Another voting rights win - Ohio edition

[Lemon Drop]

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/...wsuit.html

"Citing the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bush v. Gore in 2000, (US District Court Judge Peter) Economus said the “Court stresses that where the state has authorized in-person early voting through the Monday before Election Day for all voters, ‘the state may not, by later arbitrary and disparate treatment, value one person’s vote over that of another.’ "

[August West]

:thumbsup:

[cbelt3]

Yet strangely this 'separate and disparate' treatment that is being bandied about was exactly identical and standard across the entire state. In fact the Dems were asking Ohio to allow Democratic specific election commissions to allow in person pre-election voting on weekends, when the rest of the state does not.

So I find the findings and the whole issue to be rather confusing and foolish. The Ohio sec state demanded that the boards comply wth the ruling. Which is being used to force changes. Which are specifically for the advantage of the Democratic party.

Sorry, kids. I always learned that 'fair and equal' means everyone gets treated the same. Apparently to the Democratic Party, 'fair and equal' means you get more than the rest of us.

[August West]

So I find the findings and the whole issue to be rather confusing and foolish.

Probably why you are in manufacturing and not the legal system. :wink:

[Lemon Drop]

Sorry I think you've got that backwards cbelt. You Republican Secretary of State had allowed expanded voting hours in Republican counties, and not in Democratic ones.

http://www.toledoblade.com/State/2012/08...-rule.html

[cbelt3]

The sec state specifically asked each commission to standardize on voting hours across ohio. The issue you have was with an individual board. But then again I was reading the Cleveland papers, which are a bit less left-win than the toledo rags.

[Lemon Drop]

cbelt3 wrote:
The sec state specifically asked each commission to standardize on voting hours across ohio. The issue you have was with an individual board. But then again I was reading the Cleveland papers, which are a bit less left-win than the toledo rags.

Your Sec of State was the deciding vote on the boards that are not Republican dominated. The Republican boards voted to give themselves more hours. The vote was tied (along party lines) in the areas that have more Democratic voters, and your Sec of State cast the deciding vote AGAINST extended hours for those areas.

The federal judge has just ruled that the state cannot do that.

[Lemon Drop]

"I guess I really actually feel we shouldn't contort the voting process to accommodate the urban -- read African-American -- voter-turnout machine," said Doug Preisse, chairman of the county Republican Party and elections board member who voted against weekend hours, in an email to The Dispatch. "Let's be fair and reasonable."

read African American

Not even a dog whistle - just put it out there!
Got it?

http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/0...-ohio?lite

Kudos to Rachel Maddow for following this when it was getting little other media attention, and the Romney campaign weirdly tried to distort the lawsuit into discrimination against military voters, something it never was.
http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/0...-ohio?lite

[Gutenberg]

I would think the Republicans would favor weekend hours. After all, they are so busy working, working, working to support all the Democrats on welfare that they can't find time during regular working hours.

[Dennis S]

Why is it so hard for Democrats to vote? Can't they just hop in their Escalades and cruise down to to polls with their gold spinners sparkling in the sun? Or they could give an illegal a couple of bucks and tell him, hey man, while you're down there voting illegally, could you slip in an extra one for me?