| How to Join | Member's Area | Private Library | Search | Sanctuary | Login | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main Forums | Discussion | Tech Talk | Mature Content | Archives |
A home without a wall, |
|
|
||||||
| How to Join | Member's Area | Private Library | Search | Sanctuary | Login | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Main Forums | Discussion | Tech Talk | Mature Content | Archives |
A home without a wall, |
|
|
|
||||||
| The Alley |
|
Voter ID....thoughts? |
|
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA 
|
http://news.yahoo.com/obama-administration-objects-texas-voter-id-law-161037385.html |
||
| © Copyright 2012 Michael Mack - All Rights Reserved | |||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
They can't win without dead people, fictional characters and illegals. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
My understanding, based on a quick check (see link), is that currently in Texas you have to apply for a voter registration card 30 days before an election at which point your eligibility is checked before the card is issued. When you turn up on voting day you have to present the registration card or a suitable form of identification, which is checked against the electoral register, before you’re allowed to vote. Coincidentally that’s exactly how it works in the UK. Are they suggesting that the requirement for pre-registration is dropped and replaced with a simple id check at the point of voting? Or are they insisting that a voter registration card AND a form of identity is required? What exactly is the new proposal Mike? http://www.texas.gov/en/discover/Pages/voting.aspx?AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1 |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
I don't know how they do it in other states but I never have to even show my voter registration card when I go to vote. I don't have to show anything, I just have to sign a book, I guess so they have a signature if fraud is ever alleged they have signatures to check. Here is what was uncovered in Vermont: http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/03/13/OKeefe%20Video%20Exposes%20Voter%20Fraud-Friendly%20Policies%20in%20Vermont |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
The states are insisting that a government-issued photo id be used to register and vote. Obama's admin does not want that requirement to be mandatory. It is obvious why they don't. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: Is it because it increases costs for both voters and government, which isn’t a good idea when money for both is a little tight, or that it would disenfranchise some Americans, namely those that don’t have the required ID? I can understand the first reason, the second is slightly harder to swallow, I find it hard to believe that there are people today who don’t have some form of identification - that said though I’ve read some interesting and compelling arguments to the contrary. I guess the fairest thing to do would be to gather more accurate data. If it turns out that, say, 30% of any particular demographic didn’t have ID I’d be against the proposal. If the figures came back closer to 3% I’d be leaning the other way. In the UK each local authority maintains an electoral register based on census information that’s cross referenced using the register of births/deaths. The register is also used to allocate council tax which tends to spur folk into getting it corrected if it turns out to be wrong. A couple of months before the election a nice independent canvasser calls to verify the entries, then shortly after you get your personalised registration card. It seems to work ok, the local polling station is generally manned by local volunteers and cover a small enough area that almost everyone knows everyone else – at least by sight. I guess voter fraud must be a bigger problem in the US though given that they’re trying to decrease the possibility of it happening. Are there any verifiable figures available that point towards how widespread voter fraud might be? . |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Is it because it increases costs for both voters and government, which isn’t a good idea when money for both is a little tight, or that it would disenfranchise some Americans, namely those that don’t have the required ID? You give two choices...I'll add two more.. Dead people Illegal aliens No, we don't have the "small" voting areas where everybody knows your name, especially not in metropolitan areas and, yes, it is a big problem here. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
How big of a problem is it Mike? Have you any reliable data? Also are both parties involved in voter fraud or is it one-sided? . |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. How many things can you not do without a valid picture ID in this country? . |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
The claim that there is no voter fraud in the U.S. is patently ridiculous, given our rich and unfortunate history of it. As the U.S. Supreme Court said when it upheld Indiana's photo-ID law in 2008, "Flagrant examples of such fraud . . . have been documented throughout this Nation's history by respected historians and journalists." The liberal groups that fought Indiana's law didn't have much luck with liberal justice John Paul Stevens, who wrote the 6-3 decision. Before being named to the Supreme Court, Justice Stevens practiced law in Chicago, a hotbed of electoral malfeasance. Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/12/voter_fraud_for_the_complete_idiot.html#ixzz1p3uVenez |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Voter registration in the United States largely reflects its 19th-century origins and has not kept pace with advancing technology and a mobile society. States’ systems must be brought into the 21st century to be more accurate, cost-effective, and efficient, according to Pew Center statement. Research commissioned by the Pew Center on the States highlights the extent of the challenge: Approximately 24 million—one of every eight—active voter registrations in the United States are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate. More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as active voters. Approximately 2.75 million people have active registrations in more than one state. Meanwhile, researchers estimate at least 51 million eligible U.S. citizens are unregistered, or more than 24 percent of the eligible population. The study also identified: Approximately 12.7 million records nationwide that appear to be out of date and no longer reflect the voter’s current information. More than 1.8 million records for people who are no longer living, but have active registrations on voter rolls. About 12 million records with incorrect addresses, indicating that either the voters have moved, or that errors in the information on file make it unlikely the Postal Service can reach them. Illegal alien voters A study released by the conservative think-tank the Heritage Foundation provides proof that illegal aliens and immigrants with green cards are committing rampant voter fraud in the United States. Reports of ineligible persons registering to vote have raised concerns about state processes for verifying voter registration lists. States usually base voter eligibility on the voter’s age, US citizenship, mental competence, and felon status. Although individual states run elections, Congress has authority to affect the administration of the elections. The Help America Vote Act of 2002 (HAVA) had set a deadline for states to have a statewide voter registration list and list verification procedures, according to Heritage analysts. For example, the methods used in seven selected states to verify voter eligibility and ensure accuracy of voter registration lists were varied and include relying on registrant self attestation, return mailings, and checking against lists of felony convictions or deceased individuals. Some states, for instance, failed to do any more than ask on their application forms if the registrant was a US citizen. The applicant will merely check off the “Yes” box, but there is no action taken to verify the authenticity of that answer. “The voter registration officials simply take the word of the registrant with no follow-up,” said conservative political strategist Michael Baker. “Some states that require some backup documentation merely ask for a utility bill or a driver’s license — neither of which prove citizenship. In other words, legal or illegal aliens can easily register to vote in local and national elections,” warns Baker. http://www.eurasiareview.com/21022012-voter-fraud-research-study-suggests-major-us-election-problems-oped/ |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Grinch, of course both parties point fingers at the others with regards to voter fraud. Democrats claimed the "hanging chads" kept Gore out of office, for example. Democrats di everything they could to keep absentee ballots from overseas military personnel from counting because the majority were pro-republican. With regards to illegal aliens, it's a proven fact that the majority of illegal aliens are latin and the majority of latins vote democratic. That is the reason for the current actions of the administration. They want those votes, whether or not the voters can legally vote. |
||
|
nakdthoughts Member Laureate
since 2000-10-29
Posts 19200Between the Lines |
Denise, unless I am mistaken and dreamed it ( listening to too much news while resting yesterday), PA just passed a law that requires everyone to have a photo ID to vote in the state and that the Motor Vehicle Dept. will provide for free, an ID card for anyone who legally needs one. I, myself, have a driver's license and then get an additional ID at the same time when I renew so that I am not carrying the driver's license on trips where I won't be driving ( that way I can't lose it.) M |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
(Reuters) - A requirement that voters show photo identification at the polls became law in Pennsylvania on Wednesday, the latest in a spate of Republican-led efforts to impose stricter controls at the ballot box. Pennsylvania Governor Tom Corbett signed the act into law, saying it set a "simple and clear standard to protect the integrity of our elections." "I am signing this bill because it protects a sacred principle, one shared by every citizen of this nation," the Republican governor said. "That principle is one person, one vote." Opponents, who say the measure seeks to suppress voter turnout, vowed to challenge it in court. Pennsylvania joined several Republican-governed states, including Texas, Kansas and Wisconsin, that have adopted stricter voter identification laws, arguing they were needed to prevent ballot box fraud. Supporters say the laws are no different from needing identification to board an airplane or obtain a library card. But some civil rights groups say such laws discriminate against the poor who may not be able to pay fees for copies of legal documents such as birth certificates, and that they could suppress minority votes. Democrats say voter identification measures are aimed at squeezing out university students and senior citizens who tend to vote for Democrats. