DIMINISHING THE SANCTITY OF OUR VOTE

DIMINISHING THE SANCTITY OF OUR VOTE

By Domenick J. Maglio, PhD. Traditional Realist

There are three means of negating a vote: falsifying the voter count, denying the ability to vote and allowing fraudulent votes to cancel legitimate votes.

In the 2012 election cycle there has been an ongoing discussion of voter suppression and voter fraud. Suppression discussion has centered on voter identification. The Democrat party has argued that showing photo identification would suppress the vote of the poor and minorities. They state underprivileged people do not have the means to obtain a driver’s license or other photo identification although these same people have the ability to produce an ID to write a check, to apply for Social Security and in some states to get food stamps.

The Republicans concerns focus on increased voter fraud. They say illegal immigrants; felons and dead people have to be eliminated from the voter rolls. They believe each non-legitimate vote including voting many times, is a corruption of the voting process weakening and robbing the peoples’ fundamental right to have their vote count. Fraudulent votes should not cancel out legitimate ones.

Many of the states and the Supreme Court have not definitively ruled on the ID issue. The Department of Justice, DOJ, has not chosen to use its power to prosecute the Philadelphia Black panthers for videotaped voter intimidation or dismantle Acorn’s morphed infrastructure that encouraged voter fraud. They have been reluctant to deal with this issue.

On the other side of the equation the Department of Justice has aggressively acted supposedly to increase voter turn out by suing the State of Texas’s voter ID laws and threatening to do the same to other states. The effects of the DOJ in interfering in states rights are to encourage illegal voters by making it easier for a person to pass as a legal voter. This relaxing of the need for identification is an open invitation for voter fraud.

When it comes to easy voting access for overseas soldiers, DOJ has reversed its enforcement policy. The DOJ appears to be against this voting group receiving the same consideration as they are offering the poor and minorities.  Even though congress has passed the 2009 MOVE Law mandating easier voting for military personnel. The DOJ has not pursued implementation of the law that was supposed to give soldiers more time to participate in US elections. In 2008 20% of overseas military voted while in 2010 only 4.6% was counted. This disenfranchising of the military personnel was the impetus for passing the MOVE Law.

Although congress had made its wishes known to assist soldiers to have easier access to voting, the DOJ filed a suit against Ohio extending early voting for military personnel. The DOJ has argued in court it is “arbitrary and unconstitutional” to give special consideration to service member voting. They also stated that there is no rational basis for distinction between military and civilian voters. Although there has been a tradition existing in our nation dating back to the Revolutionary War of giving special voting arrangements for military. Over a dozen fraternal organizations are filing suit against the DOJ’s position on behalf of our servicemen. Many military advocates are expressing the belief that the soldiers’ vote is being suppressed due to their Republican voting pattern.

Besides the DOJ’s seeming bias in enforcement of voting laws, the media is providing the American public with selective news. The establishment media appears to be acting like Democrat operatives instead of investigative journalists. Any unfavorable economic or foreign incident of the Obama administration is not reported while any Romney campaign activity is either ignored or framed in a negative light. The censoring of the news threatens the viability of our electoral process.

The media’s presidential polls also have raised eyebrows because of the questionable methodology being used. Democrats are over represented while Republicans are under counted.  This is skewing the poll results by the media assuming a much larger number of Democrats will vote by using the 2008 election as a reference point. They are doing this even though every indicator is pointing to a less enthusiastic Democrat voting base. This action appears to be a conscious effort to suppress Republican turnout and contributions to the party by making it appear that Romney does not have a chance.

Both parties have agreed to increase the time voters have to vote by the use of extending the time, days and using absentee ballots to the point that 35%-45% of the population votes before election day.  Early voting has a predictable consequence where the early voters do not have the full knowledge of the candidate’s stance because they have not had the full advantage of the debates and additional facts that will happen after their vote is cast.

It is not how many people vote but how many legal, informed citizens vote. It is not suppressing the vote to eliminate fraudulent voters from the voting rolls. It is the protecting of the sanctity of the voting process.

The media shenanigans of biased manipulation of the news is not a criminal offense but it is an ethical abdication of the free press’s essential responsibility as the fourth pillar of our free nation to report the truth. Suppression of legal voters by intimidation is a crime and should be prosecuted. Allowing and encouraging illegal voters or rigging the electronic voting devices are also criminal offenses that need to be severely punished to protect our vote.

The diabolical dictator, Josef Stalin, was partially right when he said it does not matter who votes but who counts the votes. In a free society it does matter that legally informed citizens vote. It is essential.

We the people have to do all the little things to be knowledgeable voters. We should study the candidates, be informed by seeking the truth in political statements and read the amendments on the ballot before voting.  We have to research on the Internet and alternative media as well as the legacy media to make an educated decision.

 We are witnessing first hand that suppressing legal voters and encouraging fraudulent voting can rob us of our constitutional republic.  Selecting the best leader to preserve our national identity and our liberty is worth every bit of citizen effort.