• 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!

SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

Yet conservatives ignore all the Nixon dirty tricks to get these IDs in the confederate states .
 
Yet conservatives ignore all the Nixon dirty tricks to get these IDs in the confederate states .

What does Nixon have to do with the Obama broken promise or results? Since you obviously didn't like what you believe Nixon did then why do you condone what Obama has proven to have done or the Democrat Party has done?

I guess offering cigarettes to voters along with lunches and other "stuff" including providing the vans is certainly ok to you? How about using those vans to drive people to get their voter ID's??
 
Once again (this gets so old), there is not one iota of evidence that there is widespread voter fraud in the country OR in Texas.

To the contrary, you are in favor of the law because it means that it will hurt your opposition party and help your party. It is you who are the one with an ethics and morality problem, seems to me. It is wrong to pass a law that results in widespread discrimination among a minority class, esp. when it has been expressed by GOP leaders that that is the purpose of the law.

You should be ashamed of yourself for willingness to take away citizens' right to vote.

It sounds simple on the face of things, but having been poor, I know it is not a simple thing for many people to get a photo ID. The cost, for one thing, is prohibitive for some. THAT IS THE SAME THING AS CHARGING PEOPLE TO VOTE.

As a moral and ethical thing, a citizen should not have to pay to vote. It's a citzenship right, even if you are dirt poor, without a dime.

You are in questionable company of years past of Jim Crow laws...the kind of people that favored those laws. That is who you are, you have now explained.

Tell you what, use those vans Democrat operatives use to drive people to the polls to drive people to get their FREE Voter Photo ID's. You have a problem with that?
 
It is quite interesting how smart liberals tell us their base is yet apparently many cannot get an photo id to vote even though they need a photo ID to do almost everything else these days. If they want to vote badly enough and if they are smart enough they will get their ID.

Well, obviously roughly 400,000-600,000 REGISTERED VOTERS in Texas do NOT need a Photo ID acceptable to vote under the new rules to go about their daily lives. It's funny that this basic fact can't sink in with conservatives.

They need "ID" but as people keep saying 1,000 different ways, "ID" =/= one of the very limited forms of photo ID acceptable to Republicans in Texas to cast a vote in person at the polls.
 
Well, obviously roughly 400,000-600,000 REGISTERED VOTERS in Texas do NOT need a Photo ID acceptable to vote under the new rules to go about their daily lives. It's funny that this basic fact can't sink in with conservatives.

They need "ID" but as people keep saying 1,000 different ways, "ID" =/= one of the very limited forms of photo ID acceptable to Republicans in Texas to cast a vote in person at the polls.

Glad to hear that you support the TX law. Why did liberals take the issue to the Supreme Court?
 
The Democrat party was responsible for those very Jim Crow laws you Libs are apparently so fond of.

AND they filibustered the 1964 voting rights act.

Never heard of this "Democrat" party....

And of course it was conservative whites in Southern states who filibustered the CRA and VRA, etc. Democrats in the rest of the country supported those bills at a higher rate then republicans. And now southern conservatives whites are nearly all republicans.
 
Glad to hear that you support the TX law. Why did liberals take the issue to the Supreme Court?

I see reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. There is no reason to make 400,000 Texans spend the time and money to get an ID they do not need in their daily lives just so they can exercise their right to vote.
 
Yes. A good trade. The state is upholding its end of the bargain. Those who do not get their ID are not upholding theirs.

That's remarkably weak.

So if your state's legislature decides that to exercise your right to own a gun, you need to register your weapon and pay an annual $500/year fee, it's OK because any law that the legislature passes that makes exercising a right contingent on jumping through expensive hoops is OK, even if gun registration has no effect on crime, gun deaths, etc.? Costly and time consuming registration of every firearm is just an "obligation" of being a citizen, and obviously you must support such a program!

You can't believe that.
 
What "obligations" are you talking about? Specifically?

You can pay taxes without ID, and set your trash out without ID. You don't actually need a photo ID to board a flight, and obviously most poor have never and will never fly on a plane.

You're confusing the obligations in YOUR life with the obligations for someone who lives an entirely different life.



24 things that require a photo ID

TOPICS: BELTWAY CONFIDENTIAL VOTER REGISTRATION

Voter-ID laws continue to get a lot of attention, and proponents of the law are being drowned out by opponents claiming the laws discriminate against certain voters.

Rather than getting IDs to the people who are supposedly disenfranchised, opponents spend their efforts trying to end the laws, even though polls consistently show overwhelming majorities of voters approve of the laws.

