OUR VIEW: Scaring Voters

When rational discourse fails to win the day politically, sometimes all that is left is hyperbolic scare tactics. We saw that predictably enough when President Obama’s response to the budget proposals by Republicans in the U.S. House was to scare old people with charges that Republicans want to take away their health care and Social Security. A complete lie, but it has always worked in the past.

Now we see the same thing at work in an elections reform bill that has passed the Florida House and is near passage in the Senate. The bills are not identical, but the thrust is to limit the voter fraud that has been too apparent in our voting in recent elections, particulary in some of Florida’s biggest counties.

Democrats and their allies have pulled the hyperbolic scare card, calling it a “voter suppression” bill. Brad Ashley of Florida PIRG, a non-partisan — and we use that term lightly — advocacy group, said: “We are looking at eliminating minority votes, student votes and women’s votes.”

Oh puleeeze. Here is the provision that opponents find most egregious: If a voter’s name or address does not match voting records, perhaps because of divorce or marriage, those votes become provisional and are counted later, when their accuracy is shown. This is meant to curb the problem with double-voting, which disenfranchises honest voters.

But why shouldn’t there be a little inconvenience when voting? This is a sacred right in our nation, and there is nothing that suggests we should make voting effortless for those too ignorant or too lazy or even too busy. If a few minutes of inconvenience will hamper turnout among some voters, they probably have taken no time to inform themselves of the issues and candidates and just want to pull a party lever. Frankly, we don’t think that kind of voter should be encouraged.