|
|
|
|
|
| | New ID voter law?Page 4 of 29 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29) | Well, when one googles some craype from some website and doesn't verify the info they post...then all they've posted is craype...in connecticut the state ID costs $22.50 and must be applied for and paid for at the DMV...the cost is not $15
http://www.dmv.org/ct-connecticut/id-cards.php
And when one comes to the DMV here...they get in line to get a number to get in line...and someone getting a state ID...pays in the second line and goes to a third line...the picture line...therefore, one can expect to be at the DMV for 2 hours...and of course...with the economic mess left to us by former President Bush...DMV's are closing and reducing hours...so good luck with all that.
Then we are a democrat leaning state...so, the concept of voter identification is foreign to us. | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/19/2012 4:37:10 PM |
Well, when one googles some craype from some website and doesn't verify the info they post...then all they've posted is craype...in connecticut the state ID costs $22.50 and must be applied for and paid for at the DMV...the cost is not $15
http://www.dmv.org/ct-connecticut/id-cards.php
Well lets see just what the yearly cost is for that $22.50 is.....Even if the card is only good for one year its daily cost would be $0.o6164 per year if it is good for the same 4 year period a drivers license is the cost plummets to $0.01541
So you can still find more than that in the laundry in a months time.
Again how does that disfranchise the poor as the left claims?
(ps) the info could have been accurate at the time since obozo has hiked the cost of most everything surly you realize cost do go up even if it is a fraction of a cent a day! 
Get real people, the IDs are a good idea it insures only people that are legal to vote does. Surly the dems doesn't want to win an election with illegal votes! | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/19/2012 4:38:49 PM | You can leave if you don't like it, you know.
I like the Golden state just fine.
You complain about $22? That's chump change.
It maybe chump change to YOU. However, for those that have to scrap for pennies day after day, it is not.
The poor shouldn't be voting anyway. It's not their money that is at stake. What property do they have to tax?
Oh I get it now. So this is why the GOP decided to instate these laws. The poor has nothing to offer. Geez. Why didn't I think of that one? I'm glad that's out of the way.
| |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/19/2012 4:43:39 PM | @ Nr 75 ...
" ... What a true democracy should be striving for is getting more people to vote, not fewer. But then again a lot of Republicans really don't have much respect for democracy. The idea that the poor may want to take part in the electoral process doesn't sit well with them. ... "
Umm, not so much. A 'true democracy' is NOT what we have in the United States. We are a Constitutional republic, not a 'democracy'. As Franklin said when asked by a lady what kind of government the Founding Fathers had given us: " A republic, madam, if you can keep it." We are well down the road to becoming the 'democracy' you dream of - unfortunately.
If 'democratic voting' were to mean anything at all, it would only be in the Jeffersonian sense of 'democracy'. Under Jefferson's concept, the privilege of the vote would be granted only to those who successfully completed a term of military service with an honorable discharge. Oh. You want to know 'Why?', right? Because those people would be the ones who successfully demonstrated the capacity to put the welfare of all before their own private welfare. Those who did not perform military service would still have all the rights of citizenship - except the right of the vote.
The reason so many cities today have exorbitant tax structures when it comes to the property tax is because many of those who voted to impose the new tax(-es) do NOT own property - they rent. They have no stake in it - or so they believe. They fail to understand that the owner of the property will merely pass the tax down to them in the form of increased rent. If people who don't own property can vote on the taxes paid by those who do own property, the owners will never have their property taxed at a fair or equitable rate. The present scheme that allows non-property-owners to vote on taxes they feel will never impact them (despite the fact they're wrong) is a clear and present case of discrimination against property owners by non-property owners ... but since they have the 'right to vote' under our present descent into 'democracy', we should just accept that and agree it's 'fair'. I mean, they can vote, right ... ? | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/19/2012 4:45:23 PM |
Surly the dems doesn't want to win an election with illegal votes!
No surly is your attitude when proved wrong.
the info could have been accurate at the time since obozo has hiked the cost of most everything surly you realize cost do go up even if it is a fraction of a cent a day
Nope it was $22.50 when Bush was pres | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/19/2012 6:02:01 PM | Voter fraud is essentially a myth brought about Republicans to suppress the vote of minorities and the poor, a group who traditionally support Democrats.
A recent study by the nonpartisan Brennan Center for Justice found just seven cases of voter fraud out of three million votes cast in Wisconsin during the 2004 election, a fraud rate of 0.0002 percent. All seven of these cases involved persons with felony convictions who weren’t eligible to vote after being released from prison.
http://www.truthaboutfraud.org/pdf/TruthAboutVoterFraud.pdf
To put it in perspective.
"The Bush administration launched a multi year investigation into voter fraud but found no evidence that it is a pervasive or serious problem."
Number of possible cases of voter impersonation- 9.
Number of cases of deaths caused by lightening- 352.
