Citizens’ right to vote should not be altered

A recent response to Denise Jewell Gee’s column about the Electoral College was indicative of the hard-line, right-wing sentiment that is seeping out after the election. The writer signals his displeasure with the outcome of the election, although he chose to show it by attacking everyone’s right to vote. It is clear to me that the writer feels that uneducated, unemployed, non-English speaking lazy voters returned President Obama to the White House for a second term. His bulleted ideas can lead a reader to no other conclusion.

He is pro-military and wants to give our service members the “first crack at the vote.” Perhaps he feels that only our service people can “get it right.” But what about the rest of us? He calls for requirements that would satisfy his personal criteria to exercise our constitutional right to vote; a “legitimate reason” for an absentee ballot, the ability to read, write and communicate in English and a civics course passed with an “acceptable grade.” What would the criteria be for these “acceptable” reasons and test scores? How proficient in English must we be?

What the writer fails to understand is that the control of such criteria can lead to manipulation of voting rights. Florida provided a great example of this in the 2000 presidential vote.

I would counter that the same uneducated, lazy, non-English speaking population elected President George W. Bush twice. Maybe the last thing this writer wants is a highly educated voting public.

Dan Bailey

East Aurora