Texas Voter-Identification Law Is Blocked by Justice Department as Biased

[Grapesoda]

http://www.businessweek.com/news/201...ment-as-biased

what a bunch of complete dumb fucks...

The Obama administration blocked Texas (BEESTX)’s new law requiring voters to show government-issued photo identification at the polls, escalating a partisan dispute over voting restrictions.



you mean non citizen hispanics dont' ca?

the measure may disproportionately harm Hispanics.... shit, a model can suck cock with a dl, but you don't need one to vote.....

[uno]

The laws are biased and are pretty pointless. No one registers as Mickey Mouse and actually shows up to vote. How many cases of voter fraud have there been in the last 20 years?

[AsianDivaGirlsWebDude]

The Brennan Center for Justice at the NYU School of Law has published comprehensive findings in a report titled "The Truth About Fraud".

Allegations of widespread fraud by malevolent voters are easy to make, but often prove to be inflated or inaccurate. Crying ?wolf? when the claims are unsubstantiated distracts attention from real problems that need real solutions.

Moreover, these claims are frequently used to justify policies ? including restrictive photo identification rules ? that could not solve the alleged wrongs, but that could well disenfranchise legitimate voters.

The Brennan Center carefully examines allegations of fraud to get at the truth behind the claims.

Two New Reports:

An analysis of more than 250 claims of fraud in the Supreme Court's photo ID case finding not one proven case of a fraudulent vote that the challenged law could prevent exposing false assertions that photo ID is required for common activities

The Truth About Voter Fraud, examining inflated claims of voter fraud nationwide debunking claims of double voting, dead voters, and more.

ADG

[baddog]

Originally Posted by uno

The laws are biased and are pretty pointless. No one registers as Mickey Mouse and actually shows up to vote. How many cases of voter fraud have there been in the last 20 years?

There is little fraud because people have to be able to prove who they are.

What is biased about having ID? And what is pointless about it?

[baddog]

Originally Posted by AsianDivaGirlsWebDude

The Brennan Center for Justice at the NYU School of Law has published comprehensive findings in a report titled "The Truth About Fraud".



ADG

I am a Democrat and I don't care who you want to vote for, if you are not registered and can't prove who you are, then screw you, you are not smart enough to be voting in the first place.

And to those Independent tools that think they should be able to vote in the primaries, screw you too. The primaries are so WE can pick who WE want to represent US in the general election. Your opinion is not relevant or desired, IMHO.

[Qbert]

Originally Posted by baddog

What is biased about having ID?

It's biased because the law impacts one segment of voters significantly more than others. In this case Latino voters are far more likely to not have the required forms of ID.

In many voting district here in Texas there is a Latino majority, yet rich white guys still hold the most powerful political positions. The fat cats are trying to hold on to their gravy train.

Similar BS taking place here with updating Congressional Districts based on 2010 Census figures. Federal Court has stepped in. Texas Presidential Primary was supposed to be this month, still no date set while they litigate this.

[edit]These Latino voters are registered, they are citizens, they just don't have the photo ID's the law specifies nor do that have a reason to need them other than to satisfy the law.

[uno]

Originally Posted by baddog

There is little fraud because people have to be able to prove who they are.

What is biased about having ID? And what is pointless about it?

If there is little fraud, why the need for extra regulations on it?

It's biased because it disproportionately affects certain segments of the population in favor of or for a generally more favorable(to those doing the changing) demo. A lot of places, a photo isn't required at all on gov't issued id's, let alone photo, supporting documents such as a birth certificate or other. Poor people, for example, may not be able to get to a DMV or may not need to at all if they don't have a car and no need to drive.

Some places the proposed regulations for voting are tighter than for buying a gun.

Different states have been taking different steps to disenfranchise voters so YMMV.

[uno]

Originally Posted by baddog

I am a Democrat and I don't care who you want to vote for, if you are not registered and can't prove who you are, then screw you, you are not smart enough to be voting in the first place.

And to those Independent tools that think they should be able to vote in the primaries, screw you too. The primaries are so WE can pick who WE want to represent US in the general election. Your opinion is not relevant or desired, IMHO.

I agree about open primaries.

[DaddyHalbucks]

1. Do some research on ACORN. It allegedly conducted voter fraud on a massive scale.

2. Intimidation? What intimidation?!

https://youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU

[baddog]

Originally Posted by Qbert

It's biased because the law impacts one segment of voters significantly more than others. In this case Latino voters are far more likely to not have the required forms of ID.