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/03/15/us-usa-politics-pennsylvania-voting-idUSBRE82E01K20120315 |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: Who’s claiming that there’s no voter fraud Mike? I honestly don’t know either way, which is why I asked if you had any figures, my reasoning being that if voter fraud is widespread the proposed law might make some sense but if voter fraud is a rare event the new law is a potential waste of time and money. Without knowing the facts it’s impossible to make a reasonable argument either way. The same goes for the number of people who don’t have an acceptable form of ID, as I said earlier my gut feeling is that the number is probably low but that’s just a guess – again, not a good thing to base a reasonable argument on. If you haven’t got any of the figures handy Mike that’s ok, I just thought I’d ask. Normally I’d do the research myself but I thought I’d ask in case you’d already been there and done that. Does anyone else have any figures regarding the extent of voter fraud? |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. "And now to the dull math, so dull that the Indy Star didn't seem disposed to undertake the effort. Paul K. Ogden, however, helpfully breaks out his calculator for the edification of the press. According to STATSIndiana, In 2007, Indianapolis/Marion County had an estimated population of 876,804. Of that number 232,607 were below 18 years of age, for a total of 644,197 people in Marion County/Indianapolis 18 or over and thus eligible to vote. (Indiana allows felons to vote as long as they are not incarcerated). So we have 644,197 people eligible to be registered in Marion County/Indianapolis, and 677,401 people registered. Congratulations go to Indianapolis for having 105% of its residents registered!" http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/10/09/ indiana-more-registered-vote-eligible-media-misses-story I remembered this . . . . |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
The same goes for the number of people who don’t have an acceptable form of ID, as I said earlier my gut feeling is that the number is probably low but that’s just a guess – From what I have seen of your guesses, grinch, they are normally based on figures, reason, and your brand of logic. In this case, your "gut feeling" isprobably from those same ingredients....and rightfully so. If it turns out that, say, 30% of any particular demographic didn’t have ID I’d be against the proposal. If the figures came back closer to 3% I’d be leaning the other way. Then enjoy your lean. ID is required to get a drivers licence, cash a check, open a bank account, get a passport, library card, get a loan of any kind, board a plane and other things too numerous to mention. If you simply take the drivers license, bank account and check-cashing, you would be hard pressed to find a demographic that reached 30%, or 10 for that matter. True, there may be an eskimo tribe somewhere in Alaska that fits in there or a few Navajos that don't drive but it's not likely. What is the best that the left can come up with? Students may not have enough money to get a copy of their birth certificate. I'd be hard pressed to come up with a more flimsy excuse than that one. Normally I’d do the research myself Yes, and I am of the opinion you already have or, if you actually haven't, you would still do the research to check on the figures that someone else provided....so you may as well go ahead - if you haven't, of course.  Who’s claiming that there’s no voter fraud Mike? Many people, grinch, and mainly democrats. Voter fraud cheapens the value of the universal franchise. There are those, like the current president of the United States and his attorney general, however, who act like it's a fiction, some kind of right-wing fantasy that does not deserve our attention. And, as such, they are taking steps to oppose every reasonable effort to guard against it. http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2012/03/15/obama-administrations-texas-decision-invites-voter-fraud Whether supported by either party, this unprecedented push relies on two falsehoods: that voter fraud is rampant and that every honest voter has a driver’s license. The first premise, that voter fraud is rampant, draws attention after rumors and accusations each Election Day. But how many accusations produce actual evidence? Incredibly few. This is because states already establish identity during the registration process through requiring identification or cross-referencing driving records. http://www.suntimes.com/news/7677379-418/gop-push-vs-voter-fraud-based-in-rumor-not-reality.html As Republicans warn of catastrophe at the polls, an expert on election fraud explains the real partisan hoax -- the suppression of Democratic votes. http://www.salon.com/2008/10/15/voter_suppression/ Voter fraud is just a dark GOP fantasy: Connie Schultz http://www.cleveland.com/schultz/index.ssf/2011/08/voter_fraud_is_just_a_dark_gop.html Grinch, everyone knows what's going on here. The following article sums it up pretty well.. Already, Team Obama is putting voter fraud policies in effect to tilt the election. Eric Holder’s stance on the right of individual states within the U.S. to require voter identification is the most obvious example. Several court cases have already upheld the states’ right to require voter identification. Furthermore, many studies have shown that requiring voter identification prevents voter fraud and is no more illegal than requiring identification to obtain Medicare or Medicaid or social security payments. Nevertheless, , Holder’s move—especially claiming that voter identification requirements are racist---is indicative of the panic that Democrats in power are feeling as the 2012 election looms and they search for ways to replace ACORN’s fraudulent voter numbers. More recently, Team, Obama is speeding up the immigration process and rushing illegal aliens to citizenship, often ahead of those who have waited, patiently and legally, for years. A 2011 report exposed the problem wherein the immigration visa processors within DHS are, apparently, being pressured by senior officials within the agency to approve applications as quickly