• 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!

Justice Dept opposes Texas voter ID law

Erod

DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 28, 2008
Messages
15,483
Reaction score
8,227
Location
North Texas
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Conservative
Justice Dept opposes Texas voter ID law - Yahoo! News

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Justice Department's civil rights division on Monday objected to a new photo ID requirement for voters in Texas because many Hispanic voters lack state-issued identification.
Texas follows South Carolina as the second state in recent months to become embroiled in a court battle with the Justice Department over new photo ID requirements for voters.
Photo ID laws have become a point of contention in the 2012 elections. Liberal groups have said the requirements are the product of Republican-controlled state governments and are aimed at disenfranchising people who tend to vote Democratic — African-Americans, Hispanics, people of low-income and college students.

Has ever an attorney general been so politically active?

Why it's such a big damn deal to prove who you are before you vote is beyond me. You have to prove who you are to get a job, drive a car, go to school, rent an apartment...
 
Why all of a sudden do you think this has become and issue? It's certainly not because of voter fraud...

Sure, because how can you prove voter fraud when you can't prove who is standing in line at the polls. Best argument ever.
 
Justice Dept opposes Texas voter ID law - Yahoo! News



Has ever an attorney general been so politically active?

Why it's such a big damn deal to prove who you are before you vote is beyond me. You have to prove who you are to get a job, drive a car, go to school, rent an apartment...

This should not be within the authority of the United States Justice Department. Hope it goes to the Supreme Court to test constitutionality. That's where it belongs...once and for all.
 
SCOTUS would shoot it down too. If we didn't need it for 236 years, why would we need it now?
 
This should not be within the authority of the United States Justice Department. Hope it goes to the Supreme Court to test constitutionality. That's where it belongs...once and for all.

the surpreme court is what gave the justice dept the authority to begin with as a part of civil rights rulings.

Sent from my YP-G1 using Tapatalk. My YP-G1 is a very nice device that hardly ever explodes or shoots jets of burning acid at my face. Samsung has done a good job in that respect in building it. However one has to consider hamsters in regard to android as cyborg hamsters are very cool. Imagine how fast an Android hamster could run in their exercise wheel for example.
 
Justice Dept opposes Texas voter ID law - Yahoo! News

Has ever an attorney general been so politically active?

Why it's such a big damn deal to prove who you are before you vote is beyond me. You have to prove who you are to get a job, drive a car, go to school, rent an apartment...

I dont understand it either. This should be implemented as a federal law. Getting an ID is not that hard.
 
Getting a photo ID is not very difficult, and adding another, small step to voter registration really won't do much. Yes certain groups do tend to not have ID's at a higher rate than the rest of the population. However, they are still just as capable of getting them as everyone else. On the other hand, how much voter fraud do we really see today? At best the law is superfluous and will needlessly cost taxpayers money. The whole debate seems silly. Passing these laws will not mean a return to Jim Crow. Not passing them will not destroy democracy.
 
I dont understand it either. This should be implemented as a federal law. Getting an ID is not that hard.
Normally not, but we are talking about people likely to vote for Obama. Maybe there should issue a food stamp picture ID card rendering this a non-issue for democrats.
 
Normally not, but we are talking about people likely to vote for Obama. Maybe there should issue a food stamp picture ID card rendering this a non-issue for democrats.

I dont think who they are going to vote for really matters. Either party can send a group of people in to vote claiming to be someone else. This is not a matter of left vs right, its a matter of keeping the election process as honest as possible.
 
Normally not, but we are talking about people likely to vote for Obama. Maybe there should issue a food stamp picture ID card rendering this a non-issue for democrats.

