Frontline: "Unprecedented" Number of Restrictive Voting Laws Being Introduced
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 01:34:43 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  U.S. General Discussion (Moderators: The Dowager Mod, Chancellor Tanterterg)
  Frontline: "Unprecedented" Number of Restrictive Voting Laws Being Introduced
« previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Frontline: "Unprecedented" Number of Restrictive Voting Laws Being Introduced  (Read 2349 times)
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,386
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: May 31, 2012, 06:35:35 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/government-elections-politics/unprecedented-number-of-restrictive-voting-laws-being-introduced/
Logged
HagridOfTheDeep
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,717
Canada


Political Matrix
E: -6.19, S: -4.35

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: May 31, 2012, 07:06:11 PM »

Heaven forbid someone has to show proof of citizenship to vote.
Logged
NVGonzalez
antwnzrr
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,687
Mexico


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: May 31, 2012, 09:34:55 PM »

Heaven forbid someone has to show proof of citizenship to vote.

So let's purge people because their name seems somewhat foreign. Right?

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/05/29/491430/meet-bill-the-91-year-old-decorated-wwii-veteran-targeted-by-florida-governor-rick-scotts-voter-purge/?mobile=nc
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: May 31, 2012, 09:39:11 PM »


He of course merely has to present proof of citizenship. No problemo.
Logged
NVGonzalez
antwnzrr
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,687
Mexico


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: May 31, 2012, 10:17:15 PM »


Except he is no longer on the voter roll at least not now unless the justice department or the state itself restores it. However there are 61,000 people who got screwed over this. You do not fight voter fraud with voter fraud.
Logged
Inverted Things
Avelaval
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,306


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: May 31, 2012, 11:54:07 PM »

Requiring an ID is no big deal to anyone on this forum, probably.  Mark Ritchie points out that there are corner cases:
http://www.theuptake.org/2011/05/25/sec-state-ritchie-urges-dayton-to-veto-voter-id-legislation/

Summary: Requiring an ID implies making available a free ID, and getting it to folks who may not have any sort of transportation.  This costs state money... you know, that stuff the republicans always say we should avoid spending?

Snark aside, there's also the fact that we have little evidence that voter fraud is a problem, or that this would fix it.

So, we have a proposed law which solves a problem that may not exist.  More worrisome: the proponents of this law aren't even trying to find evidence that there is a problem.
Logged
○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└
jfern
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 53,570


Political Matrix
E: -7.38, S: -8.36

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: June 01, 2012, 12:07:09 AM »

Requiring an ID is no big deal to anyone on this forum, probably.  Mark Ritchie points out that there are corner cases:
http://www.theuptake.org/2011/05/25/sec-state-ritchie-urges-dayton-to-veto-voter-id-legislation/

Summary: Requiring an ID implies making available a free ID, and getting it to folks who may not have any sort of transportation.  This costs state money... you know, that stuff the republicans always say we should avoid spending?

Snark aside, there's also the fact that we have little evidence that voter fraud is a problem, or that this would fix it.

So, we have a proposed law which solves a problem that may not exist.  More worrisome: the proponents of this law aren't even trying to find evidence that there is a problem.

Actually, there is real fraud, but these laws are certainly not designed to go after the Xavier Suarezs. Florida scrub lists and the like are themselves a fraud.
Logged
pbrower2a
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 26,837
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: June 01, 2012, 11:54:26 AM »

Heaven forbid someone has to show proof of citizenship to vote.

Most Americans do not carry proof of citizenship on their persons.
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: June 02, 2012, 10:07:23 AM »

Voter registrations could be checked against the Social Security database. Not only would non-citizens be spotted, duplicate registration would end immediately.
Logged
Inverted Things
Avelaval
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,306


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: June 02, 2012, 10:49:37 AM »

Voter registrations could be checked against the Social Security database. Not only would non-citizens be spotted, duplicate registration would end immediately.

That's actually a really awful idea.  Firstly: not everyone has a social security number.  For example, some Amish refuse to get one.  They are still citizens of this country, and should be allowed to vote.

Secondly: There are a quite a few people who know my social security number.  My parents, my wife, several past employers, my current employer, several banks, my past landlords, and my current landlord.  Under your proposed system it would be very easy for any of these folks to invalidate my right to vote by registering in my name with a false address.  (They probably could not actually cast my vote, but they could prevent my vote from counting if I lived in a state without same-day registration.)

Thirdly, we should not solve the problem of duplicate registration without first investigating whether it is actually a problem, and if it is, the extent of the problem.
Logged
greenforest32
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,625


Political Matrix
E: -7.94, S: -8.43

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: June 02, 2012, 02:38:59 PM »
« Edited: June 02, 2012, 02:40:38 PM by greenforest32 »

Gotta stop "those people" from voting.

