Changes to Voting Laws

Several recent commentors seemed to think that some people wanted voting made too easy, as though it was only of value if you have to work for it. What many of us object to is a rolling back of voter rights in the state of Florida.

For  instance, the League of Women Voters is a non-partisan organization, which has been doing voter registration for some 70 years, but changes to the Florida voting laws are forcing them to stop doing so. Why did the law on voter registration change? Because many of the people who have been registered in voter drives over the past few years have been younger, poorer people who are more likely to vote Democratic, and the Republican power structure in Tallahassee wants to curtail that to try to hold onto power longer.

Similarly, Democratic candidates seemed to fare better during early voting, so that has been shortened. Other provisions of the new law have made it impossible for a voter to change address or name at the polling station, as they have been able to do in the past. Again, the people who have needed to do so have been younger and poorer, and the Republican government wants to limit their ability to vote.

The new law, on the whole has been an attempt at voter suppression among voting groups who the government in Tallahassee feels is less likely to support its candidates. The reason given for all this is preventing voter fraud, which is largely a non-existent problem. The ACLU said there were only about 35 cases of suspected voter fraud in the last election in Florida, and only in about 10% of those was there enough evidence to prosecute. So out of roughly 5,344,000 votes for the US Senate in the 2010 election, perhaps four votes were tainted. So how many thousands of people will be unable to vote in order to stop perhaps four fraudulent votes?

Anti-Zionist?

I have no issues with Zionism, though I oppose expansion of the West Bank settlements for two reasons. First, the settlers often do not acquire legal title to the land they settle on, and often simply appropriate land which is privately held by Palestinians. Second, the expansion of the settlements convinces the Palestinians that Israel is not serious about peace, and makes them less trusting and less willing to work to an equitable solution. Similarly, I opposed the home demolitions (which have largely stopped) because they did not seem to inhibit terrorist activities, but just radicalized people who were not involved in terrorism. I opposed targeted assassinations, first because they killed innocent bystanders, and second because there was no legal recourse for the 'accused', and both are contrary to Jewish law. I have taken issue with Jews trying to reclaim land east of the green line which had been owned by Jews prior to 1948, while refusing to grant the Palestinians rights to land west of the green line. We are supposed to have one set of laws applying to everyone - not laws which grant more rights to Jews than to non-Jews.

I oppose terrorist activities by the Palestinians, and have openly disagreed with people and said that if the Palestinians had been led by a Gandhi and pursued non-violence, they would likely already have their own nation. One time, I actually got one person to agree that just because the rockets from Gaza did not kill many people did not make them okay, and he even reluctantly conceded that Israel might have some justification for retaliating for rocket attacks.

Israel & Palestine

I am saddened by the state of affairs in Israel and Palestine. I think the majority of people on both sides would prefer peace, but there are also people on both sides who are opposed to any sort of equitable peace agreement. There are people on both sides who do things which further enflame the situation.

We can argue at great length over who is more to blame. Each side has done its wrongs. Each side tries to blame the other side for all of the ills. Neither side has clean hands. Each side at one time or another has done something to sabotage peace. As I see it, only G-d can truly weigh the actions of both sides and find who has committed the greater wrongs. Regardless, to spend time trying to blame the ‘other side’ for all the wrongs, does nothing to bring us closer to a genuine peace.

In the interests of full disclosure, I am Jewish. I have visited Israel, and want Israel to remain as a homeland for Jews. I also want a fully independent Palestinian state living in peace with Israel. I want to see an end to Israeli occupation of the West Bank. I want to see an end to rocket fire from the Palestinian territories into Israel. I want to see an end to the expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank. I want to see an end to suicide bombings and terror attacks on Israelis.

For a genuine peace, there must be a number of things. The core of it is in the Arab Peace Initiative of 2002, though there will be negotiation over the exact implementations of some of the items. The core was as follows:

Israel to affirm:

I-                    Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights, to the June 4, 1967 lines as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon.

II-                  Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194.

III-                The acceptance of the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied since June 4, 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

Arab countries affirm:

I-                    Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region.

II-                  Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.

There will need to be negotiations over the exact borders between Israel and Palestine. The pre-1967 borders will be the basis for negotiations, and the Palestinian state should have no less territory than that of the pre-1967 borders, but there will need to be territorial swaps, equal in quantity and quality. There will need to be continuous borders, with no isolated enclaves within the West Bank. Israeli troops must leave all areas to be included in Palestine. Palestine will need to be demilitarized, with its territorial integrity guaranteed by Israel, Jordan, Egypt, among others.

The solution to the Palestinian refugee problem will include a nominal amount of resettlement within Israel, but primarily compensation for the refugees along with resettlement within Palestine or other Arab countries. Israel will not accept a mass influx of Palestinians to Israel, and I suspect the greater number of Palestinian refugees don’t want to live under a predominantly Jewish government.

The Clinton plan offered five practical options for the resolution of the refugee issue: (1) Return to the Palestinian State; (2) Return to territory formerly part of Israel that would be transferred to Palestine within the framework of land swaps; (3) Rehabilitation of refugees in host countries; (4) Resettlement in third countries (Canada, Australia); (5) Admission to Israel, subject to the sovereign and exclusive decision of the State of Israel.

East Jerusalem is mostly Arab, except for some Jewish settlements. Most of eastern Jerusalem needs to be part of Palestine. The Old City has shrines sacred to Judaism, Islam, and Christianity, and members of each religion need access to their holy sites. The Old City as a whole must have some sort of joint sovereignty shared by Israel and Palestine, probably with an impartial arbiter to help resolve any issues.

Israel needs to be secure within its borders. That means no rockets, no terror attacks, and no threats of invasion. Palestine also needs to be secure within its borders, which means neither Israel, nor any other country may violate the borders with impunity. Both sides must agree that any peace settlement resolves all territorial and other issues between Israel and Palestine, and both sides must agree to abandon any territorial claims against the other.