Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > New ID voter law? [CLOSED]      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 251
view profile
History
New ID voter law?Page 11 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)

No, I would not waste money on new tires when I know the problem is not with the tire but something else.


Like the entire point that you seemed to have dismissed


To help alleviate this:
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/161265-1
Start listening at14:00 in. There was no method to determine #of votes cast to #of votes counted. A voterID process creates that ability to correlate results.


New scenario:
What is the real goal of all of the claims of socio-economic and age/racial voter suppression. Simple.... If Obama doesn't win then Democrats will call the election a fraud and must have been a fraud because of the voter suppression caused by VoterID therfore Romney will have been installed as a tyrant by the ruling rich class. This will trigger protests and riots starting with the OWS crowd and then spread through compliant media with an attempted overthrow of the elected government.

why... because the only call to validate the vote to prevent this from happening is being called suppression of votes.

Just because you claim it... well that can cause a riot. But you already knew that... didn't you.
 GreenThumbz18
Joined: 4/25/2012
Msg: 252
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/22/2012 2:10:28 PM
^^^^^
" In Florida, a judge already has halted a plan to take away voting hours in counties with heavy African-American concentrations."

Am I reading this correctly?
http://electionsmith.wordpress.com/2012/08/20/exclusive-the-effects-of-floridas-hb1355-early-voting-law-on-turnout/
In Florida they have 2 weeks to vote?
In California we have one day to vote.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 253
view profile
History
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/22/2012 2:20:28 PM
Voter suppression laws are more than just making it more difficult to vote by requiring a certain type of ID. It also extends to playing around with the location and hours of polls.


Individual states create these laws. Mostly they are not restricted to a 'particular type of ID'. The redistricting of areas to ensure encumbants, the changing of polling places, the changing of many things that change voting are all linked into each other but not in the way you portray.

You portray it as being a purposeful suppression of only a white republican threat to ... ???

The reality is that this is politicians acting like politicians and protecting their seats. The do it locally and most of the time these things do not make national news. Both sides do it and have always done it and the really stupid simple answer to prevent it is to have rules. Remember, freedom is not natural and leads to unpredictability. You use this understanding to target areas where stress is created. Elections and voting are problem areas of social stress.

Your listing of some incident that occurred in Ohio and was overturned is the system working property. It doesn't matter who benefited all the time. It should always be a mix. If one side starts to benefit more than the other we should start looking at reality and not parties. Are most Voter reform laws coming from only republicans actually indicating a problem with democrats abandoning the voter system? Shouldn't they be bringing up their own legislation? If not then they have no rational position to claim invalid elections such as occurred in2000 and anytime after.

My first question is that since Democrats assert that everyone should vote why isn't their a call for mandatory participation by every adult citizen? If you say they are denied then you must expect their participation and can not accept their lack of participation.

Oh look at this... One day ago
http://ideas.time.com/2012/08/21/should-voting-be-mandatory/?iid=op-main-lede

There are many arguments against mandatory voting; each reflects a lack of faith in democracy itself.


That argument is flawed as hell but is that because the guy is dumb or just well intentioned but short sighted liberal.

BTW... do you think he once considered that in order to make elections mandatory you must account for every citizen. How do you do that? Maybe with an ID? Only now... you must fine those people that cant afford it or do not have access to a computer nor the ability to properly fill out the forms nor understand it... IOW democrats hate the poor :) How does Obamacare plan on fining those without insurance? They have to know about them right? ID cards?

If the illogic isn't clear on the arguments against voterID by now then it is just purposely ignoring facts and magical thinking filled with ridiculous leaps in logic.

VVVVV Had no idea. I knew that with mail-in ballots you can turn them in early. Had never heard of early bird voting. So many states with so many rules and each state has rules per district. http://www.texasgop.org/posts/272-the-early-bird-gets-the-vote
"The first day of early voting is upon us! Polls are now open through today, July 23rd through Friday, July 27th. Get out and vote!"

