Justice Department Investigating Pa. Voter ID Law

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


It's clear from the timing of it, that it's not about preventing fraud at all... and all the states that are implementing new voter photo id laws currently have Republican governers in office.

Curious.

Originally posted by Junkheap
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

It's clear from the timing of it, that it's not about preventing fraud at all... and all the states that are implementing new voter photo id laws currently have Republican governers in office.

Curious.

edit on 10-8-2012 by Junkheap because: (no reason given)

Even more curious that the Democratic Party has been using illegal's, convicted felons and dead people to win the last few elections. Heck it has already been proven a democratic senator(Al Franklin) only won via voter fraud, thus enabling ObamaCare.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000



The amount of voter fraud that goes on is minimal.

It is certainly not enough to justify putting up a barrier for people to vote.

Again, why should someone have to jump through hoops to vote?

From the 26th amendment:

Who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of age

Requiring seniors to have to go to another agency to get the right to vote is an abridgement.


you people are so up in arms about a potential illegal immigrant, voting when they shouldn't, that you are willing to strip rights away from our vets and senior members.

reply to post by Junkheap

Well, not too curious. Politics or motivation aside, the Department of Justice has made it pretty clear they will sue. So, I imagine the only ones even willing to try are those with ideological or perceived voter blocks to gain.

I don't understand the partisanship though. I really don't How is this party or racial to have an ID? Oh well.. Another debate that never ends but it just seems like common sense. If money is an issue..make it free, and a few states have.

Personally, I'd be just as happy to do it the day after the election or make it a straight Federal law for national elections. Fair enough and everyone has the exact same thing to deal with that way.

reply to post by korathin


Do you have any basis for your venom? Or you are just spewing party lies?

The Brennan Center has analyzed purported fraud cited by state and federal courts;
multipartisan and bipartisan federal commissions; political party entities; state and local election officials;
and authors, journalists, and bloggers. Usually, only a tiny portion of the claimed illegality is substantiated
— and most of the remainder is either nothing more than speculation or has been conclusively debunked.

truthaboutfraud

reply to post by nixie_nox


Well, Nixie... You're right about the amendment, but it raises a problem, doesn't it? You have to be 18 and a citizen. Now this isn't race or ethnic based at all. A white walking up could be a Canadian, Brit or Russian until they say something..and even then, depends on how long they've lived here. If they're illegal, they can get the deport trip out of the nation as well..and absolutely not vote.

You say voter fraud is minimal, and I answer...How do we know?? When a state like Florida has started, DOJ is Johnny on the Spot to sue..and that was simply when they wanted to do basic housekeeping to cull dead people and criminals. If we don't ID anyone and we can't verify the voter rolls at all because that is all "Improper", what is the point of voting at all?? As much as that is said around around here, it takes on serious meaning when anyone really CAN vote early and often by simple not going to the same ballot box twice.

ANY fraud is TOO MUCH fraud when the solution is simple and can be (and is) done entirely free of charge in many cases and should be in all cases. It's not a poll tax. Nothing like it. It's literally verifying you really are 18yrs old and a U.S. Citizen who is eligible to vote. Common sense....

Originally posted by korathin
Even more curious that the Democratic Party has been using illegal's, convicted felons and dead people to win the last few elections. Heck it has already been proven a democratic senator(Al Franklin) only won via voter fraud, thus enabling ObamaCare.

OK.

Where is that proof?

reply to post by nunyadammm


washingtonexaminer.com...

Enjoy.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Because any official allegations of fraud are investigated. And all the reports have shown that most are unsubstantiated.

My point is, even if voter fraud numbers are higher, it does not warrant barring even one legal voter. EVER.

But I think you folks are not seeing how many people would actually be hurt from this.

Texas

[W]e conclude that the total number of registered voters who lack a driver's license or personal identification card issued by DPS could range from 603,892 to 795,955. The disparity between the percentages of Hispanics and non-Hispanics who lack these forms of identification ranges from 46.5 to 120.0 percent.

Before anyone jumps on the illegal immigrant bandwagon, they are talking about legal citizens.

Texas has no driver's license offices in almost a third of the state's counties. Meanwhile, close to 15 percent of Hispanic Texans living in counties without driver's license offices don't have ID. A little less than a quarter of driver's license offices have extended hours, which would make it tough for many working voters to find a place and time to acquire the IDs.

the atlantic

The city has just over 1 million registered voters. About 800,000 of them are considered "active."

"And about a third of them are on one of these two lists as potentially having ID problems," says
The Pennsylvania Department of State recently released two lists of the Pennsylvania residents whose state IDs have expired since last November (and thus can’t be used to verify their identity at the polls this fall), as well as a list of the active voters whose names don’t match up with the PennDOT database as currently having an ID. This second list is terribly sloppy (one database spells names like McCormack as “Mc Cormack,” and there's all kinds of chaos with hyphens and apostrophes). But nonetheless, the best official data available suggests that as many as 280,000 voters in Philadelphia may need to get an ID between now and November to have their votes counted.

theatlantic


This isn't just a handful of people,which is why the DOJ is taking this so seriously.

reply to post by Junkheap


Because most of the minorities that will be turned away tend to have liberal leanings.

reply to post by korathin


Funny, I can't find any reference to the 1000 felons other then a free right wing paper.

Well, first, lets get this out of the pie in the sky theory and down to the literal reality of what we're talking about here. Texas does not require you have just a Texas Drivers License or a Texas Non-Driver ID Card. They thought about this a little bit...and they have quite a wide selection of acceptable documents, actually.

