Romney Says Obama Lawsuit Blocks Ohio Military Voters
Email 133 Smaller Font Text Larger Text | Print
A new flap in the ongoing battle on voting equality began this week when Mitt Romney accused President Obama’s re-election committee of suing to restrict military voting rights in Ohio. And while Romney did not address the issue campaigning in Indiana today, he called the lawsuit “an outrage” in a written statement
“The brave men and women of our military make tremendous sacrifices to protect and defend our freedoms, and we should do everything we can to protect their fundamental right to vote,” it reads. “I stand with the fifteen military groups that are defending the rights of military voters.”
Republicans say a lawsuit brought by Obama for America in July seeks to eliminate additional time for in-person early voting allotted to service members in the battleground state. Democrats, on the other hand, contend the presumptive GOP nominee is deliberately trying to distort the facts.
“Mitt Romney is falsely accusing the Obama campaign of trying to restrict military voting in Ohio,” a Friday statement said. “In fact, the opposite is true: The Obama campaign filed a lawsuit to make sure every Ohioan has early voting rights, including military members and their families.”
Get more pure politics at ABC News.com/Politics and a lighter take on the news at OTUSNews.com
A series of laws passed in the past year by Ohio’s Republican state legislature and Gov. John Kasich have waived the last three days of in-person early voting before Election Day for all but members of the military. Civilians now have until Friday, Nov. 2,to cast those ballots and must arrive at the booth before 6 p.m.
Republicans faulted the extra time for civilians as too costly for local governments and prone to fraud and abuse. Meanwhile, service members were exempt from the restrictions, allowing them to vote at any time before polls close, an extra three days without restrictions.
As previously reported by ABC News, the Obama campaign sued the Buckeye State last month to block those laws from taking effect, restoring weekend voting as it was in 2008. Democrats say those last days before Nov. 6 give a crucial extra cushion for Americans who might not have had the opportunity to enter the voting booth in the days prior. The civilians’ exclusion, they believe, is arbitrary and a violation of the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution.
The Obama campaign says if the challenge is successful military voters would not see a change in their rights.
The stakes of Obama for America v. Husted are clear. Obama narrowly won Ohio with 51.4 percent of its electorate and its 18 electoral votes remain hotly contested this year. Additionally, 30 percent of Ohio’s turnout cast their ballots early in 2008, according to a non-partisan voter advocacy group. This includes 93,000 votes in those last three days before the election.
The lawsuit does not address absentee voters. In most states, men and women in uniform are given extra time to mail in absentee ballots, given that they might be serving in posts far from their homes.
http://maddowblog.msnbc.com/_news/2012/ ... oters?lite
The conservative spin:Romney gets caught lying about Obama, military voters
By Steve Benen
-
Mon Aug 6, 2012 10:34 AM EDT
Associated Press
President Obama greets troops at Camp Victory in Baghdad.
After spending the last several months paying attention to Mitt Romney's habitual dishonesty at a granular level, I've become largely inured to his more routine, casual lies. Some of the deliberate falsehoods are just too common to get upset about.
But once in a while, Romney tells a lie so blatant and offensive that it raises questions anew about the candidate's character and what standards of decency he's prepared to abandon to advance his ambitions.
As Rachel explained on the show on Thursday, voting rights in Ohio have been a mess in recent cycles, and new voter-suppression tactics imposed by state Republican lawmakers are inviting "chaos" at the polls this fall. Of particular interest is a state policy that restricts early-voting rights: active-duty troops can vote up to three days before Election Day, but no one else.
To that end, President Obama's campaign filed a lawsuit a few weeks ago, asking a federal court to "restore in-person early voting for all Ohioans during the three days prior to Election Day." Three weeks later, Romney came up with a new response to the lawsuit, posting this message to Facebook:
"President Obama's lawsuit claiming it is unconstitutional for Ohio to allow servicemen and women extended early voting privileges during the state's early voting period is an outrage. The brave men and women of our military make tremendous sacrifices to protect and defend our freedoms, and we should do everything we can to protect their fundamental right to vote. I stand with the fifteen military groups that are defending the rights of military voters, and if I'm entrusted to be the commander-in-chief, I'll work to protect the voting rights of our military, not undermine them."
