• 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!

Appeals court reinstates Texas voter ID law

Napoleon said:
If there is no in-person voter fraud then what purpose does such a law serve?
Click to expand...

People shouldn't have to prove who they are to vote?

What a genuinely trusting, naive thought.
 
Kobie said:
This in absolutely no way refutes (or even has dick-all to do with) anything I posted.
Click to expand...

Noting you posted has dick-all to do with the topic, neither.
 
lizzie said:
Good. Glad to hear it. Whenever anyone has an issue to proving who they are, in order to vote, thus influence our entire legal system, I have questions about their honesty and integrity. If voting is important to you, you shouldn't mind showing that you're doing it legitimately.
Click to expand...

It's never about reluctance to prove one's identity. It's about one's ability to obtain the paperwork, which is more expensive and time consuming than conservatives are willing to admit. If these laws came with a method for providing ID cards, at no cost, to all voters, then liberals would probably get behind them. We're not at all opposed to making sure that votes are cast legally. We're opposed to people being turned away from the polls on election day and not getting to vote at all. We're opposed to putting any extra burdens on lawful voting.

lizzie said:
Exactly- an excellent point. It is my right to buy a gun, but I am required to not only show ID, but also go through a federal background check. Let's see how that would go if it were a voting rights issue.
Click to expand...

It's probably because voting and gun ownership are different things, and different things are treated differently and have different levels of constitutional protection. One has nothing to do with the other.
 
apdst said:
Noting you posted has dick-all to do with the topic, neither.
Click to expand...

Uh, yeah it does. Have you been paying any attention to the discussion in which you've been participating?
 
Paschendale said:
It's never about reluctance to prove one's identity. It's about one's ability to obtain the paperwork, which is more expensive and time consuming than conservatives are willing to admit. If these laws came with a method for providing ID cards, at no cost, to all voters, then liberals would probably get behind them. We're not at all opposed to making sure that votes are cast legally. We're opposed to people being turned away from the polls on election day and not getting to vote at all. We're opposed to putting any extra burdens on lawful voting.
Click to expand...

I've posted basically this more times than I can count. It is always ignored or pooh-poohed by far-right partisans.
 
Μολὼν λαβέ;1063866776 said:
People shouldn't have to prove who they are to vote?

What a genuinely trusting, naive thought.
Click to expand...

I have my doubts that it's trusting and naïve, and rather suspect that it's a lack of caring about the integrity of our polling system. I'd love it if the general populace were trustworthy and honest enough that I didn't think voting ID was an issue, but I have seen first hand, and on multiple occasions, that we're not dealing with integrity as a general rule. There are far too many people who stand to benefit personally from well-placed politicians these days.
 
Kobie said:
That's nice.

Charging for an ID and then requiring that ID to vote is a poll tax, which is an explicit violation of the 24th Amendment.
Click to expand...

That's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.
 
apdst said:
Yeah, the ID I use to buy a gun? I paid for that mother****er!
Click to expand...

Since the vast majority of people already have ID's, paid for ID's like drivers licences, gun permits, hunting licences, etc. On these free voter ID's perhaps a notation should be placed on them, "Valid for voting purposes only." I mean since we have to pay for ours. Seems only fair.
 
Paschendale said:
It's never about reluctance to prove one's identity. It's about one's ability to obtain the paperwork, which is more expensive and time consuming than conservatives are willing to admit. If these laws came with a method for providing ID cards, at no cost, to all voters, then liberals would probably get behind them. We're not at all opposed to making sure that votes are cast legally. We're opposed to people being turned away from the polls on election day and not getting to vote at all. We're opposed to putting any extra burdens on lawful voting.
Click to expand...
As someone pointed out before, why put that same burden upon the exercise of our second amendment rights if it is as onerous as you claim? This is the 21 century. No one should have difficulty obtaining a picture ID. And for those few poor souls who cant do it, there are literally billions of campaign dollars floating around each election cycle that can be used to make it happen. Chances are these are the same people democrat operatives pick up in vans and take to the polls anyway. Spend a little extra time a get them an ID first.



It's probably because voting and gun ownership are different things, and different things are treated differently and have different levels of constitutional protection. One has nothing to do with the other.
Click to expand...
No its because liberals ignore laws they don't like. Demonstrating that you are who you say you are on election day is vital to the integrity of the entire political process. It is actually more important than showing an ID to get a gun.
 
disneydude said:
Wanna see what Republicans truly believe about voting issues? Couple voter-ID laws with a law that allows people to register to vote when they get their driver's licenses and you will watch Republicans run away faster than a kid chasing an ice cream truck. The reality is....Republicans know that when more people vote they lose elections....which is why they try as hard as they possibly can to keep people from voting.
Click to expand...
As long as the process confirms the individual is authorized to vote and nut just a means to cheat I am fine with the process.
 
countryboy said:
That's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.
Click to expand...

