The Department of Justice approves New Hampshire’s voter ID law
Back on June 27th, the last day of session, the state legislature voted to overturn Governor John Lynch’s veto of the voter ID law and beginning in this Tuesday’s primary contest the law was slated to go into effect unless the federal government stepped in and stopped it.
I fully expected Eric Holder to intervene by suing the state to stop implementation of this law, and judging by the reaction of the opponents to the law, so did they. Democrats called this law an extreme attempt by the radical Tea Party Republican legislature at stopping minorities from voting because they are nothing but a bunch of racists. You know, the usual name calling.
It turns out–and I didn’t know this–that the Department of Injustice wouldn’t even have to sue New Hampshire to stop this law because New Hampshire is subject to the Voting Rights Act because in 1968 ten towns had low voter turnout because the state still required a literacy test as a requirement to vote.
The Department of Injustice could have simply ruled this law invalid and there was nothing the state could have done about it, but yesterday Eric Holder approved the new law and it will go into effect immediately.
On top of this comes news that the Department of Injustice also approved another bill which drew the scorn of Democrats in the state, the residency requirement law, which also saw a Governor Lynch veto overridden. Needless to say the Democrat claimed the Republicans were trying to suppress the college vote because college students tend to vote Democrat. Obviously the federal government didn’t see it that way. The law simply states that you must either be a resident of New Hampshire, or intend to become one in the near future, in order for you to participate in state elections.
The Democrats in the state tried to use these two laws as examples of how radical the Republicans in the legislature are, but unfortunately for the Democrats the federal government didn’t agree with them.
America's Watchtower 
I still don’t understand what is wrong with either of those points. Literacy, one would think, would be a good thing in a voter, and identification of said voter would prevent criminal multiple voting or voting in someone else’s name. Oh, oops, mybad. That’s why the enemy wants those things quashed.
LikeLike
Agreed! And you are right, the last thing the left wants is an informed voter that is why they fight all these attempts.
LikeLike
*SIGH* I know, I know. What’s wrong with me?
LikeLike
I don’t think it is you who has the problem, it is the left who has issues. Our only problem is that we still hope things are on the up and up when clearly they are not.
LikeLike
Literacy is fine in a voter – let me administer the tests.
Hope all’s well with everyone. It’s raining cats and dogs right now here in New York City, where the BW and I are spending a few days around tomorrow’s wedding of my eldest to a man who actually asked our blessing for their marriage – a wonderful beginning.
Take good care and may God bless us all!
TGY
LikeLike
Glad all is well!
LikeLike
Congratulations on the wedding! Rain can be a blessing or a curse, so hope it clears up in time for what you need to do if it is outside!
LikeLike
I was actually shocked to learn about the literacy test and was equally shocked that New Hampshire fell under the Voting Rights Act. I like to think I am up on New Hampshire politics, but I had no clue about this.
Congrats on the impending wedding and it sounds like she picked an upstanding young man.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on Cmblake6's Weblog and commented:
Well, somebody pulled their head out.
LikeLike
Thanks again!
LikeLike
Did you ever think that maybe AG Holder has more stuff on his plate now and this is just not as important to him as it once was? We have no idea what all is going on under the radar, but we can only hope that he is in deep at this point. Maybe Joe Arpaio has some things going on that we don’t know about, as well. The excuse that those poor people can’t vote because they don’t have an ID, is a bunch of crap…if they are on welfare or ssi or medicaid, etc, they have ID’s, how stupid do they think we are? It is very easy to get a state ID at the drivers license facility and the ID is probably free, it is here in Illinois. These are just more excuses and there are those that buy into it, I do not. Good luck on your votes, you will be a step ahead of most of us that don’t require ID’s.
LikeLike
Maybe there is more at play here, perhaps Holder is too busy defending himself and can’t concern himself with this issue right now. But I am not sure if that is the case because he simply could have deemed the law in violation of the Voting Rights Act and be done with it without much effort. Or perhaps he just couldn’t find any justification to block the law, I don’t know what the reason is, but I am happy with the result.
LikeLike
What is the chance that the DOJ will challenge the results in precincts where Obama loses? I don’t put anything past this administration.
LikeLike
That is an interesting question Jim and I wouldn’t put it past this administration either.
LikeLike
Jim, didn’t we hear awhile back that Obama was “lawyering up” just for this reason? If they can’t find those extra ballots in trunks or basements, then they can always challenge the vote with his attornies.
LikeLike
Yes he is Lou, and it makes one think that this election could get very ugly after the votes are cast.
LikeLike
Voting without a picture ID and having courts uphold “voters rights” is ridiculously-outrageous! You can’t take a piss these days without some form of picture identification. When the Felons and The Dead vote…anything is possible.
Good for New Hampshire! I think the AG, the Obamanation administration and those loony judge panels are not finished with this issue yet…Remember…”Win at any cost.”
PLU from SSF
LikeLike
You are probably right, they just might have something up their sleeve on this issue and we won’t find out what it is until after the election.
LikeLike
I to think that he is out to win, at any cost, Don. Pretty bad for a president that has done nothing but negative things for our country.
LikeLike
Given how he has fought other voter ID laws, I find it odd that Eric Holder would let this one slip through the cracks. Makes me wonder what he has up his sleeve.
LikeLike
I guess the difference here is that the law is a little more lenient in regards to what can be used as ID. In the primary on Tuesday IDs will be asked for but not needed to vote in order to prep voters for the new law, and over three years the law will be fully implemented. Once the law is fully enacted a person can still cast a provisional ballot if he or she agrees to be photographed at the polls, plus a person who doesn’t have an ID will be able to get one free of charge. I think that is why he approved it, but I am still shocked.
LikeLike