(sigh) here we go again...

[Alan]

ok Gregg, fair enough. But I do want to hear your input when you have thought about it awhile. Alan's too, although I can pretty much guess his take on this, but maybe I'm wrong, and should apologize for assuming.

I think it's a non-issue being exploited for political gain.

Previously, the local board of elections in Ohio determined early in-person voting times for their area, which resulted in some counties having evening and weekend hours while others didn't. Now, the state has stepped in and created legislation to apply uniformity to the statewide election process and limiting all in-person early voting (excepting military members) during the 72 hours leading up to election day, although affirming that early in-person voting is allowed beginning 35 days prior to election day.

These rules apply across the board. No one can vote in person during that 72 hour period, therefore the Obama administrations claim that certain demographics would be unduly repressed seems absurd when taken at face value.

Every state has it's own rules regarding in-person early voting. Some don't allow it at all! And yet, for some reason, the Justice Department has decided to go after Ohio. It's importance as a swing state probably has nothing to do with it dontcha think?

If you really want my opinion, I'd say that the lawsuit re-affirms my belief that the Obama administration believes it can only win if it divides the nation, creating the allusion of victimhood to as many people as possible. I'll be glad when it's over.

[Gregg]

Am I understanding that correctly Alan, that people (as in any registered voter) can vote up to 35 days before the election, just not in the 3 days immediately before? If that is correct then the exemption for military personnel makes sense to me as the possibility they could be deployed out of state in that time frame does exist where it really doesn't for most of the rest of us. I can see the rub if the 35 day window were to close, but as it stands it sounds like there is no issue to debate. Unless there happens to be a significant number of procrastinators (from a protesting party who shall remain nameless) that just can't make it to the polls on election day...

[Alan]

Am I understanding that correctly Alan, that people (as in any registered voter) can vote up to 35 days before the election, just not in the 3 days immediately before?

Yes.
Anyone interested in a review of the current rules for early voting in all the states can see a breakdown here: http://www.longdistancevoter.org/early_voting_rules
As I previously mentioned, some states don't allow it at all. Others may limit it to 10 days before the election and still others may exclude weekends from their early voting time frame.

It certainly makes me wonder why Ohio was singled out for prosecution by the Justice Department.

[peggy]

I think it's a non-issue being exploited for political gain.

Previously, the local board of elections in Ohio determined early in-person voting times for their area, which resulted in some counties having evening and weekend hours while others didn't. Now, the state has stepped in and created legislation to apply uniformity to the statewide election process and limiting all in-person early voting (excepting military members) during the 72 hours leading up to election day, although affirming that early in-person voting is allowed beginning 35 days prior to election day.

These rules apply across the board. No one can vote in person during that 72 hour period, therefore the Obama administrations claim that certain demographics would be unduly repressed seems absurd when taken at face value.

Every state has it's own rules regarding in-person early voting. Some don't allow it at all! And yet, for some reason, the Justice Department has decided to go after Ohio. It's importance as a swing state probably has nothing to do with it dontcha think?

If you really want my opinion, I'd say that the lawsuit re-affirms my belief that the Obama administration believes it can only win if it divides the nation, creating the allusion of victimhood to as many people as possible. I'll be glad when it's over.

It's only a non issue if it's not your vote being 'tampered' with. Why this arbitrary stop of early voting, except with military? My family was in the military 30 years, these people get a lunch break, most weekends off, coffee breaks, just like everyone else. And I can almost guarantee you no one is going to be 'surprised' with deployment orders after hours on Friday to leave before Tuesday. That just doesn't happen. In fact, even in war time, you generally get weeks or even months notice. But even if it were to happen to one person, that person's spouse isn't going with him/her, so why give this special treatment to her/him?
But that's not the issue. Why deny the rest of Ohio voters this weekend? Because, first of all Ohio went to Obama last time and the republican legislature wants to change that. Traditionally many voters go after church on the Sunday before the election. This is a tradition with many people, especially minorities. Republicans know this which is why they are doing this. It is yet another blatant attempt to suppress democratic votes in a swing state.
No illusion here, Allen. It's very real discrimination. Why ever would you support denying Ohio voters what they have traditionally had, but only give it to the military? Forget the '35 days' crap, we are talking about the 3 days before the election, when people traditionally vote. How is it a non issue to allow one voting block to have those 3 days and no one else?

This tampering with the voting rules just reaffirms my belief that the Republicans think they can only win if they divide the nation further with arbitrary rules that seek to suppress democratic voters, knowing their own base is either too incurious or ideologically blinded to either notice or care. Or they will find ways to justify the unequal application of 'rules'.

[Alan]

No illusion here, Allen. It's very real discrimination. Why ever would you support denying Ohio voters what they have traditionally had, but only give it to the military? Forget the '35 days' crap, we are talking about the 3 days before the election, when people traditionally vote. How is it a non issue to allow one voting block to have those 3 days and no one else?

It's not true that Ohio voters are being denied something they've traditionally had. In the 2000 Presidential election, my wife and I were scheduled to be in France on election day. Since there was no in-person early voting allowed at that time, we had to vote using absentee ballots and had to prove that we would not be within our district on election day in order to do that.

With the adoption of early, in-person, voting the rules for implementation were left to the various counties to adopt and as a result I think that only a dozen or so ever allowed weekend voting at all. My county was not one of them.

