As has been obsessively chronicled here, Wisconsin had some problems with its last election. This is in contradistinction to Ohio, which has none. To recap:
Liberals shouted from the mountain tops that there was widespread electoral fraud perpetrated by Republicans in Ohio.
There was none. The Dems on the other hand...
Liberals decried acts of voter suppression against likely Kerry voters in Ohio.
However, in Wisconsin there was both fraud and suppression. By Democrats.
In an attempt to keep dead people and cartoon characters from voting, the Wisconsin legislature passed a law that, inter alia, requires voters to prove that they are who they claim they are by means of a photo ID. On Friday, Wisconsin's "governor" fulfilled his promise to veto it.
In most, if not all states, when the governor vetoes a bill, he or she will send a letter to the leaders of each legislative body outlining the reasons for the veto. And this is where we at the KAR will attempt something that, as far as we know, has never been done on a blog before.
We are going to fisk a governor's Veto Letter (.pdf file):
April 29, 2005
TO THE HONORABLE MEMBERS OF THE ASSEMBLY:
I am vetoing AB 63 in its entirety. This bill would require voters and persons registering at the polls on Election Day to show photo identification before being allowed to vote or register on Election Day. This bill would also repeal the current law that allows individuals to register by having their residence corroborated by another elector.
Which evokes this mental picture:
Democrat 1: I'd like to vouch for my friend's residence so he can vote.
Poll Worker: Very well. Where do you live sir?
Street Person: No hablo ingles.
Poll Worker: Ah, I see you are a member of an officially recognized victim group. Could you please translate for me sir?
Democrat 1: No problem. He said that he lives in a boat anchored outside the breakwall near McKinley Marina.
Poll Worker: Good enough for me! Here are your ballots.
Democrat 1: Don't worry, Pepe. I'll fill out your ballot for you.
Street Person: Donde estan mis pantalones?!
I am vetoing AB 63 because it places unnecessary restrictions on voting and is inconsistent with Wisconsin's proud tradition of ensuring maximum access to the constitutionally protected right to vote.
Unnecessary restrictions? Just about everybody of voting age should have some form of an official state photo ID. It's called a driver's license. I'm sure some sort of program could be put in place to get IDs to those few who do not. Is Jim Doyle the one Democrat that is reluctant to spend money?
In the 2004 election, Wisconsin ranked third in the nation in voter turnout, with about 75 percent of eligible voters showing up to exercise their right to vote.
Of course the fact that some people voted several times wouldn't have skewed that number at all...
AB 63 would make Wisconsin's election laws the strictest in the country and put us on equal footing with South Carolina, a state that had only a 50 percent turnout -- one of the worst voter turnouts in the nation.
But at least all of the South Carolina voters were actual people. And what is it about moonbats using comparisons to southern states to prove their points? Aside from being insulting, this "argument" is specious: would Doyle trade a corrupt election with a high turnout for a legitimate election with a somewhat lower (but still pretty high) turnout?
Yes he would. He's vetoing this bill, isn't he?
When it comes to voting rights and voter turnout, we shouldn't trade our laws for South Carolina's.
Like I just said: yes we should.
While it is true that Wisconsin's election system is in need of reform, AB 63 is not the answer.
What is particularly troubling about AB 63 is that it in no way addresses the problems that it is supposedly intended to remedy. AB 63 does not prevent felons from voting.
Fair point. Then again, they could pass another bill to address that issue; I am sure Doyle would veto that one too. Another crappy argument.
It does not prevent individuals from voting twice or ensure that the address appearing on a photo ID card is in fact accurate and up to date.
No, the DMV takes care of that. Maybe we should just repeal the underage drinking laws since kids tend to get their hands on fake IDs.
AB 63 does not make the lines at polling places any shorter or make them move any faster.
So f***ing what? Neither does putting a map of the ward on the wall of the polling station.
When do you folks in Wisconsin get to vote this turd out of office anyway?
And it does not make the job of poll workers any easier. In fact, AB 63 creates a host of additional administrative burdens for poll workers as they would be forced to interpret the accuracy and authenticity of each photo ID card and also determine whether individuals appearing without the required photo ID fall into one of the exemptions or whether their ballots should be marked and treated as provisional.
Yeah, it's hell being a bartender.
AB 63 creates more problems than it solves.
No. Jim Doyle creates more problems than he solves.
In addition, AB 63 would disenfranchise tens of thousands of otherwise eligible, elderly voters who do not have a driver's license or valid Wisconsin photo ID card. As I have noted before, according to the Department of Transportation, there are nearly 100,000 elderly voters in Wisconsin who would be disenfranchised by this bill. I refuse to sign into law a bill that would make it harder for Wisconsin's senior citizens to exercise their right to vote.
Now there's a good Democrat. Start dividing up the constituency into discrete victim groups and manufacture a sob story. It's bullshit, of course. For some anecdotal evidence, read this.
And where's the concern for the franchise of all of those voters whose votes were cancelled out by moonbat activists who voted 2, 3 or more times using phony registrations?
Doyle doesn't care about them. They voted for the wrong guy.
What the 2004 election revealed is that to properly accommodate increasing voter turnout Wisconsin's election system needs improvement. We ought to be focused on making it easier for legitimate voters to vote, and ensuring that every valid vote is counted. A photo ID requirement won't achieve either objective...
...other than making it harder for votes to be illegitimate....
...but it will disenfranchise tens of thousands of Wisconsin seniors who don't have drivers' licenses.
Which is an easily solved problem (if the nature and extent of the problem is what Doyle says it is). But it will take more than three brain cells to solve it, so Doyle does not come equipped for the task.
Three weeks ago, I proposed a comprehensive package of election reform that addresses the real problems: the understaffed and under-trained polling workforce, the lack of statewide uniformity in election administration, and the burdens associated with our absentee voting system.
Again, more lefty misdirection: "hey look: the problem isn't the one you actually see (people voting multiple times under phony registrations), it's hiding behind that rock over there (assertions of inefficiencies that were seldom reported, and never corroborated)."
The measures that I proposed will help restore integrity to our election system and give clerks and poll workers the tools and resources they need to properly administer elections in Wisconsin. Most importantly, my proposed reforms, unlike AB 63, do not undercut our proud history of ensuring maximum access to the ballot box in Wisconsin [to Democrats -ed.].
B F***KING S!
The protection of our citizens' fundamental rights is of utmost importance.
As long as they vote for Democrats.
Any legislative attempt to restrict those rights must be carefully scrutinized.
How is the presentation of a photo ID a "restriction of rights"? Maybe we should also do away with that cumbersome form on which one must write one's name and address in order to register to vote.
Because AB 63 needlessly strips away full and unfettered access to voting for some of Wisconsin's most vulnerable citizens [to wit: the dead, the cartoon characters, the vampires, and the famous celebrities who live elsewhere in the country -ed.] including nearly 100,000 senior citizens -- I cannot sign it into law.
/s/(in crayon) X
Yep. I can picture us in the Blogging Hall of Fame already: the KAR's trailblazing Veto Letter Fisk right next to an exhibit on Elder's 14-part series about vibrating razors.