Below are just some of the examples of things you need to prove your identity for:

1. Alcohol

2. Cigarettes

3. Opening a bank account

4. Apply for food stamps

5. Apply for welfare

6. Apply for Medicaid/Social Security

7. Apply for unemployment or a job

8. Rent/buy a house, apply for a mortgage

9. Drive/buy/rent a car

10. Get on an airplane

11. Get married

12. Purchase a gun

13. Adopt a pet

14. Rent a hotel room

15. Apply for a hunting license

16. Apply for a fishing license

17. Buy a cell phone

18. Visit a casino

19. Pick up a prescription

20. Hold a rally or protest

21. Blood donations

22. Buy an "M" rated video game

23. Purchase nail polish at CVS

24. Purchase certain cold medicines

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/24-things-that-require-a-photo-id/article/2534254

In reality, you have to have a photo ID to live in today's world. Most states make it relatively easy to procure one, and most dont even charge for just the basic ID

I really dont know what all the fuss is about.....i kinda like knowing that the person voting is the person actually registered to vote....yes?
 
In reality, you have to have a photo ID to live in today's world. Most states make it relatively easy to procure one, and most dont even charge for just the basic ID

I really dont know what all the fuss is about.....i kinda like knowing that the person voting is the person actually registered to vote....yes?

I won't bother going through the list, much of it provably BS and either false or can be done without one of the IDs on the list of IDs accepted for voting, but NO ONE OBJECTS TO THE BASIC FACT that some small percentage of citizens do not need the photo ID's acceptable to vote in some states to get through their daily lives. Posts like this are an attempt to dispute facts that aren't actually in dispute or contested by supporters of the photo ID voting laws.

It's bizarre that conservatives cannot accept simple facts in evidence, accepted by both proponents and opponents of photo ID voting rules, presented in court, subject to discovery and cross examination, etc. It's just weird how a movement now feels free to disregard reality when making an argument.
 
I see reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. There is no reason to make 400,000 Texans spend the time and money to get an ID they do not need in their daily lives just so they can exercise their right to vote.

Those same people need a photo ID to cash a check, get on a plane, and take out a loan. Voting is a privilege. I see no problem with photo ID's, why do you?
 
I won't bother going through the list, much of it provably BS and either false or can be done without one of the IDs on the list of IDs accepted for voting, but NO ONE OBJECTS TO THE BASIC FACT that some small percentage of citizens do not need the photo ID's acceptable to vote in some states to get through their daily lives. Posts like this are an attempt to dispute facts that aren't actually in dispute or contested by supporters of the photo ID voting laws.

It's bizarre that conservatives cannot accept simple facts in evidence, accepted by both proponents and opponents of photo ID voting rules, presented in court, subject to discovery and cross examination, etc. It's just weird how a movement now feels free to disregard reality when making an argument.


for all the time, energy, and money you guys are spending on fighting these laws, you could rent vans and take those few voters that you say exist to get their ID's

or is that not in the equation....if people actually have ID, does that cause you other issues?

you gotta wonder.....
 
Those same people need a photo ID to 1) cash a check, 2) get on a plane, and 3) take out a loan. Voting is a privilege. I see no problem with photo ID's, why do you?

1) Wrong. It's easier to cash a check with a state or federally issued photo ID with current address (SFIPIDWCA), but not necessary.
2) Wrong. Ditto, and it may come as a shock to you, but 10s of millions of Americans make it through a lifetime and never fly! Hard to believe, but true!!
3) Wrong. What kind of loan? And I'm sure it will shock you to know that the poor don't qualify for traditional loans by banks and credit unions and the like.

Voting is a privilege? Hilarious....
 
for all the time, energy, and money you guys are spending on fighting these laws, you could rent vans and take those few voters that you say exist to get their ID's

or is that not in the equation....if people actually have ID, does that cause you other issues?

you gotta wonder.....

What part of accepting facts is a problem with right wingers? It's not that I "say they exist" it's what every person who has looked at the effect of the new laws has determined, and those claims have been vetted in the courts, subject to cross examination and discovery, etc.

And of course people are trying like heck to help people get the IDs - you've moved the goal posts because you can't defend the point.
 
1) Wrong. It's easier to cash a check with a state or federally issued photo ID with current address (SFIPIDWCA), but not necessary.
2) Wrong. Ditto, and it may come as a shock to you, but 10s of millions of Americans make it through a lifetime and never fly! Hard to believe, but true!!
3) Wrong. What kind of loan? And I'm sure it will shock you to know that the poor don't qualify for traditional loans by banks and credit unions and the like.

Voting is a privilege? Hilarious....

For number 2 and 3, you say wrong, but then give an argument of them not being able to. You do need an ID to get on a plane. The fact that some people will never get on a plane in their lifetime does not change the fact that someone needs and ID to get on a plane (with the exception of children). Also, you need an ID to get a loan or even request a loan. The fact that some people do not qualify for loans does not change the fact that you need an ID to get a loan from an institution.

Voting is in fact a privilege. If you are a convicted felon, you cannot vote while you are incarcerated, on parole, or on probation. Some do not get the privilege restored even after "rehabilitation".
 
What part of accepting facts is a problem with right wingers? It's not that I "say they exist" it's what every person who has looked at the effect of the new laws has determined, and those claims have been vetted in the courts, subject to cross examination and discovery, etc.

And of course people are trying like heck to help people get the IDs - you've moved the goal posts because you can't defend the point.
I am guessing you did not read the data presented to the court by the Texas Attorney General.
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/newspubs/releases/2012/071312voterid_fact_sheet.pdf
During her testimony at trial, Lydia Camarillo, Vice President of the
Southwestern Voter Education Project, testified she could only identify two voters
in the entire State of Texas
who do not have state-issued photo identifications—“the
Rodriguez sisters.”27

One of the two “Rodriguez sisters,” Victoria Rodriguez, a college student from San
Antonio and the only voter (out of 13 million in Texas) that either the intervenors—or the
DOJ—could produce at trial in support of their contention that voters who lack photo
IDs will be unable to vote. During Ms. Rodriguez’ testimony, however, those claims fell
apart when she testified that she possesses a “birth certificate,” a “voter registration
card,” and a “social security card.”28 Under state regulations, only two of the three
forms of identification possessed by Ms. Rodriguez are necessary for her to obtain an
Election Identification Certificate free of charge from the DPS.
At trial, Ms. Rodriguez testified that she did not have a car and that her parents were too
busy to take her to the local DPS office so that she could obtain a free Election
Identification Certificate. Ironically, however, Ms. Rodriguez explained in detail how she
had no trouble securing transportation to the San Antonio airport, flying more than
1,500 miles to Baltimore, and catching a train to Washington DC so that she could testify
in federal court about her inability to get to the DPS office back in San Antonio. 29
 
What part of accepting facts is a problem with right wingers? It's not that I "say they exist" it's what every person who has looked at the effect of the new laws has determined, and those claims have been vetted in the courts, subject to cross examination and discovery, etc.

And of course people are trying like heck to help people get the IDs - you've moved the goal posts because you can't defend the point.


what part of proving who you are do you have an issue with?

why do so many liberals have an issue with people proving who they say they are in order to vote in elections?

everyday life requires ID's......and they are EASY to get....and most of the time, FREE

use all these resources you are wasting fighting these laws, and get these people ID's if it is that much of a burden

there really is no excuse at this point.....the states have been hammering on this for years now

they have had plenty of time to get their act together
 
For number 2 and 3, you say wrong, but then give an argument of them not being able to. You do need an ID to get on a plane. The fact that some people will never get on a plane in their lifetime does not change the fact that someone needs and ID to get on a plane (with the exception of children). Also, you need an ID to get a loan or even request a loan. The fact that some people do not qualify for loans does not change the fact that you need an ID to get a loan from an institution.

You didn't read the link for #2:

We understand passengers occasionally arrive at the airport without an ID, because of losing it or inadvertently leaving it at home. If this happens to you, it does not necessarily mean you won't be allowed to fly. If you are willing to provide additional information, we have other ways to confirm your identity, like using publicly available databases, so you can reach your flight.

As to loans, what loans are you talking about? There are hundreds of ways to get a "loan" so if you want to make a statement, then you'll have to narrow it down a bit.

And one needs a special ID to get into the nuclear facilities at Oak Ridge. If I do not work in or visit those facilities, and I do not, then why in the hell is the ID required to do those things I DO NOT DO relevant to anything? One needs a passport to travel abroad. Why is that relevant to voting?

Voting is in fact a privilege. If you are a convicted felon, you cannot vote while you are incarcerated, on parole, or on probation. Some do not get the privilege restored even after "rehabilitation".

