Category Archives: Voter ID

Bits ‘n Pieces

Posted on by
https://jasonkander.com/files/2015/02/Jason-Kander-for-US-Senate-100x100.jpg

Missouri Secretary of State, Jason Kander

Jason Kander, our democrat Missouri Secretary of State and scion of the Kansas City democrat political machine, has announced he will run against Senator Roy Blunt in 2016. Kander received the endorsement of the entire Missouri democrat team as well as from the KC ‘Red’ Star. Surprise, surprise!

Attorney General Chris Koster, who is readying to join Kander on the statewide slate in his own run for governor: “Every day, Jason Kander uses the lessons he learned serving in the Army in Afghanistan to do what’s right for Missouri. He doesn’t care who gets credit for an idea, he just wants to get the job done for our state. We need that approach in Washington, which is why I am supporting Jason Kander for United States Senate.” — PoliticMO Newsletter, February 19, 2015.

So it will be Turncoat Koster running for Governor teaming with Kander running for Senator. All in all, Kander has a better rep than Koster. Still you have to wonder, in this ‘race of the Double-Ks’ who is helping whom?

***

An idea whose time has come? Missouri already has a Voter-ID law on the books. There are a number of acceptable forms of ID listed on the Missouri Secretary of State’s website.

ACCEPTABLE FORMS OF VOTER ID:
  • Identification issued by the state of Missouri, an agency of the state, or a local election authority of the state
  • Identification issued by the United States government or agency thereof
  • Identification issued by an institution of higher education, including a university, college, vocational and technical school, located within the state of Missouri
  • A copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, government check or other government document that contains the name and address of the voter
  • Driver’s license or state identification card issued by another state

If you do not possess any of these forms of identification, you may still cast a ballot if two supervising election judges, one from each major political party, attest they know you. – http://www.sos.mo.gov/elections/govotemissouri/howtovote.aspx

This new effort will add a Constitutional Amendment to give more teeth to the existing law which has a number of exceptions that still allow people to vote without proper ID. The existing law is a good first step, but, reviewing the documented acts of vote fraud in St. Louis and Kansas City, it isn’t enough.

Missouri House endorses voter photo ID requirements

By MARIE FRENCH, Associated Press, Feb 18, 6:21 PM EST

JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — The Missouri House is once again pushing forward with a Republican priority to require photo identification at the polls, after similar measures were stymied by the Senate or courts in recent years.

The House gave initial approval Wednesday to a proposed constitutional amendment that would go before voters in 2016 and also endorsed a bill that would institute the voter photo ID requirements if the constitutional amendment is approved.

Both measures need a second House vote and also would also have to pass the Senate, where Democrats have previously blocked the proposed photo ID requirements.

Supporters say the requirement is needed to ensure the integrity of the election process. Rep. Rick Brattin, R-Harrisonville, said the measure would protect individuals’ voting rights by making sure someone does not try to vote for another person.

“It ensures that someone did not take their vote and steal what is rightfully their vote,” Brattin said.

If you read the full article at the website, you will see, as usual, democrats, abetted by MO Secretary of State Jason Kander, protesting the measure because it would make their continuing vote fraud schemes more difficult.

***

Have you heard the term, Social Justice Warrior? It’s all the vogue on university campus across the country and in other segments of society (see my post concerning the SFWA and the Hugo Awards.) Social Justice Warriors have become the progressives’ front-line troops in their battle against free speech and expression.

Social Justice Warriors Come to Campus

By Robert Weissberg, February 19, 2015

Since the late 1960s, radical students have periodically taken over the university president’s offices to propose a laundry list of “non-negotiable” demands. Early takeovers tended to be about their school’s cooperation with the military during war in Vietnam; today, however, “social justice” is the aim so let’s call these office occupiers Social Justice Warriors or SJW’s.

Back in February 2014 a group of 30 Dartmouth students commandeered the president’s office to  announce a “Freedom Budget”:70 specific calls for greater diversity, eliminating sexism and heterosexism, an improved campus climate for minorities and gays, banning the term “illegal immigrant,” offering a class on undocumented workers in America, creating a professor of color lecture series, and harsher penalties for sexual assault, among many, many others.

