If we thought the tough part about enacting the voter ID law was over-riding Governor Lynch’s veto against it, we were sadly mistaken.  The biggest hurdle is the highly politicized Justice Department under Mr. transparent himself, Eric “gun-runner” Holder.   New Hampshire is under jurisdiction of the 1965 voting rights act, meaning that we cannot change our voting practices without the approval of Mr. Holder’s justice department.  Given the hostility he’s shown recently to states like North Carolina, Texas and heaven knows Arizona, why would we expect any favors in New Hampshire?  Especially in this very tight election year?

Let’s just put these on the border and be done with it…

At least 10 towns in New Hampshire have been subject to section 5 of the Voting Rights Act since 1968 when they failed to meet the magical formulations under section 4 of the act; In a nutshell, less than 50% of those towns’ registered voters actually voted.  Yup, that’s it.  Because very few people in these towns were motivated to vote in the 1968 election, they fall onto a list with other jurisdictions synonymous with the types of discrimination that prompted the voting rights act in the first place and any changes to their voting policies or practices need to be pre-cleared by the Justice Department.  Based on the track record this administration and its justice department has regarding states rights, I personally don’t hold out much hope that New Hampshire will go unnoticed. Once the federal government takes power from the states, they are loath to give it back.

Texas is the latest state being sued over its voter ID initiative.   In their opening arguments, the justice department pretty much summed up the whole argument they have been peddling all along: that of the racial implications, going as far as to “stress that Texas wouldn’t be able to prove there was no intent to discriminate against minority voters.”  Neat how that works.  They don’t need to prove that you’re racist, and you can’t prove, to their satisfaction, that you’re not.

We have an administration that runs guns across the border; that openly and unabashedly states that they won’t uphold the laws of the country, especially as they apply to enforcing immigration laws.  Their goal is simple.  Those who illegally set foot in this country are ordained with all of the rights legal citizens, including those immigrants who suffered the arduous process to become legal, hold most dearly.  All for a distinct advantage at the polls.  At what point do these actions become impeachable, if not treasonous offenses?

One hopes that New Hampshire can implement the new voter ID law to help bring some sanity to the political landscape.  But how will we prove that we don’t merely intend to discriminate?

This should be interesting.

 

Advertisements