then it’s the state’s responsibility to provide photo ID’s to those who need them.

Minnesota consistently leads the nation in voter turnout. This is no accident. We have one of the most transparent and accessible voter systems in the country, with same day registration and no photo ID requirement. We also have a reputation for the cleanest elections in the country. We should be rightfully proud — and the nation should follow our lead.

Just because people haven’t been convicted of committing voter fraud doesn’t mean that people haven’t tried gaming Minnesota’s voting system. This Powerline post proves that Soros-funded groups have tried:

Minnesota is one of the few states that allows same-day voter registration and has become infamous for its lax same day voter registration requirements. Under Minnesota’s registration law, an eligible but previously unregistered individual may register to vote in his precinct by showing proof of residence in the precinct or, in the absence of such proof, having a voter registered in the precinct vouch under oath that he personally knows that the unregistered individual is a resident of the precinct. Although the requirements necessary to establish residence are minimal, they are not non-existent and they are the statutory protection against vote fraud and serial voting.

Among the well-funded and supposedly independent groups supporting John Kerry in the campaign is Americans Coming Together (ACT). ACT has taken notice of Minnesota’s special vulnerabilty to vote fraud and organized a sophisticated effort to exploit it in a manner that violates Minnesota law. In Minnesota the Bush campaign has come into the possession of the following email from ACT to its Minnesota volunteers:

Election Day is upon us. You are confirmed to volunteer with ACT (America Coming Together - http://www.actforvictory.org/) on Election Day, Tuesday, Nov 2.

We will be creating name badges that include your Ward and Precinct information for each of the thousands of volunteers that day to make it easier to find a volunteer to vouch for a voter at the polls.

I am emailing you to request your street address, city and zipcode. We’ve already got your other contact information, but your record in our database does not include this information.

You can save us time on election day by replying today to this email with this information, or give us a call at [phone number with St. Paul area code].

In order to get your badge correct, please reply by Thursday.

Thank you for your help and cooperation. See you on Election Day!

This email is a smoking gun of massive premeditated vote fraud. The ACT effort contemplates the prepositioning of registered voters as volunteers at their precincts of residence to provide the “vouching” necessary to get individuals registered to vote on election day in the precinct whether or not the volunteer “personally knows” the residence of the unregistered voter. It is a recipe for illegal voting in every precinct of the state.

In addition to its offensive ground game in the state, the Bush campaign here has organized a defensive game plan to identify and prevent election-day fraud, a key component of the Kerry supporters’ plan for carrying Minnesota. Organized vote fraud, we’ll see it on election day!

This type of fraud would be prevented by photo ID’s.

Rep. Ellison said that Indiana’s law wouldn’t “prevent the fraud it was intended to prevent.” You’ll notice, though, that he didn’t say that it wouldn’t prevent voter fraud. He simply said that it wouldn’t prevent a specific type of voter fraud. Rep. Ellison also said that the Indiana legislation “is designed to prevent a type of fraud that does not exist.” Indiana’s requiring photo ID would’ve prevented the type of attempted voter fraud that ACT had planned.

Just because nobody has attempted that type of voter fraud in Indiana shouldn’t prevent Indiana’s legislature from passing legislation that prevents it from happening. That’s essentially saying that legislatures can’t pass legislation to prevent voter fraud until voter fraud has happened.

Would Rep. Ellison prevent other states from passing laws that prevent other types of voter fraud even if that type of fraud hasn’t been committed in that state? That type of logic would prevent voter fraud legislation from being passed until that type of voter fraud is proven. Until voter fraud laws are on the books, how can a specific type of voter fraud be proven?

It’s time to realize that Rep. Ellison’s op-ed is intellectually dishonest. For that reason, it’s time to marginalize Rep. Ellison.

Technorati: Voter Fraud, Keith Ellison, Soros, SCOTUS, Election 2008