Federal Government says Texas voter photo ID law discriminates against Hispanics. Huh?

reply to post by TexasTornado


Seems to me you could drive her to the DMV to get a cheap or free state issued photo ID, If she wants to vote him out of office, how does she feel that those inelligible to vote could cancel out her legal vote?

reply to post by TexasTornado


In Florida a lot of retirement/assisted living facilities give their residents photo IDs and those IDs are accepted at the polls. I am not sure with what the Texas ID requirement is but I assume it (was) similar.

Welcome to ATS. Did the Texas voter ID debate prompt you to join?

Illegal immigrants in the US should already be a thing of the past, and that goes for any race. It is obvious certain states are not doing there part, so the Feds need to take charge and put the US military on the borders, north and south. I just do not see how an immigrant can get anything in the US without becoming a US citizen. Where are the laws and rules and restrictions prohibiting an illegal alien from surviving, I was born here yet I can't get squat without the proper paperwork. Yet others can come into the US and work, drive, get medical attention and so on and not LEGALLY be in the US. It's not just voter fraud you guys should be crying about, illegal immigration is crumbling the economy. What if they were paying taxes like the rest of us? What if they paid insurance like us? If they paid their share we would not be in such debt. I do not think they should be sent back to wherever, take them to get their SS, ID or DL, and get them on the grid. Let them do their part to get the US out of debt.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

You need photo identification to: Obtain a Drivers license, buy cigarettes, purchase alcohol, check into a hotel/motel, rent a vehicle, open a bank account, use a credit card for a large purchase, travel on an airplane, and to be employed at any major corporation. I don't understand the big deal with identification and voting. Isn't voting the single most important process to make sure that we live in a democratic society? Don't you think we should check to make sure that people are who they say they are in order to vote in an election?

You need photo identification to: Obtain a Drivers license, buy cigarettes, purchase alcohol, check into a hotel/motel, rent a vehicle, open a bank account, use a credit card for a large purchase, travel on an airplane, and to be employed at any major corporation. I don't understand the big deal with identification and voting. Isn't voting the single most important process to make sure that we live in a democratic society? Don't you think we should check to make sure that people are who they say they are in order to vote in an election?

Originally posted by mastahunta

Originally posted by Nucleardiver
Your headline should read " Federal Government says Texas voter ID law prevents Daffy Duck, Mickey Mouse, Spongbob Squarepants, Acorn plants, and illegals from voting and will therefore cost Obama millions of illegal votes" because that's the truth of it.

Bull crap, you are imagining that there is a problem that is not there.
How many times has someone taken your vote from you? Huh?
How about your wife of your brother?

Obama doesn't give 2 craps about equality, discrimination, or legality. All he cares about is having 4 more years to complete the elitists agenda of destroyin our nation.

all you care about is winning so you are blind as a bat and you support anything to
get your way.

He sure didn't care about discrimination when the Black Pussycats were preventing people from voting in Philidelphia.

I swear that everyday my contempt for our government grows exponentially and I will welcome the day that enough Americans grow tired enough of this BS that we can actually force a change.

My contempt grows for you and the rest of you scalawags who will stop at nothing to
win at all costs. I'm sick of your lies and your cheating, I can't wait for that day...

Well first of all you lump me into a group as if you know anything about me. I am not a Republicrat or a Democan so trying to say Ill say or do anything to "win at all costs" and "your lies and cheating" just shows what a complete horses ass and ignorant moron you truly are.

I don't subscrribe to the idea of political parties, or as Madison called them in Federalist #47 "factions in government" because they will destroy our nation. Furthermore, just so you know I have equal contempt for Bush as well as Clinton, Bush 41, Reagan to a large degree, Carter, Nixon, Ford, Kennedy and yes even Eisenhower. If you must know I am a Jeffersonian Constitutionalists and it pisses me off that these tyrants walk all over a document that I took an oath to defend and sacrificed to defend just so they can blatantly ignore it.