Number of reports of UFO's- 32, 299.
http://yfrog.com/z/nys1zxyj | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/19/2012 7:01:06 PM | @ Nr 82 ...
And THIS ( http://www.truthaboutfraud.org/pdf/TruthAboutVoterFraud.pdf } is your SOURCE ... ? Why am I not surprised? This is the William J. Brennan Center for Justice, Inc. - it happens to be a SOROS-funded operation, but then, we all know how 'impartial' George Soros is, don't we? In case you haven't done your research, here's just a bit of what Soros does to keep Brennan alive and subverting our nation ... he can't afford to give up a 'golden goose' like Brennan when it hatches so many 'golden eggs' for him ... this is exactly in line with the Socialist philosophy extant in the White House now ... and you cite this 'instititution' as a 'source' ... go figure ...
http://sorosfiles.com/soros/2011/10/william-j-brennan-center-for-justice-inc.html
William J. Brennan Center for Justice, Inc.
Grantee: William J. Brennan Center for Justice, Inc. ?
Ranking: 19th highest grantee, 2005 – 2009?
Received: $4,571,000?
Type: Public Policy and Law Institute?
Issues: Campaign Finance Reform, Racial Justice, Criminal Law
About: The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law proudly describes itself as “a singular institution” for its combination of advocacy, research, lobbying, and direct legal action. This hybrid think-tank and public interest law firm openly advocates for left-wing causes while presenting itself as a “non-partisan” and scholarly entity and drawing on the institutional support of a law school.
Brennan Center activism ranges from filing amicus briefs and providing counsel in controversial cases, to producing biased research and testimony, to lending support to or directly organizing advocacy groups.
Soros’s “Open Society” ambitions are demonstrated throughout the Brennan Center’s ideological priorities:
• Voter Empowerment: The Brennan Center has taken a lead in opposing voter I.D. laws; promoting the right of felons to vote, and reforming redistricting in ways that “defend minority civil rights” and the Voting Rights Act. Claiming that Florida’s H.B. 1355 will restrict the ability of blacks and Hispanics to register and exercise their right to vote, the Brennan Center is representing the radical group La Raza and others in legal challenges to the law.
• Campaign Finance Reform: The Center is leading both legal and activist challenges to the Citizens United decision. It advocates for public funding for judicial and other campaigns.
• Racial Justice: The Center supports “increased racial and gender diversity on the bench”; produces research to support claims of racial profiling and discrimination, and lobbies against purported racial disparities in policing and prosecution.
• Poverty Activism: The Center has represented A.C.O.R.N. in legal battles to impose “Living Wage” laws; tried to end fees and fines for low-income convicts, and lobbies for increases in public spending on and ever-widening range of legal services.
• Opposing National Security Measures: The Center’s Liberty and National Security Program opposes anti-terrorism security measures put into place by the federal government and the N.Y.P.D. following 9/11.
• Building Activist Networks: The Center’s vaguely named Community Oriented Defender Network, a coalition of public defenders and community groups, opposes legislative restrictions designed to restrict the use of public funding to subsidize activism and lobbying by public defenders and other “offender services” providers. The CODN argues that any “holistic” interpretation of criminal defense must necessarily include funding to lobby for “racial justice,” increased resources for offenders, and for reducing financial and legal consequences for crimes.
The CODN is one building-block in the growing field of “re-entry” services, a priority of the Holder Justice Department. The CODN is modeled directly on Open Society strategies for maximizing public funding for partisan activism aimed at increasing the tax burdens and growing bureaucracies.
The Brennan Center’s affiliation with New York University School of Law typifies the extreme political double standard practiced by academics who loudly denounce educational endowments from conservatives while accepting funding — and even subsidies for direct action — from wealthy leftists for the promotion of openly leftist causes through the universities. | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/19/2012 7:05:08 PM | Rush, you keep using your poverty level as an excuse for a person to not be able to afford an ID. Well you are on the computer quite a bit. Maybe if you skip a month of internet service would do the job. An without the internet, you would most likely have time on your hands again to do something productive to get out of the poverty level.
I do not think it is the reasonable price of the ID for the lack of one, I believe like I and others have stated above, it's laziness, illegal, wanted by the law, or just want to be under the radar.
Everybody wants to blame "The Man" for everything. Everything has to hace some sort of evil to it.
It's just an ID for crying out loud. But how dare they enact something that cost up to 2 Hours of your life at the DMV every 8 years. Be willing to bet, most of these people spend more than 2 hours a day on the internet. | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/19/2012 7:13:05 PM | Hey one eyed.............
Voter fraud is not a problem just like illegal aliens in L.A. County, Cal., is not a problem..... The total number of illegals in LA County have been estimated at 2.5 million...................
How many cases of illegals being thrown out of the country have you heard about?
Just because they don't prosecute it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.
By the way, have you taken any trips on the UFO's you mentioned?
Paul K | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/19/2012 7:17:23 PM |
"The Bush administration launched a multi year investigation into voter fraud but found no evidence that it is a pervasive or serious problem."
