This certainly sounds outrageous, but it is not true. Since 2005, Ohio has had in person early-voting in the three days prior to the election. This year, however, the Republican legislature in Ohio eliminated early voting during this period, except for members of the military. The Obama lawsuit is attempting to restore voting rights for all Ohioans, not restrict them for the military or any other group.

 

Even Fox News acknowledges the purpose of the suit, noting “the lawsuit does not restrict the ability of military personnel to cast their ballots early.”

 

Romney Falsely Claims Obama Filed Lawsuit To Restrict Military Voting

So is the purpose of the law suit to reinstate the 3 days for everyone or are they looking to restrict the 3 days for the military? I can't seem to find a straight answer on that.

I still can not find where they took away the 3 days.

 

But here is an WSJ article on this.

 

Obama Campaign Sues Ohio for Cutting Early Voting Days - Law Blog - WSJ

 

“This lawsuit seeks to treat all Ohio citizens equally under the law,” Bob Bauer, attorney for President Obama’s campaign committee, said. “We want to restore the right of all to vote before Election Day,” he said...

 

I have news for Mr. Bauer...there is no 'right' to vote before election day.

 

HB 224 was passed unanimously it appears. See here - Laws, Acts, and Legislation

 

Maybe Ohio set the 3 day limit on in-state early voting earlier. This law - by itself - does not 'take anything away'. I think the summary statement that allows for the '3 days' is this (from summary at link above):

 

Requires a uniformed services or overseas absent voter's ballot to be submitted

for mailing not later than 12:01 a.m. at the place where the voter completes the ballot, on

the date of the election.7

 

Votes meeting this criteria can be counted and final counting has up to 10 days post election day to be final.

 

Thus, it appears that this only impact truly out of state and mailed-in ballots. It is not that service personnel who are physically inside the state get any specific special treatment from what I can tell.

 

So there must have been some other law - not cited in the original lawsuit - that 'took away' the 3 days from in-state early voters. But it is the law that is being targeted. Thus, this directed at only the military it seems.

 

If the national Dem operatives want to play 'let everyone vote' card they should attack the law that cut off early voting. But it was not this law. So the characterization this targeting the military is not completely off-base at all, IMHO.

So is the purpose of the law suit to reinstate the 3 days for everyone or are they looking to restrict the 3 days for the military? I can't seem to find a straight answer on that.

 

For the law in question see the link in #17...

 

From what I can tell only MAIL-IN ballots from military are impacted. From what I can tell - NO ONE that is 'in-state' gets to vote early Saturday, Sunday or Monday. At least that is how my (very quick) read has it.

Found some more info. The law was changed in 2004 to allow for everyone to vote upto 3 days early because of the problems in 2004 with long lines and "disenchantment." Some waited upto 7 hours to vote. The first election to allow this early voting was 2008 where 21% of Ohioans cast an early ballot.

 

Again, this is not a lawsuit seeking to restrict anything regarding military voting DESPITE that being how it was presented by news outlets.

 

A legit debate can be had as to WHY you should exclude one group in favor of another. Just present it fairly and accurately.

..and for the record I still contend that ANY elimination of voting on Sunday is 100% pure politics aimed at trying to decrease votes from a particular group who has SHOWN to vote early on Sunday FOR the D side.

 

It's nothing else than that. They can hide behind how long it takes to count or cost but it's 100% aimed at black voters.

One more item. Veterans groups in Ohio are not happy with this either. They say the legislature didn't realize the impact it would have on them. He says it restricts the voting rights for 900k OH veterans.

Using the original lawsuit here is what they are asking for:

 

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request of this Court the following equitable relief:

A. An order declaring that lines 863 and 864 of Sec. 3509.03(I) in HB 224,

which amended Ohio Revised Code § 3509.03 by changing the deadline for

in-person early voting from the close of business on the day before Election

Day to 6 p.m. on the Friday before Election Day, and the SB 295 enactment of

Ohio Revised Code § 3509.03 with the HB 224 amendments, violate the

Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution;

B. A preliminary and permanent order prohibiting the Defendants, their

respective agents, servants, employees, attorneys, successors, and all persons

acting in concert with each or any of them, 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;

C. Attorney fees and costs;

D. Such other and further relief as this Court may deem necessary or proper.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ DONALD J. McTIGUE

______________________________

Donald

 

 

It looks like 'in-person', not just mail-in is allowed for military.

 

Trying to read the details - it is confusing. That part is without too much doubt. SB this, HB that, passed, receded, etc.

 

Their claims may have logical merit. But legally the question is - do they have standing? You have show damage or high probability of being damaged to have even basic standing in court. They have not done that, IMHO. And the Ohio AG says they have not done so. So even if the law IS confusing there is no claim of specific harm to the candidate.

 

Like many a 'birther' lawsuit. It should be tossed due to lack of standing.

Confusing ??Is Obama challenging voting privileges of Ohio military members? - The Washington Post

One more item. Veterans groups in Ohio are not happy with this either. They say the legislature didn't realize the impact it would have on them. He says it restricts the voting rights for 900k OH veterans.

 

I saw that figure on a quick soundbite while channel-surfing last night, but no specifics.