They have all deviated so far from the constitution that it is nearly nonexistent and our form of government as it was designed has been destroyed. Let me tell you what my idea of winning is, it is living as free people under a government that understands that it not only serves the people but that it answers to the people for every action. To live in a nation where we can truly live with "Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness" without a corrupt government dictating to me what I have to do or lying and stealing from me in order to finance their perverse ideals.

I also like how you had no reply or answer to the subject or voter intimidation in Philly........just skipped right over that one. And no it didn't happen to me, and if it did you would have seen me on the news because there is no way a inner city thug with a baseball bat is going to intimidate me. He would have woken up in a trauma unit....if he woke up at all.

But the fact that Obama and Holder intervened and stopped prosecution proves the support voter fraud and intimidation.

Scalawag?!!!!!!!......so you just ASSume that I'm a white southern republican? I guess its beyond your comprehension to look to the left and see where I live huh? North Dakota.....cant get much further from south than that.......MORON!
And white?.....try Irish, Lakota Souix, and Navajo........IDIOT!

I would ask what "that day........." is but I'm sure it would just be more pathetic, sad ramblings.

Usually I enjoy engaging in a battle of the wits, but I make it a rule to never engage an unarmed opponents, so I am off to find a discussion with someone whom has the ability to arm themselves.

Does anyone even read the articles anymore?

The Justice Department didn't say that Texas could not impose a voter ID law, but they said the the State FAILED to prove to the Justice Department that this law would not be discriminatory against minorities.

And if this law does not discriminate then why did the state of Texas fail to provide proof of this?

Originally posted by muse7
Does anyone even read the articles anymore?

The Justice Department didn't say that Texas could not impose a voter ID law, but they said the the State FAILED to prove to the Justice Department that this law would not be discriminatory against minorities.

And if this law does not discriminate then why did the state of Texas fail to provide proof of this?

So now states have to conform to the regulations of the Dept of Justice when they pass laws? Kind of nullify's the 10th Amendment and the idea of states rights doesn't it.

reply to post by Nucleardiver


Again, where did I say such thing?

The State of Texas failed to provide proof that this law would not be discriminatory against minorities, so therefor under section 5 of the voting rights act the state department is objecting it.

It's up to Texas to provide proof that this law will not be discriminatory.

From the article

Tom Perez, wrote a a six-page letter to Texas' director of elections saying that Texas has not "sustained its burden" under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to show that the new law will not have a discriminatory effect on minority voters. About 11 percent of Hispanic voters reportedly lack state-issued identification.

Originally posted by Nite_wing
reply to post by TexasTornado

 

Seems to me you could drive her to the DMV to get a cheap or free state issued photo ID, If she wants to vote him out of office, how does she feel that those inelligible to vote could cancel out her legal vote?

Howdy there, by all apperences you dont seem realise how big the great state of Texas is. I run a cattle ranch and hunting outfit just outside of Amarillo. My Grandmama lives on the outskirts of Marshall. That is a 1080 mile drive for me back and fourth.

It seems to me that if the state of Texas wants to require her to have an ID to vote, then a local revenuer should show up at her homestead and issue her one.

Originally posted by jrod
reply to post by TexasTornado

 

In Florida a lot of retirement/assisted living facilities give their residents photo IDs and those IDs are accepted at the polls. I am not sure with what the Texas ID requirement is but I assume it (was) similar.

Welcome to ATS. Did the Texas voter ID debate prompt you to join?

I take a ganders at the internets when time obliges me. Yes it did causeded me to join. My grandmama don't live in no retirement home and she certainly aint gonna ask for no damn handout of a ride into town. She is proud and stubborn as a mule on a crooked moutainside trail.

Thank you for the welcoming.

Originally posted by muse7
reply to post by Nucleardiver

 

Again, where did I say such thing?

The State of Texas failed to provide proof that this law would not be discriminatory against minorities, so therefor under section 5 of the voting rights act the state department is objecting it.