Another hypocritical usage. BUSH IS THE ONE THAT WAS ACCUSED OF FRAUD!!!! So somehow in the twisted use anything to support your cause regardless of its irrationality you are accepting the report of the one that supposedly committed the act. That is like agreeing with Bush that there were WMD's right? | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 12:35:37 AM | By all the voter id gods, not excluding the irish people's little Chryste, STOP arguing the id claims of these incessantly lamenting, hand-wringing unconsolables.
These UCs, you see, not only know they are righteous, but have most thoroughly, most swell and most swole proven themselves fully aware that their collective has been properly screwed by the American political system.
Therehence by the blasphemous almighty irish Chryste, let any in opposition who choose withdraw from presenting further real truths for now, thereby granting the UCs the time and space they desire to salve the gaping open sores indirectly inflicted upon them by the lawfully elected.
Meh. So say I. | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 3:57:43 AM | | Ok then since you don't want to insure that only Citizens vote..How bout we enforce our Immigration laws? You guys can preach all you want about disenfranchisement and what not but the truth is when people want things they make it happen...getting ID may be an inconvenience and some trouble for some..but the States have offered free assistance for those cases...what percentage of actual voters who are Citizens will really be affected by Voter ID laws? | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 5:48:02 AM |
It's just an ID for crying out loud. But how dare they enact something that cost up to 2 Hours of your life at the DMV every 8 years. Be willing to bet, most of these people spend more than 2 hours a day on the internet.
You would be willing to bet that people who can not afford an ID spend more than 2hrs a day on the internet?
I would like to take you up on that bet.
Because if you can not see how stupid that statement is, Congratulations on your fail. | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 6:40:31 AM | Ok then since you don't want to insure that only Citizens vote..How bout we enforce our Immigration laws?..
Because basic understanding of economics would show that your country would be broke and in a huge mess in 6 months to a year if all the illegals where removed.
| |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 9:23:48 AM | And what is your personal vendette against poverty, workbug? You and others act as if it is not possible to not be able to afford ID. There are difficulties, and just because you don't see them, that doesn't mean they don't exist.
While I agree that laziness could be one of the factors behind some US citizens not having a photo ID, there are other factors contributing to that.
For the lazy one's who may not care to have photo ID, may just be the one's who also don't participate in voting. At the end of the day, not having a valid ID is not the real reason behind the GOP new laws. | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 9:35:28 AM |
not having a valid ID is not the real reason behind the GOP new laws
You are correct. The real reason behind the new laws is so that when someone makes the declaration, "VOTER FRAUD" there is some level of effort already in place to help assure that ballots cast were valid. Unlike closing eyes and pressing the 'easy button' or the ever popular, "trust me." | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 10:15:24 AM | @ Nr 93 ...
" ... not having a valid ID is not the real reason behind the GOP new laws. ... "
Right, right, right ... right on. It's ALL the fault of those damned Republicans. Having a valid ID is SOOOOOOOO '1999' ... it's so much easier if people can just walk into a polling place, say they don't have an ID but they want to vote and they're a Democrat but they've never found time to register in the fifty-something years they've been alive and they've now seen the error of their ways and sincerely desire to participate in the political process so they can do their 'civic duty'. Believe that ... ? Why, of course you do. Can you - or any liberal - imagine the crucifixion scene that would have taken place at the polling place in PA had the individual dressed in combat boots, beret, and baton been a WHITE REPUBLICAN ... ? God forbid. Perish the thought. That would have been 'disenfranchisement'. That would have been 'voter intimidation'. But since that's not what happened in real life, it's all okay and Holder's 'justice department' has dismissed the adjudicated guilty verdict against the perps. I wonder if the Black Panther had a valid photo ID on him ... ? Prolly not. The baton was his ID ... | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 10:57:56 AM | The cost excuse has been addressed. I have shown where even the most expensive ID costs much less than a penny a day.
I even pointed out you could find enough money in the laundry to buy one.
The reasons the liberals don't want these laws is it would prevent many of the ones that are illegally in this country from voting.
Which is a crime to start with.
The democratic party's only hope of holding power comes from being sure they keep enough people on the government dime so they can count on their votes.
The only people this would disenfranchise would be millions of illegals that should NOT be voting to start with.
As someone pointed out the US is not a democracy it is a republic.
What gets me is why the democrats want to change a system that in less than 200 years birthed the greatest nation on earth.
One that a person can start with nothing except hard work, can rise out of the poverty that the government welfare system keeps them in.
The founding fathers never envisioned a welfare state when they hammered this nation out of their hard work and sacrifice.
It is sad when anyone would want the right to vote in this nation to be skewed by people that have no right to be in a voting both in this country to start with.
What do you think any other nation would say if Americans went into their country and voted?
Voter IDs are not only a good idea but necessary to insure the integrity of our country's election process. | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 11:58:41 AM | Hey aris.........