No, it's really not a privilege. If it is then I'm sure you agree owning a gun is a privilege (felons get that 'privilege' taken away) and so is liberty (since the privilege of personal liberty is taken from felons while incarcerated against their will). And the courts don't view voting as a privilege either, because when voting is mentioned in the Constitution, such as the 14th amendment, it's referred to as a 'right.' Try again.
 
1) Wrong. It's easier to cash a check with a state or federally issued photo ID with current address (SFIPIDWCA), but not necessary.
2) Wrong. Ditto, and it may come as a shock to you, but 10s of millions of Americans make it through a lifetime and never fly! Hard to believe, but true!!
3) Wrong. What kind of loan? And I'm sure it will shock you to know that the poor don't qualify for traditional loans by banks and credit unions and the like.

Voting is a privilege? Hilarious....

Just goes to show how out of touch you are with society and the world in general. Tell the people of Iraq and Afghanistan that voting isn't a privilege. What you continue to ignore is what both parties do to get people to the polls and how bad some of the cities are that use those tactics. It really is a shame that this is even an issue but politics are big business and big bucks that need better controls than what we have. A photo ID is a great first step in today's world.
 
Since we're talking about the urban poor, don't they get food stamps and other forms of welfare? Don't they need ID to get those things, or does the state simply hand them out to anyone who says they want them?

If it's the latter, then no wonder we spend so much on means tested government benefits, around a trillion a year isn't it?
 
I am guessing you did not read the data presented to the court by the Texas Attorney General.
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/newspubs/releases/2012/071312voterid_fact_sheet.pdf

That's not actually an estimate of the number of Texas registered voters without a Photo ID, and apparently refers to a different trial. It's a cherry picked bunch of out of context quotes and testimony.

In the district court, recently decided, the state didn't even pretend to do an estimate of the number. Several experts did, however, and the best the state could do was lob weak objections to some small parts of the very large and comprehensive efforts. Bottom line is several people went through thorough efforts to determine the number, and the result was somewhere around 600k without ID, and about 500k that didn't qualify for a disability exception. Some of them were elderly and could vote by absentee, which is more likely to generate fraudulent votes than voting in person.

But NO ONE testified in court, or presented any estimate in court, that there aren't hundreds of thousands of Texans, registered to vote, who will need to get new IDs. Partisan hacks can make any claim they want when it's not under oath and falsehoods and misleading half truths can't be challenged and have consequences. Get back to me with court testimony in any state backs up the view that few don't have the required ID. I won't be holding my breath, you can't produce such testimony.
 
Since we're talking about the urban poor, don't they get food stamps and other forms of welfare? Don't they need ID to get those things, or does the state simply hand them out to anyone who says they want them?

If it's the latter, then no wonder we spend so much on means tested government benefits, around a trillion a year isn't it?

How many times can this be pointed out before it sinks in with some people - "ID" =/= "State issued photo ID with current address, or veteran ID, or passport" in Texas. For example, here's information from MassLegalServices: http://www.masslegalservices.org/node/30291

Required or "mandatory" proofs for SNAP eligibility

Proof of the identity of the head of household.

This can include wage stubs, your state ID or driver’s license, school record, a health care card with your name on it, a birth certificate. You do not need a photo ID. And, if you don’t have any of these and are applying for expedited, DTA can confirm your identity using the SSN data base. See Question 8 (What if I am having trouble getting all the proofs, or the proofs get to DTA late?).

Only the head of household must verify identity. DTA can verify everyone else using the name, date of birth and SSN of each member. 106 C.M.R. § 361.610(G) (link is external).
 
How many times can this be pointed out before it sinks in with some people - "ID" =/= "State issued photo ID with current address, or veteran ID, or passport" in Texas. For example, here's information from MassLegalServices: 07. What proofs (verifications) do I need and how do I get them to DTA? | Mass Legal Services

Sweet! So, I can use someone else's pay stubs and SSN to qualify for welfare?

No wonder we're spending a trillion a year on means tested government benefits.
 
well.....those facts dont match up with what the left is telling everyone

so they cant be true....can they?

:doh

Testimony in court, subject to discovery and cross examination, is held to a higher standard than propaganda. And the propaganda didn't even bother to estimate the number.

Gosh, I wonder why the state of Texas, instead of lobbing bricks at figures others came up with, didn't do their own estimate? Maybe because they realize there is no gain in 1) doing a crap job that will be shredded in court, or 2) doing a legitimate effort that largely confirms the claims of the plaintiffs suing to overturn the Photo ID rules? That's my guess, what's yours?
 
Back
Top Bottom