Supreme Court allows Wisconsin Voter I.D. law to stand

The U.S. Supreme Court has effectively "allowed" the Wisconsin Voter I.D. law to stand.

The Court decided *NOT* to hear arguments and therefore, the Wisconsin law stands as Constitutional.

The request to hear stemmed from a lower court ruling by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that said the law was in fact Constitutional.

The floodgates are opening

And for anyone who "has it backwards", voter I.D. does not mean you need a specific "special" voter i.d. to vote (some people actually think that way).

Supreme Court allows Wisconsin Voter I.D. law to stand

The Supreme Court today refused to accept for review a case challenging the Wisconsin Voter I.D. law.

In early October, 2014, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the Voter I.D. law, as we reported at the time:

The 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Wisconsin’s new voter ID laws are constitutional, meaning that those heading to the polls in November will need to show ID before casting a vote….

Last month, the same panel of the 7th Circuit issued a short Order vacating the district court injunction staying enforcement of the law, and instead held that the voter ID laws would indeed be in effect for this November’s election. The court indicated that a full decision on the merits would be forthcoming.

Progressive activists in Wisconsin and across the country had a meltdown following the ruling

And they are not taking it well this time, either,

2nd article
US Supreme Court upholds Wisconsin voter ID reform

Good on them then. I'm all for proving your identity to vote, it's kind of a no-brainer to me. And for the record, I've yet to meet any liberal or progressive who actually thinks voting should be a wild west thing. It makes me wonder who the talking heads calling themselves progressives really are.

a reply to: xuenchen

Another feather in Walker's cap.

I would prefer a free market open society that encourages immigration but, until we get rid of the welfare state we can't even think about open borders and unverified ballots.

originally posted by: greencmp
I would prefer a free market open society that encourages immigration but, until we get rid of the welfare state we can't even think about open borders and unverified ballots.

Humans have a long, long way to go before the unscrupulous nature of cheaters is abated in politics. If folks think voter fraud is bad now, unverified ballots is going to be a schemer's cakewalk.

It's a nice notion for some far-off future, but right now, proving your identity when voting is the closest thing to fair we have.

Well finally the Democrats are stopped cold in their "cheating tracks"!
Bob Dornan Robbed of Seat 1996
It all started with this travesty of election fraud by Bill Clinton funded Mexican living in Orange County to indoctrinate illegals into voting as a strategy to screw Americans.

originally posted by: Nyiah
Good on them then. I'm all for proving your identity to vote, it's kind of a no-brainer to me. And for the record, I've yet to meet any liberal or progressive who actually thinks voting should be a wild west thing. It makes me wonder who the talking heads calling themselves progressives really are.

I don't have a problem with voter ID laws in theory but I have concerns about implementation.

About 18% of Americans 65 and older (6 million voters) do not have a valid government issued photo ID. This includes people like my grandmother who didn't drive for the last 40 years of her life. In fact, overall about 11% of eligible voters (21 million people) lack the government issued photo ID required by the most stringent voter ID laws.

Obtaining required identification shouldn't be overly burdensome. From The Challenge of Obtaining Voter Identification (PDF), a 2012 research paper from the Brennan Center for Justice (NYU School of Law):

Unfortunately, these free IDs are not equally accessible to all voters. This report is the first comprehensive assessment of the difficulties that eligible voters face in obtaining free photo ID. The 11 percent of eligible voters who lack the required photo ID must travel to a designated government office to obtain one.

Yet many citizens will have trouble making this trip. In the 10 states with restrictive voter ID laws:

• Nearly 500,000 eligible voters do not have access to a vehicle and live more than 10 miles from the nearest state ID-issuing office open more than two days a week. Many of them live in rural areas with dwindling public transportation options.

• More than 10 million eligible voters live more than 10 miles from their nearest state ID-issuing office open more than two days a week.

• 1.2 million eligible black voters and 500,000 eligible Hispanic voters live more than 10 miles from their nearest ID-issuing office open more than two days a week. People of color are more likely to be disenfranchised by these laws since they are less likely to have photo ID than the general population.

• Many ID-issuing offices maintain limited business hours. For example, the office in Sauk City, Wisconsin is open only on the fifth Wednesday of any month. But only four months in 2012 — February, May, August, and October — have five Wednesdays. In other states — Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas — many part-time ID-issuing offices are in the rural regions with the highest concentrations of people of color and people in poverty.