I have only known the Election day voting. 7am through 8pm.
 GreenThumbz18
Joined: 4/25/2012
Msg: 254
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/22/2012 2:33:23 PM
^^^^^^
I DID see an early voting in Los Angeles county, but they had only one location, about 30 miles from me, and there was a 5 hour line.
It's very strange how each state conducts its voting.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 255
view profile
History
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/22/2012 2:57:50 PM
^^^^
That should tip you off that something is wrong as well. It occurs just doesn't get widely shouted down with a call of racism nor as a terrorist plot against the poor.

I can not find a single example of a Democratic politician trying to pass a law that would restrict voting that would affect mostly Republicans.


http://www.ballot-access.org/2012/07/03/california-legislative-democrats-advance-bills-to-restrict-ballot-access-for-minor-parties-and-constitutional-initiatives/

On July 3, the California Senate Public Safety Committee passed AB 2058, which makes it a criminal offense to pay registration-drive workers on a per-registration card basis. Because Proposition 14 (the “top-two open primary” law) eliminated the vote test for a party to remain ballot-qualified, the only method for qualified parties to remain on the ballot is to have registration of over 100,000 members. Neither the Libertarian Party nor the Peace and Freedom Party nor Americans Elect have that many registered voters.

AB 2058 makes it very difficult for a party to run an effective drive to increase its registration. The state chair of the Peace and Freedom Party, C. T. Weber, and the state chair of the Libertarian Party, Kevin Takenaga, testified against the bill, but the association of county elections officials, and the Secretary of State, testified for it. It passed on a party-line vote, with all Democrats in support and all Republicans against.



http://sonoranalliance.com/2011/12/22/a-must-read-how-democrats-fooled-californias-redistricting-commission/

California’s Democratic representatives got much of what they wanted from the 2010 redistricting cycle, especially in the northern part of the state. “Every member of the Northern California Democratic Caucus has a ticket back to DC,” said one enthusiastic memo written as the process was winding down. “This is a huge accomplishment that should be celebrated by advocates throughout the region.”


From everything you know about life / people / human nature / and everything does it make any sense that one entire group of politicians is all bad while another is all good? It is impossible. They are all people and regardless of political affiliation people lie, cheat, steal. This should be seen in every part of life to some degree and as we have all known our entire lives... especially in politics. If you have one group promoted as caring and one as evil... which one is lying?
 Bishopboat
Joined: 9/3/2010
Msg: 256
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/23/2012 1:40:51 AM
Well if a literacy test is racist, I guess this is too (that's what kept most blacks from voting in the south during the 50s, hence the civil rights act)...
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 257
view profile
History
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/23/2012 9:26:27 AM

State Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen is asking the Wisconsin Supreme Court to step in and review rulings by two judges striking down the state's voter ID law


I suppose it's out of the question that an AG's office could be politicized. Certainly we all know that at a national level, Mr. Eric Holder--that pillar of virtue and character--is above misusing the law for political ends. I'm sure you've analyzed the legal reasoning in those judges' rulings and understand it thoroughly. Could you briefly explain that reasoning to those of us who are less knowledgeable about these things? I'm especially interested in how the judges distinguished the Indiana law requiring photo ID for voters that the Supreme Court of the U.S. upheld in 2008 in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board. Could it be just that the Indiana law was a nice, kind one, while Wisconsin's is all mean and icky?

By the way, my favorite Wisconsin judge was Joe McCarthy. A few years ago at least, he was still the youngest judge ever to be elected in Wisconsin. Later, as a U.S. Senator, helped by a devoted young lawyer named Bobby Kennedy, he devoted his life to fighting the communists who were bent on destroying this country from within. (I often wonder what he would think of the fact a majority of American voters, in their great wisdom, saw fit to elect one of them President four years ago.)
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 258
view profile
History
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/23/2012 9:25:21 PM

Perhaps you have and you can enlighten us.


If I had, I wouldn't have asked you. It was you who cited those judges so approvingly.


Maybe you can go check.


Maybe I could--but certainly I won't. You cited the article, you can research it.


It has nothing to do with this topic.