It's up to Texas to provide proof that this law will not be discriminatory.

From the article

Tom Perez, wrote a a six-page letter to Texas' director of elections saying that Texas has not "sustained its burden" under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to show that the new law will not have a discriminatory effect on minority voters. About 11 percent of Hispanic voters reportedly lack state-issued identification.

Slow down man, I didn't say you said it! I was.merely commenting on what the DoJ is trying to say. The fact that the DoJ is trying to dictate what criteria a state has to meet in order to pass a law is a clear violation of the 10th Amendment. That is the whole purpose of that Amendment to allow states to retain the right to pass their own laws independent of the federal government. Now if a state was trying to pass a law that the fed has constitutional authority on it is a different story and the fed would have a say.

But since each state is independent of the fed and are legally allowed to have their own election laws the DoJ has no jurisdiction since it is there job to investigate on the federal level. As I stated in an earlier post only the USSC could rule on this law, or a district court but it would still be the USSC that would have the last word.

Originally posted by mastahunta

Originally posted by Dustytoad
You get to vote once...
Prove you voted once...

easy...

I have democrat leanings.

I do not like voter fraud.


Give me some reason why you want someone to vote without positive ID?

Tell me how many times someone you know has had their vote taken from them because
another person went to the polls and pretend to be them?

It's a fake problem, it is intended to decrease vote counts plain and simple.

It happens all the time, and local news actually covers it sometimes. This is one of the things MSM ignores because voter fraud benefits liberals, mostly because they commit way more of it than the GOP. That is not to say the GOP isn't stinking rotten corrupt nowadays anymore, either, but the democrats institutionalized it long ago.

reply to post by AwakeinNM


absolutely, a little common sense profiling goes a long way.
Keeping honest people honest the easy way.
This country could go a step further and have the same security status and airline flights
in the Voters square

Originally posted by muse7
reply to post by Nucleardiver

 

Again, where did I say such thing?

The State of Texas failed to provide proof that this law would not be discriminatory against minorities, so therefor under section 5 of the voting rights act the state department is objecting it.

It's up to Texas to provide proof that this law will not be discriminatory.

From the article

Tom Perez, wrote a a six-page letter to Texas' director of elections saying that Texas has not "sustained its burden" under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to show that the new law will not have a discriminatory effect on minority voters. About 11 percent of Hispanic voters reportedly lack state-issued identification.

That is the DoJ's position, and it is utterly ridiculous on its face. It's like asking someone to prove that a little twinkly light in the night sky ISN'T an alien spacecraft. It's impossible to prove one way or the other. The DoJ put Texas in a no-win situation.

Originally posted by AwakeinNM

Originally posted by muse7
reply to post by Nucleardiver

 

Again, where did I say such thing?

The State of Texas failed to provide proof that this law would not be discriminatory against minorities, so therefor under section 5 of the voting rights act the state department is objecting it.

It's up to Texas to provide proof that this law will not be discriminatory.

From the article

Tom Perez, wrote a a six-page letter to Texas' director of elections saying that Texas has not "sustained its burden" under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act to show that the new law will not have a discriminatory effect on minority voters. About 11 percent of Hispanic voters reportedly lack state-issued identification.

That is the DoJ's position, and it is utterly ridiculous on its face. It's like asking someone to prove that a little twinkly light in the night sky ISN'T an alien spacecraft. It's impossible to prove one way or the other. The DoJ put Texas in a no-win situation.

No

The doj is simply asking for more proof that this law will not be discriminatory, which isn't a bad things in my opinion. It's not a no-win situation for Texas. If this law will not be discriminatory then why did Texas fail to provide proof?

Originally posted by questforevidence
You need photo identification to: Obtain a Drivers license,

In Texas you just need a birth certificate or a SS Card

Originally posted by questforevidence
buy cigarettes, purchase alcohol,

In Texas it states only people under 35 are carded.

Originally posted by questforevidence check into a hotel/motel,

In Texas, you just need a credit card.

