Citizenship affirmation on ballot should not be viewed as controversial
Cole Bertsos' article, Washtenaw County among those choosing not to comply with ballot citizenship confirmation (9/14/12), avoids mentioning the motivation for the county refusing to ask voters to affirm their citizenship when they vote.
In a release, Secretary of State Ruth Johnson noted that the question led to the successful identification of improperly registered voters.
And certainly, anyone qualified to vote should have no difficulty whatsoever filling in a bubble to affirm their citizenship when they go to vote.
It's not as if they're being asked to produce proof. It's only an affirmation.
Therefore, it's plain to see that Johnson's directive would do nothing more than prevent non-citizens from wrongfully voting.
That Democrats would oppose this — and it is clear, it is entirely Democratic clerks and election boards doing so — indicates that Democrat officials openly condone illegal voting where they believe it will work for their benefit.
There is no other explanation for opposing a simple affirmation that one is qualified to vote. It would disenfranchise nobody.
The opposition to this common-sense rule proves that there is an agenda among some elements of the Democrat party to condone election fraud for the party's benefit.
It should not be controversial that voters should affirm they are U.S. citizens when they vote. No matter what your political beliefs, we should all agree that fair elections are the interest of all Americans.
And Democrats who believe in their party's values should be alarmed to see their party tarnished for condoning election fraud to achieve its ends.
Adam de Angeli