Ink and voter ID

Share with others:

Print Email Read Later

From the April 6 front-page article concerning the Afghan election (“Afghans Vote Despite Threats”): “As in past elections, voters had their forefingers dipped in indelible ink to guard against multiple vote-casting.”

Now, if conservatives were telling the truth about their deep and abiding concern about vote fraud, this would seem to be the perfect solution, both far simpler and far cheaper than any state-approved voter ID measure.

But, of course, conservatives will raise some phony objection to this because their real concern is not with nearly nonexistent vote fraud. Their concern is only with winning elections that are no longer possible for them to win in the free marketplace of ideas without stacking the deck, which is a form of cheating every bit as vile as voting fraud but more insidious.

They hope to do this by suppressing the votes of poor people, working people (often one and the same) and seniors. And while a forefinger dipped in proof-of-voting indelible ink may be at least as good a guard against vote fraud as state-approved ID (which any conservative exercised about illegal immigrants knows can be easily faked), its convenience and simplicity at the voting booth will not serve to suppress anyone’s votes. Therefore, conservatives will never support it.



Join the conversation:

Commenting policy | How to report abuse
To report inappropriate comments, abuse and/or repeat offenders, please send an email to and include a link to the article and a copy of the comment. Your report will be reviewed in a timely manner. Thank you.
Commenting policy | How to report abuse


Create a free PG account.
Already have an account?