Originally posted by questforevidence rent a vehicle,

Obviously. You have to prove you are allowed to drive, so of course you need a driver's license.

Originally posted by questforevidence open a bank account

Isn't that federal law? If so, that's expected.

Originally posted by questforevidence, use a credit card for a large purchase,

Not true. I've worked in retail in Texas. It's not required, simply suggested. Some stores are notorious for not checking, while others may ask for it due to their clientele and wanting to keep up with the prestige of being a customer at X or Z. Macy's for instance won't ask for your ID and neither will Best Buy. You would think Best Buy asks for your credit card. Unless that particular Best Buy was hit due to credit card theft, they won't ask. However, sometimes randomly a Victoria's Secret or Wal Mart will ask to see your ID. It really does depend on the store.

Originally posted by questforevidence travel on an airplane,

Did you know that's not necessarily true? There are ways to bypass showing a photo id if you have other supporting documents. I only learned this recently. It should be up on the TSA website. I could tell you that shocked me, but it was informative none the less.

Originally posted by questforevidence and to be employed at any major corporation.

Lots of illegal people work at your local restaurants that are corporate owned. I know it should be part of the process, but even then people still manage to get a job at different corporations. True, they may not work as a medical assistant, but some corporations are more notorious for hiring people with sketchy backgrounds. These corporations generally tend to be in the service and food industry.

I don't see the law hurting Hispanics at all, but on the other hand I do worry that your elderly voters may not have the proper documents because if you were born prior to 1930 there is no guarantee you still have your birth certificate. My own mother who was born after 1930 no longer has her birth certificate. Elderly people are also most likely do not drive. If your driver's license is revoked due to safety concerns when you're around 70 and you need to get a photo id, what are the chances you have your social security card and birth certificate? I can see that affecting not simply Hispanics, but all elderly people regardless of race. Now is this possibility a huge epidemic? Probably not, but I don't like thinking that they're disenfranchised because a little old lady lost a piece of paper dating back to 1933.

I do know lots of Hispanic people, legal citizens, who just don't carry an ID for whatever reason, but when push comes to shove they get their if necessary. Hell, I put it off, for no real reason other than I didn't like the idea of having a government photo id, but I got one in the end. (Plus, due to the job I have, I had to have my finger prints taken and entered into a database, so any squeamish thoughts I had about a state ID were nothing compared to fingerprints in a national database.)

However, once they need one, they get the id. I can agree that we should take voter id laws seriously, but your only flaw is thinking that we are always required to show a photo id. There are so many ways around photo ids for several of the things you mentioned that you really have to question when if ever are we required to use a photo id.

Funny. I didn't know that Hispanics weren't allowed to get photo ID. Illegal aliens, be they Hispanic, Russian, British, etc. can't. Why would this be against "Hispanics"? Hmmmmmmmmm. Methinks they want the illegal aliens voting.

The only problem I have with this is: does Texas issue free state ID's? I know Minnesota doesn't so effectively this is requiring people to pay to vote if they don't already have an ID. I know people are going to say that you already need ID in America but you actually only need it for certain activities, such as drinking, gambling, etc. If Texas wants to issue free state ID's to it's residents then I'm all for this.

Originally posted by thov420
The only problem I have with this is: does Texas issue free state ID's? I know Minnesota doesn't so effectively this is requiring people to pay to vote if they don't already have an ID. I know people are going to say that you already need ID in America but you actually only need it for certain activities, such as drinking, gambling, etc. If Texas wants to issue free state ID's to it's residents then I'm all for this.

I agree with your words. asking for an id that is not delivered to your door free of charge is a tax on many including my grandmamma. the constitution prevents these things. I think it is the 24th amendment.

I love Texas but I hate rick perry and his assault on Texans that still consider us americans.

reply to post by TexasTornado


I suspect you could send her a couple of dollars for a cab or a bus. If she is so durned stubborn to not give a hoot about who votes against her, then that is her problem...and ours.