But in a way it does. You mentioned some Wisconsin judges, and it reminded me that he was my favorite Wisconsin judge.


Seems simple enough for me.


Oh yes--that constitution business is all simple. Phrases like "substantial impairment" are especially simple, don't you think? How could anyone conceivably disagree about what that meant, any more than people could conceivably differ about whether a pitch on the corner was a ball or a strike? Certainly we all agree on the exact point at which an impairment becomes substantial!

A couple judges thought Wisconsin's voter ID law violated the state constitution. Maybe the state supreme court would agree, and maybe not. But if it should strike this law down, here's an idea for a counter-move. Claim the state constitution's protection of voting rights is so broad it fosters voting fraud, and therefore violates the Constitution of the United States by diluting the votes of all the legitimate voters. Remember that Florida tried to pull off voting fraud in the 2000 presidential election, with the connivance of some second-rate liberal judges on its supreme court, and the U.S. Supreme Court wouldn't have it.

Voting is a fundamental right the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment protects from undue infringement by any state law--including state constitutions. The U.S. Supreme Court usually defers to state supreme courts' interpretations of their states' constitutions, but it won't allow even a state constitution to interfere with rights--especially fundamental rights--protected by the U.S. Constitution. Given the fact the Court just upheld a similar Indiana law three years ago, I don't like the chances of getting it to say Wisconsin's law is no good.
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 259
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/23/2012 10:35:29 PM
"by diluting the votes of all legitmate voters"

Hmmmm, here we go! Inventing issues where few to none exist! Since no state has PROVED that voter fraud exists in any meaningful way..why not restrict the vote so Romney gets elected? Hahahahahaha! A typical republicant trick, invent a problem where none exists!!!!

Gee, they never pointed out this problem before?

As for the Supreme Court, this is a joke...a one time ruling to get shrub to steal an election!


"Remember that Florida tried to pull off voting fraud in the 2000 presidential election"

Remember that they NEVER counted all the votes? You have to be the most disingenuous person on the face of the earth...the Supreme court..stopped the count, and made it a one time decision. The FIRST and ONLY time this has happened in it's history...
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 260
view profile
History
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/24/2012 12:27:22 AM
Inventing issues where few to none exist!


Oh, but they do. In fact, diluting the votes of millions of people is exactly what the curs behind all this are trying to do. Under the guise of protecting the franchise of a few people who probably don't need it protected, they hope to sneak in Dimocrat votes by illegal aliens, felons, dead people, or whoever else they can scrounge up. Voter fraud violates the fundamental constitutional right of qualified Americans to have their votes count fully. And I know just how much you and other supporters of the current President care about the Constitution.


As for the Supreme Court, this is a joke...a one time ruling to get shrub to steal an election!


I'm sure you've read Bush v. Gore and understand all the difficult constitutional issues in it, and that that is the basis for your thoughtful opinion. I've read it, too--carefully--and I do understand those issues. Someone was trying to steal an election, all right--but for Mr. Gore. A lot of people would say it's disingenuous to suggest otherwise--that it blames the intended victims.

The Court made exactly the right call. Mediocre liberal judges on the Florida Supreme Court tried to throw a U.S. presidential election by knowingly misinterpreting Florida election law, and thanks partly to a ferocious, damning dissent by the court's Chief Justice, a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court saw through the trick and stopped it.


The FIRST and ONLY time this has happened in it's history...


What of it? Cry all you want--it's too late now.
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 261
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/24/2012 12:52:48 AM
"Cry all you want--it's too late now."

Thank you....thank you...I'm sooooo happy you said that!

Ya see, IMO, this will come up shortly, in about 75 days! Surprisingly in the same state, possibly Ohio as well!

I expect to hear those plantive whines, although on the republican side...."we been robbed!"...and they should suck up the same bitter pill...but not you guys! Despite a massive amount of midol and tampons...you will be on here b1tchin about "how ya been robbed!" Hahahahahahaha!You people don't accept defeat easily or fairly...


