Is it really about preventing voting fraud or is it about preventing as much people as possible from

voting?

Looks like the Supreme Court ruling unleashed a GOP feeding frenzy that will ultimately bring us Jim Crow 2.0

Can someone please tell me what these things do to prevent voting fraud?

Those things are included the recent North Carolina bill that is waiting to be signed by the Governor.

Require voter ID at polling places.

Reduce the early voting period from 17 days to 10 days.

Prohibit counties from extending poll hours by one hour on Election Day even in extraordinary circumstances, such as in response to long lines. (Those in line at closing time would still be allowed to vote.)

Eliminate pre-registration for 16- and 17-year-olds, who currently can register to vote before they turn 18.
Outlaw paid voter registration drives.

Eliminate straight-ticket voting.

Eliminate provisional voting if someone shows up at the wrong precinct.

Allow any registered voter of a county to challenge the eligibility of a voter rather than just a voter of the precinct in which the suspect voter is registered.

In the month since the Supreme Court struck down the pre-clearance formula of the Voting Rights Act, Texas, Florida and North Carolina are working on rules designed to make it harder to vote. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who wrote the dissent in Shelby County v. Holder, is not surprised. "I didn't want to be right, but sadly I am," she told the Associated Press' Mark Sherman.

LINK

Changes like the ones proposed in North Carolina are NOT about preventing voting fraud by simply having to show an ID. It's about making it more difficult to vote, it's about the disenfranchisement of young people and minorities.

I think the GOP sees the writing on the wall, At the national level, basic demographics spell the end of their party. What they are trying to accomplish with these laws is what Saddam Hussein tried to do when he set the oil wells on fire...they are just trying to make a big mess while they can.

There is no legitimate justification, none, for what NC Republicans are now trying to do to silence the ("wrong") voters of their state. It's the most blatant, bold, and complete effort at voter suppression seen in any state since the end of the Jim Crow Era. (An Era ended, by the way, by the very same Voting Rights Act the U.S. Supreme Court just decided to gut.)

Link

Jim Crow 2.0 a lil much? All this does is make you have your voter registration card and your ID on you when you go and vote for the most, oh, and show up on time. You can still do early voting but the time is shrunken down a lil, big deal. If you do early voting, when you get your ballot fill it out and send it back in the next day. Its not like its hard to fill in the little circles. I also like the restriction of paid voter registration drives as they are partisan at best instead of just informing people that they really should vote their conscience.

Also, Im tired of people saying that having to bring and ID to vote is restricting their right to vote. Are you serious? All you have to do is whip out your drivers license or state ID card if you cant have a DL. That is all. How does that restrict your right to vote as opposed to restricting voter fraud?

My question will always be: Why is it OK for our gov to give away millions of dollars to foreign countries to increase voter ID, but racist here at home? What is the answer?

1) Use the money we would have given away to buy ID cards in the states?
2) Admit that our gov carries out racist programs over seas?
3) admit that an ID card requirement is in no way racist?

Personally I think Iraq had the right voting system.

Each individual must be present to vote
When casting a ballot, blue ink is used on the right thumb, to "seal the ballot
(this ink remains on the skin for several days)
Less chance of fraud in their system

If people want to vote they should get to the voting site on time. It's not like voting is conducted for one day from 3-4 PM. They have a week if not more to get their vote in and the sites are open extended hours as is.

Why would you pre-register underage voters to begin with? Are 16-17 year olds able to pre-register for selective service? (I had to wait until I was 18 not really sure if that has changed)

Mail in ballots have always been and always will be an abused system. This is where the majority of dead voters cast their ballots I would assume.

But all that aside, can you explain to me how any law that is being changed will effect minorities more than whites?

I'm a registered voter and I always carry my drivers license with me. It's called ID and if you get pulled over or stopped on the street and do not have ID, they can make things difficult for you.

I have never figured out why this is a big deal. Everyone needs to have ID, for their own protection from hassle if nothing else. What if you get hit by a truck and are unconscious...might be a good idea to have ID on your person so they know who you are and have a chance to locate next of kin.

You register to vote when you get your license/ID. They WILL mail you a voter ID card.

We are getting our panties in a wad over a non issue that effects a much smaller percentage of people than the MSM is reporting.

My question is this...why don't you have ID? How do you cash checks or get a job without ID? How do you drive a car without ID?