Got that? Obama wants all eligible Ohio voters, including servicemen and women, to have the same ability to vote, which Romney says, in writing, means Obama is trying to "undermine" the troops' ability to vote.
This is as loathsome a lie as Romney has told all year -- and given his record, that's not an easy threshold to meet.
It's important to realize that this isn't a matter of opinion. CNN's headline over the weekend said, "Romney campaign jabs at Obama over voting rights suit." The headline on the Politico homepage yesterday said, "Obama, Mitt camps spar on military voting."
No. Wrong. No one is "jabbing" or "sparring." One candidate lied and got caught. Full stop.
Indeed, when pressed, Romney's spokesperson could point to "no place in Obama's lawsuit that seeks to restrict the rights of military voters," and Romney's legal counsel failed to "offer evidence that Obama's lawsuit would make it tougher for members of the military to vote."
After the campaign's dishonesty was exposed, Romney put a twist on his lie, saying Obama now opposes giving the troops special treatment. But even by Republican standards, this is insane -- by this reasoning, Romney supports a policy that discriminates against military veterans in Ohio who would be legally prohibited from the same early-voting rights as active-duty servicemen and women.
Does Romney want to deny special treatment for veterans of foreign wars? Does Romney think it's befitting a Commander in Chief to deny equal voting rights to those who put their lives on the line to defend the United States?
Yesterday, the Republican presidential campaign said the Obama campaign's lawsuit calling for equal voting rights is "despicable."
It's as if words no longer have any meaning, and Americans politics has become so blisteringly stupid, candidates believe they can say literally anything and get away with it.
http://www.redstate.com/paulkib/2012/08 ... ign-lying/
So here we have Romney trying to drum up outrage among members of the military, by claiming that Obama is trying to take away their early voting rights, and therefore pull military votes to the Romney camp as well as alienate the patriotic Americans against Obama. Forcing Obama to expend money and time to fight against the allegations. And since the Romney camp has more money than Obama, then Romney camp can drain the democratic coffers, or fight a war of attrition against the Dems.Obama Campaign Lying About Ohio Voting, Military Groups Suing
Posted by Paula (Diary)
Monday, August 6th at 5:48AM EDT
18 Comments
Recommenders: checkmate2012 (Diary)
It has been fairly widely reported that fifteen military groups have filed a “motion to intervene” in the Obama for America vs. Husted case. I posted a diary last week claiming that the Obama campaign was suing to disenfranchise military voters. Since that time there have been various comments (including in response to my diary) citing an apparently unimpeachable source: Snopes, which has apparently debunked the “myth” that the Obama campaign is seeking to restrict military voting. Their “report” is a tortured collection of snippets from the AP, the ACLU, and a few out of context sentences from the lawsuit. It concludes by citing the DNC talking points that, rather than trying to restrict military voting, they’re attempting to extend the early voting period for everyone! We’ve all heard that, right?
The Obama campaign has taken this and run with it:
“Mitt Romney and his campaign have completely fabricated a claim that the Obama campaign is trying to restrict military voting in Ohio,” said Rob Diamond, Obama’s veterans and military family vote director. “In fact, the opposite is true: The Obama campaign filed a lawsuit to make sure every Ohioan, including military members and their families, has early voting rights over the last weekend prior to the election.”
Except that what the Democrats (and Snopes and many in the media) are spinning ignores much of the background that surrounds this issue. Please refer to my original diary for a more detailed legislative history. And a disclaimer: I am not a lawyer and have no legal experience whatsoever. I’m simply reading the plain text of the legislation and the lawsuit and calling ‘em as I see ‘em.
The short version is that in fall of 2011 the law was that Ohio allowed early, in-person casting of ballots until the Monday before Election Day. However, Ohio law allowed individual precincts to make the decision about whether or not to stay open the weekend before the election (which is outside of regular business hours). Many did, but most did not. This created a patchwork of election dates and times throughout the state and from precinct to precinct. A person could move across the street and have different voting times and dates in the next election.
When Republicans took control of the legislature in 2011 they reformed the election laws (HB 194). One aspect was to create uniformity in the early voting laws. Voting would be completed by the Friday before the election at 6 PM (or the close of business, a minor detail causing major headaches). Democrats threatened to repeal the law through a referendum and began collecting signatures to put the measure on the ballot.
