The Journal Sentinel editorial board today takes a look at the problem of felons voting in elections. They have three solutions. Better lists, more poll workers (at least they're consistent), and to scuttle voter ID.
I ask you, of the three, which one of those things is not like the others?
That's right, scuttling voter ID. I'm not really sure why they felt they needed to bring voter ID into this editorial. Their argument is this: Felons voted, and that is bad. With better inelligible voter lists and more poll workers, we can end this problem. Oh yeah, and since these people voted under their real names, voter ID's wouldn't have stopped it, so we should just scrap the idea of voter ID's.
That would be like airport security at General Mitchell International Airport saying, "Well, we really need to protect against plastic explosives being smuggled on board airplanes. So we need bomb sniffing dogs and explosives detecting machinery. But since metal detectors won't solve out plastic explosives problem, let's just scrap 'em."
The Journal Sentinel editorial board finds itself in a poor position on election safeguards. They want a partially effective system that only protects against some sources of voter fraud, but not all. Their system of safeguards shuts the door on felons voting, but it leaves it wide open to those who may wish to misidentify either themselves or where they live in order to vote multiple times. To bring the analogy back up, they want elections that are like airports without metal detectors-secure against one or two things, but as a whole, utterly unsecure.
No comments:
Post a Comment