Quote Originally Posted by Alan View Post
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.
yes, various states have various laws, I guess we all know that. But that is not the topic. Nor is Ohio's voting laws compared to other states. completely irrelevant to the discussion. But a nice try at a diversion.
The topic is Ohio trying to apply it's laws unequally. Period. The justice department's job is to make sure the laws of the land, whatever they are, are applied equally. That is their job. Has not much to do with politics, and everything to do with THEIR JOB. Last I checked, Ohio is still a member of the United States, therefore under scrutiny by the Justice department if they try to fudge their laws. Now I'm sure if, say, Miss. tried to reinstate Jim Crow laws you would expect the justice dept to do their job try to put a stop to that. I'm sure if Calif tried to say only Rastafarian's could build churches in this state, you would expect the federal government to step in and put a stop to that.
Again, Ohio's generosity in early voting isn't the issue, nor is the military make-up of this forum, (however I'm pretty sure if the military were largely democratic voters, the republican legislature wouldn't be trying to get them exempt) the issue is unequal application of the laws, period.
You just can't bring yourself to say this is a wrong application of law can you. You just can't admit that this is an unfair and unequal application of the law. No matter who it benefits.