Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Sunday, Sept. 30, 2012 | 2:01 a.m.
Another view?
View more of the Las Vegas Sun's opinion section:
• Editorials - the Sun's viewpoint.
• Columnists - local and syndicated writers.
• Letters to the editor - readers' views.
Have your own opinion? Write a letter to the editor.
Letter writer Joel Rector is wrong, as are all the other people who think they have a constitutional right to vote (“Voting is guaranteed under the Constitution,” Sept. 25). Although there are many phrases, clauses and amendments in the U.S. Constitution concerning not denying the right to vote to certain people, there is nothing in the Constitution that explicitly guarantees anyone the right to vote.
As we know now it is mandatory for people here illegally and without identification, those non-needy on welfare and like Thoses using free government provided phones, and anyone who does not pay income taxes are to be driven by an Acorn community organizer to McDonnell's for a Happy Meal before being taken to the poll to vote for Obama.
There is no explicit, affirmative right to vote in the Constitution, besides the explicit protection of the 15th amendment.
Is that an excuse to target minorities by adding additional hurdles to the voting process? No.
Is that an excuse to "purge" voter rolls by targeting college students or people with common names or ethnic names? No.
Is that an excuse to allow secretly-funded 3rd-party groups to challenge the vote of registered voters? No.
Are all of these actions obviously discriminatory and aimed at suppressing turnout in order to help GOP candidates? Yes.
The GOP is so pathetic and sad, their only hope at winning elections is by rigging the game.
99 proving who you are is not too high a hurddle
It not an excuse for anything
PS be sure to take your drives license when you drive to the poll
There's nothing in the Constitution that "explicitly guarantees" political parties either. We should eliminate them long before we consider tinkering with voting laws.
This is an accurate statement by the letter writer. It's a state decision. Even those under 18 can be granted the right. Those in prison can/ are denied the right by states. These are not constitutional matters.
"There's nothing in the Constitution that "explicitly guarantees" political parties either"
This is partially true.
The is nothing in the Constitution that says political parties must exist.
In the Constitution is the "the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
So if people want to peaceably assemble to form a political party then there is nothing the government can do about it.
If that people want a political party to nominate people to run for office then there is nothing the government can do about that.
States can choose to accept or deny a nomination to be placed on the general ballot.
There is nothing in the US Constitution or in any state Constitution that requires them to be forced to put people on ballots.
All states have laws which state how a person gets on a ballot.
I hope the Supreme Court knows that!
Interesting point! It certainly opens the door for some new amendments.
1) Making it clear that all citizens have a right to vote.
2) Eliminate the Electoral College.
3) Guaranteeing the equal rights of political parties in campaigns.
4) Removing "personhood" from corporations and unions.
5) Eliminating lobbyists
6) Banning money in politics
7) Direct popular vote of President and Congress members.
8) Let's add a federally established voter ID upon reaching the age to vote, including a centralized birth registry with access to all citizen's to easily and inexpensively to obtain a certified valid birth certificate.
9) We could have an internal passport/ID that we could carry with us, validating our identity and rights as a citizen. It would included a pages to be stamped when official business is done, like registering marriages, births, voting, etc.
10) Right of women to be free of mental and physical abuse
11) Right of the individual, of any gender, to be the sole decision maker in their choices and decisions about their reproductive health and interests, without interference from elected officials to abridge that right.
Voting has become a joke. Left and right, all politicians are filthy, lying, thieves who are self-serving pieces of trash. I do love the youthful enthusiasm of so many who actually believe it makes a difference who gets into the white house and congress. Heh, heh. Keep up that mystical belief. It's good for the soul.
PeaceLilly
How about removing "personhood" from the government..
The "government has become entirely too opinionated of late i.e. an elected or unofficial official acting in an official capacity and spouting off about his/her personal opinion as a matter of public policy..such as..Hillary Clinton's film review..
Frankly..I don't think she should be calling any film reprehensible or offensive and neither should Obama..It is not their job to Critique films or make opinions about free speech best left to the Supreme Court
They should condemn the murder of an American Ambassador which is illegal and well within the purview of the President and Secretary of State instead of being Bullies who shout out from the Public Pulpit..
The government is persons. It is a government created by We the People, as stated in the preamble to the Constitution.
The film was incredibly offensive, even to me, and I am not Muslim.
Given the critical events in the Middle East, it is clear that diplomacy does not ignore what is both inciting violence, particularly against American's, nor condone it, when it is clearly morally wrong.
I am very happy with the response of the State Department, including Hilary Clinton, as well as President Obama, in their response to the events and the film.
I wish I could be respectful of Mr. Romney's premature ejaculation of criticisms of the Obama Administration, but I do understand his severe lack of any foreign policy or diplomatic skills, as well as his irresponsible politicizing of a life and death situation underway. It is the way he is...clueless. He has one aim...power for himself at any cost.
The argument of free speech is not viable since it has already been decided by the Supreme Court that you cannot apply the free speech argument when it is dangerous and false, such as in this case.
Larry.......
We have the right to out-vote you republicans.
AND WE WILL!