Good luck with that!
 GreenThumbz18
Joined: 4/25/2012
Msg: 262
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/24/2012 1:44:14 AM
Holder:Some Ethnicities "Biologically Incapable" of Obtaining Voter ID

http://clashdaily.com/2012/08/holder-some-ethnicities-biologically-incapable-of-obtaining-voter-id/

(WASHIGNTON) --Responding to more inquiries about the Justice Department's attempt to stop states like Florida from requiring citizens to produce official identification in order to vote, Attorney General Holder told the Senate Judiciary Committee some ethnic groups in the U.S. were "simply biologically incapable" of obtaining government issued IDs, and declared that requiring all voters provide IDs to vote would be "discriminatory."

Holder was explaining the DOJ's recent increase in agents assigned to investigate allegations of "voter suppression" in Florida and other states. But the Committee got more than it bargained for as Holder blurted, "Throughout history minorities and the poor have been prevented from voting by means such as 'poll taxes,' literacy tests. . .. And requiring voters to produce government-issued IDs today is just like those racist practices."

Continued Holder, "Frankly, much of the anthropological data we've acquired concludes that certain ethnicities are simply biologically incapable of obtaining voter IDs."

Holder added that "non-Westerners" have historically lacked emphasis on people proving who they were through written identification. "In Asia, Africa, and especially Latin America, people were not asked to produce documentation proving who they said they were, even when going to vote . . . granted the few occasions they were allowed to do so."

According to Holder, "although there is no 'physical imperative' to Hispanics and other 'ethnicities of color' obtaining government-issued identification, such requirements would demean the long tradition of trusted, verbal self-identification so common with 'non-Western cultures' in the United States, and so would show disrespect if (minorities) were made to produce 'an official writ' proving they are who they claim they are."

"It's a simple matter of respect," proclaimed Holder Wednesday. "Either we can honor the traditions of ethnicities in the U.S. who have no historical cultural demand they prove who they are, or we can take a step back to the days of Jim Crow and force people who have no familiarity with proving who they are to do so in a most uncomfortable setting (voting)."

Added Holder, "After all, this is America; we're founded on 'inclusion;' on making people from other nations and cultures feel comfortable. How else can we achieve that unless we allow Hispan. . .I mean, uhh, 'people' to practice the traditions of their native lands?"

From the ‘I Wouldn’t Doubt It’ file…This article is a piece of satire, meant to illustrate the DOJ’s absurd attempts at preventing illegal(s) from voting in certain states. Thank you.)

(excerpted for satirical impact)
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 263
view profile
History
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/24/2012 11:03:29 AM

you will be on here b1tchin about "how ya been robbed!" Hahahahahahaha!You people don't accept defeat easily or fairly...



I do have a challenge for any of the republicans on this issue... There are two problems with Voter ID. You are being identified on your vote and second it is nearly a national ID card. Both of those are not really great things.

As for his Oyness.... Why don't you advocate for a compulsorily vote? That way no one gets left out. Isn't that as fair as fair can possibly get?
 why_oh_why
Joined: 8/19/2012
Msg: 264
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/24/2012 11:28:02 AM

There are two problems with Voter ID. You are being identified on your vote and second it is nearly a national ID card. Both of those are not really great things.

I can see how you can keep the voter ID off the ballot that is actually cast. ID at the door allows entry or a ticket, no name or number on the ballot, so no being identified on your vote.

Being a national ID card is pretty much the only reason I am against a voter ID law. If it wasn't for that, I'd be all for them.
Although I could see some process where you are given a one time use ID card when filing a tax return or picking up your gov't handout.


There are two problems with Voter ID

No matter what there are going to be problems with any solution to any problem.


Why don't you advocate for a compulsorily vote?

