Democrats in US House Urge All Secretaries of State to Oppose New Voting Laws

While Minnesota is leading the Nation in Convictions for Voter Fraud, all four Democrat members of Minnesota’s congressional delegation have signed a letter urging secretaries of state to cool it on enforcing their respective state’s new election integrity laws. 

The letter, addressed to the 50 secretaries of state, decries the supposed disenfranchisement of people somehow unable to obtain free state-issued ID.

 

House minority whip Steny Hoyer (MD-5) sponsored the letter. A press release from his office describes it as “urging the secretaries of state to oppose new measures that make it harder to register and vote,” meaning voter ID.

 

While the persistent problem of voter fraud been proven time and again in court, resulting in over 100 recent convictions in Minnesota alone, the argument that Voter ID laws disenfranchise voters has been rejected in the US and state Supreme Courts.

 

Groups like the League of Women Voters, Common Cause and the NAACP have been busy suing states who enact voter ID laws, based on the disenfranchisement theory. The only problem is they haven’t been able to bring even a single individual before a court who would have actually been unable to vote because of a photo ID requirement.

 

The Brennan Center for Justice recently published a paper suggesting up to 5 million people will be disenfranchised by voter ID laws, but it’s pure speculation that’s refuted by all legally admissible evidence (or lack thereof) heard by the courts.

 

A US District Court Judge in Georgia was initially swayed by the hyperbolic warnings of mass disenfranchisement and issued a temporary restraining order against implementing the state’s new Voter ID law. Then, he heard the case.

After hearing all the arguments and evidence, Judge Harold Murphy ultimately upheld Georgia’s Voter ID law. He found the fact that the plaintiffs, despite their efforts, had failed to uncover anyone “‘who can attest to the fact that he/she will be prevented from voting,’ provides significant support for the conclusion that the Photo ID requirement does not unduly burden the right to vote.”

So what do Reps. Walz, Peterson, McCollum and Ellison have against clean elections?