Why would a Latino not need ID and more than a white person? Because he is an illegal?

Originally Posted by uno

If there is little fraud, why the need for extra regulations on it?

It's biased because it disproportionately affects certain segments of the population in favor of or for a generally more favorable(to those doing the changing) demo. A lot of places, a photo isn't required at all on gov't issued id's, let alone photo, supporting documents such as a birth certificate or other. Poor people, for example, may not be able to get to a DMV or may not need to at all if they don't have a car and no need to drive.

Some places the proposed regulations for voting are tighter than for buying a gun.

Different states have been taking different steps to disenfranchise voters so YMMV.

What "proposed regulations" are stricter than to get a gun? Where? What government ID does not have a photo on it?
Where in this country is it not required to have ID if you are over 18? Have a reliance for that?

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

1. Do some research on ACORN. It allegedly conducted voter fraud on a massive scale.

This is one instance that he is correct.

[tony286]

Originally Posted by DaddyHalbucks

1. Do some research on ACORN. It allegedly conducted voter fraud on a massive scale.

2. Intimidation? What intimidation?!

https://youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU

They got paid by the registration forms filled out.so a bunch were bullshit but a form saying mickey mouse doesnt mean mickey mouse voted. Also the two new black panthers thats too funny. And the voting from that polling place was the same as it was without them. Also isnt it convenient someone was there to film the actors putting on a show. So fox could show it over and over.

[tony286]

http://www.tampabay.com/news/politic...icle852295.ece

[Qbert]

Originally Posted by baddog

Why would a Latino not need ID and more than a white person? Because he is an illegal?

It doesn't matter why, the state's own data show it to be true.
"According to the state's own data, a Hispanic registered voter is at least 46.5 percent, and potentially 120 percent, more likely than a non-Hispanic registered voter to lack this identification"

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-te...aw-3401087.php

Educate yourself, maybe you won't come off quite so much like an idiot.

[Paul Markham]

Originally Posted by baddog

I am a Democrat and I don't care who you want to vote for, if you are not registered and can't prove who you are, then screw you, you are not smart enough to be voting in the first place.

Agreed.

[baddog]

Originally Posted by Qbert

It doesn't matter why, the state's own data show it to be true.

I disagree, it does matter why.

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by Qbert

It doesn't matter why, the state's own data show it to be true.
"According to the state's own data, a Hispanic registered voter is at least 46.5 percent, and potentially 120 percent, more likely than a non-Hispanic registered voter to lack this identification"

http://www.chron.com/news/houston-te...aw-3401087.php

Educate yourself, maybe you won't come off quite so much like an idiot.

sounds like some bullshit made up sound bit by some political hack, smoking pot leads to herion, porn people have hiv etc...

[brassmonkey]

obama needs the illegals in texas to vote. hell its payment for living tax free

[Just Alex]

Originally Posted by brassmonkey

obama needs the illegals in texas to vote. hell its payment for living tax free

Illegals cant vote.

[sperbonzo]

What complete crap. You need an ID to get a library book, you need one to rent a car, to open a bank account, to pick up a package at the post office!

So why isn't it "racially biased" to ask people for an ID when they borrow a book or pick up a package.


What a load of total bullshit. On that basis, EVERY SINGLE THING that involves the government and you showing an ID, should be thrown out as "racially biased". Hell, you need an ID to cash a government check! Why don't they stop that also??


What a complete political frizbee, simply designed to create "victims" when there aren't any.


Since when is having an ID a "restriction".


.

[baddog]

Originally Posted by sperbonzo

Since when is having an ID a "restriction".


.

When it imposes on non-registered voters or illegals>

[Qbert]

Originally Posted by baddog

When it imposes on non-registered voters or illegals>

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with illegals. Illegals cannot register to vote. Legal immigrants who are not citizens cannot register to vote. We're talking about US citizens, legal residents, who are registered to vote and are also Hispanic.

"According to the state's own data, a Hispanic registered voter is at least 46.5 percent, and potentially 120 percent, more likely than a non-Hispanic registered voter to lack this identification"

Originally Posted by brassmonkey

obama needs the illegals in texas to vote. hell its payment for living tax free

Texas is a red state by a sizable margin. Whether these Hispanic voters are allowed to vote or not won't change that. This has nothing to do with the Presidential election. This is about Texas politics and the good-ol-boy network.

