PRESIDENT OBAMA’S LAWSUIT ENDANGERS PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT OF OUR MILITARY

by Byron Donalds, Candidate for the US Congress, Florida District 19

President Obama’s Campaign Committee (Obama for America), along with the Democratic National Committee and the Ohio Democrat Party have sued Ohio over its law that allows military personnel three extra days of early-voting.

They argue that it’s unconstitutional and arbitrary to grant such “special privileges” based upon military service. They assert that a two-tiered early-voting process is unfair to other Ohio voters. All three plaintiffs are political organizations, two of which are directly controlled by the President, indicating his approval.

Not a single Ohio voter is party to the suit claiming interference with the right to vote, however fifteen organizations whose members are active or retired military have asked and were granted permission to join the suit against President Obama, his Campaign and the Democratic party.

Issues in the Law Suit

The suit involves a law giving three extra days to active duty military members and their immediate families to cast what Ohio law refers to as “in person absentee ballots”. In many states, this is simply known as early voting. Ohio citizens residing overseas, who are non-military, may also vote under this law during the Saturday, Sunday and Monday preceding an election.

The law suit asks a federal court to declare that the law violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution and to stop the state of Ohio from enforcing its law. The suit requests the court find the law unconstitutional and allow all voters to vote in person absentee until Election Day.

The Equal Protection Clause

The Fourteenth Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause provides that "no state shall ... deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." The exact meaning of those words has evolved over time. The guiding principle has become: “all persons similarly situated should be treated alike”. To succeed, the President must argue that civilian citizens of Ohio are “similarly situated” to members of the military. Four times the President’s complaint asserts that military members are “similarly situated” with civilian citizens.

Members of the Military are Not “similarly situated” With Civilians

The military organizations properly object to the thought that military members are the same as civilians:

”The ‘differences between the military and civilian communities result from the fact that ‘it is the primary business of armies and navies to fight or be ready to fight wars should the occasion arise.’ … Due to such ‘unique military exigencies,’ the military ‘must insist upon a respect for duty and a discipline without counterpart in civilian life.’ … It ‘regulates aspects of the conduct of [its] members . . . which in the civilian sphere are left unregulated.’… It is common knowledge that military life differs significantly from civilian life. Soldiers, Sailors and Marines are not free to come and go as they please. They do not make up their own work hours. They do not choose the locations of their jobs. They do not choose what clothes they will wear to work, or even how they will wear those clothes. . . . Military life—as a matter of functionality, necessity and national security—is one of regimented, controlled, ordered existence. …As a result, “[h]ow and where [members of the military] conduct their lives is dictated by the government. The vote is their last vestige of expression and should be provided no matter what their location …”

The United States has a history of providing preferential treatment to those that defend our rights, including our right to vote. During the Civil War, polling places were set up in camps, an early instance of remote voting. President Lincoln ordered cessation of military operations to allow soldiers that were dying for the Constitution to vote. Clearly he recognized that military and civilians are not “similarly situated”.

The Dangers of the President’s Legal Arguments to Military Preferences

Many state and federal laws give military personnel and their families preferential treatment. These preferences include not only voting. There are hiring preferences, gun licensing preferences, driving privileges, and more. These preferential treatments that benefit active duty and veterans recognize two things: 1) military members are not “similarly situated” with civilians and 2) we owe a debt of gratitude to those who put themselves in harm’s way for our security and freedoms.

If the President’s suit is successful against Ohio voting laws, lawyers would have the ability to argue with a straight face any case when a military member (or veteran) receives a government benefit different from a civilian, that the civilian was being deprived of “equal protection”, whether in Ohio or elsewhere. A job-seeker could argue that he had been denied a job because a veteran was hired before he was. A student that he is not receiving the same low or no cost education as the veteran. This is the danger of the President’s argument that the military and civilians are “similarly situated”. It risks the legal status of not only voting treatment, but any special treatment, resulting in not so unintended consequences down the road.

The Only People Touched by the Suit are Those Who Defend the Rights of We the People

All the plaintiffs in the suit are political organizations. No Ohio voter claims this law interferes with his/her right to vote. The Commander In Chief’s argument that military personnel are no different from civilians ignores the differences of military and civilian life. It risks the national tradition of deservedly treating those who serve and those who have served as having a special place in our community. We can ask them to volunteer to put their lives on the line, but not show our gratitude by affording them special rewards in our society for doing so. The only individuals affected by this suit, but not a party to it, are people who are defending our country, and the state of Ohio.

In effect, if this suit were to succeed, all military could lose the many benefits we offer them in thanks for risking life, limb, and their own personal liberties to selflessly secure ours.

President Obama, his campaign, and the democratic party as a whole are telling our active and retired military that their service to their country is meaningless, that their efforts are to be left unrecognized, and that our gratefulness to them should amount to nothing by way of tangible differences. He is saying they deserve no such preference in our society. One can only wonder how long it will take to make defending our nation an untenable avocation once special privileges are removed. It will only serve to degrade our National Security while at the same time ensures that a large segment of society will not be able to cast their vote.

Jamie Cain

Deputy Campaign Manager

Friends of Byron Donalds

Office: 239-961-2827

Home:239-774-5787

Cell: 330-323-6276

jamie@byrondonalds.com

http://www.byrondonalds.com

You need to be a member of The Patriots For America to add comments!

Join The Patriots For America

Email me when people reply –