You wrote:
"Because basic understanding of economics would show that your country would be broke and in a huge mess in 6 months to a year if all the illegals where removed."
Don't you get tired of saying things on topics that you obviously know nothing about? In the greater LA, California area, there are an estimated 2.5 million illegal imigrants living. 2.5 million....... million, do you understand this number? Below is a coy/paste of the three major areas where the illegals COST money.
1. Education. Based on estimates of the illegal immigrant population in California and documented costs of K-12 schooling, Californians spend approximately $7.7 billion annually on education for illegal immigrant children and for their U.S.-born siblings. Nearly 15 percent of the K-12 public school students in California are children of illegal aliens.
2. Health care. Uncompensated medical outlays for health care provided to the state's illegal alien population amount to about $1.4 billion a year.
3. Incarceration. The cost of incarcerating illegal aliens in California's prisons and jails amounts to about $1.4 billion a year (not including related law enforcement and judicial expenditures or the monetary costs of the crimes that led to their incarceration).
State and local taxes paid by the unauthorized immigrant population go toward offsetting these costs, but they do not come near to matching the expenses. The total of such payments can generously be estimated at about $1.6 billion per year.
Further, there are whole school districts in the LA area, where English is NOT EVEN SPOKEN UNTIL HIGH SCHOOL. This I get from a former in-law who worked in the administration of a particular district. Then we wonder why the schools are doing so abysmally.
You really should come up here and stay a while in some of the areas where mostly illegals live.
Paul K | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 12:02:19 PM | From the opening thread:
"According to networks like MSNBC, and CNN, approximately 5 million American's will not be able to vote due to the new restriction."
Should have read ...........Approvimately 5 million PEOPLE in America who will not be able to vote due to the new restriction.
Again, as I understand it, they are not requiring a special Voting Photo ID card, they are merely requiring A Photo ID .
Now, since the argument that is perpetuated in this thread is that it disenfranchises the poor, are not these same disenfranchised people, required some sort of Photo ID to get all the FEE Goddies, i.e Food Stamps, Free Cell Phones, WIC, Welfare and a host of other FREE programs most of us do not even know exist?
I have no "VENDETTA" towards to poor nor do I have any tolerance for LAME excuses. If as much time and energy was spent looking for work and improvement as complaining about the sysytem, the poor could most likely change their economic situation, but why start at the bottom in some job when they can recieve so much more in public aide and blame the very system most of them exploit.
I have a small business in Chicago, and trust me, I lived well below the poverty level during the early days. What amazes me, I go into every income level home in Chicago doing service work.. When ever I am in a so called low income neighborhood, I get the sob story of how bad things are and wanting an extreme discount off of my already modest charges (to stay competitive). Yet when I see the stuff in their homes as walking through, what do I see, 48" Flat Screen TVs, 3 or 4 Computers, PS3's,$ 200.00 Sneakers (Long Sigh). Flashy newer car in drive way, and the best thing is, the LINK Card laying on the table and I am not making this up. Yet, I am to believe they cannot scrounge up at best 30.00 for an ID. I bet they have the times and meens to apply for all those FREE programs, and with a big smile on their face most likely.
So, yes, the Democrats definitely have a guaranteed vote from them for sustaing their lifestyle, but yet to see why they would be disenfranchised as they should already have a photo ID to get their "ENTITLEMENTS".
So who again does that leave out, the Lazy, The wanted criminal, the illegal Alien or the non tax payer flying under the radar.
And for the record, I am neither Republican or democrat, I am what Politicians forgot about being, AN American. My stance is pretty much Anti-Incumbant. No elected official seem to have the good of the nation or it's people in the forefront of their personal agenda, He11, the President has to almost start campainging as soon as in office for reelection. One term restrictions for all offices and corruption will start to diminish. less time to establish coolitions in the Senate and Congress. Get elected use your term to serve Public Service, the good or bad, you are done and get some fresh talent and ideas in the Offices. | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 12:10:52 PM | Ahhh, the joys of debate with those incapable of reason! So let's see what pearls we have from the last 24 hours.
"entitle you to such condescension"
Gee, funny you seemed to enjoy that when posting funny racial rhetoric on that now deleted Limbaugh thread. Are republicans the only ones entitled to condescension? I'll make a note of that!
"everything must be SAVED"
Well I don't know about everything, voting is an important part of the process of keeping our rights, so in this case, YEAH, it must be saved.
"CHILDREN have not had the vote"
Oh I see, mocking the issue is why we debate, see my note above to the other guy about condescension..I forgot, this is a republican right only, yeah gotcha
"don't see what te big friggin deal is"
Well different from Canada, the right to vote here "IS" a big friggin deal!
"The poor shouldn't be voting anyway. It's not their money that is at stake. What property do they have to tax."
WOW!! Now we all can see the republican mind set! Who said slavery was dead? These poor people should be just chattel!
