• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Supreme Court strikes down Arizona voter ID citizenship law

Verify what? They can check to see if you pay an electric bill at the address you gave but that doesn't mean a damned thing as far as citizenship goes. Besides, if they get 1,000,000 of these forms then who will do the checking, how long will it take and how much will it cost?

They don't verify citizenship because they can't.
 
A question is asked
Who doesn't have a birth certificate?

As many as 13 million Americans don't have birth certificates

Here's one case, and note that this woman is a retired government employee
Why New Photo ID Laws Mean Some Won't Vote : NPR
When Thelma Mitchell, a retired state employee, learned that her old employee ID (which was issued by the state and included her photo) wouldn't meet Tennessee's new voter ID law, she went to a motor vehicle office to obtain a valid photo ID. The agency asked her for a birth certificate, but she didn't have one and was denied her request for a new ID.

Mitchell, 93, has never had a birth certificate. She wasn't born in a hospital and was delivered by a midwife, in Alabama in 1918. Birth certificates, particularly for African-Americans in the South, weren't regularly generated at the time. As a result, Mitchell may not be able to vote this year for the first time in decades.
 
You went to w w w . a l g o r e . com

Tes I clicked on the link, however - in big letters so you notice THERE IS NO PERSON WITH THE NAME ALGORE! Using such is meant as a derogatory statement of disrespect for a former Vice President, nothing more nothing less
 
Verify what? They can check to see if you pay an electric bill at the address you gave but that doesn't mean a damned thing as far as citizenship goes. Besides, if they get 1,000,000 of these forms then who will do the checking, how long will it take and how much will it cost?

All kinds of records exist in all kinds of databases. It isn't hard to check if someone has a birth certificate or passport.
 
A question is asked


As many as 13 million Americans don't have birth certificates

Here's one case, and note that this woman is a retired government employee

Your link claims that 13 million American citizens do not possess birth certificates. Almost all of them could obtain one and, if the process to do so isn't easy, it can be made easy. As for your counterexample, and I accept it as a valid one, it shouldn't be too difficult to devise a procedure to accomodate exceptions like Thelma Mitchell.
 
In the state of Texas in order to get a driver's license, one is required to have a social security card. In order to get a social security card one must have a birth certificate...certified copy, in fact. In order to get a Texas State Picture Identification card, which looks similar to a driver's license, one must have a social security card.

In essence...it is a system that pretty much is proof that anybody with a drivers license or Texas Picture ID...is a citizen.

Until about Aug 2012...Texans could be asked for an official picture ID in order to vote. That was shutdown by a Federal District Court, which stated the following:

A Texas law that would have required voters to show photo identification, ruling that the legislation would impose “strict, unforgiving burdens” on poor minority voters.

Describing the law as the most stringent in the country, the unanimous decision by a three-judge panel marks the first time that a federal court has blocked a voter-ID law. It will reverberate politically through the November elections. Republicans and Democrats have been arguing over whether tough voter-ID laws in a number of states discriminate against African Americans and Hispanics.

The panel at the U.S. District Court in Washington ruled that Texas had failed to show that the statute would not harm the voting rights of minorities in the state. In addition, the judges found that evidence indicated that the cost of obtaining a photo ID to vote would fall most heavily on African American and Hispanic voters.

Evidence submitted by Texas to prove that its law did not discriminate was “unpersuasive, invalid, or both,” David S. Tatel, a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, wrote in the panel’s 56-page opinion. Voting Rights Act cases must be decided by a special panel of three federal judges.

The ruling followed a decision Tuesday by another three-judge panel in Washington that found the Republican-controlled Texas legislature had intentionally discriminated against Hispanics in drawing new legislative districts.

And a greater reality was that the State Texas couldn't really provide sufficient evidence that there were very many true incidents of voting fraud.

Exactly how many incidents of voting fraud would it take to alter...say a presidential election? And given that we have an electoral college system...how many states would have to have enough fraudulent votes to gain enough electoral votes to ensure a win for a specific candidate?

In Congressional races...to get a specific candidate in office based on fraudulent votes...would be extremely difficult. Manipulating votes in a state like Texas, which has 254 counties...would require a very, very organized effort to alter primaries and/or main election periods.

Elected officials have found way more effective means of altering election outcomes.

Who are the real frauds....the voters...or the politicians? I vote the latter.
 
All kinds of records exist in all kinds of databases. It isn't hard to check if someone has a birth certificate or passport.

I see....so it somehow or other makes sense that "someone" will check this information out but AZ is prohibited from doing so:roll: I get the impression that you haven't thought this through.
 
why dont we just send absentee ballots to all Mexicans in Mexico so they can vote also if being an American citizen isn't required
 
All kinds of records exist in all kinds of databases. It isn't hard to check if someone has a birth certificate or passport.

Do you think the Federal Motor Voter application, which was the basis of today's decision, collects the information necessary to make this even theoretically possible?
 
They don't verify citizenship because they can't.