More than 1 million eligible voters in these states fall below the federal poverty line and live more than 10 miles from their nearest ID-issuing office open more than two days a week. These voters may be particularly affected by the significant costs of the documentation required to obtain a photo ID. Birth certificates can cost between $8 and $25. Marriage licenses, required for married women whose birth certificates include a maiden name, can cost between $8 and $20. By comparis

What needs to be considered is how big of a problem is voter fraud — that is in person, intentionally fraudulent activity — and how does it compare to the number of eligible voters who are effectively disenfranchised by voter ID laws?

My honest opinion is that in many instances, voter ID laws aren't passed to prevent fraud but rather to discourage voting by specific groups of eligible voters that traditionally don't vote for conservatives. Where these laws existed, every effort should be made to facilitate legitimate voting.

originally posted by: xuenchen

And they are not taking it well this time, either,

Well, unfortunately, since we know the liberals on that court are....well....liberals and we know (individual mandate) Roberts seems to be suspiciously cooperative with liberalism and Alito was installed by the same corrupt president who installed Roberts, I wouldn't trust any of these people any farther than I could throw a cinder block.

I have never understood how this has become a partisan issues. It is just common sense that a person should identify themselves (the same way you would for banking) before doing something as important as voting in an election. The only reason that someone would be opposed to this law is if they planned to cheat.

a reply to: Metallicus

The link in my post explains that Bill Clinton started the whole travesty.

originally posted by: theantediluvian

originally posted by: Nyiah
Good on them then. I'm all for proving your identity to vote, it's kind of a no-brainer to me. And for the record, I've yet to meet any liberal or progressive who actually thinks voting should be a wild west thing. It makes me wonder who the talking heads calling themselves progressives really are.

I don't have a problem with voter ID laws in theory but I have concerns about implementation.

About 18% of Americans 65 and older (6 million voters) do not have a valid government issued photo ID. This includes people like my grandmother who didn't drive for the last 40 years of her life. In fact, overall about 11% of eligible voters (21 million people) lack the government issued photo ID required by the most stringent voter ID laws.

Obtaining required identification shouldn't be overly burdensome. From The Challenge of Obtaining Voter Identification (PDF), a 2012 research paper from the Brennan Center for Justice (NYU School of Law):

Unfortunately, these free IDs are not equally accessible to all voters. This report is the first comprehensive assessment of the difficulties that eligible voters face in obtaining free photo ID. The 11 percent of eligible voters who lack the required photo ID must travel to a designated government office to obtain one.

Yet many citizens will have trouble making this trip. In the 10 states with restrictive voter ID laws:

• Nearly 500,000 eligible voters do not have access to a vehicle and live more than 10 miles from the nearest state ID-issuing office open more than two days a week. Many of them live in rural areas with dwindling public transportation options.

• More than 10 million eligible voters live more than 10 miles from their nearest state ID-issuing office open more than two days a week.

• 1.2 million eligible black voters and 500,000 eligible Hispanic voters live more than 10 miles from their nearest ID-issuing office open more than two days a week. People of color are more likely to be disenfranchised by these laws since they are less likely to have photo ID than the general population.

• Many ID-issuing offices maintain limited business hours. For example, the office in Sauk City, Wisconsin is open only on the fifth Wednesday of any month. But only four months in 2012 — February, May, August, and October — have five Wednesdays. In other states — Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas — many part-time ID-issuing offices are in the rural regions with the highest concentrations of people of color and people in poverty.

More than 1 million eligible voters in these states fall below the federal poverty line and live more than 10 miles from their nearest ID-issuing office open more than two days a week. These voters may be particularly affected by the significant costs of the documentation required to obtain a photo ID. Birth certificates can cost between $8 and $25. Marriage licenses, required for married women whose birth certificates include a maiden name, can cost between $8 and $20. By comparis

What needs to be considered is how big of a problem is voter fraud — that is in person, intentionally fraudulent activity — and how does it compare to the number of eligible voters who are effectively disenfranchised by voter ID laws?

My honest opinion is that in many instances, voter ID laws aren't passed to prevent fraud but rather to discourage voting by specific groups of eligible voters that traditionally don't vote for conservatives. Where these laws existed, every effort should be made to facilitate legitimate voting.

No adult in the US should be without an ID

How does she bank without an ID?

How does she cash checks? My bank, the tellers know me yet I have to show an ID to withdraw or cash checks.

How does she write a check at the grocery store?

How does she use a credit card?

If Grandma doesn't have a valid ID, and you know it, why aren't you taking her to get one?

It is nearly impossible to function in the US today without a valid photo ID.

Not just to vote, but to shop, to use the bank, etc.