While driving through New Mexico I heard a guy on the radio say something like "if you want to increase the number of voters, just tell everyone there's going to be a limit on who can vote. Stand outside and turn people away. Only 45% turned out for that last election? Then next election stand there and tell people 2/3 are going to be turned away. You can vote, you can vote, not you, sorry, not you either, thanks for coming, not you. Only 45%or whatever are going to be allowed to vote. See how many show up then or for the next election."
I'd like to see that happen. Not actually turn people away, just say they are going to. Just to see what happens.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 265
view profile
History
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/24/2012 11:51:19 AM
I'd like to see that happen. Not actually turn people away, just say they are going to. Just to see what happens


That is what the invalid arguments against voterID are effectively doing. They are telling everyone that they are being denied access to voting to stir them up to vote. It's kind of an awful idea. I would rather have people who know what they are voting for and have thoughtfully considered it rather then invigorated teenagers.

I can't remember the last time I thought of going to a 20yr old for advice on matters of governance... well other then when I was 20.

It's okay to not vote... It is okay to have a voting process that has built in health checks. Trying to have that system and maintain integrity through social changes and technological changes is a complex issue. It would be a good idea to have adults in charge.
 Aristotle_Amadopolis
Joined: 12/8/2011
Msg: 266
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/28/2012 7:42:37 AM

It's okay to not vote... It is okay to have a voting process that has built in health checks. Trying to have that system and maintain integrity through social changes and technological changes is a complex issue. It would be a good idea to have adults in charge.

Yeah and those built-in health checks will do as much to stop voter fraud as would breast screenings in teenage boys would help with early diagnosis of cancer.

So far we have:

The number voter fraud occurences that these I.D. laws would have prevented = 0

The number of people who would be prevented from voting = much greater than 0


This is just another example of how conservatives want to waste tax payers money while getting nothing done other than tipping the field.



South Carolina Voter ID Trial: State Sen. Admits Law Couldn't Address His Examples Of Voter Fraud
By SUZANNE GAMBOA 08/27/12 03:46 PM ET AP

WASHINGTON -- The federal trial over South Carolina's voter identification law got under way Monday with a state senator insisting his work on the law was aimed at fighting fraud and instilling public confidence in the election system.

During morning testimony, state Sen. George "Chip" Campsen III cited examples of fraud that he took into consideration while drafting early versions of South Carolina's law. These included vote buying, voter rolls indicating a woman who showed up at the polls had already voted, and press reports of voters being registered in both South Carolina and North Carolina.

But under questioning from Justice Department attorney Anna Baldwin, Campsen, a Republican, said the examples he gave did not involve the type of fraud that requiring photo identification would address.

"None of the examples you gave in your testimony involved incidents of impersonation?" Baldwin asked.

"Correct," Campsen answered. He also said he could not find cases of voter impersonation in South Carolina, but added that the state lacks the tools to root them out...

Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/27/south-carolina-voter-id_n_1834299.html?utm_hp_ref=elections-2012
 Gashlycrumb_Briny
Joined: 9/26/2010
Msg: 267
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/28/2012 8:03:36 PM

Under the guise of protecting the franchise of a few people who probably don't need it protected


Shouldn't all legitimately eligible voters have their franchise protected? or are people too poor to afford ID cards too undeserving? is there tiered citizenship?



they hope to sneak in Dimocrat votes by illegal aliens, felons, dead people, or whoever else they can scrounge up.


Is it your contention that this has happened, or has been happening in past elections? or just something Democrats have specially planned for 2012?



Mediocre liberal judges on the Florida Supreme Court tried to throw a U.S. presidential election by knowingly misinterpreting Florida election law


Would their efforts have been thwarted by voter ID requirements?





I can't remember the last time I thought of going to a 20yr old for advice on matters of governance...


Are you saying you think the voting age should be raised?
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 268
view profile
History
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/29/2012 11:34:14 AM

Shouldn't all legitimately eligible voters have their franchise protected? or are people too poor to afford ID cards too undeserving?


Why is it only now, after all the decades that all these people who supposedly are too poor to have any kind of valid ID must have existed, that attention is being drawn to the alleged scandal of their being deprived of the right to vote?


Is it your contention that this has happened, or has been happening in past elections? or just something Democrats have specially planned for 2012?