"do NOT own property-they rent. They have no stake in it."
Ohhh a second vote for disenfranchising the poor. They pay income taxes, unless they earn below a certain amount. They pay the same federal taxes on goods and services(gasoline, liqour, cigarettes, and other things the federal government taxes. They also comprise a high percentage of the military, to fight the wars, you republicans have seemed to enjoy starting these last 10 years. I rarely see richie rich, picking up a gun and going off to war. The only time he picks up a gun is for skeet or hunting!
@83 and THIS is your source...why am I not surprised"
then in #89 you quote the NY Post as a source? Hahahahahha!!! Murdock would be proud someone tries to actually get news out of that rag. They are so busy spewing hate, like faux news, that it's a wonder they have time for this instead of martian landings, 2 headed baby's and the only thing they were good for, sports news.
As for the "Bush inspired multi year investigation into voter fraud" yeah he was accused, so now he used an investigation to help republicans learn how NOT to be caught with their hand in the cookie jar, by suppressing voter turnout.
"We need a national Voting test."
Oh yeah, that will work out great for everybody. Not only do students in high school, college and as young adults, NOT know or are able to name and show where half the states are, even the ones next to where they live, but most couldn't name Clintons VP! They have for the most part no idea, nor do many care how the government works.
"The individual dressed in combat boots, beret, and baton been a WHITE REPUBLICAN"
Oh let me think now...would that be like when early in the republican candidate selection process, when a protester carrying a sign in front of the event, was thrown to the ground, and a rather large WHITE REPUBLICAN was seen in footage with his foot firmly planted on the side of her head?
Or how about all you good red necks showing up with your guns at events for congressional folks or the President? I don't remember that happening with Reagan , elder Bush or shrub, in fact not even Clinton had that happen to him! Oh but now you need them at rallies for congressional democrats or the President? So what's the story? Hoppin for a clear shot from a wacko, like what happened with Giffords?
The bottom line in all this is just about voter suppression, nothing less nothing more.
People are lazy, people are indifferent, people don't always follow the news or politics like some of us. They will show up to vote, having not changed certain documents, like the address on their drivers licenses.
Yes there are old people in senior's homes without all the neccessary ID's, why because they don't need them for their day to day existence. People suffer injury, broken bones, replaced knees, they maybe immobile, I doubt the top of their hit parade would be worrying about ID to vote once they regain mobility. As for those who claim you need it to use with a credit card, I go to dinner quite often out, and have yet to be asked to prove who I am. The same with most stores I shop in like Neiman, Bloomingdales or Macy's, he11 even the local grocery store never asked for ID.
As for students, so many attend college out of state. They have all the required ID's they need, a student ID, a drivers license from the state their families live in. They don't need a seperate one, nor would think to get one. This law would disenfranchise them as well.
How about home birth? Believe it or not, it's a common occurance in some locales of the poor. How about availability of documents? Events like the tornadoes, Katrina, has made some places hard to get the required documents from, if not damn near impossible.
BUT even given all that, no one has given me answers on the amount of voter fraud. The amount of illegal immigrants showing up in droves to vote. Funny in the last election I didn't see any, nor hear that it was even an issue. The numbers I've seen quoted were .00006, the amount persecuted was far less than 100.
This isn't about anything but the republicans hoping to suppress democratic votes in what promises to be a close election. | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 12:22:48 PM | Hey oy..............
Is it your understanding that the "new ID voter law" would require a separate "VOTER ID CARD", or that it would require that a voter show valid ID in order to vote?
The statistics of voter fraud are specious at best, as enforcement of that is as lax as enforcement of illegal aliens being here is..................................... it proves nothing.
Paul K
edit:
From what you wrote in your last post, it IS your opinion that a VOTER ID CARD will have to be shown in order to vote................
Here, from post #1 in this thread:
"Strict Photo ID: Voters must show a photo ID in order to vote. Voters who are unable to show photo ID at the polls are permitted to vote a provisional ballot, which is counted only if the voter returns to election officials within several days after the election to show a photo ID. "
Does it say VOTER ID CARD, or does it say "a photo ID"?
Gee, it says "a photo ID"...............
You remind of SNL when Gilda Radner started on a rant about "Violence", and how we don't need it, how it only leads to worse things, etc. Then she is told that the subject is about "Violins".....................
All you need to say now is "Never mind"....................... | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 12:33:11 PM | So, when Bush investigated voter fraud for 5 years he wasn't really trying to discover incidences of voter fraud???interesting:
April 12, 2007
In 5-Year Effort, Scant Evidence of Voter Fraud
By ERIC LIPTON and IAN URBINA
Correction Appended
WASHINGTON, April 11 — Five years after the Bush administration began a crackdown on voter fraud, the Justice Department has turned up virtually no evidence of any organized effort to skew federal elections, according to court records and interviews.
Although Republican activists have repeatedly said fraud is so widespread that it has corrupted the political process and, possibly, cost the party election victories, about 120 people have been charged and 86 convicted as of last year.