More recently, Clemson University SJW’s demanded that the school provide a “safe” multicultural center for students from “under-represented” groups, employing more administrators and faculty of color, a more diverse student body, mandatory sensitivity training for faculty and administrators, and increased funding for students organization catering to under-represented groups.

Then there are the University of Minnesota students who seized the President’s office to demand a bigger budget for the Department of Chicano and Latino Studies Department, removing all racial descriptions from university police reports, offering gender-neutral bathrooms at all college facilities and, of course, recruiting more faculty and students of color.

Fortunately, this is the U.S., where such political histrionics are greeted with mild amusement. Ironically, school officials typically welcome “meaningful political dialogue and change,” the need for “hard work” to achieve progress and then conclude by thanking the Social Justice Warriors for their assistance in moving forward. Though police may remove protestors, criminal charges, let alone violations of campus rules, are rarely pursued and the moral buzz for these SJW’s may last weeks. In fact, I suspect some warriors honestly believe that their achievement will burnish their resume when applying to a second-tier MBA program. Imagine if these SJW’s tried this in Russia or China?

Such incidents are easy to pooh-pooh as the politically-correct version of Animal House. But that said, they nevertheless offer important insights into today’s college activist’s thinking and why university administrators tolerate the foolishness.    

Most evidently, the Social Justice Warriors totally disregard the costs associated with their self-righteous crusades. Everything is single-ledger accounting. Will the tooth fairy fund Dartmouth’s proposed $3.6 million dollar Triangle House, the “safe haven” for LGBT? Yes, high-school dropouts may believe that government benefits are “free,” but youngsters admitted to top colleges? No wonder the U.S. sinks deeper and deeper into indebtedness — even among the smart, costs are invisible. Picture a Warrior taking Econ 101 and hearing for the first time that there is no such thing as a free lunch. What a shock!

The shallowness of these demands is breathtaking and suggests that these activists are just winging it. The Dartmouth students are surely among America’s brainiest but why do they denounce “ableism”? Are they suggesting that acknowledging variations in ability is morally wrong and if differences are to be abolished (hopeless anyhow), how would society function? Why must the campus offer gender-neutral bathrooms? Keep in mind that in a few decades such folk may be among our national leaders.

Particularly troublesome is how these presumptuous, self-centered warriors think that if they think something is good, it must be good, so case settled. For example, they glibly assume that academically challenged black and Chicano youngsters really benefit by attending schools that would never admit them in a merit-based admission process.  Have these young do-gooders considered the downside of this generosity — schools will fake the numbers by creating easy-to-pass courses in dubious ethnic-studies departments, steering them to easy grading instructors or just tolerating rampant grade inflation. Or, more important, that these in-over-their-head youngsters may be better off in community college acquiring well-paying skills like welding?

Closer to home, have these SJW’s calculated the link between achieving their vision of “social justice” and tuition? Attracting minority students, addressing their academic deficiencies, creating a nurturing environment and all the rest costs money, and this will inevitably push soaring tuition even higher and, since there is no Santa Claus, a college education will be yet further beyond the reach of many poorer students while saddling graduates with yet more debt. In effect, these idealistic protestors are demanding a tax on those who are not members of their version of “under-represented.” Imagine if these SJW’s had to hold jobs to pay their own tuition?

Do these Social Justice Warriors realize that their demands will require administrators to break the law to achieve this multicultural Utopia? That is, under today’s judicial guidelines it is almost impossible to admit students solely on the basis of race or ethnicity. California, Michigan, and Washington (among others) have state laws explicitly banning racial preferences.

Why do schools tolerate such idiocy, including ignoring violations of campus policy? The answer is that no matter how imprudent the demands, they help drive the university’s bureaucratic expansion, and in today’s campus life, size matters. A symbiotic relationship exists between the children’s crusades and yet more bureaucratic bloat. Universities are not the profit-driven private sector. Absolutely everything, everything in every one of these SJW catalogues entails spending more university money, hiring more personnel, and creating yet more rules and regulations and the apparatchiki to monitor and enforce them.

