(sigh) here we go again...

[peggy]

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.

[Alan]

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.

No I can't. I don't see discrimination, just an attempt to make it easier for military personnel to vote, which does not infringe upon anyone else's ability to vote due to the remarkable amount of accommodation afforded to all voters in the state.

In the 2008 Presidential election, the percentage of the general populace voting in the election was 64%. The percentage of active duty military voting in the same election was 42%, probably due to the requirement to be away from home for extended periods of time.

I don't have a problem with states supporting our military members in whatever means possible to help compensate for the services they provide to the country. It's a hard job and they could use a little affirmative action on their behalf.

If you believe the federal government should be in the business of ensuring that everyone in the country enjoyed the same benefits and privileges regarding the mechanics of voting, you should have them looking into your states refusal to allow any in-person early voting at all. That is if you really believe their goal should be enforcing fairness.

[freein05]

I think the question should be why are we seeing all of these voting issues coming up since the Republicans took control of so many states. In PA the Republicans defending the new voter ID law admit there has not been any cases of voter fraud.

I think the Republican party should be ashamed of it's self for using such undemocratic methods to stay in power!!!!

[peggy]

No I can't. I don't see discrimination, just an attempt to make it easier for military personnel to vote, which does not infringe upon anyone else's ability to vote due to the remarkable amount of accommodation afforded to all voters in the state.

In the 2008 Presidential election, the percentage of the general populace voting in the election was 64%. The percentage of active duty military voting in the same election was 42%, probably due to the requirement to be away from home for extended periods of time.

I don't have a problem with states supporting our military members in whatever means possible to help compensate for the services they provide to the country. It's a hard job and they could use a little affirmative action on their behalf.

If you believe the federal government should be in the business of ensuring that everyone in the country enjoyed the same benefits and privileges regarding the mechanics of voting, you should have them looking into your states refusal to allow any in-person early voting at all. That is if you really believe their goal should be enforcing fairness.

Wow Alan, you are unbelievable! You keep misdirecting this topic to my state and how many days you have to vote, etc...when the topic is the unequal application of the law. Period. PERIOD.
Of course they are trying to make it easier for the military to vote, as this is largely a republican voting block. And what is the other side of easier? Harder. Why not make it EAISER for every Ohio citizen to vote?
I don't know why so many military didn't vote last time, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't because of deployments. I lived overseas 7 years so i voted in plenty of absentee votes. Not only was it easy, but talked about, sung about, encouraged and allowed time for, so no excuse there. The military living in the state are not under lock and key. They aren't slaves or prisoners, as it turns out, and are also given plenty of opportunity to vote. If they don't exercise this right, that's their problem. They don't need more time, just more motivation. And, as I pointed out earlier, no one is going to get surprise deployment orders Friday after hours to be gone before Tuesday. This is a straw man argument. Either let all Ohio citizens vote the previous weekend or none. If the voting laws are so generous in number of days, then they don't need to add this special little gift that is designed only for some.

But I get it. You are for unequal application of the laws. The laws only apply to some people, and not for others. Is this the republican platform cause I'm pretty sure that would be important to know. Certainly makes sense considering other points in the republican platform. I guess you need to scrape that old 'Rule of Law' bumper sticker off your truck. It doesn't serve the purpose anymore.

[Gregg]

I see a purely intellectual argument vs. actual application, but in the end I just don't see discrimination. If it was only male military members or only white military members that would obviously be wrong. If ONLY military personnel could vote in the 35 days prior to the election that would certainly raise questions. Since, the way I understand it, anyone who is a registered voter can vote in 32 of the 35 days prior to the election I would conclude that the state of Ohio is pretty accommodating when it comes to giving people a chance to vote.

I can see the idea behind shutting down the voting for a few days in advance of the election just to make sure everything is set up and working before the big day. Across the country it is a popular theme to find ways to give some extra benefits to our military. I support that trend as do many here. The three day deal, truthfully, just seems like a little lip service for the soldiers, but it IS a form of recognition.

I just can't seem to find any monster lurking under the bed because all the non-military voters can vote the week before the election, or the week before that, or the week before that, or even the week before that! I just can't imagine the scenario where someone in Ohio can ONLY get to the polls on the weekend before the election, but not have even one opportunity to get there for more than a month before the election or on election day or to use a mail in ballot. In the real world how many people could be in that situation? Peggy, if you can point out any reason that any block of voters would not be able to get to the polls at any time prior to that weekend OR on election day then I'm certainly willing to reconsider, but I just can't come up with that scenario in real life.

Discrimination and favoritism are not the same thing. Discrimination requires that someone is suffering or disadvantaged to be an issue. Because of the opportunity everyone in Ohio has to vote prior to the election I just can't see that anyone is disadvantaged here. It is true that military personnel are being showed a level of favoritism, but since I can't see how that hurts any other group and I am generally in favor of recognizing their service when we can I can't seem to find a reason to oppose that.

[Alan]

Wow Alan, you are unbelievable! You keep misdirecting this topic to my state and how many days you have to vote, etc...when the topic is the unequal application of the law. Period. PERIOD.
Of course they are trying to make it easier for the military to vote, as this is largely a republican voting block. And what is the other side of easier? Harder. Why not make it EAISER for every Ohio citizen to vote?
I don't know why so many military didn't vote last time, but I'm pretty sure it wasn't because of deployments. I lived overseas 7 years so i voted in plenty of absentee votes. Not only was it easy, but talked about, sung about, encouraged and allowed time for, so no excuse there. The military living in the state are not under lock and key. They aren't slaves or prisoners, as it turns out, and are also given plenty of opportunity to vote. If they don't exercise this right, that's their problem. They don't need more time, just more motivation. And, as I pointed out earlier, no one is going to get surprise deployment orders Friday after hours to be gone before Tuesday. This is a straw man argument. Either let all Ohio citizens vote the previous weekend or none. If the voting laws are so generous in number of days, then they don't need to add this special little gift that is designed only for some.

But I get it. You are for unequal application of the laws. The laws only apply to some people, and not for others. Is this the republican platform cause I'm pretty sure that would be important to know. Certainly makes sense considering other points in the republican platform. I guess you need to scrape that old 'Rule of Law' bumper sticker off your truck. It doesn't serve the purpose anymore.

This is a good example of why I love you so much Peg, that single minded determination to find fault with anything that can be linked to the enemy. It's quite entertaining.


I see this in the same manner you might see progressive taxation which holds some people to no standard and others to a very high standard. If you want to argue an equal application of the 'Rule of Law', you could start there as it affects so many other people.Or perhaps a better analogy would be affirmative action programs which are considered to be perfectly acceptable programs even though they provide preferential treatment to targeted groups.

In this matter, the facts are that every Ohio citizen has a hugely generous window in which to vote in person. A much more generous window than many other states. I believe that allowing military members to be exempted from the 72 hour closing window is more of a way of recognizing the hardship associated with serving your country. You believe it's part of a master plan to deny the vote to Democrats. We'll never agree on that point.

[AnneM]

Gosh! I have been reading the two threads in this Simple Public Policy forum that are being dominated by Peggy. Peggy, I don't know you and I am sure you are a nice person, but your posts are full of so much vitriol!

By the way, I have many active military in my family, and they run both red and blue. We shouldn't pigeonhole someone as following a certain set of political beliefs, just because they are in the military.