Citizens of Maryland get it. And, nothing has sent that message to elected officials (and some Republicans who shall remain unnamed at this time!*) louder and clearer than the recent petition drive to allow the voters of Maryland to decide through referendum if they wish to subsidize the college educations of those in the US illegally.
Here is a letter to the editor to the Hagerstown Herald Mail two days ago from Boonsboro resident Greg Morris asking a really good question!
I’ve been following the story on Del. Neil Parrott’s petition drive to get SB 167 onto the ballot, so that the people of Maryland can vote on the issue. Parrott utilized the Internet to make it possible for Marylanders to have a voice on this issue, rather than have a few politicians introduce a bill at the last minute, behind closed doors, in the middle of the night and shove it down our throats without, we the people, even knowing that it exists. But, be that what it may.
Now I see that the American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland has written to the Maryland State Election Board and asked that the legality of the online system of petitioning that Parrott utilized be examined, because it thinks that it may be susceptible to fraud. Duh! There is no system in the world that is not susceptible to fraud.
I have read the applicable Comar law, and the election process law, and I see no infringement of the law by the use of the Internet. Of course, I do not claim to be an expert on election law. The point that I would like to make here is this: When did the “American” Civil Liberties Union become an advocate for Illegal Immigrants?
The ACLU is two-faced as we learned recently from the Washington Times. While in Maryland they oppose the use of the internet in obtaining petition signatures, in Utah, where the referendum was something the ACLU supported, they argue in court that the internet petition gathering is legal!
From the Washington Times:
Two months before the Maryland chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union questioned the legality of a website used to collect signatures opposing the state’s Dream Act, the group’s Utah chapter filed a lawsuit demanding that its state allow online signatures for referendum efforts.
Read it all.
Good news! At the close of business yesterday the State Board of Elections has validated 87,073 signatures and found 17,938 invalid and there are thousands more to be reviewed. There might even be enough signatures obtained without the computer-generated ones to reach the magic number!
* CASA de Maryland (Joseph E. Sandler) could still release all names of signers, so it will be interesting to see who is (and who isn’t) on the list.