A voter who has not been issued a driver’s license or social security number may register to vote, but such voter must submit proof of identification when presenting himself/herself for voting or with his/her mail-in ballots, if voting by mail. These voters’ names are flagged on the official voter registration list with the annotation of “ID.” The “ID” notation instructs the poll worker to request a proper form of identification from these voters when they present themselves for voting. Acceptable identification includes:

* a driver's license or personal identification card issued to the person by the Department of Public Safety or a similar document issued to the person by an agency of another state, regardless of whether the license or card has expired;

* a form of identification containing the person's photograph that establishes the person's identity;

* a birth certificate or other document confirming birth that is admissible in a court of law and establishes the person's identity;

* United States citizenship papers issued to the person;
* a United States passport issued to the person;
* official mail addressed to the person by name from a governmental entity;
* a copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name and address of the voter; or

* any other form of identification prescribed by the Secretary of State.

Texas Voting Law

Now, as it shows there, even mail that is Official and meets the guidelines can be used as ID. They've made it as easy as humanly possible and as fair as it gets without bringing the polling place right to someone.......and Mail-In can be handled if someone is sick, 65+ or out of the county for the election. SO....the argument that it's no access to a license office isn't valid, and perhaps you didn't know that. The media story sure doesn't show that part that I saw....... The media 'forgets' so much, depending on what side they report from, eh?

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Well, first, lets get this out of the pie in the sky theory and down to the literal reality of what we're talking about here.

The fact that these laws are being used to suppress votes because none of the fraud they claim to be for has been found? That reality?

Originally posted by korathin
reply to post by nunyadammm

 

washingtonexaminer.com...

Enjoy.

Cute story on a blog.
How come I cannot find this story anywhere else or even any proof of it?

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Mail is a photo ID?

reply to post by nixie_nox


"There's only a little voter fraud."

Well, as long as it's only a little bit, what's the bit deal?

/TOA

when Mickey, Minnie, Goofy, Dumbo and Snitch have to show a photo ID, then maybe we should too

i think the whole dang fiasco is formulated to make fraudulent voting less detectable.
thanks to the poster [Wrabbit2000] who linked the Tx rules ... this is just plain crazy.
photo ID is just that, not mail.

official mail = public assistance programs of which many "illegal" ppl participate.
so, how does this eliminate fraudulent voting ?

photo ID can be on a bank card, debit or credit card, (easily produced off campus) school IDs, so how does this eliminate or reduce fraudulent voting ?

illegal immigrant children in school have illegal parents who receive "official" mail from the school ... if that's acceptable ID, where are the restrictions again ??


ETA: just adding a thought here ... some gym membership cards have your photo on them. if i travel frequently and happen to use that card as ID, i wonder how many states i could legally vote in with that same card in 16 hrs or so, given time zones ??
[the membership card is from a franchise that does not indicate a location of either it's originating facility or member address)

Originally posted by nunyadammm
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

Mail is a photo ID?

Under the laws of the State of Texas and for purposes of Identification at a polling place, yes. It would seem Official mail that has the right information is accepted. This isn't that shocking. At least in this region. There are a number of things where canceled mail from Utilities or other official sources is required as part of what gets presented. I'm surprised at this being on the list for ID to vote, but obviously and to topic, Texas did do everything possible to make it as open and fair as they could.

You just can't walk up..simply say with no more than your voice, who you are...and then expect to grab a ballot and vote in a US National Election. Sounds fair to me.... It's unbelievable it's been that easy up to this point.

@Honor93

I don't want to seem to be disagreeing when I'm really not. I don't care for the idea that simple cancelled mail from the right place, to the right address and in the right name would seem to be accepted. ...it's kinda nuts, as you point out. It sure shows the crazy lengths they went to in writing it, to counter every possible challenge tho..

Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by Junkheap

 

Because most of the minorities that will be turned away tend to have liberal leanings.

I am politely calling you out on this. There are alot of minorities that are younger(due to the fact that immigration levels weren't as high when the boomers where growing up) and younger people like to drink. Some younger people like to smoke.

If they are lawful American Citizen's, people who want to do those things are going to make sure they at-least get a State ID. Even American's who are of the ethnic groups liberals can only think of them(view them as incapable of being anything other than) poor little wards of the state, they would still have to have ID's. And it is a lot harder to get fake ID"s then real ones(and a lot riskier to buy bootleg), unless of course the person is a citizen of another country that doesn't belong in the USA.

Now, if your advocating for the breaking of USA law's, in regards of allowing citizens of foreign nations to vote in USA elections, then the actions of many of those who are in the Democratic Party or affiliated with it make sense.

P.S

Just because someone is a different race, ethnicity, gender or even religion, doesn't make them permanent infants, people incapable of doing good with their lives. It just makes them different. Doesn't make them inferior/superior, just different. Some times the differences mesh, sometimes they don't, that is life.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000
your statement doesn't come across as disagreement
i agree a lot of effort went into writing that rule, however, it's kinda pointless when you consider that those who desire to subvert the system can easily achieve it.

in this sanctuary city, a rule such as that wouldn't deter any fraudulent voting whatsoever.

here's the part i really don't understand.
(maybe i'm just old but) the first time i registered to vote, a Voter ID card was forwarded and that is the only card i've ever shown to cast a vote.

from my understanding, citizens who are not registered to vote may not cast one.
(this may differ state to state)
but, if registering is required to cast a vote, why do we need additional verifications to participate ?