Fraud claims don’t hold up

October 16, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
There’s a fight going on in Indiana against early-voting sites, but the punches are being thrown at the wrong opponent.

A few Republicans in the typically Democratic-leaning Lake County have challenged the use of satellite voting sites because they feared it would increase the chance of voter fraud.

Because of conflicting court rulings in Lake Circuit and Superior courts, the Indiana Supreme Court stepped in and consolidated the cases for a speedy resolution yesterday.

Why? Because people want to vote early. Lines are forming in clerks’ offices and satellite voting sites across the state because people are eager to cast their votes.

The Republicans challenging the early-voting sites are using the excuse of voter fraud to try to make a legitimate claim to close these voting sites, but it seems to me those Republicans want to restrict voters’ access to these sites, which may be easier for voters to get to instead of the clerk’s office. Typically, it’s Democratic voters relying on public transportation or a ride from someone in order to vote. These closer, early-voting sites will help them out more.

How will voting early, in person, increase the chance of voter fraud? Voters will still have to produce a government-issued ID in order to vote, just as they would if they voted on Election Day.

If the Republicans (or Democrats for that matter) want to challenge something, how about absentee voting, in which you don’t have to produce an ID before mailing in your vote? Seems to me that’s where you’ll get your voter fraud, not from in-person absentee ballots cast at a satellite voting site.
ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT
  1. I have had an ongoing custody case for 6 yrs. I should have been the sole legal custodial parent but was a victim of a vindictive ex and the system biasedly supported him. He is an alcoholic and doesn't even have a license for two yrs now after his 2nd DUI. Fast frwd 6 yrs later my kids are suffering poor nutritional health, psychological issues, failing in school, have NO MD and the GAL could care less, DCS doesn't care. The child isn't getting his ADHD med he needs and will not succeed in life living this way. NO one will HELP our family.I tried for over 6 yrs. The judge called me an idiot for not knowing how to enter evidence and the last hearing was 8 mths ago. That in itself is unjust! The kids want to be with their Mother! They are being alienated from her and fed lies by their Father! I was hit in a car accident 3 yrs ago and am declared handicapped myself. Poor poor way to treat the indigent in Indiana!

  2. The Indiana DOE released the 2015-2016 school grades in Dec 2016 and my local elementary school is a "C" grade school. Look at the MCCSC boundary maps and how all of the most affluent neighborhoods have the best performance. It is no surprise that obtaining residency in the "A" school boundaries cost 1.5 to 3 times as much. As a parent I should have more options than my "C" school without needing to pay the premium to live in the affluent parts of town. If the charter were authorized by a non-religious school the plaintiffs would still be against it because it would still be taking per-pupil money from them. They are hiding behind the guise of religion as a basis for their argument when this is clearly all about money and nothing else.

  3. This is a horrible headline. The article is about challenging the ability of Grace College to serve as an authorizer. 7 Oaks is not a religiously affiliated school

  4. Congratulations to Judge Carmichael for making it to the final three! She is an outstanding Judge and the people of Indiana will benefit tremendously if/when she is chosen.

  5. The headline change to from "religious" to "religious-affiliated" is still inaccurate and terribly misleading.

ADVERTISEMENT