It's all bunk...if you don't have ID, there is a very large chance you ARE NOT contributing to society in any way, shape or form...as I said, you can't cash a check, in most cases you can't get a job...so...maybe your voice is best kept to yourself in those cases...

reply to post by muse7


People who say the two parties are the same ignore this one fact: Which party doesn't want more people to vote. Then ask why. Anyone who brings up photo IDs is full of crap and they know it. This kind of voter fraud is almost nonexistent. If you want to stop voter fraud (which of course they don't care about except to prevent votes) why not go paper, every state and voting lasts for a 3 day weekend every voting period. Plenty of time to check registration.

But here is what they cry about: Dead people voting!
The rest of us worry about minimal voting machines in highly populated areas when the rich have plenty of voting opportunities. But instead what the RIGHT scream about is as usual a LIE!

www.politicususa.com...

reply to post by muse7

Jim Crow was a racist system designed to quash the black vote. None of this looks targeted toward African Americans, and it's a stretch to say any of it would have even an incidental disproportionate impact. Unless you think African Americans are too stupid/irresponsible/lazy to comply with a few simple voting laws. Laws like, "Prove you are who you say you are," "Vote where you're supposed to vote," and "Vote on time."

I watched a double vote or misidentified voter during my first (or second) election. Guy came in to vote, and when he went to sign his name in the book it had already been signed. He said it was a mistake and got to fill out a provisional ballot. Was he double-voting? Was somebody else? Did an earlier voter sign the wrong block without the official noticing? It was obvious to me then that the system was poorly-designed and mismanaged. Checking an ID against the register might have caught the error, if there had been an error, or exposed the fraudulent vote, if that was what happened. When I went back for a later election, I had been (illegally, I believe) removed from the voter roles, so it was my turn to cast a provisional ballot. That's voter suppression. Asking for a government-issued ID is not.

Originally posted by 200Plus
Why would you pre-register underage voters to begin with? Are 16-17 year olds able to pre-register for selective service? (I had to wait until I was 18 not really sure if that has changed)

If someone turns 18 the day of the election, they are legally entitled to vote in that election. I assume they would need to register prior to the election in order for the registration to be processed. No idea why a 16-year-old would need to pre-register, though. Maybe it's a convenience thing at the DMV?

dupe

Strange how it used to be disenfranchisement because apparently only middle aged wealthy white people are able to get a legal state ID and walk into their polling station at the scheduled time on the scheduled date.

That was insulting to anyone who wasn't a middle aged wealthy white person so they now say it's just .... "keeping the vote low".

How about voters must be legally qualified to vote, registered to vote and have proper ID?

This means they must vote in the proper place, at the proper time, be of the proper age, have a pulse and only vote once.

One legally qualified voter, one vote.

Evil huh?

I think this is wonderful and it's about time they implement something like this! This will do two things, it will quell the people crying about voter fraud, and it will make sure that the people casting their votes are who they say they are.

The arguments against this are extremely weak and pathetic. If you want to work in this country you have to have a form of ID. If you want to drive in this country you have to have a form of ID. If you want to come here illegally and suck off the system, guess what, you still have to have some form of ID. If you want government assistance, drum roll..... YOU HAVE TO HAVE ID in one form or another!

Who did I leave out that would be voting? I guess that covers about everyone except maybe the homeless, and even most of them have ID.

Only problem I can see with this is the provisional voting function being eliminated - I do think if their is a problem at the polls such as a missed change of address or other legitimate issue that can be cleared with further information then that particular vote can be approved or denied based on provision further data.

The rest is fine by me as it ensures voter identity and other eligibility criteria which ensure election integrity on the front end.

I heartily agree that purple ink should be used then there is little question of multiple votes being cast in multiple precincts.

Currently as I read it, states without voter ID had higher rates of voter fraud versus states that have ID laws.

Its not suppression at all, its ensuring integrity.

If one can't get to the polls in ten days then I think they have other interests and concerns besides exercising voting rights that they deem more important - so be it.

Require voter ID at polling places.

I have never understood why this isn't already a requirement at every polling place.

No one is forced to vote or have an ID, but if you choose to vote simply identify that you are the person you say you are to avoid fraud or even someone else voting as you.

Any sane person would understand this requirement.

# # #

ETA: I just noticed this is a MUSE post so now I understand that this was never meant as an attempt to have rational discourse, but to simply put forth their partisan political spin.

Does any intelligent person still think it matters if you vote Democrat or Republican? TPTB treat us like children by giving us two handpicked choices and pretending they are different.

Egads!

How rude asking for ID to vote and how hypocritical from the crowd that gave us our 'Nazi national ID' number.

The SS number.