It is a long article and I urge you to follow this link to the website and read the entire piece. It may be an education for you; make you aware of another insidious attacks against our liberty by ‘progressives.’ Joe Stalin and Adolf would be proud of them.

Facebook

One week

Posted on by

We’re a week away from the election. In a number of states, including Missouri, people have already voted. In Missouri, it absentee voting. The other states have early voting, a scheme by democrats to make vote fraud easier.

Easier? How?

It’s simple. Most county clerks really don’t do a passable job. For them it’s best to just ease along, not making any waves. When people register to vote, they don’t cross check to see if the person is already registered with another name. For instance, I, like most Americans, that three names. Let’s make up one, John Thomas Roberts. Mr Roberts could be registered as John Roberts, Tom Roberts, John T. Roberts, J. Thomas Roberts at 123 Main Street. If the clerk mistypes the address, some of those entries could be at 123 Main Street, others at 124 Main Street—and everyone version would be registered as a real voters. Mr. Roberts could, therefore, vote four times—more if he voted early and then showed up at the polls as well. You see, most county clerks never cross-check, nor remove early voters from the poll registry. Mr. Roberts could, theoretically, vote eight times.

In areas in Kansas City, St. Louis, and other liberal bastions across the state, the local poll judges wouldn’t be able to stop them. In times past, some judges were blocked from the polls, or intimidated by thugs. Kansas City’s past history in the last decades has had both.

http://media.cleveland.com/plain_dealer_metro/photo/11647531-large.jpg

Polling station with paper ballots

Can we eliminate vote fraud? No, not completely. What we can do, however, is make vote fraud much more difficult. First, require voting by paper ballots. In my county, we mark our choices in black ink on the ballot and then it is scanned and read. Fool proof? No. If the ballot is improperly marked it could be misread. The scanner can have basic logic to reject ballots that have no votes, two votes for the same office, or marks outside of the selection box. But, if there is a question later on the vote count, those paper ballots are still available for a real person to check.

What else can be done? Photo Voter-ID, using a photo taken at the time of registration. Liberal claims to the contrary, if a photo ID is required to cash a check, there is no reason why a photo-ID can’t be required to vote. All claims to the contrary are just tactics by liberals to preserve their ability for vote fraud.

What else? Eliminate early voting. The democrat adage, “Vote early, vote often,” is real. Should we eliminate absentee voting? No, there are legitimate reasons for absentee voting. Citizens in the military, deployed  outside the country or based in other states, retain their right to vote and to have their votes counted. There are mechanisms in place for the military to vote. There are also legitimate reason why others, not in the military, cannot be present to vote at their polls. But, in those cases, the absentee voter should present and sign an affidavit attesting to their reason for not voting at their home polling station, such as travel or illness to name two.

Our Republic is based on the fundamental right of its citizens who meet the established requirements for a voter. That means that aliens, non-citizens, whether here legally or illegally, do NOT vote. The democrats want those illegal votes, it dilutes the votes of citizens and the democrats believe those illegal votes can be bought. The legality of voting is irrelevant to them. Voting is nothing more than a means for them to gain and retain power. If they thought they could get away with it, and if we don’t fight them, one day our right to vote and have it counted, will be no more.

This election appears to be leading to a ‘Pub victory in many areas of the country and in Missouri. Let’s work with our legislators, local and national, in the 2015 session to pass, and override vetos, for some real voter security—paper ballots, audits of the voting rolls and insuring they are clean, passing Photo-IDs for registration and voting, and putting some real teeth in penalties for vote fraud. In many instances, vote fraud is only a misdemeanor. Vote fraud should be a felony with a long prison term and heavy fines.

The United States is a republic, not a democracy nor a mobocracy. We must have the tools to insure it remains a republic. Else, we will have not a republic, not a democracy, but the rule of elites of a single party—just like the old USSR.