Perhaps you can argue that the state shouldn't have imposed a standard on the counties and you may even argue that it shouldn't have allowed an exception to military members, but neither of those seem to be your point.

I can tell you that Ohio provides more early voting opportunity than most other states in terms of the number of days it is allowed, and it's 72 hour ban is not unusual either as several other states do the same.

I believe the Justice Department's lawsuit is designed to inspire folks like yourself, who read a slanted opinion piece on how terrible the Republicans are, to make their way to the polls early and often. That sort of thing does seem to work for some.

Edited to add:

By the way, you live in Missouri don't you? Your state doesn't allow in-person early voting at all while my state of Ohio allows 32 days of in-person early voting. And we're the one being sued?

[peggy]

voter Fraud is a complete non issue Alan and you know it so I would very much appreciate it if you quit implying that Democrats cheat regularly by voting 'early and often'.

The ban on early voting the 3 days prior is unequal! That is exactly my point. Have it for none, or have it for all. Pretty simple Alan. No smoke and mirrors, just equal application of the voting rules for ALL.

Excuse me if I don't buy their 'perfectly reasonable' explanation for this from the republican legislature as the republicans have been screwing with voting laws across the nation in order to help their guy win. Dishonest cheaters, from your leader Rush Limbaugh who advised his followers to vote in liberal primaries where allowed to screw up the nominations, to the Penn republican chairman who inadvertently 'gave away' what we already knew.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o32tF-S6K60
and a Wisconsin republican senator agrees.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/201...hman-voter-id/

Whether they have 5 days or 50 days or 20 minutes to vote is not the issue. Absentee ballots are not the issue. Ohio's laws compared to other states is not the issue.
It is an issue when laws are applied unequally, favoring one group over another. Period

[Alan]

voter Fraud is a complete non issue Alan and you know it so I would very much appreciate it if you quit implying that Democrats cheat regularly by voting 'early and often'.

The ban on early voting the 3 days prior is unequal! That is exactly my point. Have it for none, or have it for all. Pretty simple Alan. No smoke and mirrors, just equal application of the voting rules for ALL.

Excuse me if I don't buy their 'perfectly reasonable' explanation for this from the republican legislature as the republicans have been screwing with voting laws across the nation in order to help their guy win. Dishonest cheaters, from your leader Rush Limbaugh who advised his followers to vote in liberal primaries where allowed to screw up the nominations, to the Penn republican chairman who inadvertently 'gave away' what we already knew.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o32tF-S6K60
and a Wisconsin republican senator agrees.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/201...hman-voter-id/

Whether they have 5 days or 50 days or 20 minutes to vote is not the issue. Absentee ballots are not the issue. Ohio's laws compared to other states is not the issue.
It is an issue when laws are applied unequally, favoring one group over another. Period

Well if you simply don't want the military to be exempted from another state's early voting rules, you should have just said so rather than basing your thread on the disenfranchisement of Americans.

[peggy]

Well if you simply don't want the military to be exempted from another state's early voting rules, you should have just said so rather than basing your thread on the disenfranchisement of Americans.

Well it's a republican legislature and they have been pulling all sorts of dirty tricks all across the country so I call it as i see it. But for Ohio, specifically, it is an issue of equal application of the law. I don't want to exempt anyone, I think all states should have early voting including the weekend before the election. Too many people have difficulty getting to the polls during the week and this would help everyone. It would allow everyone to vote, no excuses, and i want everyone to vote. It's their duty.
Do you agree this is wrong application of the law? And not just your off hand dismissal of the justice departments doing their job as a 'liberal' thing.

[Alan]

Well it's a republican legislature and they have been pulling all sorts of dirty tricks all across the country so I call it as i see it. But for Ohio, specifically, it is an issue of equal application of the law. I don't want to exempt anyone, I think all states should have early voting including the weekend before the election. Too many people have difficulty getting to the polls during the week and this would help everyone. It would allow everyone to vote, no excuses, and i want everyone to vote. It's their duty.
Do you agree this is wrong application of the law? And not just your off hand dismissal of the justice departments doing their job as a 'liberal' thing.

Voting is a state issue as evidenced by the varying laws in the 50 states. The Federal Government has no business injecting itself into the issue for any means, much less political means. Ohio's early voting requirements are more generous than the vast majority of states. It allows three weekends of early voting for those who would prefer that the DNC provide bus service from their churches directly to the nearest polling place. There are at least a dozen other states that limit early voting ranging from 2 to 7 days prior to election day.

A reasonable review of Ohio early voting requirements would show that they are among the most generous in terms of accommodation in the entire country.

The real issue seems to be that the legislature decided to allow military members and their families to be exempted from the 72 hour closing window. Your argument, which mirrors the Justice Dept's lawsuit, seems to be that this results in a Republican advantage, an argument that I find specious.

Just consider this forum as an example. Several folks have previously identified themselves as past military members or as military dependants. There's you, a liberal, Freein05 - liberal, Beststash - liberal, Spartana - mostly liberal, Storyteller - admitted socialist, and me - conservative. That's certainly not scientific and probably not indicative of the political makeup of today's active duty military, but it at least tells me that the Republican party doesn't have a lock on the military vote.

[JaneV2.0]

Although I take bae's point about the positive aspects of neighborhood voting, this kind of thing--along with various historical political shenanigans--make me even more of a booster of vote-by-mail for all. A paper trail, no lines, and fewer shenanigans. All good.