• 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!

Federal Court Blocks Texas Voter ID Law

R

rcart76

DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 9, 2010
Messages
1,321
Reaction score
649
Location
Dallas, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
rcart76 said:
Federal Court Blocks Texas Voter ID Law, Calling It A 'Poll Tax'

This is great news !!!!! Even the Texas judge smelled BS on this law.
Click to expand...

Considering it just like the Indiana law that the SCOTUS said was constitutional this will flip back

Ramos, a Democrat who was appointed by President Barack Obama, was expected to strike down the law.

“The State of Texas will immediately appeal and will urge the 5th (U.S.) Circuit (Court of Appeals) to resolve this matter quickly to avoid voter confusion in the upcoming election,” said Lauren Bean, a spokeswoman for Abbott’s office. “The U.S. Supreme Court has already ruled that voter ID laws are constitutional so we are confident the Texas law will be upheld on appeal.”
Click to expand...

Federal court calls Texas voter ID law unconstitutional | www.statesman.com
 
What a horribly written article. I don't know what the law said so I can't evaluate the judges opinion. I miss journalism.
 
A women told me that her husband voted Republican until the day he died.
He's been voting Democrat ever since. :lamo


When I asked her how that could happen,,, All she said was, "the ACORN didn't fall far from the tree." :roll:
 
nota bene said:
Here is another article: Federal Judge: Texas Voter ID Law Unconstitutional | The Texas Tribune

And I don't think that requiring citizens to show a photo ID is an attempt to impose a poll tax or to exclude voters on the basis of race; I think the point is to reduce election fraud.
Click to expand...

The problem with the Texas case and others is the proponents can't demonstrate that 1) the impersonation fraud at the polls which is preventable by photo ID is more than trivial (2 cases in Texas, with 20 million votes cast) or 2) that the new rules make that trivial amount of fraud less likely. Furthermore, the estimates were about 600,000 registered Texas voters didn't have acceptable photo ID. Those that didn't were 2-3 times more likely to be hispanic or black, and poor, than anglo, and therefore the effect was clearly disproportionately on minorities which Texas has a long history of discriminating against. The law was passed on a fast track that was unprecedented (rules were changed in a manner not seen for a century) for no good reason, and much more.

And anyone who thinks the "point" of the fast tracked rules changes was to reduce "election fraud" is delusional. That's the stated reason, but the actual reason is clearly and obviously to help GOPers win elections in red states. As the judge pointed out, the area where virtually ALL "voter" fraud occurs is with absentee ballots and the emergency, fast tracked, legislation left those rules untouched. Gosh, could it be that demographics that lean republican in Texas are more likely to use absentee ballots? Of course.....
 
BringIt said:
A women told me that her husband voted Republican until the day he died.
He's been voting Democrat ever since. :lamo


When I asked her how that could happen,,, All she said was, "the ACORN didn't fall far from the tree." :roll:
Click to expand...

The sad thing is many republicans will actually believe that story.
 
Well, you've certainly made up your mind on this issue.
 
nota bene said:
Here is another article: Federal Judge: Texas Voter ID Law Unconstitutional | The Texas Tribune

And I don't think that requiring citizens to show a photo ID is an attempt to impose a poll tax or to exclude voters on the basis of race; I think the point is to reduce election fraud.
Click to expand...

But large-scale voter fraud is virtually non-existent today. Yet the efforts to root it out recall the horrid Jim Crow era. The former “party of Lincoln” has been most active in this fraudulent crusade. It’s mostly prevented people of color and older folks from voting. Could it be that they’d largely vote for Democrats?

Shades of 2000 and 2004 when somehow voting machines weren’t delivered to African-American precincts in Ohio and Florida or unforeseen glitches prevented their ballots from counting. It’s not that the disenfranchised voters weren’t properly registered — by and large they were. But a systematic campaign to keep them from voting was in place. It’s been documented by several news organizations, most notably the Miami Herald.

Voter Fraud: A Massive, Anti-Democratic Deception - Forbes
 
BringIt said:
A women told me that her husband voted Republican until the day he died.
He's been voting Democrat ever since. :lamo


When I asked her how that could happen,,, All she said was, "the ACORN didn't fall far from the tree." :roll:
Click to expand...

That was so hilarious I completely forgot to laugh. Well done.
 
JasperL said:
The problem with the Texas case and others is the proponents can't demonstrate that 1) the impersonation fraud at the polls which is preventable by photo ID is more than trivial (2 cases in Texas, with 20 million votes cast) or 2) that the new rules make that trivial amount of fraud less likely. Furthermore, the estimates were about 600,000 registered Texas voters didn't have acceptable photo ID. Those that didn't were 2-3 times more likely to be hispanic or black, and poor, than anglo, and therefore the effect was clearly disproportionately on minorities which Texas has a long history of discriminating against. The law was passed on a fast track that was unprecedented (rules were changed in a manner not seen for a century) for no good reason, and much more.