Facebook

Voting with their…

Posted on by

Feet.

Sean Hannity is off the air in Kansas City. He has been for months. The local station dropped him after his last contract expired. He was replaced with Michael Savage. I believe Savage may have two or three listeners.

Due to Hannity’s absence, you may not have heard the news. New York Governor Andrew Cuomo said conservatives weren’t wanted in New York (Hannity lives on Long Island.)

Hannity soon received offers to relocate by the governors of Florida and Texas.

Sean Hannity Becomes Another High-Profile Tax Refugee

By STEPHEN MOORE AND TRAVIS BROWN, Posted 06/06/2014 06:31 PM ET

The TV host can save as much as $1 million a year just by escaping New York's tax regime.

The TV host can save as much as $1 million a year just by escaping New York’s tax regime.

Now we can add Sean Hannity to the growing list of celebrities to abandon their New York residencies in favor of states with better economic climates.

The popular TV and radio host has long been a New York resident with second and third homes in both Florida and Texas, two of the brightest stars in our nation’s economic constellation.

But on his primetime Fox News show, he recently told Florida Sen. Marco Rubio: “You’re soon going to be my senator.” He will split his time between a home in Naples, Fla., and a small ranch in Texas and end his New York residency, which means he’ll no longer be taxed by the Empire State.

Why this move after so many years as a New Yorker?

Well, in January of this year, New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo created a firestorm when he contended that conservatives have “no place” in his state. In response, both Florida Gov. Rick Scott and Texas Gov. Rick Perry invited Hannity to consider a move to their states — invitations Hannity has gladly accepted.

It’s quite obvious why Hannity would not want to live in a state where his party is vilified by the governor. Yet there are many compelling financial reasons that favor Florida and Texas.

For one, neither Florida nor Texas levies a personal income tax — quite appealing considering that New York’s marginal income-tax rate for top earners like Hannity is over 13%. For New Yorkers making over $1 million a year, a move to Florida and Texas will let these top earners take home at least $130,000 more after taxes.

Hannity no doubt pulls down an income that will save as much as $1 million a year by saying so long to New York.

He isn’t alone in choosing sunny economic climates over New York’s shakedown tax system. Between 1992 and 2011 (according to data from the Internal Revenue Service), New York lost $71.36 billion in net adjusted gross income (AGI). By comparison, Texas gained $27.34 billion, while Florida gained a whopping $100.53 billion.

With population growth outpacing New York’s nearly 3-to-1, Florida has now passed the Empire State as the nation’s third-most populous.

The annual state report by the nonpartisan Tax Foundation confirms that Hannity is making a wise financial decision. Its 2014 State Business Tax Climate Index places New York dead last on the list as a result of high income, corporate, sales and property taxes.

The article continues onto a second page, here.

Hannity’s operation pays a significant amount of taxes to New York and well as to the local government. Now Cuomo’s bombast has lost the state and Long Island. Hannity could save as much as $130,000 a year by some estimates. A drop in the bucket, perhaps, for New York—if Hannity’s decision was the only one involved. However, it isn’t. Hannity isn’t along leaving New York. Rush Limbaugh moved out several years ago after a series of harassing tax audits that netted New York nothing.

***

Photo-ID. Last Tuesday was the primary election in Mississippi. The media was focused on the race between Chris McDaniel and Thad Cochran. They conveniently overlooked another significant event in the election—the requirement for a photo-ID to vote.

The Biggest Non-Story in Tuesday’s Elections? Mississippi Voter ID Implemented With No Problems

Hans von Spakovsky / / Jameson Broggi /

It wasn’t the biggest story following Tuesday’s elections in various states, but it was the biggest and most-ignored non-story.

Mississippi’s new voter ID law got its first run in the June 3 primary, and the sky did not fall. Despite the tiresome and disproven claims by opponents that such laws cause wholesale voter disenfranchisement and are intended to suppress votes, Mississippi “sailed through” its first test of the new ID requirements, according to The Clarion Ledger, the newspaper of Jackson, Miss.

Aside from being able to use any form of government-issued photo ID, like every other state with ID requirements, Mississippi provides a free ID for anyone who does not already have a government-issued photo ID.  Contrary to the claims of those who say large numbers of Americans don’t have an ID, Mississippi estimated that only 0.8 percent of Mississippians lacked an ID.  In fact, even that may have been an overestimate since the state had to issue only about 1,000 voter ID cards. All those who forgot their ID on Tuesday also could vote by an affidavit as long as they returned and showed an ID within five days.

The Clarion Ledger reported how few problems there were in the implementation of the new requirement. Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann said the state “devoted countless hours of time and training to election officials across the state” and the result was that there were hardly any complaints. There was only one reported case of a man mistakenly being turned away for lack of an ID, at which point an election commissioner was sent to solve the problem. But this was one of the few reported problems across the entire state in which almost 400,000 voters turned out to cast their ballots in the primary elections, including in the fiercely contested Republican U.S. Senate primary where incumbent Thad Cochran faced off against challenger Chris McDaniel in a razor-thin election.

As Sid Salter from the Clarion Ledger put it, the voter ID law was a “non-event” and “voters expressed little, if any, inconvenience at the polls due to the new law.” So how is the new law being covered by the media? Instead of reporting that the voter ID law is “sailing through,” the mainstream media has instead elected to remain silent. As Hosemann said, “No news is good news.”

An interview of Sharyl Atkission, formerly of CNN and under attack by Media Matters, slams the current crop of journalists as being tools, easily manipulated by Obama and the liberal establishment. Atkission left CBS because of the restrictions by CBS on her reporting. She was immediately attacked by CBS and Media Matters for her claims of liberal bias in the news.

Facebook

Recap: MO 2014 Legislative Session – Successes and Failures

Posted on by

All in all, the view for the 2014 Legislative session is one of failure. When push came to shove, the ‘Pub leadership caved to the dems and unions. The influence of union money was obvious. Right-to-Work never got out of the chute and Paycheck Protection fared little better.

The ‘Pubs hold veto-proof majorities in the House and the Senate. They could, if they really wanted, push any bill through the Legislature and then override Nixon’s veto? Proof? They did just that for the Tax Cut Bill, SB509. But the rest? Once again, the team of Tom Dempsey (R-St. Charles) and Ron Richard (R-Joplin), controlling the Senate, betrayed the conservatives of Missouri.

Here’s a quick breakdown of some of the bills:

Tax Reform, SB509. Passed, veto overridden. The legislation will cut Missouri’s top individual income tax rate for the first time in almost 100 years and make the state the third to enact a special deduction for business income reported on personal tax returns. — ABC News.

COMMON CORE, HB1490. Passed, pending Nixon’s signature or veto. This bill requires the Missouri Department of Education to write new guidelines for student achievement standards for English, math, science and history. New goals would replace Common Core Standards being pushed by the US Department of Education. This bill did not block Common Core but does place a one-year moratorium while new standards are written.

“It’s a step in the right direction.” — Breitbart.

Pending Nixon’s signature or veto…

Abortion, HB1307. Extends the 24 hour waiting period for an abortion to 72 hours. This makes Missouri only the 3rd state, after Utah and North Dakota, to impose a 3-day waiting period. Read more here.

Early Voting, SB892. Allows early voting during the six working days prior to an election. The period is only for Monday through Friday of the prior week and the Monday before the election, during normal working hours and does NOT allow voting on the weekend.

In addition, “Lawmakers on May 5 granted final approval to legislation that would move Missouri’s future presidential primary elections from February to March starting in 2016. The bill, SB 892, passed 25-7 in the Senate and 101-47 in the House of the Representatives. The bill now awaits action by Gov. Jay Nixon.”

“The legislation was prompted by national Republican and Democratic party rules that prohibit all but certain states from holding their presidential primaries prior to March. Under SB 892, the Missouri’s 2016 presidential primary would take place on March 15. The primary would be held on Feb. 2, 2016, under existing law.” — Capitol Report.

Guns, SJ36 and SB656. SJR 36 passed 122-31 in the House of Representatives and 23-8 in the Senate. It is a Constitutional Amendment, that would, “declare the right to keep and bear arms to be ‘unalienable,’ meaning it is a universal right that isn’t subject to restriction. The measure also would repeal existing language that says the constitutional right to bear arms ‘shall not justify the wearing of concealed weapons.’ ” Because it goes before voters, it bypasses Gov. Jay Nixon and isn’t subject to veto.

SB656 Allows specially trained teachers and administrators to carry concealed weapons in public schools and lowers the age to get a concealed gun permit to 19 from 21.

Failed to pass…

Paper Ballots, SB623. “Establishes the paper ballot as the official ballot and requires audits before election certification” — Missouri Precinct Project Newsletter. Failed in committee.

Property Rights (Anti-Agenda 21),HB 1647. “Prohibits the state and political subdivisions from implementing policies affecting property rights and from entering into certain relationships with organizations” — Missouri Precinct Project Newsletter. Failed in committee.

Second Amendment Preservation Act, HB1439. A collection of individual bills to expand guns laws in Missouri, impose state regulation on the enforcement of federal acts and regulations deemed to violate the US 2nd Amendment and impose restrictions on employment for federal agents and employees who attempt to enforce Federal regulations that violate the 2nd Amendment. A poison-pill amendment was added that effectively killed the bill. The ‘Pub House conference committee added the poison-pill amendment and then blocked further action until the legislative session ended. Failed in committee.

Voter ID, HJR47. Asks voters to approve to a constitutional amendment allowing a requirement that voters show government-issued photo identification at the polls. Passed the House but not the Senate. HJR47. Failed in committee. — Missouri Precinct Project Newsletter.

Yes, there was one significant success in the passage of the Tax Cut bill. Overall, however, this legislative session must be viewed as a failure. With over whelming numbers, the ‘Pubs in the Legislature, with a few exceptions, showed once again they were spineless and ineffectual.

Facebook

Countdown

Posted on by

The Missouri Legislative session only has a few more days to run. Conservatives passed a much needed Tax Cut by overriding Nixon’s veto of the bill. The tax cuts will affect small businesses and individual taxpayers the most.

Unfortunately, many other bills are hung in committees, held hostage by RINOs who dare not offend their liberal constituents. They care not for their conservative supporters.

Here is the run-down on some of the more popular bills. It’s possible one or two may break loose and make to the the floor for their final votes. If so, expect Nixon to vote each one.

The first item is the Impeachment of Governor Jay Nixon. Three separate bills of impeachment were submitted. All are sitting in the House Judiciary committee and they will likely remain there. None of the ‘Pub committee members have the guts to bring the bills to a vote, much less allow them to reach the House floor. Those members, all lawyers, are using legal reasoning to block the bills. Impeachment is NOT a criminal charge—it’s a political charge, but the lawyers in the committee refuse to consider that position.

Right-to-Work. Dead. However, it is still possible that Paycheck Protection, a separate bill, may be voted upon this week.

House Majority Floor Leader John Diehl, R-St. Louis, said explicitly Thursday he does not believe Republicans the votes to send ‘right-to-work’ to the Senate. The bill was a chief priority of the conservative wing of the House Republican Caucus, including House Speaker Tim Jones. Instead, labor eyes are turned to the Senate, where lawmakers are expected to return to the ‘paycheck protection’ bill. The legislation would require annual authorization for public labor unions to use dues and fees to make political contributions, and consent for withholding earnings from paychecks. — PoliticMO Newsletter, May 12, 2014.

Voting Bills. There are two Voting bills in the Legislature that may get final attention this session. One will be presenting a Constitutional  amendment to the voters to require photo-ID for anyone voting in Missouri. Voter-ID has been under attack in the state and this effort is another plan to strengthen our battle against liberal vote fraud in St. Louis, Kansas City and other locales in the state.