OK, so rebut it.

Does the 24th Amendment bar poll taxes? Yes.

What is a poll tax? Attaching a cost to the franchise of voting.

Is requiring an ID that must be paid for in order to vote attaching a cost to the franchise of voting? Yes.

Looks pretty airtight to me.
 
countryboy said:
That's one of the stupidest things I've ever heard.
Click to expand...

It is a stretch. Pushing the envelope so to speak. I would say it is not a direct poll tax as one would imagine or studied poll taxes to be. Although it may be an indirect poll tax. I never thought of it as a poll tax either. But in Lawyerese it probably is. Trouble is I do not speak Lawyerese.
 
Kobie said:
Uh, yeah it does. Have you been paying any attention to the discussion in which you've been participating?
Click to expand...

Have you ever read the 24th Amendment?
 
apdst said:
Have you ever read the 24th Amendment?
Click to expand...

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.[1]
Click to expand...

Explicitly bars poll taxes. Your weak attempt at deflection has been duly noted and summarily dismissed.
 
apdst said:
Can you prove it doesn't exist?

http://www.politifact.com/texas/sta...fraud-occurs-texas-though-convictions-and-gu/
Click to expand...

This is a great opportunity to point out how useless these laws are. So, there were 616 allegations over a period of ten years. Of those, 78 were found to have possible merit and were referred for prosecution. Of those, 46 were deemed to be bonafide cases of election-code violations. Of those, 18 were committed by a person as opposed to organizations, campaigns, and such. Of those, there were only 2 cases involving voter impersonation and both were committed by the SAME person and in one election. So...you're saying that the entire population of Texas must purchase an ID to vote because one person, who's name is Mary Comparin btw, pretended to be two different people in the 2008 general election? And somehow you find that reasonable?
 
Last edited:
Perotista said:
It is a stretch. Pushing the envelope so to speak. I would say it is not a direct poll tax as one would imagine or studied poll taxes to be. Although it may be an indirect poll tax. I never thought of it as a poll tax either. But in Lawyerese it probably is. Trouble is I do not speak Lawyerese.
Click to expand...

The 24th Amendment:

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

Voter ID proving citizenship status would then be appropriate legislation.
 
Texas....



Wisconsin.....



Keeping people from the polls is probably what keeps the fraudsters in office.
 
Utility Man said:
Texas....



Wisconsin.....



Keeping people from the polls is probably what keeps the fraudsters in office.
Click to expand...




Chicago, Detroit, pretty much all of California....
 
Kobie said:
OK, so rebut it.

Does the 24th Amendment bar poll taxes? Yes.

What is a poll tax? Attaching a cost to the franchise of voting.

Is requiring an ID that must be paid for in order to vote attaching a cost to the franchise of voting? Yes.

Looks pretty airtight to me.
Click to expand...
Not at all airtight. There can be costs attached to voting that are not considered poll taxes (e.g. gas money, bus fare, postage, etc.) - so the argument doesn't support your conclusion.
 
Napoleon said:
This is a great opportunity to point out how useless these laws are. So, there were 616 allegations over a period of ten years. Of those, 78 were found to have possible merit and were referred for prosecution. Of those, 46 were deemed to be bonafide cases of election-code violations. Of those, 18 were committed by a person as opposed to organizations, campaigns, and such. Of those, there were only 2 cases involving voter impersonation and both were committed by the SAME person and in one election. So...you're saying that the entire population of Texas must purchase an ID to vote because one person, who's name is Mary Comparin btw, pretended to be two different people in the 2008 general election? And somehow you find that reasonable?
Click to expand...

You claimed they were totally non-existent. I proved otherwise.
 
Kobie said:
Explicitly bars poll taxes. Your weak attempt at deflection has been duly noted and summarily dismissed.
Click to expand...

If ID's are free, there is nothing even close to a tax. Unless, something free is now classified as a tax. Is it?
 
apdst said:
You claimed they were totally non-existent. I proved otherwise.
Click to expand...

No, I asked if this was a real-world problem in Texas. I don't consider 1 example scrounged from 10 years worth of data to be proof of a real-world problem. Its certainly not the horde of election-throwing impostors you guys tried to make it out to be.
 
apdst said:
If ID's are free, there is nothing even close to a tax. Unless, something free is now classified as a tax. Is it?
Click to expand...

What I actually posted.

Kobie said:
That's nice.

Charging for an ID and then requiring that ID to vote is a poll tax, which is an explicit violation of the 24th Amendment.
Click to expand...

Obviously, if the ID is free, it doesn't apply here.
 
Napoleon said:
No, I asked if this was a real-world problem in Texas. I don't consider 1 example scrounged from 10 years worth of data to be proof of a real-world problem. Its certainly not the horde of election-throwing impostors you guys tried to make it out to be.
Click to expand...

Obviously, it is a real world problem. I posted evidence of such.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom