Get free daily email updates

Syndicate this site - RSS

Recent Posts

Blogger Menu

Click here to blog

Doug Haaland

Voter Integrity Act would prevent voter fraud

California’s infrastructure problems have taken front and center over the last month, but there is another example of the legislative schizophrenia hovering over the Golden State.

One legislator wants to lower the voting age in California from 18 years old to the age of 17, while another wants to raise the age of issuing a full driver’s license from 18 to 21. In short, one liberal believes minor childrenof our state are “mature” enough to vote in an election, while the other believes they are too immature to operate cars until they reach the ripe old age of 21.

Enter a note of sanity. California Assemblyman Travis Allen (R-Huntington Beach) has introduced the Voter Integrity Act of 2017. The measure allows voters to present eight different forms of identification to officials to receive a ballot during an election. It also allows a voter without proper ID to get a provisional ballot and even authorizes a free registered voter photo ID if they lack any of the listed forms.

Allen’s measure will provide liberals, includingCalifornia Secretary of State Alex Padilla, achance to pound their chests while declaring him as being racist, evil, and otherwise targeting minorities for voter suppression.

Considering the aforementioned accusations let’s take a look at some facts put forward by Secretary Padilla. Under current California law, as required by the Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA), persons who register or re-register to vote are required to include their California driver’s license number, state ID card number or the last four digits of their Social Security Number. Per the SOS website over 30 forms of identification can be used for providing the required proof of identity.

Secretary Padilla reported there were about 24.9 million “eligible” voters with 19.4 million Californians registered at the time of the 2016 election. The Secretary also stated, in an LA Times editorial meeting, that he believes research shows 90% of eligible voters have a driver’s license or state ID. Why then are liberal Democrats so worried about a law requiring that same identification to vote. Applied to the over 14.6 million voters in the last election it would seem to most folks that nearly every voter already has an ID in their possession.

Strangely, over 200different professions in Californiaare required to “display” their state-issued permit to be a doctor, barber, lawyer, or even an immigration consultant when doing business in California. It would seem then that the Voter Integrity Act of 2017 simply adds one more privilege to the list of so many that require practitioners to display their right to participate.

These facts raise the question, if Secretary Padilla and his fellow liberals believe being required to provide ID to vote is racist, bigoted, and demeaning of poor and minorities, then why is Secretary Padilla being racist, bigoted and demeaning of poor and minorities by requiring the same people to present an ID to register in the first place?

If Secretary Padilla believes a vast plurality have ID’s and HAVA requires eligible persons to show an ID to registerto vote, what makes showing an ID to vote any more “racist” or burdensome than presenting that same ID when using a credit card at the grocery store or when boarding an airplane in today’s world?