People need to give it a rest if you think voting is so important prove who you are and vote, they aren't telling people who to vote for.

reply to post by muse7


I think the real question for this Muse is what's the next move for the GOP and conservative groups when even this doesn't make a difference to their chances in winning? What other restrictions would they think of? That's what I'm wondering.

reply to post by muse7

Looks like the Supreme Court ruling unleashed a GOP feeding frenzy that will ultimately bring us Jim Crow 2.0

Why didn't you list the actual Jim Crow laws and compare them to the new regulations being proposed? Because that would ruin your argument and your entire premise of your thread that's why.

Can someone please tell me what these things do to prevent voting fraud?

Can you tell me how these things only target minorities? Again didn't think so.

It's about making it more difficult to vote, it's about the disenfranchisement of young people and minorities.

Since neither of your "links" make that case (one of which is a BLOG and not a news source), you need to do that and which ages are "young people", which minorities, provable stats to qualify this statement.

Where did the thread title come from, it wasn't in either link. Since you made it up, it is deceiving since you aren't really asking a legitimate question since you are already bias against the issue.

Typical

Having looked at the last election, and the issue at hand the following can be stated:

There have been cases of voter fraud. While it may not be as wide spread as it is claimed, though the numbers are still being debated on, the fact that it does exist, does give credence to the claims of such. Especially when people are voting who should not vote. And as part as a means to prevent fraud, it is suggested that a person who does vote, or intends to vote, present an ID to cast a ballot.

Yet there are those who would claim that such is a form of discrimination, racist and ultimately will disenfranchise minorities from being able to vote.

Now here is what I get confused on, when you apply simple common sense to the matter.

To drive you have to have an ID, more specifically a DL that has a picture, a persons name and address.
To cash a check, if it is not at your bank, it is normal to ask and provide an ID.
To get a job, one would have to have an ID as part of the verification system that a person is a US citizen or is authorized to be in the US.
To purchase age controlled substances, namely alcohol and tobacco, most places ask for an ID to a certain point.
To purchase or pick up some medications, an ID has to be presented.

So if it is a form of discrimination to ask for ID to show you have the right to vote, and are on the roles, why are all of the other activities that would require an ID not be considered discrimination?

I have to show a legal photo ID to buy Sudafed over the counter.

I don't think it is asking too much to show one to vote.
ETA:
People opposed to voter ID laws always say that voting fraud is next to nonexistent.

I think that the number of people without photo ID are next to nonexistent. If you think that I am wrong, show me some numbers!

i have to agree with 200Plus

if you want to stop voter fraud the best things to do is

a) get rid of "voting machines" they can be tampered with. paper is far superior, it can be counted and recounted as filled out, with a "voting machine" if it has been tampered with how can you "recheck" the ballots? with paper you can just count them again. you can always use one of those "fill in the dot" systems and use a reader to count, but at the same time you can always recount and verify by eye.

b) ink people's fingers with something that stays for a couple days, keeps people from casting multiple votes as seems to have happened the last election. so even if someone has several "fake id's" they will still only get to VOTE ONCE.

c) have proper PICTURE id in order to vote, that can be matched to a voter registration list. yes errors can occur, in that case have a separate box that can be used and the person verified as an eligible LIVE voter in the area, when votes are counted, before adding their vote in.

d) have a way to VERIFY that voter id is AUTHENTIC to prevent anyone from using a fake id to vote when they are ineligible. anyone caught using a fake id arrested on the spot, and held until their trial, (which should be done quickly, perhaps even that day, so that if in the end it turns out that person WAS eligible to vote, they would be able to)..

e) ABSOLUTELY [I]NO[/I] "RESULT COVERAGE" AT ALL WHILE VOTING IS STILL IN PROGRESS ANYWHERE IN THE COUNTRY. no "early returns" coverage or anything at all, until ALL votes are in. i know a few people who base their vote on who is "doing better" at the time. in fact they should not release ANY results until AT LEAST THE NEXT DAY. this would give time for any recounts found may be needed. and no results should be publicly released until all parties are satisfied that vote counts are correct and any recounts felt needed are complete.

f) ALLOW ex-CONVICTS to vote. if they have served their time then they have PAID for their crime and should not be held back from being eligible to vote, who knows they might have reformed. in a lot of ways i think even INMATES should be allowed to vote as long as they are eligible otherwise.

It's because in the last two elections North Carolina is going blue.

To prevent a democratic majority from showing up and voting they are enacting ways to slow down if not outright stop those people from voting.

Originally posted by cenpuppie
It's because in the last two elections North Carolina is going blue.

To prevent a democratic majority from showing up and voting they are enacting ways to slow down if not outright stop those people from voting.

So,

You're saying ONLY Democrat voters would have a problem ?

Are Democrat voters the only ones who have a deficiency ?

If 'they' are a majority, then what's the problem ?

Now I get it.