The Columbian nails it: In Our View-Weak Solutions

When they're right... they're right

The democrats will flip out, of course, because they tend to view the fraud vote as their exclusive property. And, while they're right on that, it's hardly reason to label a bogus attempt at reform as something substantial.



In Our View: Weak Solutions
Friday, October 14, 2005
Columbian editorial writers

Proving you're eligible to vote by producing a utility bill is like proving you graduated from college by wearing a college ring.

The state Voters' Pamphlet for the Nov. 8 election calls the new requirement to present identification at polling sites "a critical improvement" that holds "election administrators and voters more accountable." That's a sham. Legislators who wanted to look tough on voter fraud but had no desire to enact real change came up with the so-called improvement. That's frustrating given last year's close governor's race when we learned that every vote really does count but that some are cast fraudulently and shouldn't be.

The new ID requirement will not stop people in this country illegally from voting. Nor will it block others from voting more than once or voting for a dead relative.

The anything-goes-list of what counts as valid ID includes: a driver's license and state ID, etc., but also utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, government check or government document.How does a bank statement prove a person's legal voting status?

The new ID requirement is a joke, but one that, thank goodness, will play out in only nine counties. The state's 30 other counties, including Clark, will conduct vote-by-mail elections. Still, the Legislature should pass real ID reform when it reconvenes in 2006.

Resistance comes from some Democrats and the ACLU. They contend that requiring a state ID or driver's license would be discriminatory. But no one has said how requiring real proof of ID is undemocratic. That's because it isn't. But allowing people to vote fraudulently and jeopardize close elections is.