as possible, often ignoring issues relating to eligibility and security. Many Americans have broad-based concerns about immigration, illegal and otherwise, and there is broad-based consensus that the current immigration system and our nation’s policies need reform urgently. But what the Obama Administration is doing is not the kind of reform Americans had in mind. This current urgency to relax immigration standards in advance of the upcoming election looks exactly like it is-- a craven attempt to mine for new voters to tilt the election. http://townhall.com/columnists/luritadoan/2012/01/09/democrats_embrace_voter_fraud/page/2 |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: I haven’t researched the figures Mike, largely because I don’t think I need to at this point, you see I don’t have a preferred position on this issue – I’m simply waiting to be convinced one way or the other. When someone suggests that voter fraud is so rife that the only option is to introduce sweeping ID laws the best way to convince me is to show me how rife voter fraud actually is. So far I see lots of jumping up and down, wringing of hands and gnashing of teeth but no actual figures to verify the claim. I’m still waiting to be convinced. Will I double and triple check the figures if any turn up? Absobleedinglutely  |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
I won't be the one spending time trying to convince you, grinch. When you have a political party, democrats, doing their best to squelch laws that would deny illegal aliens to right to vote, and those same illegals vote unanimously democratic, that says it all for me. If there were no problem there, Dems would not be fighting so hard against it. I will let people's individual logic make their own choices. If yours doesn't, that's fine with me. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: The trouble is Mike that without providing some sort of evidence to back up your claims you’re unlikely to convince anyone else either. . |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
I don't presume to think or speak for others. They can draw their own conclusions. I'm satisfied with my presentation, most of which you have ignored. Be well. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
quote: You must be easily satisfied Mike. You’ve presented a bunch of figures suggesting the electoral register isn’t as accurate as it could be and absolutely no evidence whatsoever that any of those dead folk etc. have ever cast a vote. I’m not really surprised that you haven’t presented any real evidence though Mike, common sense suggests that if the evidence existed those in favour of photo id would have been pointing it out at every opportunity. If they haven’t managed to find clear evidence of voter fraud with the resources they have available it’s a little unfair to expect you to. Let’s pretend for a moment though that evidence of rampant voter fraud does exist and that those unscrupulous Dems are experts at utilising it. Can you explain why they don’t win every election? When Republicans win is it that they’ve been better at voter fraud than the Dems? |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
I'm not going to keep trading jibes with you, grinch, as our conversations always seem to turn out to be. Republicans want controls in place to insure that voters are legal residents. Democrats do not. People can draw their own conclusions from that fact. Think what you like. I've officially lost interest in continuing the conversation. |
||
|
Grinch Member Elite
since 2005-12-31
Posts 2929Whoville |
[Edited - please address the post and not the posters - Ron] quote: So have I Mike. As I said at the start, without accurate data regarding the extent of voter fraud and the possible negative impacts, it’s impossible to have a serious discussion about photo ID. If you ever find any though give me a shout and I’ll be happy to talk about it. . [This message has been edited by Ron (03-17-2012 09:33 AM).] |
||
|
rwood Member Elite
since 2000-02-29
Posts 3793Tennessee |
What a quandary of conspiracies, eh? I’ve had an I.D. since I was 12. Military dependent. Not sure why anyone would feel disenfranchised over an I.D. BUT? I think poll integrity is a sorry sidestep for atrocious roll failures. Grinch has a point and you touched on an incident that is on topic. Dems claimed Bush stole the vote against Gore in Fla. and that the small winning percent could have been the dilution of immigrants or illegals. I don’t support any of this, because If Hispanics "unanimously vote Dem," Mike? Gore would have won. So, either the Reps did a really great job of diluting the polls while the Dems did a really crappy job, while the Independents remain dully inept? This makes the Vote a scam deal from day one, and no one person is really “winning” anything, because we have a crapton of losers competing for the majority of saboteur dilution. Why the Dems aren’t the ones who are trumpeting stricter poll integrity and I.D. laws, I’m not sure, but here’s one theory: They’re letting the fear factor do its job. Becoming ugly or paranoid over any issue distances a win. Candidates, like Bush, have proven that it’s best to sincerely address, but not attack, immigration issues during an election year. Perhaps they are following his lead? Some thoughts on that and the rolly pollys: 1: The Bush/Gore vote. Bush might really have won because he actively sought & won enough of the Hispanic vote or Gore might have really lost because he didn’t win Tennessee. Nothing really disturbing there, but it is a lesson on the perceived notions about Latinos/Tennesseans. 2: Dilution of the vote does happen. People are caught for voter fraud. They are prosecuted. So, the integrity of the polls isn’t THAT screwed. Hard time and hefty fines don’t seem worth it to me, but maybe some are that willing and willful in their attempts to commit a felony, which must be proven. Most allegations of fraud cases are not willful attempts of fraud. They are clerical errors & or voter errors. 