[moeloubani]

wait so in the US you can just walk into a voting place so your name is so and so and vote?

[baddog]

Originally Posted by Qbert

This has absolutely NOTHING to do with illegals. Illegals cannot register to vote. Legal immigrants who are not citizens cannot register to vote. We're talking about US citizens, legal residents, who are registered to vote and are also Hispanic.

"According to the state's own data, a Hispanic registered voter is at least 46.5 percent, and potentially 120 percent, more likely than a non-Hispanic registered voter to lack this identification"

Why do Hispanics not have ID when everyone else does? There MUST be a reason. If it is because they can not read, then they should not be allowed to vote. So, what is the reason?

[Qbert]

Originally Posted by baddog

Why do Hispanics not have ID when everyone else does? There MUST be a reason. If it is because they can not read, then they should not be allowed to vote. So, what is the reason?

I don't know specifically why and legally it doesn't matter.

You may also want to review the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Among other things it banned literacy as a requirement to vote.

[Just Alex]

Originally Posted by moeloubani

wait so in the US you can just walk into a voting place so your name is so and so and vote?

If Vendzilla says yes, then it is.

[kane]

Here is my question:

How will this reduce voter fraud? I don't have a problem with it. It makes sense to me that people have to prove who they are to vote, but will it really cut down on fraud.

The way it works most places (as I understand) you show up at the polls, tell them your name, sign the book and vote. If someone else tries to give your name and vote they will not allow it and likely will investigate the situation.

So is the worry that they fear a group will register a bunch of illegals or fake people then send a bunch of illegals/fake voters in to vote? Is there a history of this happening in large numbers?

[baddog]

Originally Posted by Qbert

Among other things it banned literacy as a requirement to vote.

Which is how we ended up with Obama. It is time for a change. What is the point in allowing people that can not understand the issues the right to vote on them?

[Qbert]

Originally Posted by baddog

Which is how we ended up with Obama.

43 years later. RIGGGGGHHHHT. Your biases are glaring.

[Joe Obenberger]

I wonder what position the USDOJ would take in a lawsuit alleging that the ID Requirements contained in Section 2257 and the Regulations that it issues to implement them unfairly discriminate against the FIRST AMENDMENT rights of Latins and Blacks to perform in sexually explicit video?

I could have some real fun taking the allegations of their new lawsuit and shoving them down the legal throat of the DOJ as part of defending a content producer or webmaster.

For the out-of-towners asking, the usual way of voting is just like the prior poster said. You'd walk in, tell your name, they would check you off, and maybe you'd have to sign for your ballot. If an election judge/pollwatcher challenged you (the parties each get to appoint them so sit at the table and watch to keep things fair) you might be asked to prove your identity.

In the Sixties, in Wisconsin, before every election, a printed broadside listing the registered voters in each precinct would be posted on telephone poles around the precinct, the idea being that members of the public could turn in the names of the dead or moved-away to purge the lists. The community, in that way, monitored its voter list together, and in that era, someone at the polling place was sure to recognize you. Today it's much changed, with privacy concerns, and only a limited number of people, candidates for example, can get their hands on a voter print-out.

[BFT3K]

Why not just type in your name and ss # when you vote? No ID needed. Do you need ID to pay taxes, or to get audited? Use the same database if it simplifies things. This is just an idiotic political battle, that is completely unnecessary.

You should actually have the ability to just vote online, using the criteria outlined above.

Do you really think voting machines are infallible, and can't be manipulated?

The problem is, mathematically, if voting is easy, and everyone does it (legally), the GOP loses almost every time. They can't grow their base, so they try to shrink the base of their competition.

Imagine if what Americans really wanted, was what we got? How many of you would have voted for the Patriot Act, for example?

How many would have voted for Citizens United?

It's really time to take the country back... from the theives, who really don't care what party you are part of.

These issues are just smoke screens, to keep us fighting something stupid, while we get raped and robbed from the top.

Face the facts, bitches!

[raymor]

I suppose I'lll now go vote as me, then as Choker, then as PM ..

