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

All legal citizen's have the right to vote. You also have the responsibility to register to vote, research the candidates, find out your polling place.Everyone has already stated the obvious. I can pull out a photo ID in 2 seconds.The only exception might be for elderly who are need of assisted living and do not go out. I'm sure that problem can be overcome. Everyone else, you want to vote, get a photo ID.

How exactly is requiring ID to vote suppressing anyone?

Apparently there are a number of poor, old, or minority citizens who don't have ID, and probably wouldn't find out about having to have it before the election. I'm sure there are a lot of hispanic people who don't have ID because their family or relatives take care of them so they don't need it themselves. My girlfriend's mom never got a driver's license, for example.

Click here for more information.

Originally posted by DoNotForgetMe
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

 

This thread is about the news article, more or less, but I agree there is more to the big picture.

I am assuming that you pay taxes and get bent over by Uncle Sam every April. Try owning a business and having employees.. they don't even use lube then. You wonder why they stay off the grid? I know why.

If ANYONE else doesn't have to show ID, then neither do I!!! It's only fair. If any other person HAS to show ID then there is discrimination. I still believe that a voter in any said country should be required to be a citizen of the country. Otherwise, what if a bunch of (insert desired group of non citizens gang/race/creed/sex here) voters chose the legal residents statutes and laws? Any child could see this is not right. Doesn't take a rocket scientist.

Originally posted by CB328

How exactly is requiring ID to vote suppressing anyone?

Apparently there are a number of poor, old, or minority citizens who don't have ID, and probably wouldn't find out about having to have it before the election. I'm sure there are a lot of hispanic people who don't have ID because their family or relatives take care of them so they don't need it themselves. My girlfriend's mom never got a driver's license, for example.

All you need is a state photo ID, no need for the driver's version. Race,poor and old has nothing to do with it, being convalesced will pose a problem.

reply to post by mastahunta


Instead of answering a question with a question, how about you answer the original. I'll save you the immense hassle of going back to page 1 of this thread.

How exactly is requiring ID to vote suppressing anyone?

Thanks

reply to post by mugger


I agree race and poverty do not prevent people from getting a photo id. However, the elderly would encounter more problems because it may require documents they no longer possess to get a photo id such as a birth certificate, etc.

reply to post by TexasTornado


If your grandmother can make it into town to vote than she can make it into town to get an ID. You are basically telling people that your grandmother can only find a way to leave her home one day every four years in November.

I wonder how she eats seeing how she has no way of leaving her house and arriving at a destination except when she is voting. Sorry, not trying to be rude but your argument seems a little on the unrealistic false side of the fence. I don't necessarily agree with the law either (nor do I disagree, don't live in Texas, what they do is their business) but I think you are being a bit unrealistic. Just my thoughts.

I am also a bit suspect of a new member joining to participate in one conversation but immediately posting an avatar pic and having 3 friends listed in your profile, who haven't even participated in this thread, the only thread you have posted in.

Seems a bit suspicious as the process to post an avatar is not very straightforward compared to other forums nor would it seem like the first thought of somebody who joined up and only had the concern of posting in one topic. I would guess this is a duplicate account you created to hide your real identity, not positive of your motivations but looking at your friends list, I have my guesses or should I say suspicions.

Then again I am on a conspiracy web site so maybe paranoid thoughts come quick to me. Good luck to you and your grandma though I am calling BS. By all means, carry on with whatever game you are playing...

Originally posted by MissDirtySouth
reply to post by mugger

 

I agree race and poverty do not prevent people from getting a photo id. However, the elderly would encounter more problems because it may require documents they no longer possess to get a photo id such as a birth certificate, etc.

I don't know which states require a photo ID to cast an absentee ballot. I assume you have to have a legitimate address to receive one. Perhaps there is another way of verifying legitimate identity for these folks if they feel somehow disenfranchised.

Keep in mind that voting is not compulsory. If a citizen wants to vote, then they should go through proper procedures if they do not have a photo ID - there's plenty of time to get it done. Most DMVs will issue a photo ID that is not a drivers license, so there really isn't any excuse. You can't just allow people to vote because "they wanna". You need to be a citizen and be able to prove it.

I don't need proof that our election systems are broken beyond repair and need an overhaul

I'll admit to my crime

last presidential election on purpose to test I was able to vote 3 times

and in a state election I was able to vote twice.

the system is definitely broken.