3: The voter rolls are fear catalysts on the issues of poll integrity. The systems are broken. Still Broken Attempts to clear up this issue are being made, but they are still not up to par. Dead Remain Every state has similar headlines and issues. The clerics are failing to do their jobs & or the systems used to track the data are failing. Each state pulls data from different offices & systems to fit their voting laws/models. The handshaking between each office is famously flawed. This is the widespread culprit of many conspiracy theories at the polls. Dead people and felons who lack clearance are on the rolls. Some live people are dead people on the rolls. Some felons have not been cleared on the rolls after completion of their sentencing and probation, etc. The events of wrongful purging are entirely rampant.Nashville Purge I’m guessing that the numbers of people who have had their voting rights wrongfully revoked are astronomical in comparison to the numbers of people who willfully take their chances to commit a felony at the polls. 4. I.D. laws may help stop voter fraud, but broken rolls stop legal voters who already have plenty of forms of I.D. The tax dollars required to set the records straight in every state will be astronomical. So, how important is poll integrity to U.S. Citizens? Tax payers have to pay more to be officially known as Tax Paying Citizens on officially correct rolls. Shouldn’t be a real problem; due to those who are in the lead in this election being a direct reflection on citizens having no problems with paying more. (Unless every single voting poll there out there is defunct.) Conservative spending & or cuts are not a part of the leads’ histories or agendas. Ron Paul is still the Invisible Running Man and, according to Press, he’s not even electable. LOL. With all of his experience, solid history, and Identification. Hahaha. I find that ironic. 5: There are hundreds of pending apps to legislate a universal voting law. Constitutionally, all residents would have to register to vote or decline, explicitly: Opt In or Opt Out Sound familiar? This might change how flawed the system is, or not? But then there’s the issue of more big gov, compulsory, profiling and privacy issues, etc. 6: Bad Government rolls downhill. I believe the governments on the state levels are side stepping several issues, like the badly broken voter roll issue for the tackling of a bigger beast: Immigration issues. Voter fraud fears are very convenient leverage for taking a preemptive initiative with attrition by enforcement. The House is expected to remain inflamed and divided on immigration issues as they are obviously baffled (all the way around) and unable to progress toward real solutions. Let the Feds police immigration state to state? Uh, yeah. Why are we here? On Arizona’s constitutionality: “In its most recent decision on preemption, Levine v. Wyeth (2009), the Court declared that "[w]e start with the assumption that the historic police powers of the States were not to be superceded by the Federal Act unless that was the clear and manifest purpose of Congress." Every state has an inherent "police power," which allows the state to legislate for the health, safety, morals, and welfare of its people.” (William G. Ross) Hispanics represent 16% of the population. Very few vote by their own accounts. I realize it only takes one vote for a win. But, again? I’d say that the percentages of illegal immigrants, who chance getting caught at the polls to cast a vote, are infinitesimal compared to the percentages of blocked-but-valid votes from citizens. I guess it boils down to which is the bigger wrong or more passionate concern of the people which does happen to include Hispanic citizens. I do not support that Hispanics vote unanimously Dem. & especially when it comes to Obama. My Hispanic friends and affiliations are highly angry with Obama over the contraception coverage. The majority of them are Catholic, but even my Protestant friends are in an uproar over this issue. They are deeply committed to their traditional values. So much so, that many state they voted for Bush because he opposed gay marriage. Deportations have increased under Obama, not decreased. And any recent "attention" Obama is giving to Hispanics is seen as posturing for his campaign (by Dem. Hispanic lawmakers and those who have been paying attention) because he's failed on immigration reform and The DREAM Act, etc. Yeah, he gained some respect for appointing Sonia Sotomayer to the Supreme Court, but he facepalmed on the 5 Dems. that voted against the DREAM Act. Hispanics feel he should have been just as convincing to those Dems as he was to them if they voted for him as Prez. Obama has proved that he is no es un héroe para los Hispanos. And the Dems have proven to be flimsy sidekickers. Obama is pulling a Bush. A Bush in the hand is worth two in the cuckoo’s nest. I don't think he's counting on voter fraud. He’s just trying to have more face showing beneath the egg. Sorry. I guess I had a lot to say today  |
||
|
Denise
Moderator
Member Seraphic
since 1999-08-22
Posts 22648 |
I would just say that the Dems are doing a lot more than 'not trumpeting' Voter ID laws...they are actively fighting against it...witness the latest actions of the DOJ. I see nothing wrong with requiring a legitimate photo ID to vote. We need it for everything else we do. Why not that? Claims of disenfranchising segments of the population don't seem to carry any legitimacy when the states involved in those laws are making the ID available free of charge. So where is the disenfranchisement? I don't get it. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