Why haven't Democrats even tried to implement automatic voter registration in a single state yet? I can think of a few states where they control 70%+ of the state legislature and the Governorship.
Logged
Person Man
Angry_Weasel
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,681
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: June 02, 2012, 02:49:52 PM »

Well, if you have to get an ID to vote and have to pay a fee to get an ID, wouldn't that be a poll tax?
Logged
TheReporter
Rookie
**
Posts: 21
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: June 02, 2012, 03:32:04 PM »

In a way, I think the GOP's efforts to curtail voter turnout serves as a metaphor for the party's policies as a whole: promoting efforts with only short-term benefits and long-term harms, and transparent excuses. This would equate to say, the Ryan plan or the Iraq invasion. The GOP cannot see into the future, and it may be perhaps they overtly reject progressivism, but this shall really come back to bite them in the ass. It could even be the  cause of their downfall.
Logged
krazen1211
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 7,372


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: June 02, 2012, 04:33:00 PM »


Except he is no longer on the voter roll at least not now unless the justice department or the state itself restores it. However there are 61,000 people who got screwed over this. You do not fight voter fraud with voter fraud.

There's no fraud involved. He mailed in his discharge papers from the Army to verify his citizenship.

If there is a source of Fraud, its Bill Internicola.


Internicola admitted to one discrepancy in records. He says he was born in 1921, though he said his drivers’ license indicates 1919. The reason: in his youth he wanted to start driving early so “I bent the truth a little bit.”
Logged
Inverted Things
Avelaval
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,306


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: June 02, 2012, 05:45:45 PM »

Well, if you have to get an ID to vote and have to pay a fee to get an ID, wouldn't that be a poll tax?

Yup.  In fact Wisconsin's new photo ID to vote law was judged in March to be unconstitutional despite containing provisions for free IDs.  The free ID provisions were an attempt to make the law pass constitutional muster, but were apparently not sufficient.
Logged
TheReporter
Rookie
**
Posts: 21
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: June 02, 2012, 06:01:20 PM »

Well, if you have to get an ID to vote and have to pay a fee to get an ID, wouldn't that be a poll tax?

Yup.  In fact Wisconsin's new photo ID to vote law was judged in March to be unconstitutional despite containing provisions for free IDs.  The free ID provisions were an attempt to make the law pass constitutional muster, but were apparently not sufficient.

This is good news.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,047
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: June 02, 2012, 06:34:06 PM »

Well, if you have to get an ID to vote and have to pay a fee to get an ID, wouldn't that be a poll tax?

Yup.  In fact Wisconsin's new photo ID to vote law was judged in March to be unconstitutional despite containing provisions for free IDs.  The free ID provisions were an attempt to make the law pass constitutional muster, but were apparently not sufficient.

This is good news.

That was the ruling of the trial judge, ruling under the Wisconsin rather than the US Constitution. The Wisconsin Supreme Court refused to hear it on an expedited basis, so it will wend its way through a state appellate court, and eventually probably end up with the Wisconsin Supreme Court (which tends to be Pub friendly - the judges are elected).
Logged
BigSkyBob
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,531


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: June 02, 2012, 11:38:33 PM »

Voter registrations could be checked against the Social Security database. Not only would non-citizens be spotted, duplicate registration would end immediately.

That's actually a really awful idea.  Firstly: not everyone has a social security number.  For example, some Amish refuse to get one.  They are still citizens of this country, and should be allowed to vote.

The numbers are required to file income tax returns. Whatever provisions the IRS makes for the Amish would apply to checking voter registration.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Presumably, they would have to a driver's license with your name on it. If someone actually succeeded to that point, you wouldn't lose your right to vote, but, the other person would be in serious legal jeopardy.

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

One person registering and voting in the same election more than once is "a problem." There is simply no tolerable level of voter fraud.
Logged
Marokai Backbeat
Marokai Blue
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 17,477
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.42, S: -7.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: June 02, 2012, 11:42:51 PM »
« Edited: June 02, 2012, 11:44:28 PM by Marokai Béliqueux »

That was the ruling of the trial judge, ruling under the Wisconsin rather than the US Constitution. The Wisconsin Supreme Court refused to hear it on an expedited basis, so it will wend its way through a state appellate court, and eventually probably end up with the Wisconsin Supreme Court (which tends to be Pub friendly - the judges are elected).

Something to be so proud of.

Gotta stop "those people" from voting.

Why haven't Democrats even tried to implement automatic voter registration in a single state yet? I can think of a few states where they control 70%+ of the state legislature and the Governorship.

Because they're terrible. I mean, sure, even if they're getting unfairly disadvantaged by a lot of these measures to combat voter fraud that doesn't exist in (literally) any substantial fashion, you shouldn't expect the Democratic Party to become the champion of electoral reform. They may be getting the short end of the stick here, but make our electoral system too nice and neat and suddenly you may have more people bleeding out of the two party system that our awful system keeps as restrictive as possible so as to protect.

It really bothers me that electoral reform is an issue that nobody cares about. We're embarrassing compared to our first world competitors when it comes to elections and how we conduct them; let alone just simple voting.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.042 seconds with 12 queries.