Right. It's just fine and dandy to check on who I talked to on Friday and extrapolate that data into who I am likely to talk to on Tuesday but no way in hell can we allow a State to verify citizenship of voters.:soap
 
I see....so it somehow or other makes sense that "someone" will check this information out but AZ is prohibited from doing so:roll: I get the impression that you haven't thought this through.

I'll bet he HAS thought it through.
 
Your link claims that 13 million American citizens do not possess birth certificates. Almost all of them could obtain one and, if the process to do so isn't easy, it can be made easy. As for your counterexample, and I accept it as a valid one, it shouldn't be too difficult to devise a procedure to accomodate exceptions like Thelma Mitchell.

Really - and yet those of your political bent think governments spend too much money. Where are the government workers who can make the process "easy"? There are almost 500,000 fewer government employees since 2009
 
It is limited to US citizens. We're you under the impression this has changed?
how is it limited to US citizens if you don't have to show you are one. please explain that if you can?
 
Your link claims that 13 million American citizens do not possess birth certificates. Almost all of them could obtain one and, if the process to do so isn't easy, it can be made easy. As for your counterexample, and I accept it as a valid one, it shouldn't be too difficult to devise a procedure to accomodate exceptions like Thelma Mitchell.

Making voting harder for people should always be treated with extreme scrutiny. It's not as simple as you think.

As an example, there was a DMV in Wisconsin open only 5 days a year. There are entire counties in the "black belt" of Georgia that don't have a single full-time DMV. By sheer coincidence, states with GOP legislatures pushing stricter voting laws have services aligned in a manner that would have a slightly disproportionate impact on Democrat voters. And you know what? Sometimes that's all it takes. A lot of elections are decided by a percent or two. If you can convince even one percent more Democrats to stay home because voting is a hassle than you do Republicans... Why not? And in the name of what? Stopping a small percent of the already tiny instance of voter fraud? Most voter fraud occurs in a manner that these ID laws wouldn't stop. For example: that previous statement about a daughter registering twice. IDs won't stop that. State election boards do that behind the scenes - and successfully.
 
Really - and yet those of your political bent think governments spend too much money. Where are the government workers who can make the process "easy"? There are almost 500,000 fewer government employees since 2009

Yeah, tell this sad story to the TSA next time you forget to bring your drivers license to the airport.
 
how is it limited to US citizens if you don't have to show you are one. please explain that if you can?

12 pages of explaining has been done.
 
Making voting harder for people should always be treated with extreme scrutiny. It's not as simple as you think.

As an example, there was a DMV in Wisconsin open only 5 days a year. There are entire counties in the "black belt" of Georgia that don't have a single full-time DMV. By sheer coincidence, states with GOP legislatures pushing stricter voting laws have services aligned in a manner that would have a slightly disproportionate impact on Democrat voters. And you know what? Sometimes that's all it takes. A lot of elections are decided by a percent or two. If you can convince even one percent more Democrats to stay home because voting is a hassle than you do Republicans... Why not? And in the name of what? Stopping a small percent of the already tiny instance of voter fraud? Most voter fraud occurs in a manner that these ID laws wouldn't stop. For example: that previous statement about a daughter registering twice. IDs won't stop that. State election boards do that behind the scenes - and successfully.

The Voting Rights Act was enacted to deal with chicanery such as you describe. No one is defending trickery like that.
 
The Voting Rights Act was enacted to deal with chicanery such as you describe. No one is defending trickery like that.

The VRA doesn't cover changes in DMV services.

And it doesn't cover Wisconsin at all.
 
12 pages of explaining has been done.
just went through all 12 pages and no one had a intelligent answer to explain how do we keep non citizens from voting

so i will ask again how to we keep non citizens from voting if they don't have to show evidence of being a citizen?

Its a simple question that deserves a simple answer
 
Making voting harder for people should always be treated with extreme scrutiny. It's not as simple as you think.

As an example, there was a DMV in Wisconsin open only 5 days a year. There are entire counties in the "black belt" of Georgia that don't have a single full-time DMV. By sheer coincidence, states with GOP legislatures pushing stricter voting laws have services aligned in a manner that would have a slightly disproportionate impact on Democrat voters. And you know what? Sometimes that's all it takes. A lot of elections are decided by a percent or two. If you can convince even one percent more Democrats to stay home because voting is a hassle than you do Republicans... Why not? And in the name of what? Stopping a small percent of the already tiny instance of voter fraud? Most voter fraud occurs in a manner that these ID laws wouldn't stop. For example: that previous statement about a daughter registering twice. IDs won't stop that. State election boards do that behind the scenes - and successfully.

Any links to back up those claims Deuce?
 
Let me remind you that Algore didn't go to court demanding a statewide recount, he went to court demanding a recount in four heavily Democratic counties.

I don't care what horatio algore wanted, the right thing to do was initiate a statewide recount. When an election is close, count the votes. It isn't about whether or not it is good for one side or the other. It's about what's best for democracy, and getting the result to as closely reflect the actual vote is clearly the most democratic option.
 
how is it limited to US citizens if you don't have to show you are one. please explain that if you can?

How many non-US citizens voted in last year's Presidential election?

How about in 2008?

2004?

2000?
 
Back
Top Bottom