The Republican’s new strategy for the Presidential election has become clear in recent weeks. Resignation and desperation have brought forward the old strategy of voter suppression through the courts. I don’t think this tactic is specifically directed from the national level, but is sponsored independently by local “Republican Cells”. This is obvious as election procedures vary substantially from state to state. But I do believe these “Cells” key off each others successes or failures, which makes the current Cell activity across the nation extremely serious in terms of the upcoming election. I ask my question below the fold.  
Their plan in a nutshell is to scrutinize the State Election Documentation with an eye towards finding any discrepancy or weakness in the registration procedures, purging of the voting rolls or anti-fraud protection (in the actual voting procedures).  Any perceived problem, no matter how capricious or arbitrary, is immediately fired off and filed in court as a possible election fraud complaint. In the face of statistics verifying that actual voter fraud is less than a tenth of one percent nation wide, the Republicans still rush into court complaining of voter fraud and seeking injunctive relief.

Most of us are familiar with “voter caging” and other techniques that the republicans have used in the past. However, it appears that their current efforts are focused on the suppression of newly registered voters. Under attack are:
(1)    Voters who are home owners of foreclosed property in the precinct.
(2)    College students who register using their school’s address.
(3)    Registration forms gathered by various “get out the vote” groups.
(4)    In particular registration forms submitted by ACORN.
(5)    The method of validation of voters! The Republicans want all states to use some form of government issued photo ID. Lacking Photo ID’s they are demanding combinations of government validation sources be used;  such as Social Security numbers used in conjunction with a drivers license or a current public utility bill showing the person’s name and address.

It appears that the DNC and the local Democratic Party officials are leaving this problem to the either the respective Secretary of State or local election officials to deal with these growing Republican “Voter Fraud” suits. It is my concern that with the economic environment currently spiraling downward towards a national depression that there will be no funds available for government officials to legally contest these arbitrary Republican initiated “voter fraud” complaints in court. The entire Republican right wing flap against “voter fraud” by ACORN along with their allegations that ACORN’s voter registration drives are being funded by the Obama campaign is setting the ground work for the RNC to go into court to set aside the entire Presidential election results. Many people upon hearing of this will say, “Pshaw! The courts would never go along with this.” But that’s what Democrats thought back in 2000, and we all know how that turned out.

I am not a lawyer, but if I assume a lawyer, whose hourly rate is $150 per hour takes 16 hours to draft a complaint, review it, put it on the court docket, and appears at the first hearing; the total cost of this “voter fraud” complaint will be $2400. This is chump change if it succeeds in knocking 20,000 to 50,000 new voters off the rolls. So my question to all concerned rank and file Democrats and Obama supporters is “How do we effectively counter this legal onslaught of voter fraud complaints by the Republicans?” We have less than 22 days to come up with something. We effectively need a cadre of lawyers available as friends of the respective government entity to provide backup legal assistance, particularly to aid those jurisdictions that may be completely tapped out financially due to budget cuts. Could the DNC put together a nation wide corps of volunteer pro bono lawyers? Such a group could well include volunteer Para-legal help. At this point I am seriously soliciting ideas. Do you have any?      

0 0 votes
Article Rating