Yeah, like in Wisconsin where the court found that the photo ID law prevented these scumbags from voting:

[F]orty uncontested affidavits offer a picture of carousel visits to government offices, delay, dysfunctional computer systems, misinformation and significant investment of time to avoid being turned away at the ballot box. This is burdensome, all the more for the elderly and the disabled. . . . Mr. Ricky Tyrone Lewis is 58 years old, a Marine Corps Veteran and a lifelong Milwaukee resident. He was able to offer proof of his honorable discharge but Milwaukee County has been unable to find the record of his birth so he cannot obtain a voter ID card. Ms. Ruthelle Frank, now 84, is a lifelong resident of Brokaw, Wisconsin and a member of her town board since 1996. She has voted in every election over the past 64 years but she does not have a voter ID card. She located her birth certificate but found that her name was misspelled. She was advised to obtain a certified copy of the incorrect birth certificate and try to use that to obtain a voter ID card. . . .
 
I dont think who they are going to vote for really matters. Either party can send a group of people in to vote claiming to be someone else. This is not a matter of left vs right, its a matter of keeping the election process as honest as possible.
Then why are the Democrats peeing their pants on this? My suggestion would doubtlessly give them more bladder control on this issue.
 
Yeah, like in Wisconsin where the court found that the photo ID law prevented these scumbags from voting:

[F]orty uncontested affidavits offer a picture of carousel visits to government offices, delay, dysfunctional computer systems, misinformation and significant investment of time to avoid being turned away at the ballot box. This is burdensome, all the more for the elderly and the disabled. . . . Mr. Ricky Tyrone Lewis is 58 years old, a Marine Corps Veteran and a lifelong Milwaukee resident. He was able to offer proof of his honorable discharge but Milwaukee County has been unable to find the record of his birth so he cannot obtain a voter ID card. Ms. Ruthelle Frank, now 84, is a lifelong resident of Brokaw, Wisconsin and a member of her town board since 1996. She has voted in every election over the past 64 years but she does not have a voter ID card. She located her birth certificate but found that her name was misspelled. She was advised to obtain a certified copy of the incorrect birth certificate and try to use that to obtain a voter ID card. . . .

First off Mr. Lewis can get his birth certificate from the state he was born in. Its not like you lose it and it's gone forever. Secondly, Ms. Frank was on the town board then she has some type of government issued ID. Sorry these don't hold up. Anyone, ANYONE can get a government issued ID. It is not a complicated process. You go to a DMV with 2 pieces of information that can be used to ID you. One of them can be as simple as a piece of mail and a SS card. SS gives you a card for free. At 64 years old there is no reason, no excuse what so ever for you to have not gotten any type of ID by that point in your life.
 
Then why are the Democrats peeing their pants on this? My suggestion would doubtlessly give them more bladder control on this issue.

Honestly Democrats will get upset at something because Republicans like it. (it works both was FYI). Doesnt matter what the issue is, dems see that reps are in favor they immediately move to have a problem with it.
 
First off Mr. Lewis can get his birth certificate from the state he was born in. Its not like you lose it and it's gone forever. Secondly, Ms. Frank was on the town board then she has some type of government issued ID. Sorry these don't hold up. Anyone, ANYONE can get a government issued ID. It is not a complicated process. You go to a DMV with 2 pieces of information that can be used to ID you. One of them can be as simple as a piece of mail and a SS card. SS gives you a card for free. At 64 years old there is no reason, no excuse what so ever for you to have not gotten any type of ID by that point in your life.

That was a quote from a Wisconsin court decision, so apparently they held up pretty well.
 
Yeah, like in Wisconsin where the court found that the photo ID law prevented these scumbags from voting:

[F]orty uncontested affidavits offer a picture of carousel visits to government offices, delay, dysfunctional computer systems, misinformation and significant investment of time to avoid being turned away at the ballot box. This is burdensome, all the more for the elderly and the disabled. . . . Mr. Ricky Tyrone Lewis is 58 years old, a Marine Corps Veteran and a lifelong Milwaukee resident. He was able to offer proof of his honorable discharge but Milwaukee County has been unable to find the record of his birth so he cannot obtain a voter ID card. Ms. Ruthelle Frank, now 84, is a lifelong resident of Brokaw, Wisconsin and a member of her town board since 1996. She has voted in every election over the past 64 years but she does not have a voter ID card. She located her birth certificate but found that her name was misspelled. She was advised to obtain a certified copy of the incorrect birth certificate and try to use that to obtain a voter ID card. . . .


