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. Excellent initiative on the part of the AG. Thankfully someone takes action against predators taking advantage of people who have already been through the wringer. Well done!

  2. Conour will never turn these funds over to his defrauded clients. He tearfully told the court, and his daughters dutifully pledged in interviews, that his first priority is to repay every dime of the money he stole from his clients. Judge Young bought it, much to the chagrin of Conour’s victims. Why would Conour need the $2,262 anyway? Taxpayers are now supporting him, paying for his housing, utilities, food, healthcare, and clothing. If Conour puts the money anywhere but in the restitution fund, he’s proved, once again, what a con artist he continues to be and that he has never had any intention of repaying his clients. Judge Young will be proven wrong... again; Conour has no remorse and the Judge is one of the many conned.

  3. Pass Legislation to require guilty defendants to pay for the costs of lab work, etc as part of court costs...

  4. The fee increase would be livable except for the 11% increase in spending at the Disciplinary Commission. The Commission should be focused on true public harm rather than going on witch hunts against lawyers who dare to criticize judges.

  5. Marijuana is safer than alcohol. AT the time the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act was enacted all major pharmaceutical companies in the US sold marijuana products. 11 Presidents of the US have smoked marijuana. Smoking it does not increase the likelihood that you will get lung cancer. There are numerous reports of canabis oil killing many kinds of incurable cancer. (See Rick Simpson's Oil on the internet or facebook).

ADVERTISEMENT