I think it's something Democrats have always done--politics Chicago style. The voter ID business is not the first attempt by this administration to misuse the Justice Dept. to influence voting. It also refuses to prosecute black defendants for violations of federal voting rights laws, giving black thugs carte blanche to intimidate voters as the pair of New Black Panthers did in Philadelphia in 2008. And suing Arizona over SB 1070 was a transparent ruse to let in more illegal aliens. By then declaring an amnesty, a re-elected President Obama could use the promise of federal handouts to secure these people as faithful Democrat voters. Recently, his arbitrary grant of amnesty to aliens under 30 was another attempt to gain Hispanic voters by executive dictate.


Would their efforts have been thwarted by voter ID requirements?


No one can ever know that.
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 269
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/29/2012 11:57:38 AM
"As for his Oyness....Why don't you advocate for a compulsory vote?" (I eliminated the "il", hope you don't mind)

Well remember, I am a liberal, worse I am a guy who wants people to do whats right! Now we can sit on here and debate all day, what is right and what is wrong. Just like you guys are hung up on "no one gets to have an abortion", I am hung up on participation in the process, of running america.

"Isn't that as fair as fair can possibly get?"

I would back a amendment to the constitution to make mandatory voting for ALL qualified citizens.(Obviously felons, the mentally ill and a few select others would not qualify) Further I think there should be some kind of forced participation in the primary/nomination process.

Like I rant at all the time on here, people want to watch TV, and not involve themselves in politics or the process. Unlike some of my biggest fans on here, who lay out all these strawmen arguments, about illegals voting, or voter fraud..even at the cost of elections to liberal causes, I would rather see a better/larger/ involved segment of the population involved in our government and where it goes.

People in this country, I have met, actually told me they don't vote, because it would put them on the list for jury duty!! Now how bizarre is that?
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 270
view profile
History
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/29/2012 12:29:10 PM

"Isn't that as fair as fair can possibly get?"

I would back a amendment to the constitution to make mandatory voting for ALL qualified citizens.(Obviously felons, the mentally ill and a few select others would not qualify) Further I think there should be some kind of forced participation in the primary/nomination process.


And this is the fundamental problem with equality. It can only be achieved by 'forcing'. Whether that is a fine, or mental or physical force.

If people do not want to participate... you don't want their participation. They will not pick according to their thoughtful decision... they will pick out of self interest only. We are not a democracy because it doesn't work.
 OyVay...
Joined: 7/15/2011
Msg: 271
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/29/2012 1:10:33 PM
"It can only be achieved by 'forcing'."

Funny, I don't look at it as 'forcing'. I believe we are born here, to a society, that gives you privileges, and responsibilties. Why should you be allowed to get one, without the other? If the conservatives TRULY BELIEVED that, there would be no abortion debate, no voter ID law debate. The whole premise of this thread would be moot.

"they will pick out of self interest only"

Isn't that what is happening now? I rarely read on here, anyone advocating against their particular brand of political beliefs, because it is fair, or not in their own interests.

It amazes me, catholics were almost totally democrats, before Roe v Wade. After that and with the advent of the Reagan era of courting the religious. They moved to the right, not because the right really supports catholic charity, or helping your fellow man, catholic ideals. Now only because a woman might choose to do things the church does not endorse, or accept.

Over 90% of catholics use contraception, yet they support the republicans who would limit or eliminate that.

"We are not a democracy because it doesn't work"

Oh, I disagree, we haven't been a democracy for a while now. Government is now bought and paid for, lock stock and barrel. Billions spent by lobbyists helping to shape legislation that helps their corporate clients. That has little to do with "we the people" since no matter how you parse words, or definitions, corporations will NEVER be people! They don't stroll into polling places and cast votes, they are inert entities, that focus purely on business and profit.
 Aries_328
Joined: 10/16/2011
Msg: 272
view profile
History
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/29/2012 3:58:33 PM
A fundamental problem with equality. How can there possibly be a problem with equality?


Equality doesn't only mean one thing. Being fair, equality of outcome, socio-economic equality are all different. Equality under the law not the same. Equality of rights are not the same.