Most of those charged have been Democrats, voting records show. Many of those charged by the Justice Department appear to have mistakenly filled out registration forms or misunderstood eligibility rules, a review of court records and interviews with prosecutors and defense lawyers show.
In Miami, an assistant United States attorney said many cases there involved what were apparently mistakes by immigrants, not fraud.
In Wisconsin, where prosecutors have lost almost twice as many cases as they won, charges were brought against voters who filled out more than one registration form and felons seemingly unaware that they were barred from voting.
One ex-convict was so unfamiliar with the rules that he provided his prison-issued identification card, stamped “Offender,” when he registered just before voting.
A handful of convictions involved people who voted twice. More than 30 were linked to small vote-buying schemes in which candidates generally in sheriff’s or judge’s races paid voters for their support.
A federal panel, the Election Assistance Commission, reported last year that the pervasiveness of fraud was debatable. That conclusion played down findings of the consultants who said there was little evidence of it across the country, according to a review of the original report by The New York Times that was reported on Wednesday.
Mistakes and lapses in enforcing voting and registration rules routinely occur in elections, allowing thousands of ineligible voters to go to the polls. But the federal cases provide little evidence of widespread, organized fraud, prosecutors and election law experts said.
“There was nothing that we uncovered that suggested some sort of concerted effort to tilt the election,” Richard G. Frohling, an assistant United States attorney in Milwaukee, said.
Richard L. Hasen, an expert in election law at the Loyola Law School, agreed, saying: “If they found a single case of a conspiracy to affect the outcome of a Congressional election or a statewide election, that would be significant. But what we see is isolated, small-scale activities that often have not shown any kind of criminal intent.”
For some convicted people, the consequences have been significant. Kimberly Prude, 43, has been jailed in Milwaukee for more than a year after being convicted of voting while on probation, an offense that she attributes to confusion over eligibility.
In Pakistan, Usman Ali is trying to rebuild his life after being deported from Florida, his legal home of more than a decade, for improperly filling out a voter-registration card while renewing his driver’s license.
In Alaska, Rogelio Mejorada-Lopez, a Mexican who legally lives in the United States, may soon face a similar fate, because he voted even though he was not eligible.
The push to prosecute voter fraud figured in the removals last year of at least two United States attorneys whom Republican politicians or party officials had criticized for failing to pursue cases.
The campaign has roiled the Justice Department in other ways, as career lawyers clashed with a political appointee over protecting voters’ rights, and several specialists in election law were installed as top prosecutors.
Department officials defend their record. “The Department of Justice is not attempting to make a statement about the scale of the problem,” a spokesman, Bryan Sierra, said. “But we are obligated to investigate allegations when they come to our attention and prosecute when appropriate.”
Officials at the department say that the volume of complaints has not increased since 2002, but that it is pursuing them more aggressively.
Previously, charges were generally brought just against conspiracies to corrupt the election process, not against individual offenders, Craig Donsanto, head of the elections crimes branch, told a panel investigating voter fraud last year. For deterrence, Mr. Donsanto said, Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales authorized prosecutors to pursue criminal charges against individuals.
Some of those cases have baffled federal judges.
“I find this whole prosecution mysterious,” Judge Diane P. Wood of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, in Chicago, said at a hearing in Ms. Prude’s case. “I don’t know whether the Eastern District of Wisconsin goes after every felon who accidentally votes. It is not like she voted five times. She cast one vote.”
The Justice Department stand is backed by Republican Party and White House officials, including Karl Rove, the president’s chief political adviser. The White House has acknowledged that he relayed Republican complaints to President Bush and the Justice Department that some prosecutors were not attacking voter fraud vigorously. In speeches, Mr. Rove often mentions fraud accusations and warns of tainted elections.
Voter fraud is a highly polarized issue, with Republicans asserting frequent abuses and Democrats contending that the problem has been greatly exaggerated to promote voter identification laws that could inhibit the turnout by poor voters.
The New Priority
The fraud rallying cry became a clamor in the Florida recount after the 2000 presidential election. Conservative watchdog groups, already concerned that the so-called Motor Voter Law in 1993 had so eased voter registration that it threatened the integrity of the election system, said thousands of fraudulent votes had been cast.
Similar accusations of compromised elections were voiced by Republican lawmakers elsewhere.
The call to arms reverberated in the Justice Department, where John Ashcroft, a former Missouri senator, was just starting as attorney general.
Combating voter fraud, Mr. Ashcroft announced, would be high on his agenda. But in taking up the fight, he promised that he would also be vigilant in attacking discriminatory practices that made it harder for minorities to vote.
“American voters should neither be disenfranchised nor defrauded,” he said at a news conference in March 2001.
Enlisted to help lead the effort was Hans A. von Spakovsky, a lawyer and Republican volunteer in the Florida recount. As a Republican election official in Atlanta, Mr. Spakovsky had pushed for stricter voter identification laws. Democrats say those laws disproportionately affect the poor because they often mandate government-issued photo IDs or driver’s licenses that require fees.
