It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ohio May Move Forward With Inactive, Infrequent Voter Purge, Fed Court Rules

page: 2
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 03:49 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage


When was this particular rule "changed?"


What "rule" are you referring to, voter purging?

I did not necessarily mean a single "rule" per se, but the act of changing the game to win, insofar as enacting strict voter ID requirements/laws and the periodic redrawing of districts to make it easier to win elections, etc, which was in response to what Reldra said. In this case, purging and therefore disenfranchising already legally registered voters.


edit on 3-7-2016 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)




posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 03:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence




What "rule" are you referring to, voter purging?

Since that is the topic of the thread, yes.


insofar as enacting strict voter ID requirements/laws and the periodic
Do think you someone should not have to demonstrate that the are eligible to vote or that they are who they say they are? Ohio's requirements do not seem particularly onerous.

Ohio accepts the following documents for voter ID purposes:

Driver's license or state ID card with voter's name and photo issued by the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles. Must be current (not expired), but may have an old address.

U.S. Military ID with voter's name and photo (address not required).

A government ID with voter's name, current address, and photo. Note: a student ID is not acceptable.

An original or copy of one of the following documents that shows the voter'™s name and current address:
Utility bill, including cell phone bill
Bank statement
Pay stub
Government check or other government document

(These documents must have a date within one year of Election Day to be accepted as current.)

If none of the above documents is available, voters may use the last 4 digits of their Social Security numbers. Voters will then be given a provisional ballot. If the Social Security number matches a voter's registration the ballot will be counted.
www.cleveland.com...

edit on 7/3/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 04:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

It does not appear that the state attempted to contact the voters they planned to purge, that they were not sent a card to update or confirm their residence, those who were purged requested to be purged, or those who were purged had been convicted of a felony, pursuant to the National Voter Registration Act (sec 8), but that they were simply "removed" for not being a current voter.

Eta:

Oh, boy. You really edited that post.


Do think you someone should not have to demonstrate that the are eligible to vote or that they are who they say they are?


I think voter ID laws are fine, for the most part; but I also think that they have the effect of making it harder for certain people (elderly, minorities) to more easily vote, and seem to be passed only when convenient for certain political parties for the purpose of making it harder for some to vote. While Ohio may have some of the better requirements, that's not always the case.
edit on 3-7-2016 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 04:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence



It does not appear that the state attempted to contact the voters they planned to purge...
Oh, so it's not a matter of voter ID then, but do you know this, or are you assuming it?


but that they were simply "removed" for not being a current voter.
The word is inactive, not "current", and it has a specific meaning.

(d) Inactive voters means registrants who have been sent but have not responded to a confirmation mailing sent in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 1973gg-6(d) and have not since offered to vote.

www.law.cornell.edu...



edit on 7/3/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 04:31 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage


Oh, so it's not a matter of voter ID then,


No, it's not. Neither was the OP.


The word is inactive, not "current", and it has a specific meaning.


Which is why the title of the OP, and the OP itself, both say "inactive."


Inactive voters means registrants who have been sent but have not responded to a confirmation mailing sent in accordance with 42 U.S.C. 1973gg-6(d) and have not since offered to vote.


And I am not aware that happened. I do not know if it did, but if the state acted according to law by attempting to contact everyone they purged, then that's a different matter.

edit on 3-7-2016 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 04:32 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence

Which is why the title of the OP, and the OP itself, both say "inactive."
Which you converted to "not being current."



I do not know if it did, but if the state acted according to law, it stands to reason there wouldn't have been a lawsuit.

People sue for all kinds of stuff, often without merit.
If the state had acted illegally the decision of the court would have been different.

edit on 7/3/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage


Which you converted to "not being current."

"Converted." For all intents and purposes, being inactive is not being a current voter.


People sue for all kinds of stuff, often without merit.

Yes, they do.


If the state had acted improperly the decision of the court would have been different.


You know happens 100% of the time?

Courts always decide 100% correctly and always 100% according to law?
edit on 3-7-2016 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence




Courts always decide 100% correctly and always 100% according to law?

Correctly? That would depend on the opinion of the side you're on.
According to law? Yeah, by definition. Unless a higher court says otherwise.

edit on 7/3/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 04:41 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage


According to law? Yeah, by definition. Unless a higher court says otherwise.


If a higher court rules otherwise, then the lower court did make a mistakes, yes?

edit on 3-7-2016 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence



If a higher court rules otherwise, then the lower court did make a mistakes, yes?

Under the law, yes.
That goes without saying.



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 05:06 PM
link   
If the "minorities didn't vote in 2012 for Obama I highly doubt they are going to vote for hillary.
The slam to me would be knocking out blue collar ex-union whites who would have voted for trump who traditionally vote democrat in federal elections.

The policy should be 20-25 years without voting. It would clean rolls and perhaps put a stop to the infamous over 100% turnouts in precincts.



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 05:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Liquesence

originally posted by: Bluntone22
I have to renew my drivers license more often.
They will just have to register again.


Do you think it's ok to purge registration for inactive or infrequent voters without telling them they have been purged, and they therefore can't vote until they re-register?




Yes, I do and I live in Ohio, do you?



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 05:50 PM
link   
Been this way for years in most states.Including Georgia . Ohio didnt have inactive voter purge ? Shame on them




posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 06:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Metallicus


Yes, I do and I live in Ohio


Why?


do you?


No, I don't think people should be automatically purged, unless a person has been notified, as per the Voting Rights Registration Act, regarding voting inactivity.
edit on 3-7-2016 by Liquesence because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 07:00 PM
link   
a reply to: Liquesence



No, I don't think people should be automatically purged, unless a person has been notified, as per the Voting Rights Registration Act, regarding voting inactivity.

Your source:

People who don't respond to the postcard can be removed from voting lists if they sit out the next two federal elections.


www.reuters.com...

edit on 7/3/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 07:38 PM
link   
It seems to me as long as you are paying your taxes, you should be able to vote regardless of your voting history.


What is it about "no taxation without representation" you can't understand Ohio?
edit on 3-7-2016 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 08:52 PM
link   
I am still registered.

How do you know if your registration was purged I voted in 2012.
edit on 3-7-2016 by John_Rodger_Cornman because: fixed text



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: John_Rodger_Cornman
I am still registered.

How do you know if your registration was purged I voted in 2012.

voterlookup.sos.state.oh.us...



posted on Jul, 3 2016 @ 09:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

Its still listed.

You can just send in a registration form and they will put you back on the voter list.



posted on Jul, 4 2016 @ 10:28 AM
link   
I can't see how un-registering inactive voters makes sense unless they are saving money or they have a fee for registering. Other than that, most people who don't vote for that long probably aren't going to vote now. That makes them more or less neutral in their affect on the voting process. It sounds unconstitutional to me as well.




top topics



 
11
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join