[uno]

Originally Posted by baddog

Why do Hispanics not have ID when everyone else does? There MUST be a reason. If it is because they can not read, then they should not be allowed to vote. So, what is the reason?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Literacy_test

[sperbonzo]

So again I'm going to post this: What complete crap. You need an ID to get a library book, you need one to rent a car, cash a check, rent an apartment, to open a bank account, to pick up a package at the post office even! So why isn't it "racially biased" to ask people for an ID when they borrow a book or pick up a package? On that basis, EVERY SINGLE THING that involves the government and you showing an ID, should be thrown out as "racially biased". Hell, you need an ID to cash a government check! Why don't they stop that also?? Since when is having an ID a "restriction"?


What a complete political frizbee, simply designed to create "victims" when there aren't any.


http://www.kob.com/article/stories/s2518479.shtml


.

[Vendzilla]

I remember them saying that it's because the poor don't have ID cards? How to they get their government checks then?

[sperbonzo]

Originally Posted by Vendzilla

I remember them saying that it's because the poor don't have ID cards? How to they get their government checks then?

That question doesn't fit the fake victims agenda. Stop it!


.

[jMEGA]

Originally Posted by Qbert

It's biased because the law impacts one segment of voters significantly more than others. In this case Latino voters are far more likely to not have the required forms of ID.

In many voting district here in Texas there is a Latino majority, yet rich white guys still hold the most powerful political positions. The fat cats are trying to hold on to their gravy train.

Similar BS taking place here with updating Congressional Districts based on 2010 Census figures. Federal Court has stepped in. Texas Presidential Primary was supposed to be this month, still no date set while they litigate this.

[edit]These Latino voters are registered, they are citizens, they just don't have the photo ID's the law specifies nor do that have a reason to need them other than to satisfy the law.

You need an ID to purchase cigs or beer. Is that racist too?

[Qbert]

Originally Posted by jMEGA

You need an ID to purchase cigs or beer. Is that racist too?

Your argument is flawed. The law guarantees the right to vote. There is no such guarantee for purchasing alcohol or tobacco.

[Sunny Day]

There are a lot of older white women in this country without ID. They were stay at home wives who never drove a car, (Think NY City). They got a SSN and registered to vote when all it took was your birth certificate to register.
I don't know if the Amish vote, but they have no photo ID or SSN.
Now days new parents get their baby a SSN without ID, as the parents need it for the tax deduction.
There is NO LAW anywhere in this country requiring you to had an ID. Photo IDs are required for a multitude of things such as driving, filling out an I-9 form to work or getting a library card.
There is NO National ID card. Passport is the nearest item, but not required. NO STATE has a law on the books requiring you to get ID. Supreme Court has ruled several times that you don't even have to show ID if you're just walking down the street and a cop stops you. Granted they always make up some BS claim as you were staggering drunk or other crap.
You don't even need a photo ID to get on a plane. Ain't easy, but one guy made a big to-do over it a few years ago. TSA realized people lose or get their ID stolen while on trips.
This is like the Republican crap of felons voting. Only a few states won't allow ex-felons who have finished parole to not vote.

[Failed]

Casting a vote into a broken system, I doubt I'll actually go vote. Maybe I'll go vote for Obama just to piss off the rednecks in my town and cancel one out.

Anyway, here in PA they just passed the same law and it's headed to the governor to be signed. When I cast my first vote I had my voter ID card and my driver's license out when walking up to the woman who was doing the processing. She told me that I didn't need my driver's license, just my voter ID and my jaw dropped. I'm asked to identify myself almost everywhere for everything but not to cast a vote for who will run our country...wtf! I absolutely agree with this law and can't believe it's just now becoming a law.

[BFT3K]

In this world of computer technologies, it is impossible to believe that a verifiable government database of ALL legal US citizens who have the right to vote, cannot be created, if it doesn't in fact, already exist.

Just type in your name and SS number, and vote. Even though there is currently almost ZERO voter fraud, and the system has worked EVERY year, until we get a black Democrat, the plan above is fair, and ends this once and for all.

In fact, you should be able to just vote directly online.

Only one party benefits from voter repression. This is a bullshit issue, that can be solved instantly, but the GOP would be toast if this were to happen, so instead of increasing their base, which is impossible based upon their 1% agenda, they have decided instead, to reduce the base of their competition by any means necessary, including making up a totally fake problem.

It is so fucking obvious, that to argue this matter, just shows which side of the isle you are really on.