And anyone who thinks the "point" of the fast tracked rules changes was to reduce "election fraud" is delusional. That's the stated reason, but the actual reason is clearly and obviously to help GOPers win elections in red states. As the judge pointed out, the area where virtually ALL "voter" fraud occurs is with absentee ballots and the emergency, fast tracked, legislation left those rules untouched. Gosh, could it be that demographics that lean republican in Texas are more likely to use absentee ballots? Of course.....
Click to expand...

Who is the racist here? you seem to think blacks and mexicans are to lazy and stupid to get a simple id that is needed for many aspects of modern life
 
nota bene said:
Well, you've certainly made up your mind on this issue.
Click to expand...

True, because the evidence allows no other conclusion. Lawyers arguing FOR photo ID don't even really attempt to tie the new rules to preventing fraud - they can't demonstrate that any is occurring, so it's hard to argue in COURT, under oath, with the opposing side able to challenge claims, that rules changes are needed to solve the problem of nearly non-existent impersonation fraud.
 
JasperL said:
True, because the evidence allows no other conclusion. Lawyers arguing FOR photo ID don't even really attempt to tie the new rules to preventing fraud - they can't demonstrate that any is occurring, so it's hard to argue in COURT, under oath, with the opposing side able to challenge claims, that rules changes are needed to solve the problem of nearly non-existent impersonation fraud.
Click to expand...

Election fraud is/has been far more damaging then "voter fraud".

Despite many instances of electoral fraud internationally, in the U.S. a major study by the Justice Department between 2002 and 2007[2] showed of the 300 million votes cast in that period, federal prosecutors convicted only 86 people for voter fraud – and of those few cases, most involved persons who were simply unaware of their ineligibility.

I would draw attention to the fact that this study was conducted by the Bush administrations Justice Dept.!

Electoral fraud - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
Crovax said:
Who is the racist here? you seem to think blacks and mexicans are to lazy and stupid to get a simple id that is needed for many aspects of modern life
Click to expand...

I never said that, but it's nice that you made those ugly sentiments up and then attributed them to me!! Are you familiar with the term, Projection?

And the bolded part just isn't true. The people who are registered and do not have the acceptable forms of ID obviously DO NOT NEED the required forms of photo ID except to vote. If they had to have the required ID, they'd have it. The rules require 600,000 properly registered Texans to spend money on an ID they do not otherwise need. Hence, the "poll tax" nature of the law.
 
JasperL said:
I never said that, but it's nice that you made those ugly sentiments up and then attributed them to me!! Are you familiar with the term, Projection?

And the bolded part just isn't true. The people who are registered and do not have the acceptable forms of ID obviously DO NOT NEED the required forms of photo ID except to vote. If they had to have the required ID, they'd have it. The rules require 600,000 properly registered Texans to spend money on an ID they do not otherwise need. Hence, the "poll tax" nature of the law.
Click to expand...

How do they drive without ID, how do they cash checks without ID, how do they rent/own places of residence without ID, how do they travel without ID, how do they buy beer without ID. All of these things require an ID which is also an acceptable form of voter ID.
 
Montecresto said:
But large-scale voter fraud is virtually non-existent today. Yet the efforts to root it out recall the horrid Jim Crow era. The former “party of Lincoln” has been most active in this fraudulent crusade. It’s mostly prevented people of color and older folks from voting. Could it be that they’d largely vote for Democrats?

Shades of 2000 and 2004 when somehow voting machines weren’t delivered to African-American precincts in Ohio and Florida or unforeseen glitches prevented their ballots from counting. It’s not that the disenfranchised voters weren’t properly registered — by and large they were. But a systematic campaign to keep them from voting was in place. It’s been documented by several news organizations, most notably the Miami Herald.

Voter Fraud: A Massive, Anti-Democratic Deception - Forbes
Click to expand...

How can you prove fraud is or isnt going on when there is no method to test for it. That would be like saying there is no mass internet piracy because just a few people have been arrested for it.
 
Crovax said:
How do they drive without ID, how do they cash checks without ID, how do they rent/own places of residence without ID, how do they travel without ID, how do they buy beer without ID. All of these things require an ID which is also an acceptable form of voter ID.
Click to expand...

Two things. 1) you're conflating "ID" with "Photo ID acceptable for voting." They're not the same, which is a BIG part of the problem. Almost everyone has "ID" but roughly 600,000 registered voters in Texas do not have an ID acceptable for voting at the polls.