I'll answer more fully when I have more time, Regina. Thank you for such a thoughtful reply. Yes, Latins predominately vote democratic, a fact that will be easy to verify. Are some upset with Obama now? Oh, yes, as are Jews and blacks who voted for him last time on his "hope and change" platform. Ask yourself what justifies the administration's actions in this matter. They are taking on several states over this. In a time their time could be better spent on the economy, unemployment and all of the important challenges they are facing, they are using their time and resources to fight the states over this. Now, if it is such a non-issue, why are they doing this? Why bother taking states to court over something that, to you and others, really doesn't matter? Because they are fighting for the person who doesn't have the 35 dollars to get a copy of their birth certificate? I find that unlikely. As I said before, one side would like better controls that voter registration be restricted to those eligible to vote and one side wants those controls to be squelched. Why would anyone choose the second as the appropriate one? |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: Robert Heinlein once wrote, "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." I think, for some, we might have to add "... stupidity or an honest difference of opinion." What if the States tried to pass laws limiting voting to land owners, Mike? Or to just white, Christian males? While those may seem extremes to you, and of course they are, they should also illustrate the absolute need for the Federal government to oversee ANY limitations imposed on voting procedures. We went to war with England in large part because the Colonies were being ruled without any say in their ruling, and the right to vote for representation is more integral to our nation than even freedom of speech or religion. People too often want to fix problems by causing much greater problems. When a guilty man walks away from justice because of a "technicality" there's always someone screaming that our laws should be tougher. Similarly, when instances of voter fraud are suggested there's someone (often the same someone) demanding tougher voting laws. I fervently believe that if even one innocent man is punished, or even one valid vote can't be cast, then those stricter laws have failed to protect the RIGHT people. It's admittedly a fine line to walk. We need law lest we fall to anarchy, but we need good law not just more law. Which, for any Republicans listening in, is exactly the same as saying we need good government not bigger government. Voter fraud is already against the law. If we can't enforce the laws we have what sense does it make to impose more laws? You say there are 1.8 million dead people still on the active voter rolls, Mike? Well, let's get them OFF the rolls then. Instead of creating more paperwork by imposing additional burdens on the individual, lets insist the states do their jobs as already legislated. We should be doing everything in our power to make it easier for people to cast their ballots, not harder. Yes, we need measures to help insure honest voting. We might not necessarily agree on what those measures should be, Mike, but I sincerely hope a difference of opinion won't cause you to accuse me of a conspiracy to break the law by condoning voter fraud? |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Voter fraud is already against the law. If we can't enforce the laws we have what sense does it make to impose more laws? Good question, Ron. Mainly it's because that's what we do. Look at gun laws. We have plenty of gun laws in effect and yet we pass new gun laws to add to the ones we don't enforce. Look at immigration laws. When states try to enforce the immigration laws on the books, they are condemned for it. There are plenty of areas where laws are in place that are not enforced. Voter registration is just one of them. ' , they should also illustrate the absolute need for the Federal government to oversee ANY limitations imposed on voting procedures. I agree. Where do you see the limitation? By having the voters show proper ID? THAT is a limitation? Then showing ID to cash a check, board a plane, get a passport or driver's license must also be limitations? Is the government fighting those limitations? We might not necessarily agree on what those measures should be, Mike, but I sincerely hope a difference of opinion won't cause you to accuse me of a conspiracy to break the law by condoning voter fraud? A difference of opinion, Ron? A conspiracy to break the law? Ron, you are not a dumb man, no matter how many times Nan says she beats you in Scrabble. You know exactly what is behind this. Democrats want illegals to vote. They want any group to vote that they feel will vote democratic. If that is calling their actions a conspiracy, then I do so wholeheartedly. I have no doubt that if there were evidence that illegals voted predominately republican, democrats would be the ones demanding exactly what they are fighting now. Bottom line.....republicans want proof of citizenship to vote. Democrats do not. The rest is all smoke and mirrors. