Why the American Presidential Election Could Be Tainted
Published in Le Point
(France) on 6 August 2012
by Michel Colomès (link to original)
(France) on 6 August 2012
by Michel Colomès (link to original)
Translated from
by Diana Huet de Guerville.
Edited by Lydia Dallett.
"Will Ohio count your vote?" This was the striking headline from the Cincinnati Enquirer, the leading state newspaper, which raised this issue: Certain voters may not be able to cast their ballot during the American presidential election. The Ohio congress has adopted new rules to shorten the time period for early voting, and above all to virtually exclude provisional voting for voters whose identity is uncertain, who are not on the right lists or who have changed polling locations since the last election.
This is a significant issue in a country like the U.S. where people move around much more than the French do and don't hesitate to look for work in a faraway state. In Ohio alone, there were over 200,000 provisional ballots cast in 2008. This means that at national level, a million votes are at stake - enough votes to shift majorities at the local level and, above all, to heavily influence the outcome of the presidential election.
Identification
As a result, all across the country, from Wisconsin to Texas, lawsuits have been filed in federal courts to try and clamp down on local legislation seeking to determine who can vote, when they can vote and whether that vote will be counted once the ballot is cast. For the most part, the new rules pertain to the voter's identity. In the United States a simple card showing proof of voter registration is typically all that is needed to vote.
The new laws require voters to present a form of identification as well - as do most European countries, admittedly. But, and this is uniquely American, many citizens have neither a passport nor an identification card, and sometimes not even a driver's license.
The Democrats at a Disadvantage
Barack Obama's team is well aware of what's going on: Most of these new laws have been adopted in local governments with a Republican majority, and in states like Pennsylvania, Virginia and New Hampshire, all swing states where the results are uncertain and could go either way. Yet is it any coincidence that the new rules are likely to affect minorities or young first-time voters? Strangely enough, these are the categories of voters who traditionally lean Democrat.
Demonstration: In Pennsylvania, 750,000 voters could be kept from voting by new directives requiring recognized forms of identification. Yet in 2008, Barack Obama won the state by 600,000 votes.
This is a significant issue in a country like the U.S. where people move around much more than the French do and don't hesitate to look for work in a faraway state. In Ohio alone, there were over 200,000 provisional ballots cast in 2008. This means that at national level, a million votes are at stake - enough votes to shift majorities at the local level and, above all, to heavily influence the outcome of the presidential election.
Identification
As a result, all across the country, from Wisconsin to Texas, lawsuits have been filed in federal courts to try and clamp down on local legislation seeking to determine who can vote, when they can vote and whether that vote will be counted once the ballot is cast. For the most part, the new rules pertain to the voter's identity. In the United States a simple card showing proof of voter registration is typically all that is needed to vote.
The new laws require voters to present a form of identification as well - as do most European countries, admittedly. But, and this is uniquely American, many citizens have neither a passport nor an identification card, and sometimes not even a driver's license.
The Democrats at a Disadvantage
Barack Obama's team is well aware of what's going on: Most of these new laws have been adopted in local governments with a Republican majority, and in states like Pennsylvania, Virginia and New Hampshire, all swing states where the results are uncertain and could go either way. Yet is it any coincidence that the new rules are likely to affect minorities or young first-time voters? Strangely enough, these are the categories of voters who traditionally lean Democrat.
Demonstration: In Pennsylvania, 750,000 voters could be kept from voting by new directives requiring recognized forms of identification. Yet in 2008, Barack Obama won the state by 600,000 votes.
Previous article![]( "Two Auroras a Day")