example #1 was denied because his name isn't Ricky Tyrone Lewis, its actually Tyrone DeBarry. This information is pulled from the NAACP's court filing.

example #2 never had an actual birth certificate, but the state's record of her birth is accurate, except for her mother's maiden name which is misspelled. For the big fee of 20 bucks, they will generate her a birth certificate from their other records. Pulled from Voter ID becomes law of unintended consequences | Wausau Daily Herald | wausaudailyherald.com

Example #1 is clearly a clusterfark from day 1 that would take time to clearup regardless of the voterID law. Example #2 is an example where the state needs to clean up their record keeping into the 21st century, and they should waive the $20 fee since she wasn't issued a cert back in 1929.

But in the end, I do like the journalist's attempt at playing on emotions.
 
Last edited:
That was a quote from a Wisconsin court decision, so apparently they held up pretty well.

For the record and future discussions that we are sure to have, are you stating that if any court reaches a decision you will agree that it is the correct one? If not, then that is just someones opinion, just like anyone elses and I fail to understand your point.
 
example #1 was denied because his name isn't Ricky Tyrone Lewis, its actually Tyrone DeBarry. This information is pulled from the NAACP's court filing.

example #2 never had an actual birth certificate, but the state's record of her birth is accurate, except for her mother's maiden name which is misspelled. For the big fee of 20 bucks, they will generate her a birth certificate from their other records. Pulled from Voter ID becomes law of unintended consequences | Wausau Daily Herald | wausaudailyherald.com

Example #1 is clearly a clusterfark from day 1 that would take time to clearup regardless of the voterID law. Example #2 is an example where the state needs to clean up their record keeping into the 21st century, and they should waive the $20 fee since she wasn't issued a cert back in 1929.

But in the end, I do like the journalist's attempt at playing on emotions.

What journalist? To repeat, that was a quote from the judge's decision.
 
For the record and future discussions that we are sure to have, are you stating that if any court reaches a decision you will agree that it is the correct one? If not, then that is just someones opinion, just like anyone elses and I fail to understand your point.

I'm not necessarily going to agree with it, but given that it is the result of sworn testimony and evidence, and that it is issued by someone with training and experience separating **** from Shinola, I will give it greater weight some random guy's opinion.
 
I'm not necessarily going to agree with it, but given that it is the result of sworn testimony and evidence, and that it is issued by someone with training and experience separating **** from Shinola, I will give it greater weight some random guy's opinion.

So when a conservative judge rules in favor of something you oppose, does that sway your opinion?
 
What journalist? To repeat, that was a quote from the judge's decision.

I've seen that story reprinted a dozen times, so I assumed it was written as such. However, the story quoted is as provided in the lawsuit filed.

Do you see the problem with the examples given?
 
It appears from the article shown, that Wisconsin was requiring a seperate form of ID for voter registration/voting. I find it very hard to believe that niether had a drivers liscence in all that time and if he was a Marine, then he difinitly had a Armed Forces Identification at one time because it is required.

Requiring people to get another form of ID for voting I could see as a problem, but requiring you to show a form of ID I think is just sensible. My local voting place has always asked for a drivers liscence when I go in to vote. Never had a problem with that. And if you don't have a drivers liscence, there are state issued IDs for those people.

In a state like Texas which has a large population of illegal immigrants and immigration is often an issue for elected officials, I can see that requiring an ID to vote would be a very good thing. The whole issue of voter fraud is kind of hard, how do you prove that people who shouldn't vote, did, if you don't require identification for voting? There have been many cases in the past where fraud was uncovered, is there some reason some people think that it suddenly doesn't happen now?

I am definitly for using existing forms of ID at voting locations, however, I would be against requiring a new, special ID just for voting.

I guess now that DOJ has started this nonsense, our primaries will be delayed even further until both this and the redistricting issue has been settled.
 
Why all of a sudden do you think this has become and issue? It's certainly not because of voter fraud...
In CT, we've had to show ID for as long as I can remember.
 
Back
Top Bottom