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: One common definition of insanity, Mike, is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. Creating new laws instead of enforcing the old ones hasn't worked so well for either guns or immigration, the two examples you've cited, so why should we expect it to work any better for voter registrations? Maybe it's time to stop doing what we do? quote: Because in comparison, Mike, those are all very trivial things. Our country wasn't founded on the premise that everyone should be able to cash a check, board a plane, drive a car, et al. Restrictions on things like that are inconveniences. More importantly, they can be changed by the will of the people. If enough people don't want to be forced to show ID to cash a check they can use the ballot box to have it changed. They can elect representatives who will pass new legislation making it illegal to require ID when cashing a check. Or their representatives can institute wholly new ways for cashing checks. I know it sounds silly, I know it's never going to happen, but the point is that people still have options. When you take away their right to vote by imposing unnecessary restrictions, there are no options left to them. At least no peaceful ones. quote: And Republicans want any group they feel will vote Democratic to be restricted, or better yet, eliminated. Both are self-serving and short sighted views, but have NOTHING to do with the issues. I don't care what motivates them. I only care about what is right and what is wrong. Adding additional restrictions to the voting process is wrong. And dangerous. Again, Mike, if we don't want illegal immigrants or dead citizens to vote in elections then we should remove them from the voting rolls. It requires nothing more than actually doing the paperwork that is already legally required of the state. And that is absolutely where the burden should lie; on the bureaucrats, not on the citizens. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
When you take away their right to vote by imposing unnecessary restrictions, there are no options left to them. At least no peaceful ones. Then that is our difference in our ways of thinking. I do not see proving citizenship as an unnecessary restrictions. It seems to me to be a necessary step. If you want to speak of the founding fathers, my guess would be that they had citizens in mind when speaking of voting rights. Proof of citizenship ahould be a logical procedure. if you consider it "unnecessary" then you are calling the entire concept unnecessary. Perhaps we should just have all voters "cross their hearts and hope to die" to stop them from fibbing about their citizenship?? SInce you feel strongly that laws already on the books should be enforced, then it's good to know you stood behind all of the states that Obama has gone after with regards to immigration reform and I applaud you for that. This to me seems to be another case of enforcement. With all due respect, this entire thing seems silly of me to debate. We are debating whether or not citizens need to show proof of citizenship before voting, since voting requires citizenship. To me that's a given. To those who it is not, I';m apparently not capable of understanding them. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
quote: Neither do I, Mike. It's the manner of proof over which we disagree. You're essentially charging people for the right to vote. The left hand says, "You must have a valid photo ID to vote." And the right hand says, "Here, we'll sell you a valid photo ID." Your argument that most people need an ID anyway is an argument that would exclude only the poorest and most disenfranchised, which is exactly the problem. If even one innocent man is punished or even one valid vote can't be cast, the law has failed to protect the RIGHT people. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
The Texas Legislature passed Senate Bill 14, creating a new photo voter identification requirement for voter qualification in all elections in Texas beginning January 1, 2012. This advisory is intended as an overview of the new requirement. Additional information and forms are forthcoming. The new law requires all voters to present one of the following forms of photo identification in order to be eligible to vote: Driver’s license, election identification certificate, personal identification card, or concealed handgun license issued by the Texas Department of Public Safety; United States Military identification card containing the person’s photograph; United States citizenship certificate containing the person’s photograph; or United States passport. There are several exemptions to the photo voter identification requirement. Voters with a disability may apply with the county voter registrar for an exemption. Pursuant to Senate Bill 14, the exemption application, which our office will prescribe, must contain written documentation from either the U.S. Social Security Administration evidencing the applicant’s disability, or from the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs evidencing a disability rating of at least 50 percent. In addition, the applicant must state that he or she has no valid form of photo identification. Those who obtain a disability exemption will be allowed to vote by presenting a voter registration certificate reflecting the exemption. Other exemptions include voters who have a consistent religious objection to being photographed and voters who do not have any photo identification as a result of certain natural disasters as declared by the President of the United States or the Texas Governor. These voters may cast a provisional ballot at the polls and must sign an affidavit attesting to those facts in the presence of the county voter registrar within six days of the election date. Finally, the new law creates a “cure period” for voters who cast a provisional ballot without presenting a valid form of photo identification. These voters have up to six days after the election to present to the county voter registrar appropriate photo identification. Once this and all other requirements are met, then the provisional ballot must be accepted. Lastly, Senate Bill 14 creates a new form of photo identification called an election identification certificate, which the Texas Department of Public Safety issues. Effective January 1, 2012, registered voters or those eligible to register who do not have a required form of photo identification may apply for the election identification certificate. There is no fee for the certificate. http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/laws/advisory2011-10.shtml so much for the "Here, we'll sell you a valid I.D." reasoning. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