Your family has done Grandma a disservice by not ensuring she gets a picture ID.

a reply to: theantediluvian

www.abovetopsecret.com...

If the rights that were lied about include voting then this might be relevant as to how much of a problem voter fraud might be.

Some elections are won by a margin of only a couple thousand votes.

Btw-Aren't some states just GIVING illegals drivers licenses?

The "I don't have an I.D." meme is silly.

People need to prove themselves to get any welfare, medicaid, medicare, social security, insurance, etc. etc.

Maybe even a voter registration card to begin with.

Bank accounts.

But it's possible there are hermits living in secluded areas.

I bet plenty of social groups offer rides to and from government installations.

And I bet some groups even help pay for birth certificates and whatnot.

originally posted by: Metallicus
I have never understood how this has become a partisan issues. It is just common sense that a person should identify themselves (the same way you would for banking) before doing something as important as voting in an election. The only reason that someone would be opposed to this law is if they planned to cheat.

Well, I agree. However, the little matter of timing is.........interesting.

a reply to: grandmakdw

It's ironic that in other threads you're going on about 1984 and how we're sliding into a dystopian Orwellian hell thanks to progressives but as soon as it's convenient for your argument, you go right to:

No adult in the US should be without an ID

How does she bank without an ID?

Does it say in the US Constitution that all citizens must have a photo ID and a bank account? I must have missed that part.

It is nearly impossible to function in the US today without a valid photo ID.

Not just to vote, but to shop, to use the bank, etc.

Your family has done Grandma a disservice by not ensuring she gets a picture ID.

My grandmother is deceased but don't let that stop you from going on your bizarre sanctimonious rant. You may not be aware of this, but there are forms of ID that aren't driver's licenses. While most banks do require a photo ID, there are some who don't and others who do now but haven't always. There are also types of photo IDs that aren't driver's licenses. There are also people who don't have bank accounts. There are even people who *gasp* pay for things with cash.

Now if all the states would follow, this would be good. But I believe the recent illegal immigrants, also were given social security numbers and ID's and there are online reports that they're being given jobs in the police force in California, so not sure this measure is enough.

a reply to: theantediluvian

I may feel we are entering 1984.

However, the reality is that no adult can fully function within our current society without an ID.
It doesn't matter my feelings on the creeping totalitarianism, that is the way it is.

One even needs an ID to shop, to cash checks, to retrieve cash from the bank. Unless one is operating in the underground economy entirely, there is no way to function adequately in our society without an ID.

To allow a family member to not have an ID just because they are elderly is to limit their ability to function in our society and is doing a great injustice to the person.

I could not purchase my home without an ID, and every time I have rented (which has been most of my life) I have had to show an ID to even rent a place to live.

This has nothing to do with how I feel about 1984, it has to do with the realities of the current society and what it takes to live in our society.

If one is on welfare, one can not cash their welfare check without an ID, or if it is direct deposited, one can not get the money out of the bank without an ID .

The total reality is that to live (other than within a criminal or underground subculture) in our society as an adult, one needs an ID.

My mother, who is quite elderly has to show her ID to get health care under medicare, I know because I have taken her to the ER more than once and they wanted an ID. Her physician has a copy of her ID on file to get reimbursed from medicare.

The person I responded to about Grandma, said their Grandmother did not have an ID, I was saying that it is totally irresponsible of her family not to insure she has an ID. I'm sorry if you were referring to your grandmother in the past tense, sorry she passed.

I may hate the creeping totalitarianism that is upon us and growing slowly into every segment of our lives, doesn't mean I don't know what it takes to survive in our society, and what everyone needs to function adequately in our society as an adult,
a picture ID

a reply to: xuenchen

It's about time there is an official court that recognizes that proving you're an American citizen--a pre-requisite to voting per the constitution--is not unconstitutional.

I would caveat that comment with this: At least one official form of ID accepted by the state needs to be free of cost (of course, that just means taxpayer-funded) for individuals, otherwise this coult pretty easily be argued as being tantamount to a poll tax (so to speak).

originally posted by: theantediluvian
About 18% of Americans 65 and older (6 million voters) do not have a valid government issued photo ID. This includes people like my grandmother who didn't drive for the last 40 years of her life. In fact, overall about 11% of eligible voters (21 million people) lack the government issued photo ID required by the most stringent voter ID laws.

This is an argument that doesn't work. She's your grandmother...go visit her (or another family member) and take her where she needs to go in order for her to obtain an ID. It's not hard to do. Hell, I volunteer to take my 74-year-old neighbor to the polling location and to help him in any way I can in daily life (he lives alone and doesn't have family nearby). If I do that for a neighbor, where are the family members of people who "can't" obtain an ID?

