Gary Kroeger was the Democratic nominee in Iowa House district 60 last year. -promoted by desmoinesdem
Allow me to show you a classic example of disingenuous political rhetoric. Known also as “mumbo jumbo” or more precisely as “lying.” It is language cleverly designed to appear as thoughtful, truthful, even generous. In reality, however, it is a dishonest form of communication because often a sinister objective has been disguised as compassionate, and in the best interests of all concerned.
I pause when Rep. Walt Rogers is the subject of my scorn, because he defeated me and my criticisms may appear as sour grapes. And, in fact, if that is the case, then I am guilty of the same lie that I am illuminating here. But, the simple the truth is, I don’t have that axe to grind. The statements that Rep. Rogers makes are exactly why I ran against him in the first place. His position on the following issue, and a host of others, are anathema to what I feel is the better course for our state.
Rogers defends House Study Bill 93 (later renamed House File 516) which would instigate voter verification processes in the state of Iowa. The sub heading of HSB 93 is: “Election Integrity and Modernization.”
Rogers writes in his newsletter:
“Iowans should have confidence in their elections. Measures like voter verification and election modernization give Iowans assurance that our system is fair, clean, and ensures eligible voters aren’t disenfranchised. House Republicans have been working with Secretary of State Paul Pate on changes to Iowa’s election process, including voter verification, that make it easier to vote, harder to cheat, and ensures no one is turned away.”
I’m going to respond to this as a letter to Representative Rogers.
Dear Mr. Rogers,
Let’s cut to the chase. Why is there a legislative act to minimize a “problem” that has been shown to be 10 fraudulent cases out of 1.6 million votes cast in Iowa? That’s a fraud probability of 0.000000625%. You are more likely to be hit by lightning while winning the lottery. You are willing to spend the millions it will require to set up and maintain a system to fix a problem that barely exists, but you can’t budget more money for our school children?
Take a big gulp of Truth Serum so we can hear you say: “This is really about voter suppression because a higher percentage of Democratic voters are the ones who have hurdles toward getting such verification.”
I’ll even give you more information for your serum-induced, revealing regurgitation of truth: Many eligible voters will lack the necessary documents and getting them can be difficult. Even expensive. Many will be older voters who can no longer drive and have long lost other documentation. And polls have shown that many poorer voters are hesitant to give more information that can lead to inquiries that aren’t welcome. You can judge that as harshly as you’d like, but whatever their reason may be, it does not mean they aren’t eligible to vote. Voting is a RIGHT not a privilege.
And since, as a Republican, you are a devout Constitutionalist, I’m sure the Voting Rights Act, which prohibits laws that have a disproportionate impact on minority voters, is relevant to you. The requirement of voter ID’s is most challenging to voters who more likely to be poor and undereducated, and that is traceable to the effects of discrimination in areas such as education, employment, and housing. And so….that would be un-Constitutional.
Serum has worn off? Okay, go back to the BS-Double-Speak-Mumbo-Jumbo that has become your MO. Bear in mind, I don’t dislike you as a person. In fact, I think you just might believe what you say and write. But that would mean that you are falling for the BS-Double-Speak-Mumbo-Jumbo you are being told. Either way, Iowans lose.
The Guy You Beat