And 2) no one disputes that these roughly 600,000 people in Texas get by just fine without the types of Photo ID required in Texas to vote. So your question is interesting from a sociological standpoint, but irrelevant to the discussion of photo ID for voting purposes.
 
Crovax said:
How can you prove fraud is or isnt going on when there is no method to test for it. That would be like saying there is no mass internet piracy because just a few people have been arrested for it.
Click to expand...

There are methods to detect it. To engage in impersonation fraud at the polls, the person has to know that someone is registered to vote, obtain some form of ID (e.g. a utility bill) that will indicate he or she is that person, get to the polls before the REAL registered voter shows up, trust that no poll worker knows the registered person, vote, then hope that the person registered doesn't show up later and find out someone has cast a vote in their name. If the person registered is dead, that can and is checked against lists of people who are dead. If the person moved, that can also be checked - did that person vote in some other election. There is a permanent record of all registered voters and of persons casting a vote.

And the thing is, if you were going to vote as someone else, why show up at the polls and risk showing your face? Request an absentee ballot instead and you need no ID, and don't risk someone who knows Jane Doe is at the desk when you sign in as Jane Doe. Of course ALL the evidence indicates that in fact those engaging in "voter" fraud do it through absentee ballots, naturally. It's less risky, by far. And Texas and most other republican states passing strict photo ID laws did NOTHING to tighten up the rules for absentee voting.
 
JasperL said:
Two things. 1) you're conflating "ID" with "Photo ID acceptable for voting." They're not the same, which is a BIG part of the problem. Almost everyone has "ID" but roughly 600,000 registered voters in Texas do not have an ID acceptable for voting at the polls.

And 2) no one disputes that these roughly 600,000 people in Texas get by just fine without the types of Photo ID required in Texas to vote. So your question is interesting from a sociological standpoint, but irrelevant to the discussion of photo ID for voting purposes.
Click to expand...

Maybe you should read my post again, I said the same ID that is required for all of those things(DL, ID or passport) is also acceptable for voting. So please explain how they are getting by fine without doing any of those activities
 
Crovax said:
Maybe you should read my post again, I said the same ID that is required for all of those things(DL, ID or passport) is also acceptable for voting. So please explain how they are getting by fine without doing any of those activities
Click to expand...

And maybe you should read my response again. NO ONE DISPUTES that roughly 600,000 registered Texas voters ARE GETTING BY FINE without the very narrow list of required PHOTO IDs.

To be complete, the exact figures are estimates, but whether it's 300,000 or 600,000, no one disputes the number without Photo ID is very large. Every state that has estimated the number comes up with figures in the multi-hundred thousand registered voter range.

But to answer your irrelevant sociological question, many poor people don't have cars or drive. Poor people don't travel by air, and they sure as hell don't travel abroad. Many poor people don't have bank accounts. Many people rich or poor do not drink and so need no ID for alcohol. Or they get alcohol from the local store where the owner knows them and doesn't comply with the requirements to check ID.
 
JasperL said:
And maybe you should read my response again. NO ONE DISPUTES that roughly 600,000 registered Texas voters ARE GETTING BY FINE without the very narrow list of required PHOTO IDs.

To be complete, the exact figures are estimates, but whether it's 300,000 or 600,000, no one disputes the number without Photo ID is very large. Every state that has estimated the number comes up with figures in the multi-hundred thousand registered voter range.

But to answer your irrelevant sociological question, many poor people don't have cars or drive. Poor people don't travel by air, and they sure as hell don't travel abroad. Many poor people don't have bank accounts. Many people rich or poor do not drink and so need no ID for alcohol. Or they get alcohol from the local store where the owner knows them and doesn't comply with the requirements to check ID.
Click to expand...

How exactly is the list narrow? It covers all common forms of photo ID. Poor people do have cars especially in Texas, they do travel I know plenty of poor mexicans that travel to mexico at least once a year to visit relatives, even if you dont have a bank account you still have to have an ID to cash your pay check, and not all people drink but 2/3rds do and you still need ID for it.
 
JasperL said:
I never said that, but it's nice that you made those ugly sentiments up and then attributed them to me!! Are you familiar with the term, Projection?

And the bolded part just isn't true. The people who are registered and do not have the acceptable forms of ID obviously DO NOT NEED the required forms of photo ID except to vote. If they had to have the required ID, they'd have it. The rules require 600,000 properly registered Texans to spend money on an ID they do not otherwise need. Hence, the "poll tax" nature of the law.
Click to expand...

This is the lamest argument. What kind of person does not have an id. This is yet another invasion of liberalism in our courts. Anything that allows libs to cheat
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom