Texas Voter-Identification Law Is Blocked by Justice Department as Biased

[hazlnut]

[h=1]Texas Voter-Identification Law Is Blocked by Justice Department as Biased[/h]
If if ain't broke... It voter fraud is not a real issue in the larger state and national elections, then why did they attempt to modify the procedure with an added step??

When you break it down and see who is actually effected by the added step, then you realize it was the GOP tricky dicks trying to play dirty and swing the numbers in their favor by keeping potential Dems away from the polls.

When it comes to breaking and busting up our U.S. Constitution, and most sacred traditions, the GOP far out does the Dems every time...

The Obama administration blocked Texas (BEESTX)’s new law requiring voters to show government-issued photo identification at the polls, escalating a partisan dispute over voting restrictions.
The U.S. Justice Department used its power under the Voting Rights Act to halt the Texas law, saying in a letter to the state today that the measure may disproportionately harm Hispanics. The department in December blocked a similar law in South Carolina (NFSESC).
Democrats have objected to the voter ID laws as impediments to minority voting while Republicans have said they protect the integrity of elections. Republican officials in Texas, one of eight states that passed voter identification laws last year, said the administration has no valid reason to challenge the measure.

Will one GOP candidate please stand up and do the right thing on this and say, "Look folks, Voter fraud is a crime, but it happens in such tiny small itty-bitty percentages that have NO EFFECT on the outcome... I'll say it one more time, NO EFFECT ON THE OUTCOME... Let's not waste time with more needless Government bureaucracy..." Ron Paul? Anyone?

 

[jgarden47]

The same conservative politicians who support citizens producing photo ID to prevent voter fraud are opposed to a national photo ID system because it would represent "an infringement of privacy and civil liberties!"

National identity cards have been advocated by law enforcement to facilitate the surveillance and identification of criminals and potential terrorists.

At present, there are millions of law abiding Americans who don't possess a state drivers licence, a US passport or other forms of photo ID required to comply with new voter ID laws.

 

[JasonI]

I have only been here a few weeks, but I already have a sense that the GOP'ers are nothing more than partisan hacks who would NEVER even consider condemning anything their party does. I mean, I even know Catholics (Santorum) who can't say anything bad about the pedophilia in their own church...I imagine it's not much different here...you know the GOP motto, "Party before Country!"

 

[Tigger]

Will one GOP candidate please stand up and do the right thing on this and say, "Look folks, Voter fraud is a crime, but it happens in such tiny small itty-bitty percentages that have NO EFFECT on the outcome... I'll say it one more time, NO EFFECT ON THE OUTCOME... Let's not waste time with more needless Government bureaucracy..." Ron Paul? Anyone?

Actually, I'm looking for the one GEPer who will stand up and say "Because of this we need a National ID card that every citizen must carry with them at all times and produce on demand to any LEO.

 

[jgarden47]

..... 31 states require voters to show some form of identification at the polls. Fifteen of them require photo IDs. At least five of those states just recently passed tough new photo ID voting laws that could affect voters for the first time in 2012.

..... By all estimates, those least likely to have a government-issued photo ID fall into one of four categories: the elderly, minorities, the poor and young adults aged 18 to 24. The Brennan Center estimates that 18 percent of all seniors and 25 percent of African-Americans don't have picture IDs.

Seniors traditionally have been the most consistent voting group, particularly in absentee balloting. Turnout among minorities has steadily risen over the years and reached a record in 2008 (when the rate of black turnout virtually equaled that of whites for the first time). Also in 2008, turnout of under-24-year-olds reached its highest rate since 1992.

http://www.npr.org/2012/01/28/146006217/why-new-photo-id-laws-mean-some-wont-vote

- 11% of Americans (21 million American adult citizens in 2000) don't have picture IDs according to a survey conducted by Brennan Center for Justice, NYU, 2006

- 18% of all seniors don't have picture IDs (seniors traditionally have been the most consistent voting group)

- 25% of African-Americans don't have picture IDs (in 2008, the rate of black turnout virtually equaled that of whites for the first time)

- young adults aged 18 to 24 (in 2008, turnout of under-24-year-olds reached its highest rate since 1992)

It doesn't take "rocket science" to understand why conservative politicians have jumped on the "photo ID bandwagon" to combat those notorious sources of "voter fraud" - the elderly, minorities, the poor and under-24-year-olds.

 

[Tigger]

It doesn't take "rocket scientist" to understand why conservative politicians have jumped on the "photo ID bandwagon" to combat those notorious sources of "voter fraud" - the elderly, minorities, the poor and under-24-year-olds.

The true FRAUD is that these people, who are notorious for having no idea who or what it is they are voting for, are allowed to cast a ballot without proving they are COMPETENT to do so, nevermind legally elligible to do so.

 

[JasonI]

The true FRAUD is that these people, who are notorious for having no idea who or what it is they are voting for, are allowed to cast a ballot without proving they are COMPETENT to do so, nevermind legally elligible to do so.

You could say that about the 52% of southerners in Miss and Ala who think Obama is a Muslim...

 

[Tigger]

You could say that about the 52% of southerners in Miss and Ala who think Obama is a Muslim...

Agreed, 100%. I am all for removing EVERY SINGLE POTENTIAL VOTER who cannot or will not prove their competency from the voting rolls, PERMANENTLY. Regardless of their party affiliation, voting record, etc....

