More Trouble Down In Texas

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by whell

A system that used to be "Simple. No problems" has been ravaged by political corruption and an influx of individuals who do not have the right to vote but could easily register to vote. The left loves to characterize voter ID laws as "transparent attempt to suppress voting turnout". Yet those arguments fail to address legitimate concerns about securing the voting process for citizens.

Please explain the "legitimate concerns for securing the voting process for citizens" and explain what evidence supports these legitimate concerns.

What are the statistics concerning registration by individuals who do not have the right to vote?

Are those concerns more legitimate than concerns about obstructing the access to the voting process for individual who are actually citizens?

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

A system that used to be "Simple. No problems" has been ravaged by political corruption and an influx of individuals who do not have the right to vote but could easily register to vote. The left loves to characterize voter ID laws as "transparent attempt to suppress voting turnout". Yet those arguments fail to address legitimate concerns about securing the voting process for citizens.

Where are these people? Have any of them been identified or prosecuted? How many cases did the Bush Justice Department prosecute after their 5 year long investigation?

And I suppose all these state laws that are being struck down by federal courts are the victims of a vast left wing conspiracy.

As always, whell, your post is a complete pile of shit.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/wa...n/12fraud.html

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

A system that used to be "Simple. No problems" has been ravaged by political corruption and an influx of individuals who do not have the right to vote but could easily register to vote. The left loves to characterize voter ID laws as "transparent attempt to suppress voting turnout". Yet those arguments fail to address legitimate concerns about securing the voting process for citizens.

"ravaged" Oooooooo. Such melodrama!

"could easily register to vote." That's your justification? What you say they COULD do? Based on nothing but your fevered, bigoted, xenophobic right-wing imagination?

Dishonest blather to justify plot to suppress votes. Period.

[whell]

Originally Posted by d-ray657

Please explain the "legitimate concerns for securing the voting process for citizens" and explain what evidence supports these legitimate concerns.

What are the statistics concerning registration by individuals who do not have the right to vote?

Are those concerns more legitimate than concerns about obstructing the access to the voting process for individual who are actually citizens?

I'm not going to write you a research paper on the topic. But your buddies at ThinkProgress might help you out:

https://thinkprogress.org/why-you-ha...1cd#.hkmiljfto

Conversely, maybe you can cite valid statistics from reliable sources showing how such laws have obstructed "the access to the voting process for individual who are actually citizens"? As far as I know, those states include GA, IN, KS, TN, WI, MS and VA. Seems like McCauliffe got elected in VA despite folks having to show and ID.

[Boreas]

Originally Posted by whell

I'm not going to write you a research paper on the topic. But your buddies at ThinkProgress might help you out:

https://thinkprogress.org/why-you-ha...1cd#.hkmiljfto

Conversely, maybe you can cite valid statistics from reliable sources showing how such laws have obstructed "the access to the voting process for individual who are actually citizens"? As far as I know, those states include GA, IN, KS, TN, WI, MS and VA. Seems like McCauliffe got elected in VA despite folks having to show and ID.

And this applies to the issue at hand how, exactly? How does extending the franchise to non citizens for local offices damage the integrity of the vote?

As to your proof, you can look at the findings of the courts which have overturned many of these laws or, since you seem to be enamored of Think Progress:

https://thinkprogress.org/study-find...f52#.txofxc1na

or:

http://www.brennancenter.org/analysi...bad-pretty-bad

[d-ray657]

Originally Posted by whell

I'm not going to write you a research paper on the topic. But your buddies at ThinkProgress might help you out:

https://thinkprogress.org/why-you-ha...1cd#.hkmiljfto

Conversely, maybe you can cite valid statistics from reliable sources showing how such laws have obstructed "the access to the voting process for individual who are actually citizens"? As far as I know, those states include GA, IN, KS, TN, WI, MS and VA. Seems like McCauliffe got elected in VA despite folks having to show and ID.

In other words, there are not legitimate concerns.

Requiring people to obtain an ID in order to vote makes it more difficult to vote. By definition then a voter ID law is an obstruction.

[merrylander]

Because it was suggested that the Russkie hackers may also have been buggering about with voter registries I applied all over again. New voter ID card arrived in the mail today. No photo but you do have to sign it. They had the date of my original application which was the day after I was naturalized.

[whell]

Originally Posted by Boreas

And this applies to the issue at hand how, exactly? How does extending the franchise to non citizens for local offices damage the integrity of the vote?

Originally Posted by d-ray657

In other words, there are not legitimate concerns.

Requiring people to obtain an ID in order to vote makes it more difficult to vote. By definition then a voter ID law is an obstruction.

Of course there are legit concerns. The US Constitutions relative silence on suffrage qualifications has been the cause of mischief-making since the constitution was adopted. You know that, counselor. I suspect you covered the history of suffrage qualifications and rights in your educational history, so for you to state that there are no "legitimate concerns" is disingenuous.

Yes, in my opinion, there should be legitimate obstructions to voting to assure that voting is of the rights and privileges of citizenship, and those rights and privileges are protected. Otherwise, you get, for example, scenarios like this:

http://www.king5.com/news/local/inve...cord/327490798

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by whell

...Otherwise, you get, for example, scenarios like this:

http://www.king5.com/news/local/inve...cord/327490798

One guy maybe? That's the reason for heaping possibly onerous requirements on millions? Of course, he did a terror thing, so that strokes the xenophobia, which is what you're trying to use to 'put over' this policy that is actually* aimed as suppressing Democratic votes.


* Don't try to deny it. Remember that Republican guy in PA who admitted it?

[Rajoo]

From the link in from the OP.

Thus, for example, a voter who had to make multiple day long trips to a government office and make burdensome document requests to obtain an ID would not be able to vote, under Texas’ standard, unless that voter was willing to jump through all of these considerable hoops.

So the intent here is to make obtaining the ID process itself onerous, not the requirement of the ID itself, but one does lead into the other. The net effect is that this is a form of vote suppression since people without resources will simply not bother.