Letter: New Vote-Denying Laws Are Shameful

Editor’s note: The following letter is in response to Frank Morelli’s letter “Support For Mitt Romney,” published last week.

First of all, I’m not going to respond to Mr. Morelli’s 12 points (facts to him) but rather deal with his first point. It bespeaks of Mr. Morelli poignantly!

Dispelling it through fact, to me, means that being untruthful once suffices for me to disregard the rest. Mr. Morelli wrote that “Mr. Obama will win if enough people vote who are… not eligible to vote” — a clear insinuation if I ever heard one that there is Democratic voting fraud.

The facts in Florida point out almost zero ineligible voters voted in our 2008 elections, but our governor put out a list of 182,000 who are registered but may be ineligible. So far, the records show that 98.4 percent are eligible, and the rest are being checked out.

For our last few national elections I believe fewer than 25 ineligible voters voted nationally, and now millions might be disenfranchised by Republican states with Republican governors to ensure a Republican victory. We can argue until the cows come home, but there is no proof of voter fraud, and by statute, 90 days before an election (or primary), one cannot institute new voting rules because it is insufficient time to remedy any issues. Yet this has occurred in numerous “red states.”

The vast majority of those being targeted are Latinos and blacks, and statistics show them mostly pro-Democrat (perhaps more so now). Here and in many states, voter suppression has been not unlike our old-time poll taxes and literacy tests to exempt minorities from voting (mostly Democrats) by cutting voting days, requiring heretofore never required photo ID, cutting Sundays before the elections (effectively stopping minority churchgoers who traditionally go by church buses to vote), etc.

In one state, the attorney general was bragging that the new requirements “would give Romney the election,” and this was televised on TV. Ordinarily I would not put this on Mr. Morelli’s feet, but he brought this up, and he should be ashamed.

To date almost every state that has attempted this has been struck down by state courts, in many of which the judges were Republican-appointed, many by George W. Bush.

It is the most heinous act in a democracy, and for Mr. Morelli to bring it up tells me much about his beliefs. There is proof that the number of voters committing this act is so small as to be infinitesimal, but the Republican response would/could stop millions from voting.

Mr. Morelli is not outraged, rather his partisanship prevails; win at any cost. His terms such as “Kool-Aid progressives,” “graduates of liberal universities,” “rejecting God” are not only generalizations but inflammatory Republican talking points. He is parroting!

I guess that because his candidate cannot relay his own message without putting his foot in his mouth, Mr. Morelli has tried, but his first point, of ineligible voters voting, shows his dearth of facts and, might I add, an inhumanity for those elderly and unable to procure new documents immediately before an election.

Let it be noted, they had almost three-and-a-half years to prove their points and try to change things. Instead, they waited past the legal time frame for these changes. This out-Herods Herod!

George Unger