The other bill would be to authorize early voting. This is another attempt by democrats to provide a means for more vote fraud. Urge you Legislators to vote NO on this provision.

Second Amendment Protection Act. This one, too, is hung in a House Committee. Ron Calzone in his May 10th, 2014, Missouri First newsletter reports:

Five legislators hold the fate of SAPA, the Second Amendment Preservation Act in their hands.

That’s how many members of an 8 person committee are needed to sign a Conference Committee Report that will take most of the teeth out of HB 1439 and send if back to the Senate, where it will probably die.

Right now, it looks like at least 5 of them are probably going to recommend to the House and Senate that they remove the strongest enforcement clause from the bill. If they do, our only hope would be for Senator Nieves, the Senate handler of the bill, to refuse to make a motion to accept the Conference Committee Report, or for the House or Senate to vote the report down and go back to the stronger bill.

The frustrating thing for me is that it’s the House sponsor of the bill, Rep. Doug Funderburk, who wants to take most of the teeth (the “ineligibility clause”) out of the bill. Doug says he’s afraid that unless we weaken the bill, one particular Republican senator will vote “no” if a veto override is needed next September.

While it’s true that the senator he’s concerned about IS a potential no vote on override, this senator voted FOR the bill WITH the ineligibility clause in it just 10 days ago. This same senator voted FOR the veto override last September.

The ‘ineligibility’ clause was reinstated in the Senate. It prevents any Federal official from taking employment in Missouri in the Law Enforcement field under some circumstances.

The “ineligibility clause” in HB 1439 is the most important enforcement provision in the bill.

It’s designed to prevent federal officials who would infringe on your gun rights from accessing state resources as well as provide personal disincentive to those federal officials.

In addition to the “ineligibility clause”, SAPA includes a “private cause of action” provision that gives legal standing for any victim of 2nd Amendment infringement. Such a civil suit against an agent or agency does not depend on government doing their job, as would be the case with criminal charges.

However, because of something called “Supremacy Clause immunity”, civil suits and criminal charges, are almost impossible to make stick against federal officials. That’s where the “ineligibility clause” comes in.

The “ineligibility clause” simply says that any federal official who violates the Missouri Second Amendment Preservation Act shall be forever ineligible to hold a Missouri law-enforcement job.

Paper Ballots. The purpose of this bill is to insure that a paper audit trail will exist. Electronic voting, used in some parts of Missouri, have no paper trail and are vulnerable to hacking…or manipulation. Vote fraud exists. In one St. Louis precinct, more people voted that were eligible in the entire precinct. Without a photo-ID and an audit trail, just examples of vote fraud are very difficult to prove in court.

This bill, SB623, is hung in Rep. Thomas Flanigan’s Fiscal Review Committee. The Missouri Secretary of State claims this bill would cost counties money to remove the electronic voting machines and implement processes and procedures to insure paper audit trails are built to conform to the requirements of this bill.

We’ve come close this year but not close enough. We must all remember, when we approach the polls in the upcoming August Primary and the General elections next November, who voted for these bills, who did not, and most importantly, the gutless wonders who blocked these bills in committee. Remember, come August and November.

Facebook

A win in Kansas

Posted on by

A federal judge in Wichita has declared Kansas’ Voter-ID law, a law that requires proof of citizenship, constitutional. What’s more, the judge has ordered the Election Assistance Commission (EAC) to change the registration forms to reflect the requirement for documentation, proof of citizenship. The EAC has refused to change the form which does not have the requirement for proof of citizenship. The judicial order stated that the EAC does not have the statutory right to refuse to change the form when requested by the states.

Voter Citizenship Law_Cham640.jpg

Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach

The judge said the Constitution gives states the power to determine voter qualifications, and if states want to insist on proof of citizenship, the election commission cannot overrule them.