At the Justice Department, Mr. Spakovsky helped oversee the voting rights unit. In 2003, when the Texas Congressional redistricting spearheaded by the House majority leader, Tom DeLay, Republican of Texas, was sent to the Justice Department for approval, the career staff members unanimously said it discriminated against African-American and Latino voters.
Mr. Spakovsky overruled the staff, said Joseph Rich, a former lawyer in the office. Mr. Spakovsky did the same thing when they recommended the rejection of a voter identification law in Georgia considered harmful to black voters. Mr. Rich said. Federal courts later struck down the Georgia law and ruled that the boundaries of one district in the Texas plan violated the Voting Rights Act.
Former lawyers in the office said Mr. Spakovsky’s decisions seemed to have a partisan flavor unlike those in previous Republican and Democratic administrations. Mr. Spakovsky declined to comment.
“I understand you can never sweep politics completely away,” said Mark A. Posner, who had worked in the civil and voting rights unit from 1980 until 2003. “But it was much more explicit, pronounced and consciously done in this administration.”
At the same time, the department encouraged United States attorneys to bring charges in voter fraud cases, not a priority in prior administrations. The prosecutors attended training seminars, were required to meet regularly with state or local officials to identify possible cases and were expected to follow up accusations aggressively.
The Republican National Committee and its state organizations supported the push, repeatedly calling for a crackdown. In what would become a pattern, Republican officials and lawmakers in a number of states, including Florida, New Mexico, Pennsylvania and Washington, made accusations of widespread abuse, often involving thousands of votes.
In swing states, including Ohio and Wisconsin, party leaders conducted inquiries to find people who may have voted improperly and prodded officials to act on their findings.
But the party officials and lawmakers were often disappointed. The accusations led to relatively few cases, and a significant number resulted in acquittals.
The Path to Jail
One of those officials was Rick Graber, former chairman of the Wisconsin Republican Party.
“It is a system that invites fraud,” Mr. Graber told reporters in August 2005 outside the house of a Milwaukeean he said had voted twice. “It’s a system that needs to be fixed.”
Along with an effort to identify so-called double voters, the party had also performed a computer crosscheck of voting records from 2004 with a list of felons, turning up several hundred possible violators. The assertions of fraud were turned over to the United States attorney’s office for investigation.
Ms. Prude’s path to jail began after she attended a Democratic rally in Milwaukee featuring the Rev. Al Sharpton in late 2004. Along with hundreds of others, she marched to City Hall and registered to vote. Soon after, she sent in an absentee ballot.
Four years earlier, though, Ms. Prude had been convicted of trying to cash a counterfeit county government check worth $1,254. She was placed on six years’ probation.
Ms. Prude said she believed that she was permitted to vote because she was not in jail or on parole, she testified in court. Told by her probation officer that she could not vote, she said she immediately called City Hall to rescind her vote, a step she was told was not necessary.
“I made a big mistake, like I said, and I truly apologize for it,” Ms. Prude said during her trial in 2005. That vote, though, resulted in a felony conviction and sent her to jail for violating probation.
Of the hundreds of people initially suspected of violations in Milwaukee, 14 — most black, poor, Democratic and first-time voters — ever faced federal charges. United States Attorney Steven M. Biskupic would say only that there was insufficient evidence to bring other cases.
No residents of the house where Mr. Graber made his assertion were charged. Even the 14 proved frustrating for the Justice Department. It won five cases in court.
The evidence that some felons knew they that could not vote consisted simply of a form outlining 20 or more rules that they were given when put on probation and signs at local government offices, testimony shows.
The Wisconsin prosecutors lost every case on double voting. Cynthia C. Alicea, 25, was accused of multiple voting in 2004 because officials found two registration cards in her name. She and others were acquitted after explaining that they had filed a second card and voted just once after a clerk said they had filled out the first card incorrectly.
In other states, some of those charged blamed confusion for their actions. Registration forms almost always require a statement affirming citizenship.
Mr. Ali, 68, who had owned a jewelry store in Tallahassee, got into trouble after a clerk at the motor vehicles office had him complete a registration form that he quickly filled out in line, unaware that it was reserved just for United States citizens.
Even though he never voted, he was deported after living legally in this country for more than 10 years because of his misdemeanor federal criminal conviction.
“We’re foreigners here,” Mr. Ali said in a telephone interview from Lahore, Pakistan, where he lives with his daughter and wife, both United States citizens.
In Alaska, Rogelio Mejorada-Lopez, who manages a gasoline station, had received a voter registration form in the mail. Because he had applied for citizenship, he thought it was permissible to vote, his lawyer said. Now, he may be deported to Mexico after 16 years in the United States. “What I want is for them to leave me alone,” he said in an interview.