For the vote I am referencing more along the line of equality of outcome. The goal is 100% participation to have the outcome of the election equal across the nation to ensure that it is a fair election. To do that there must be mandatory voting. If anything is mandatory there must be a penalty for non compliance. If there is no penalty ascribed then it really isn't mandatory as you have no realistic exception of 100% participation.

Being free means you get to opt out of the system. You may not like the person for opting out but it is their right. This occurs all the time and people 'feel' free from it. Musicians abandon the popular route and perform some crazy version of their own style... it isn't a 'social norm' style. This is a generic sense of liberty. If you fined a musician for not playing classical music because only real musicians play classical music there is no freedom in music industry.

Many parts of a free country are things you can't stand. Many people can not stand abortion. Are we more free or less free if it is restricted?

That is the problem with equality. It has many definitions and many of them do not have good end results.

yes, even creating laws against discrimination can have this effect. When it turns into the opposite form of discrimination then the law is no longer useful. Many of these laws need to exist as they move things in the right direction but they also never have a way to show 'success' and their success is that they are no longer needed. This is where groups groups hold many points of power and authority over other groups. In order to be fair they force others to be fair in some way... but they never relinquish power.

Also, if you make mandatory voting the law then you must also quantify that it is successful. All voters will need to be identified at time of voting. How else would you avoid being fined?
 matchlight
Joined: 1/31/2009
Msg: 273
view profile
History
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/29/2012 5:29:34 PM
It sounds very noble to talk about protecting the right of everyone who's qualified to vote. But there has to be *some* way to make sure a person is qualified. I doubt many people think it's unreasonable that we demand enough proof so a foreign national vacationing here would not be allowed to vote. If anyone who was at least 18 and had a pulse could vote, it would weaken to some extent every vote cast by legitimate voters. I don't know what features of the Wisconsin law, or any other state's are claimed to present such an unfair obstacle to voting. As I said, it's only been a few years since the Supreme Court held that Indiana's voter ID law didn't do that.

My guess is that the objections to the Wisconsin law are based on the state constitution, and that it protects the franchise even more strongly than the U.S. Constitution. But a state's authority to extend extra protection to a right is not unlimited, and at some point it will conflict with the U.S. Constitution.

States have always restricted the right to vote based on age, residency, and felony convictions. So it's clear the U.S. Constitution allows at least some restrictions. There are even cases where courts upheld laws that kept people from voting on local school or water board measures, for example, because they didn't have the kids in school or the irrigated land needed to give them a legitimate interest in the outcome.
 robertaus
Joined: 1/26/2010
Msg: 274
New ID voter law?
Posted: 8/31/2012 7:01:05 AM

this from australia
http://www.aec.gov.au/faqs/voting_australia.htm

Is voting compulsory?
Yes, voting is compulsory for every Australian citizen aged 18 years or older. If you do not vote and do not have a valid and sufficient reason for failing to vote, a penalty is imposed. For further information see Compulsory Voting.


Has been interesting reading this thread where voting is not compulsory.Yes voting is compulsory in Australia.However this thread has made me think about how it works here.You are expected to enroll to vote when you turn 18.But unless things have changed I don't think that is policed very strictly.
I know people who have never enrolled to vote and as such have never voted in their life.The ID thing is a bit of a strange concept here.When you vote you just tell them your name and address and they cross you off the list.It is easy to vote for someone else here as they don't ask for ID and i know people that do just that(saves getting fined).
I've even heard of people paying other people to vote on their behalf.Then we get a lot of informal voters who just go and get their name crossed off and just put blank forms in the box(saves getting fined).
It would be interesting to see if it ever got changed and voting wasn't compulsory.I think a lot of Australians wouldn't bother.I know I wouldn't.There are better things to do on a Saturday afternoon than stand in a mile long line just to avoid a fine.
 BigBadNIrish
Joined: 1/31/2011
Msg: 275
New ID voter law?
Posted: 9/1/2012 3:33:59 PM
Court Blocks Texas Voter ID Law, Citing Racial Impact

By CHARLIE SAVAGE and MANNY FERNANDEZ


WASHINGTON — A federal court on Thursday struck down a Texas law that would have required voters to show government-issued photo identification before casting their ballots in November, ruling that the law would hurt turnout among minority voters and impose “strict, unforgiving burdens on the poor” by charging those voters who lack proper documentation fees to obtain election ID cards.