 

[d0gbreath]

The true FRAUD is that these people, who are notorious for having no idea who or what it is they are voting for, are allowed to cast a ballot without proving they are COMPETENT to do so, nevermind legally elligible to do so.

Proving competence hasn't been used in a long time. Even back then, owning land that you inherited never meant that you were competent. Breathing is the only requirement to vote. The idiot voters from both sides tend to cancel each other out.

 

[Tigger]

Proving competence hasn't been used in a long time. Even back then, owning land that you inherited never meant that you were competent. Breathing is the only requirement to vote. The idiot voters from both sides tend to cancel each other out.

Unfortunately the idiots really don't cancel each other out most of the time. That's why we need a system to remove them from the process completely.

 

[PeteEU]

Agreed, 100%. I am all for removing EVERY SINGLE POTENTIAL VOTER who cannot or will not prove their competency from the voting rolls, PERMANENTLY. Regardless of their party affiliation, voting record, etc....

In other words you want to get rid of voting, since you wont meet the "competency" requirements either (nor me!).

 

[Tigger]

In other words you want to get rid of voting, since you wont meet the "competency" requirements either (nor me!).

I wouldn't mind getting rid of most voting, but that's a different topic. I'm fairly certain I could meet the competency requirements.

 

[PeteEU]

I wouldn't mind getting rid of most voting, but that's a different topic. I'm fairly certain I could meet the competency requirements.

Are you sure? Crazies like us would normally not be allowed to vote I bet

 

[katiegrrl0]

Agreed, 100%. I am all for removing EVERY SINGLE POTENTIAL VOTER who cannot or will not prove their competency from the voting rolls, PERMANENTLY. Regardless of their party affiliation, voting record, etc....

There would be entire red states that would not be able to vote if you did that.

 

[jonny5]

Ok, so if you dont think voter ID is needed, how do you know the person voting is the person who registered to vote? Your argument seems to be based on the idea that a small amount of voter fraud is acceptable. Is that a correct assessment?

 

[Tigger]

Are you sure? Crazies like us would normally not be allowed to vote I bet

I've actually come up with a system that I believe would work very well....

90 days before each election every candidate and the groups promoting/against all the ballot questions would be required to provide their information (Resume, Biography, Platforms, Voting Records, etc... for candidates and Position Papers for ballot questions) free of charge to all the Libraries and Town Halls in their appropriate districts.

30 days before the election a 50 question, multiple-choice exam would be available for all potential voters based on the information provided by the candidates and groups. A minimum passing score would be 75%. Failing to take or pass the exam would void your voter registration for that year. Three consecutive years of voiding would void your voter registration PERMANENTLY.

 

[Tigger]

There would be entire red states that would not be able to vote if you did that.

There would also be entire Blue States (Like Connecticut) that wouldn't be able to vote either under the system I just described above.

 

[Amigo]

There would be entire red states that would not be able to vote if you did that.

The democractic base is the most ignorant. They vote for the dems because of a union telling them to do so, 18 times. :lol:

Anyway, the government has no right to stop Texas from their voter ID law.

 

[TheNextEra]

There would also be entire Blue States (Like Connecticut) that wouldn't be able to vote either under the system I just described above.

As much as I am sure you would be a hoot to drink with, I am very glad that you are in no position of power to even remotely make your style of voting come true.

 

[Meathead]

Can you imagine how civil rights groups would respond to a competency requirement?

 

[TheNextEra]

Can you imagine how civil rights groups would respond to a competency requirement?

As rightfully they should.

 

[katiegrrl0]

There would also be entire Blue States (Like Connecticut) that wouldn't be able to vote either under the system I just described above.

Since the average IQ in Connecticut is 100.6 and ranks 7th in the US what are you trying to say. Ten of the bottom 14 states are red. What are you saying? The top seven in IQ ranking are blue.

 

[Meathead]

Since the average IQ in Connecticut is 100.6 and ranks 7th in the US what are you trying to say. Ten of the bottom 14 states are red. What are you saying? The top seven in IQ ranking are blue.

If you vetted those functionally illiterate and so on, it would be far worse for the Democrats than photo id, that's for sure. Obama would not have a prayer.

 

[tessaesque]

The same conservative politicians who support citizens producing photo ID to prevent voter fraud are opposed to a national photo ID system because it would represent "an infringement of privacy and civil liberties!"

National identity cards have been advocated by law enforcement to facilitate the surveillance and identification of criminals and potential terrorists.

At present, there are millions of law abiding Americans who don't possess a state drivers licence, a US passport or other forms of photo ID required to comply with new voter ID laws.

Why? You need photo ID to do so many things in this country....from gaining access to a bar or an 18+ concert, buying cigarettes or alcohol, renting a hotel room, getting a library card, registering your kids for school, verifying identity for employment, government benefits, or other services, etc., etc., etc. Hell, having photo ID is so important that some states are trying to pass legislation that would allow illegal immigrants to acquire it without penalty.

 

[TheNextEra]

If you vetted those functionally illiterate and so on, it would be far worse for the Democrats than photo id, that's for sure. Obama would not have a prayer.

Doubtful to be sure. Both sides would suffer as there are large voting blocks on both sides that vote for their particular brand no matter what the issues. Remember, there are people that voted for Bush twice and there are those that will vote for Obama again.

Over 75% of voters would be kicked off if something like Tigger suggested was put into place.