Whenever the Democrats get uppity about ID to vote I have to ask questions. Doesn’t the government require ID for many things, including welfare, EBT, and Social Security? Then there’s travel, a library card, a license for a pet, opening a back account, cashing a check, buying alcohol, renting a car, renting a room, buying tobacco, donating blood, buying adult material – unless you’re in the Pubic School system (that’s not a typo), and (of course) access to medical care.
That’d be a short list, but if you look down the list, it is a litany of things people engage in more frequently than voting. At no point is any “no-voter-ID democrat” weeping about the hardships of this for anyone, particularly the disabled, several of whom need a driver’s license and a doctor’s note to get the handicap placard.
But require ID to vote or, in today’s lesson, to vote by mail or Absentee (SB287), and it’s a friggin’ hardship. OMG! You ableist bastards hate disabled people.
Keep in mind that the no ID to vote folks (who want ID for everything else) are the ones who insist the college ID of an out-of-state tuition-paying student voter is proof of “residency” in New Hampshire for voting purposes (but little else), even when they were not in the State during COVID.
You can’t register a dog or obtain a fishing license without a valid ID (and you can’t use a student ID), but let ’em vote!
No thanks. But they still do.
Remember when Sununu told College Kids they had to go home to get their COVID shots!
So, SB287. It requires an ID to get an absentee ballot, and advocates say this is a hardship for the disabled. Let’s get one thing perfectly clear. Democrats, the afore mentioned no ID to vote party, don’t give a shit about making it difficult for the disabled to vote. Their issue is requiring an ID to request an absentee ballot to vote remote. Period.
“I think it’s important to talk about the practical realities of what you guys are imposing,” Sen. Rebecca Perkins Kwoka, a Portsmouth Democrat, said during negotiations Monday. “This is again just further ways that we’re making it harder for people to vote.”
You left out the word illegally. We’re making it harder for people to vote illegally.
And I’m not in the Ross Berry fan club, but he hit this out of the ballpark.
Rep. Ross Berry, a Weare Republican and the chairman of the House Election Law Committee, framed this in the context of his and his colleagues’ opposition to early and absentee voting.
“The House’s concern and the position of the House has always been that as much of Election Day should happen on Election Day as possible,” he said during negotiations Monday. “It should just be like that.”
Berry said the discrepancy between what is required of in-person and absentee voting “is something that the House is interested in closing up.”
And so it should. And I don’t think it’s a hardship.
[Related: Dem Kathleen Calavaro Encourages Massachusetts Residents to Vote for Her in NH]
More supposed issues.
During a press conference last week, James Ziegra, senior staff attorney at the Disability Rights Center of New Hampshire, said the new requirement would be burdensome as it requires anyone unable to go to a clerk’s office in person to have access to a photocopier or accredited notary. Many people with disabilities are unable to drive themselves, he pointed out.
Maybe, but if they don’t have access to a printer (most of which have scanners or are also copiers), how do they print out the application for the ballot to mail it to the town clerk? They can access it online, but that’s useless without the tools to print it. I don’t recall that being brought up as a hardship.
And if they have to go to the clerk because they don’t have a printer or copier to do that, why can’t they show them their ID then? OMG! They Can!
And I bet you could probably email a picture of the front and back of your photo ID (is a mobile phone another hardship?), and the clerk could call if they had any questions.
Maybe? Or someone could bring them to the polls to vote. Perhaps the Democrat trying to vote for you could do that because, in the greater interests of election integrity, this does not strike me as the problem opponents claim. After all, the only people who should be voting absentee are those who are out of state (and actually from New Hampshire) or are genuinely unable to get to the polls on Election Day and can’t be driven there. Everyone else needs to show up to save the Democracy or something.
I think it’s worth the effort.
Requiring an ID to obtain an absentee ballot should be a bipartisan solution that protects elections and ensures accurate results and voter trust.
SB287 needs to pass, and Governor Ayotte needs to sign it. Let disabled advocates sue. I don’t think it’ll survive even casual scrutiny by an actual judge, which does mean we’ll probably need one who is not working in New Hampshire.
One more point, not to kick this dead horse again, but you need proof of identity to cash a check made out to you. Voting is deciding who writes and cashes a big check that spends someone else’s money. I don’t care what your situation is. You need to provide ID, please.