Photo ID should be REQUIRED and checked and names marked so repeaters can be checked.

the last presidential election i voted twice in 1 area then after lunch I pulled it off at another precinct.

so if you really want to stuff ballots, vote more than once. It's so easy to do it's down right scary. Most places don't even check ID and they just "glance" at the voter registration you can scan your voter registration card, and photoshop several names and revote multiple times since no photo ID is ever checked.

Originally posted by Cito
I don't need proof that our election systems are broken beyond repair and need an overhaul

I'll admit to my crime

last presidential election on purpose to test I was able to vote 3 times

and in a state election I was able to vote twice.

the system is definitely broken.

Photo ID should be REQUIRED and checked and names marked so repeaters can be checked.

the last presidential election i voted twice in 1 area then after lunch I pulled it off at another precinct.

so if you really want to stuff ballots, vote more than once. It's so easy to do it's down right scary. Most places don't even check ID and they just "glance" at the voter registration you can scan your voter registration card, and photoshop several names and revote multiple times since no photo ID is ever checked.

I don't doubt that for a minute. Here in New Mexico they haul out the gag slogan every election year: "Vote early, Vote often."

It's not really that funny because people do just that.

Wait a minute!
You do not need a photo ID to vote?

You just say i'm ******* and vote?

errrrrrrrmmm.. i believe even in Afganistan you need some photo evidence to vote

and you believe elections are not rigged...



America surprises me with it's own stupidity - once strong, smart, mighty nation turning into complete idiocracy

How is it possible that you dont need ID to vote in the US?
Where I'm from (P.R) the goverment issues an Electoral Card that
you get free of charge by showing your S.S card.
It can be used as ID where accepted but it's only for voting.

ID for alcohol or cigs? Nope, unless you look underage.
ID for cold medicine? lol no.

Priorities man!

reply to post by nolongerblind


The deception must be upheld. The people must remain distracted. It's simple, really; you give people the illusion of democracy and power and they feel content.

reply to post by AwakeinNM


Such idiocy, I mean really. For starters, this only hurts the illegal-Hispanics. And last time I checked, they were criminals who broke the countries laws by crossing it's borders without proper documentation. As I'm sure most legal Hispanics have one or another form of picture I.D.

Not sure if this is political correctness gone overboard costing us fraudulent votes or if it's meant to encourage fraudulent votes... Sickening either way, and just a sign to show you that political correctness will be the cause of Western downfall. (Amongst others)

I'm stunned by these news.
I'm really speechless. This is a rape in progress, of the US of A.

Shame on those who made this decision.

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.

If this is a law/measure that discriminates against the 'Suspect Classifications' (race, alienage), that is the typical standard of constitutional review - 'Strict Scrutiny'; the burden of proof is upon the State to show that the measure is necessary to achieve a compelling State interest. This is an extremely difficult burden to meet, and where strict scrutiny is the standard of review, State gov'ts/the Federal gov't seldom is able to demonstrate/meet that standard.

Originally posted by Nucleardiver
Something just occurred to me about this whole situation. Since when does the justice Dept have the constitutional authority to make a ruling on the constitutionality or legitimacy of a law? We have procedure in this nation that is long established and the current government is circumventing every aspect of it. It is the job of the USSC to decide the constitutionality and legitimacy of laws.

It would appear that the Obama Gang has absolutely zero respect for our rule of law. Every one of the crooked tyrannical SOB's should be thrown out on their asses and imprisoned for treason and conspiracy to destroy our constitution.

We are all doomed if we do not put a stop to this.

Well, if the measure in question originates from one of the States that is required to received Federal approval under s.5 of the Voting Rights Act, then presumably the DoJ can enjoin/injunct/temporarily halt enforcement of the law while the matter is litigated in court.

Just looked it up. Under the 1965 legislation, the Department of Justice or a three-judge panel of a Federal District Court in the relevant jurisdiction, whereby either of those two actors 'pre-clear' the measure (or in the case of the three-judge panel, issue a declaratory judgment) in question.

According to the wikipedia article (I always feel so stupid when I say this but I unfortunately no longer have my subscription to Lexis Nexis or Westlaw, both of which are quite comprehensive legal research/citation sources), the US Supreme Court has given a very broad reading/construction to the relevant provision of the 1965 Act, so that the DoJ has a fairly wide ambit to throw a spanner in the works of anything States do with regards to Voting that DoJ doesn't approve of.

Do they not maintain lists of registered voters? I for instance have a Driver's license but am not yet a US citizen. I don't see how merely showing a driver's license would actually prevent me from voting if this was the only check that was in place. If that is[/i[ the only check in place to ensure that I was actually a naturalized citizen, then the people in charge must be crazy or high - not really much in the way of an effort to dissuade or discourage non-citizens voting.