Also, these are not 6 million voters, they are six million potential voters.

Obtaining required identification shouldn't be overly burdensome.

I quite agree, but I don't think that any of the things listed in your link count--in my mind, anyhow--as "overly burdensom." Sometimes living in society and participating come with burdens. I can only vote on one day of the year here in KY. If you believe everything you read, to some people, that's "overly burdensome." I disagree with that, as well. If you can't make it in, then I guess that sucks and your life is too busy or you failed to properly prepare.

What needs to be considered is how big of a problem is voter fraud — that is in person, intentionally fraudulent activity — and how does it compare to the number of eligible voters who are effectively disenfranchised by voter ID laws?

My honest opinion is that in many instances, voter ID laws aren't passed to prevent fraud but rather to discourage voting by specific groups of eligible voters that traditionally don't vote for conservatives. Where these laws existed, every effort should be made to facilitate legitimate voting.

Well, we're all entitled to our own opinions. You can argue that voter ID laws (although a specified pre-requisite to voting prescribed in the Constitution...being a citizen) are some sort of evil conspiracy, and others will argue that the furvor with which some people protest against them is a conspiracy to keep inelligible people voting at the polls. You're going to get that argument from both sides.

And then there are what I consider to be the rational people--if voting is a constitutional right afforded to citizens only, then the voter should have to prove that they meet that requirement. It's about the intergrity of the system, not some unprovable ratio of fraud-to-disenfranchisement.

The solution to voter-ID-related "disenfranchisement" is to start helping out your neighbors and volunteering you time. We don't need to keep the system set to the lowest security setting just because there are some people who can't get in to get an ID on their own.

Until the 2011 & 2012 elections I didn't care about voter ID laws. What I saw during those two elections changed my mind. My Mother voted in both of those elections and she passed away in 2010.

My Mother lived with me until she died in Aug. of 2010. We went to the same polling station for voting. Where I live when you vote, you go to the polls and they look up your name in their ledger. When they find your name, you sign on a line right next to a copy of your signature. They hand you a fob that you place in a slot on the voting machine and then you vote. When you return the fob they color over your name with a yellow hi-lighter.

The ledgers are in alphabetical order, which means that my Mother's signature area is three names down from mine. When I went to sign my name, I noticed that her's was already signed and hi-lighted. I mentioned it to one of the poll workers and I was told that it must have been a mistake. I looked at her signature area and there was a scrawl that I couldn't make out. I voted and left without saying anything else.

When I went to vote in 2012, again her name was hi-lighted and somebody had tried to match her signature. When I called it to the poll worker's attention, I was told again that it must have been a mistake. This time I asked that if it was a mistake, why was her name signed in the space? I was threatened with arrest if I didn't leave immediately. I sent a letter to the County's Office of Elections asking WTF? I never got an answer, but in the 2013 election her name wasn't in the ledger.

originally posted by: SlapMonkey

It's about time there is an official court that recognizes that proving you're an American citizen--a pre-requisite to voting per the constitution--is not unconstitutional.

I would caveat that comment with this: At least one official form of ID accepted by the state needs to be free of cost (of course, that just means taxpayer-funded) for individuals, otherwise this coult pretty easily be argued as being tantamount to a poll tax (so to speak).

FREE Wisconsin ID cards for voting

If you are a U.S. citizen, will be at least 18 years of age by the next election, and would like a Wisconsin ID card to vote, please check the ID for FREE box when completing the MV3004 (Wisconsin Identification Card (ID) application) or when applying online.

A Document Verification Petition Process is available if fees arise in order to obtain a free ID card for voting. This petition process is available if any of the following applies:

Applicant is unable to provide documents for proof of name and date of birth as required by Wis. Admin. Code § Trans 102.15(3)(a) but which require a fee to a government agency to obtain. This includes documentation needed for proof of legal name change.
Applicant is unable to provide documents for proof of United States citizenship as required by Wis. Admin. Code § Trans 102.15(3m) but which require a fee to a government agency to obtain.


A free ID card is NOT available under the following circumstances:

If you currently have a valid, unexpired driver license (DL), you are not eligible under Wisconsin law to obtain an ID.
If you will not be at least 18 years of age on the date of the next election.
If you are not eligible to vote in Wisconsin.

DMV does not have information regarding voter eligibility, poll locations, voter registration information or other election information. Please contact your local election officials or county clerk for election information. The Government Accountability Board is another useful source of information.

Obtaining an identification (ID) card