During this time, the legislature passed HB 224, which explicitly gave members of the military and their families the right to vote up until election day under UOCAVA (it was actually an amendment to another bill).
Once it was clear that there would be enough signatures to get the repeal measure on the ballot, Republicans, unwilling to go through another messy ballot battle, retaliated by chucking HB 194 – they repealed it themselves (SB 295)…
Except…
Remember, HB224 would now allow the military to vote through Monday (or maybe through election day….pass the Excedrin).
What Obama for America v. Husted seeks to do is throw out the first law (HB 194) and the new law relating to the military early voting (HB224) and revert back to what we had in Ohio before the 2011 reforms:
“A preliminary and permanent order prohibiting the Defendants…from implementing or enforcing lines 863 and 864 of Sec. 3509.03 (I) in HB 224, and/or the SB 295 enactment of Ohio Revised Code § 3509.03 with the HB 224 amendments, thereby restoring in-person early voting on the three days immediately preceding Election Day for all eligible Ohio voters;”
Except that we NEVER HAD in-person early voting for all eligible Ohio voters the weekend before Election Day. Again, we only had this for select (mostly Democratic-leaning) districts. So, David Axelrod and the Obama campaign are not telling the truth when they say their only motivation is to “restore” early voting to “all” Ohio voters. And again, this lawsuit, if successful, will disenfranchise military voters, allowing fewer military voters to vote.
The fifteen military groups apparently agreed. The suit, which minces no words, says:
“The principal campaign committee of President Barack Obama, the Commander-in-Chief of the U.S. Armed Forces, is arguing before this Court that the State of Ohio has violated the U.S. Constitution by giving members of the Armed Forces—who serve under his command, and risk their lives pursuant to his orders—three extra days to participate in early voting…The Obama campaign and Democratic National Committee contend that they cannot “discern” any “legitimate justification” for giving members of the military extra time to participate in early voting…”
“…Although the relief Plaintiffs seek is an overall extension of Ohio’s early voting period, the means through which Plaintiffs are attempting to attain it—a ruling that it is arbitrary and unconstitutional to grant extra time for early voting solely to military voters and overseas citizens—is both legally inappropriate and squarely contrary to the legal interests and constitutional rights of Intervenors, their members, and the courageous men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces….
“…Members of the U.S. Armed Forces risk their lives to keep this nation safe and defend the fundamental constitutional right to vote. The Obama campaign’s and Democratic National Committee’s argument that it is arbitrary and unconstitutional to afford special consideration, flexibility, and accommodations to military voters to make it easier for them to vote in person is not only offensive, but flatly wrong as a matter of law.” [emphasis added]
Probably wasn’t a good idea for Obama to get on the wrong side of these groups representing a million military members. They continue:
“Finally, efforts to facilitate and maximize military voting should be welcomed, not viewed with constitutional suspicion. .. (recognizing that the men and women of the U.S. Armed Forces “fight for the very principle that our democratic society is based [upon]—the fundamental right to vote”). For these reasons, it is hardly “arbitrary” for the State of Ohio to facilitate voting by members of the military by giving them an extra weekend to cast in-person absent ballots.”
They also make the important point that the reason for not extending voting for the entire state through Monday is this:
“Finally, the State could have recognized that the number of overseas voters who would be in a position to vote in person the weekend before Election Day was so de minimus that allowing them to do so would not burden election officials or interfere with Election Day preparations. Allowing the general public to vote throughout that weekend, in contrast, would be a substantial burden on election personnel, and risk undermining their preparations for Election Day…(noting that “approximately 93,000 Ohioans voted in the three days prior to the 2008 presidential election”).”
Here’s a little reminder of what we had to deal with in Ohio in 2008. Boards of Election were overwhelmed with thousands of unregistered voters bused in by groups like ACORN and the SEIU the day before the election. There were multiple individuals and groups prosecuted for election fraud as a result, which led to the reforms of 2011.
Members of the military have every right to be upset about what the Obama campaign is trying to do. The Ohio legislature was right to give our men and women who serve our country a few extra days to vote. There are a myriad of reasons they may need to do so and we should make every accommodation for them to get to the polls. That the Obama campaign would sue to try to skim a few extra votes on election day at the expense of our military while denigrating the important work they do is shameful.