The three-judge panel in United States District Court for the District of Columbia called Texas’ voter-identification law the most stringent of its kind in the country. Gov. Rick Perry and the state’s attorney general, Greg Abbott, vowed to appeal the decision to the United States Supreme Court.

The judges’ ruling came two days after another three-judge panel in the same court found that the Texas Legislature had intentionally discriminated against minority voters in drawing up electoral district maps, citing the same section of the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Known as Senate Bill 14, the state’s voter-identification law requires voters who show up at the polls to identify themselves with one of five forms of ID, including a driver’s license or a United States passport. Those lacking one of the five types of identification must obtain an election identification certificate, a government-issued card similar to a driver’s license. Prospective voters would need to travel to a state Department of Public Safety office to get an election ID card, and, although it is free, they would have to verify their identity to obtain one, in some cases paying $22 for a certified copy of their birth certificate.

In its unanimous 56-page ruling, the federal judges found that the fees and the cost of traveling for those voters lacking one of the five forms of ID disproportionately affected the poor and minorities. “Moreover, while a 200- to 250-mile trip to and from a D.P.S. office would be a heavy burden for any prospective voter, such a journey would be especially daunting for the working poor,” the decision read, referring to the dozens of counties in Texas that do not have a D.P.S. office.

Mr. Perry and other Texas Republicans had argued that voter identification laws were constitutional methods of preventing voter fraud, and they believed the courts could not legally consider factors like poverty when determining whether a law complies with the Voting Rights Act.

Mr. Perry criticized the judges and the Obama administration. “Chalk up another victory for fraud,” he said in a statement. “Today, federal judges subverted the will of the people of Texas and undermined our effort to ensure fair and accurate elections.”

The United States attorney general, Eric H. Holder Jr., who had told the N.A.A.C.P. in July that the Texas law’s requirements amounted to a poll tax, praised the ruling. “The court’s decision today and the decision earlier this week on the Texas redistricting plans not only reaffirm — but help protect — the vital role the Voting Rights Act plays in our society to ensure that every American has the right to vote and to have that vote counted,” he said in a statement.

The wave of voter ID laws enacted by Republican-led state governments in recent years has created a polarizing debate.

Supporters, mostly conservatives, argue that such restrictions are needed to prevent fraud. While there is no evidence of significant levels of voter impersonation — the sort of fraud that would be addressed by ID requirements — they argue that it is just going undetected. But critics, mostly liberals, say voter impersonation fraud is rare and contend that the restrictions are a veiled effort to suppress turnout by legitimate voters who are less likely to have a photo ID card and who tend to support Democrats, like students, the indigent and minorities.

Mr. Perry signed the voter identification bill in May, but it had not taken effect because Texas and other states with a history of racial discrimination cannot make changes to their voting procedures without first receiving so-called preclearance, a requirement under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

The case could add to pressure on the question of whether Section 5 of the act is still constitutional. The Supreme Court, which is already hearing an affirmative action case in its coming term, is deciding whether to review an appeals court decision upholding the Voting Rights Act in the face of a constitutional challenge by Shelby County, Ala. Texas is also challenging the constitutionality of the law in the voter ID case, one of a handful of states to do so recently, including Florida and Alaska.

While opponents of voter ID laws celebrated the ruling, it was narrowly focused on the Texas law and emphasized that it should not be read as implying that all voter ID laws should be blocked by Section 5.


Charlie Savage reported from Washington, and Manny Fernandez from San Antonio.


This article has been revised to reflect the following correction:

Correction: September 1, 2012

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/31/us/court-blocks-tough-voter-id-law-in-texas.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print
Show ALL Forums  > Off Topic  > New ID voter law? [CLOSED]