LOL. Yea, like that makes voting "free" again. Is this really the kind of bureaucracy Republicans are advocating these days, Mike? We're going to need a new government agency just to count the hoops people are forced to jump through. So what happens, Mike, if an illegal alien or a dead person walks in and asks for an Election Identification Certificate? Or, more succinctly perhaps, how does one prove one is NOT an illegal alien or a dead person? And how do they do it without cost, either in time consuming red tape or cold hard cash? |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Ok, Ron...you've worn me down with your sparkling redress!  Anyone should be allowed to vote. he Chinese can send 6 billion or so tourists to choose the candidate of their choice. The Disney characters ACORN signed up should animate themselves down to the voting booths and cast their ballots for their own Goofy candidate. The dead should rise en masse in a sequel entitled "Night of the Living (or unliving) Voter." The old Chicago motto of Vote Early and Vote Often should be a button on every voter's shirt or blouse. In the case of those who have just swum up from Mexico to vote, make that their swimming trunks. No one should be inconvenienced to vote. Voting Wagons should drive the streets and visit all residents, knocking on doors and presenting ballots, not asking people to actually spend the energy getting out of their easy chairs to vote, but presenting the ballots to them, along with a pen, of course, because no one should have to use up their own ink or pencil lead. Anything presenting any cost, no matter how small, or any expenditure of enery or anything that could involve the dreaded "red tape" should be outlawed. Being asked to fill out a form should be considered torture on the same level as waterboarding. How dare republicans be so Draconian as to require people to prove their citizenship just because the silly law states that voters must be citizens! Even though it is free, people may have to stand in line (we all know how grueling that is) or fill out forms and running the risk of carpal tunnel syndrome. I've tried to match you in silliness but you are still the King.  |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
LOL. Mike, I'm not even in the royal line when it comes to silliness (or anything else, I suppose). You're just making it a whole lot harder than it needs to be. People already have to register before they can vote, Mike. Thanks to Clinton's National Voter Registration Act of 1993, the vast majority of Americans now register when they renew their driver's license or apply for social services. We should be able to put a check mark next to almost all those names and consider them already vetted? It's then up to the State to check the remaining names against public records to determine citizenship. Living in Amish country, I know a lot of people who don't have a picture ID (including at least one family member who is not Amish). However, I don't know anyone who doesn't have a Social Security number. Our government already knows who is and isn't a legal citizen, Mike. They probably know what you and I had for breakfast. You register to vote. The State vets your registration. You vote. It really shouldn't be any more difficult or complex than that. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Obviously it IS more difficult, Ron, or 5 states would not be taking extra measures like they are. I'll check further. |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
Sorry, Mike, but that's not a rationale I'm willing to follow. Just because five states do something doesn't necessarily make it the right thing to do. A man with a hammer starts to think everything looks like a nail, and legislators similarly begin to see new legislation as the cure for every evil. As you said earlier, that's just "what we do," and it's exactly why we have a whole lot more government than we need. I won't pretend, however, that my suggestions aren't overly simplified. They are. But I think the underlying point remains the same. In a court of law, the onus is on the state to prove guilt, not on the defendant to prove innocence. Voting in this country is such a basic human right that I think it has to be approached with exactly the same care. The burden has to fall on the State, Mike, not on the individual voters. Again and yet again, if even one innocent man is punished or even one valid vote can't be cast, then the law has failed to protect the RIGHT people. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
interesting video... http://mrctv.org/videos/are-voter-id-laws-racist |
||
|
Ron
Administrator
Member Rara Avis
since 1999-05-19
Posts 8669Michigan, US |
I thought the most interesting part, Mike, centered on the people interviewed. Did any of them look to you like they had been forced to go without a meal lately? I don't think voter obstruction laws are necessarily racist. Such laws, rather, tend to discourage the poor of all colors equally well. The disproportionate overlap between race and poverty? Now, THAT is racist. |
||
|
Balladeer
Administrator
Member Empyrean
since 1999-06-05
Posts 25505Ft. Lauderdale, Fl USA |
Interesting take, Ron. One of the most interesting parts of it I found was Debbie Wasserman chultz' comment. |
||
|
Huan Yi Member Ascendant
since 2004-10-12
Posts 6688Waukegan |
. "The disproportionate overlap between race and poverty? Now, THAT is racist." http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/293878/race-and-rhetoric-thomas-sowell . |
||
|
|
⇧ top of page ⇧ |
|
| All times are ET (US). All dates are in Year-Month-Day format. | ||