“The EAC’s nondiscretionary duty is to perform the ministerial function of updating the instructions to reflect each state’s laws,” Judge Melgren ruled in a decision out of Kansas. “The court orders the EAC to add the language requested by Arizona and Kansas to the state-specific instructions of the federal mail voter registration form immediately.”

A spokesman for the EAC said the commission was reviewing the decision. The Justice Department, which argued the case before Judge Melgren, didn’t return a message seeking comment. — The Washington Times.

Missouri is about to join Kansas and Arizona.  A bill is making its way through the legislature, not as stringent as Kansas nor Arizona, that would require photo-ID for registering to vote and for voting.

JEFFERSON CITY • The question of whether voters should have to carry a photo ID to the polls could be decided on the ballot in 2014.

The Missouri House on Thursday [February 27, 2014] approved measures to require photo identification, but the changes to the state’s constitution require approval by voters. Senate President Pro Tem Tom Dempsey, R-St. Charles, said he would like to put the issue to a vote of the people.

Proponents of a requirement that voters present a photo ID or cast a provisional ballot argue it will increase the integrity of the election process. Rep. Stanley Cox, R-Sedalia, sponsored the constitutional amendment.

“We deserve the protection of photo identification at the moment the vote is cast,” Cox said. — St. Louis Today.

Opponents in each of these three cases claim that requiring ID, either a photo-ID or proof of citizenship, is an impediment and a form of discrimination. That is a facetious argument because many other entities, from government to merchandisers, require some form of photo-ID to conduct business—a fact opponents continually ignore.

The basis of this ruling, according to US District Judge Eric F. Melgren, was the US Constitution. “The judge said the Constitution gives states the power to determine voter qualifications, and if states want to insist on proof of citizenship, the election commission cannot overrule them.”

 

Facebook

Democrat declares he will not uphold the law

Posted on by

Yep, the democrats are upholding their reputation of lawlessness. After a Pennsylvania Appellate Judge refused an injunction against the state’s Voter ID law, a Philadelphia suburb democrat official says he will not enforce it.

A Democratic election official in Pennsylvania says he won’t enforce a new voter ID law, ahead of a state court ruling and Justice Department findings on the issue.

Delaware County elections inspector Christopher L. Broach told The Philadelphia Inquirer on Thursday he would not ask voters to show photo identification at polls in November.

“To ask me to enforce something that violates civil rights is ludicrous and absolutely something I  am not willing to do,” Broach, an Internet technology consultant, told the newspaper.

He also said the law, signed this spring by GOP Gov. Tom Corbett, was a “wholly unethical decision that violates civil rights for the sake of Mitt Romney.” — Foxnews

The democrat tactic appears to be: tie the law up in court; refuse to enforce it until the election is past.  It’s what we’ve come to expect from democrats: lawlessness, corruption, and fraud.

Like Missouri, Kansas had a primary last week,  Kansas also has a Voter ID law.  Kris Kobach, the Kansas Secretary of State was asked if there was any problems with the new law.  “No,” he replied,  “There were some who arrived without ID and went home to retrieve the needed documentation.” There was only one person who arrived and said they had no ID according to Kobach. They were turned away.  Kobach didn’t say whether that individual was registered. One instance across the state. That’d be much less than one percent of the voters. Probably less than one tenth of a percent. It appears that acquiring the necessary photo ID isn’t all that big a deal!

It seems that voting is the only task that democrats believe doesn’t need a photo ID.  All other public transactions, tasks required for daily living, requires some form of ID. Photo ID at that.  The one significant duty of a citizen does not, accord to the democrats.  I would submit that is prima facie evidence of conspiracy of vote fraud.

Will the ‘Pubs in Philadelphia take this official to task? Work to have him removed from office?  Somehow, I doubt.  Philadelphia is not known as a hot-bed of conservatism. More the opposite.  What the ‘Pubs should do is insure there are poll judges and assistants at every polling station ready to document every instance of fraud and have legal help on hand to take immediate action.

Remember ACORN? Philadelphia was one of their strong-holds. They still exist. It’s up to us to insure that the inevitable democrat fraud is kept to a minimum.

Facebook