Federal prosecutors in Kansas and Missouri successfully prosecuted four people for multiple voting. Several claimed residency in each state and voted twice.
United States attorney’s offices in four other states did turn up instances of fraudulent voting in mostly rural areas. They were in the hard-to-extinguish tradition of vote buying, where local politicians offered $5 to $100 for individuals’ support.
Unease Over New Guidelines
Aside from those cases, nearly all the remaining 26 convictions from 2002 to and 2005 — the Justice Department will not release details about 2006 cases except to say they had 30 more convictions— were won against individuals acting independently, voter records and court documents show.
Previous guidelines had barred federal prosecutions of “isolated acts of individual wrongdoing” that were not part of schemes to corrupt elections. In most cases, prosecutors also had to prove an intent to commit fraud, not just an improper action.
That standard made some federal prosecutors uneasy about proceeding with charges, including David C. Iglesias, who was the United States attorney in New Mexico, and John McKay, the United States attorney in Seattle.
Although both found instances of improper registration or voting, they declined to bring charges, drawing criticism from prominent Republicans in their states. In Mr. Iglesias’s case, the complaints went to Mr. Bush. Both prosecutors were among those removed in December.
In the last year, the Justice Department has installed top prosecutors who may not be so reticent. In four states, the department has named interim or permanent prosecutors who have worked on election cases at Justice Department headquarters or for the Republican Party.
Bradley J. Schlozman has finished a year as interim United States attorney in Missouri, where he filed charges against four people accused of creating fake registration forms for nonexistent people. The forms could likely never be used in voting. The four worked for a left-leaning group, Acorn, and reportedly faked registration cards to justify their wages. The cases were similar to one that Mr. Iglesias had declined to prosecute, saying he saw no intent to influence the outcome of an election.
“The decision to file those indictments was reviewed by Washington,” a spokesman for Mr. Schlozman, Don Ledford, said. “They gave us the go-ahead.”
Sabrina Pacifici and Barclay Walsh contributed research.
Correction: April 14, 2007
A front-page article on Thursday about the scant evidence of voter fraud that has been found since the Bush administration began a crackdown five years ago misstated a court ruling on a 2003 Texas Congressional redistricting law. While the Supreme Court ruled that the Texas Legislature violated the Voting Rights Act in redrawing a southwestern Texas district, the court upheld the other parts of the plan. It did not strike down the law.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud.html?pagewanted=print | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 1:30:30 PM | @ Nr 99 ...
" ... This isn't about anything but the republicans hoping to suppress democratic votes in what promises to be a close election. ... "
Oh goodness. You are SO right. Why, it's not as if that nice Mr Obama has put in place with his policies and actions ANYthing that would cause his loyal liberal lapdog psychophants to have any feeling toward him save pure unvarnished joy. I mean, 'we all know' that there are more jobs out there than y' can stick a sheikh at, right? Those evil Republicans that control the news media are just using their powers of control to suppress that knowledge. Then there's the matter of the economy - 'we all know' that those evil Republicans are just trying to cram more and more tax increases down our throat, don't we? And what about ObamaCare? Once again, 'we all know' that those corrupt Republicans forced that nice Mr Obama to put pen to paper and sign it into law after those same evil Republicans twisted the Democrats' arms and threatened them with things like loss of committee chairmanships if they wouldn't play ball with them and vote for it, don't we? Damned right, we do.
I must admit defeat. All this time I've believed the Democrats were the ones who were putting in place the policies that would cause everyone in possession of two neurons capable of firing sequentially to re-think their 'Loyalty Oath' to Dear Comrade Leader Obama (PBUH) ... but no, I was wrong. Mea culpa. Those damned evil Republicans have once again pulled the wool over my eyes and now - using their Most Top-Secret Master Plan to Regain Power - they're going to magically 'suppress the vote' so all those ones who can't afford a FREE PHOTO ID won't make the trip to the polling place on election day. I guess it's still up to the Democrats to win their hearts and minds with the free box lunch, free cigarettes, a ride to the polling place, and that $20 dollars worth of 'walking-around money'. How could I have ever believed those wonderful, caring Democrats wouldn't fight to protect the right of the illegal / incarcerated / deceased to cast a vote without proper photo ID? Why, that's crazy talk ... | |
|
| New ID voter law?
Posted: 3/20/2012 1:53:19 PM | Now how should I catergorize that last post...is it condescension or sarcasm?
Thanks to your bestest pal, miyawn, we now know that "FREE PHOTO ID", is not real, since he lists costs for each state.
While we are on the subject of "free", isn't a cornerstone of the republicans agenda, to cut costs? Won't some of these voter ID's and their enactment, enforcement, cost money to do? I mean it's far better to spend money on voter suppression, than on say, oh I don't know, more teachers, police or firemen?
Although, I really did enjoy your tantrum, better luck next time, and thanks for playing! | |
|
|
|
|
Page
4
of
29 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29)
|
|
Home
login 