[tony286]

Originally Posted by Sunny Day

There are a lot of older white women in this country without ID. They were stay at home wives who never drove a car, (Think NY City). They got a SSN and registered to vote when all it took was your birth certificate to register.
I don't know if the Amish vote, but they have no photo ID or SSN.
Now days new parents get their baby a SSN without ID, as the parents need it for the tax deduction.
There is NO LAW anywhere in this country requiring you to had an ID. Photo IDs are required for a multitude of things such as driving, filling out an I-9 form to work or getting a library card.
There is NO National ID card. Passport is the nearest item, but not required. NO STATE has a law on the books requiring you to get ID. Supreme Court has ruled several times that you don't even have to show ID if you're just walking down the street and a cop stops you. Granted they always make up some BS claim as you were staggering drunk or other crap.
You don't even need a photo ID to get on a plane. Ain't easy, but one guy made a big to-do over it a few years ago. TSA realized people lose or get their ID stolen while on trips.
This is like the Republican crap of felons voting. Only a few states won't allow ex-felons who have finished parole to not vote.

Yep my grandmother in NY never drove. She had no ID. Also when you go vote you have to be registered or you dont vote.

[PornoMonster]

Originally Posted by kane

Here is my question:

How will this reduce voter fraud? I don't have a problem with it. It makes sense to me that people have to prove who they are to vote, but will it really cut down on fraud.

The way it works most places (as I understand) you show up at the polls, tell them your name, sign the book and vote. If someone else tries to give your name and vote they will not allow it and likely will investigate the situation.

So is the worry that they fear a group will register a bunch of illegals or fake people then send a bunch of illegals/fake voters in to vote? Is there a history of this happening in large numbers?

YES,
ACORN.
Heck the gov still sends out millions of $$ for dead people in SS benifits.

[PornoMonster]

Originally Posted by tony286

Yep my grandmother in NY never drove. She had no ID. Also when you go vote you have to be registered or you dont vote.

Some states are giving FREE Voter ID cards. Election is over a year away.

[BFT3K]

So, just to be clear, you guys are not interested in addressing the elephant in the room, right?

[PornoMonster]

Originally Posted by BFT3K

In this world of computer technologies, it is impossible to believe that a verifiable government database of ALL legal US citizens who have the right to vote, cannot be created, if it doesn't in fact, already exist.

Just type in your name and SS number, and vote. Even though there is currently almost ZERO voter fraud, and the system has worked EVERY year, until we get a black Democrat, the plan above is fair, and ends this once and for all.

In fact, you should be able to just vote directly online.

Only one party benefits from voter repression. This is a bullshit issue, that can be solved instantly, but the GOP would be toast if this were to happen, so instead of increasing their base, which is impossible based upon their 1% agenda, they have decided instead, to reduce the base of their competition by any means necessary, including making up a totally fake problem.

It is so fucking obvious, that to argue this matter, just shows which side of the isle you are really on.

WRONG...

How does this Repress ANYONE?
Go get your FREE ID card.
If you can make it to vote, you can go get the ID Card.
If I have a List of names and ss #'s I can vote MANY TIMES
If I have a List of names and ss #'s I can vote MANY TIMES
If I have a List of names and ss #'s I can vote MANY TIMES

[BFT3K]

Originally Posted by PornoMonster

WRONG...

How does this Repress ANYONE?
Go get your FREE ID card.
If you can make it to vote, you can go get the ID Card.
If I have a List of names and ss #'s I can vote MANY TIMES
If I have a List of names and ss #'s I can vote MANY TIMES
If I have a List of names and ss #'s I can vote MANY TIMES

Read what I wrote above. If you don't understand it, then continue making shit up, and creating a false argument.

[PornoMonster]

I will go read all of your Posts. But just in case,

Explain to me how this will keep Legal people from Voting???

[BFT3K]

Originally Posted by PornoMonster

I will go read all of your Posts. But just in case,

Explain to me how this will keep Legal people from Voting???

Why would you want to restrict "Legal" voters from voting?

[PornoMonster]

Tell me what I made up? You are the one making stuff up, if you just use

"Only one party benefits from voter repression"

Tell me how ANYONE is repressed if the Voter ID card is FREE?
Oh and dont give me the crap about no car to get there to get the free card.
These people can get out to do many things include VOTE.

And your crap about a Black President is shit. Since I was a small child I remember people crying Voter fraud. Ballots not being counted, now computer screen switching and so on.

[PornoMonster]

Originally Posted by BFT3K

Why would you want to restrict "Legal" voters from voting?

You said it is repressing voters not me...

"Only one party benefits from voter repression"