Texas Voter ID Law Blocked

[DaGoose]

A controversial new Texas law requiring voters to present personal identification before going to the polls has been blocked by the Obama administration.

In a letter Monday to state officials, the Justice Department said the legislation could have a discriminatory effect on Hispanics and other minorities.

The department concluded there is little evidence of voter fraud in Texas warranting the legislative changes.

The landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965 gives the federal government the power to oversee any changes in voting procedures in states and jurisdictions with a history of voter discrimination.

"Even using the data most favorable to the state, Hispanics disproportionately lack either a driver's license or a personal identification card ... and that disparity is statistically significant," Perez said

Administration blocks Texas voter ID law - CNN.com

 

[DiamondDave]

Yeah.. that's gonna get appealed and get overturned

 

[RetiredGySgt]

Federal LAW requires that ALL voters be properly identified by all States. There is no way this stands.

 

[M14 Shooter]

The state has a compelling interest in verifying the identity of a prosepctive voter, as it is imperative that a person who wants to cast a vote is who he says he is - failure to do so undermines a basic tenet of democracy. A picture ID is the least restrictive means to this end.

Why do liberals oppose positively verifying a prospective voter, but demand the same for a prospecive gun owner?

 

[ladyliberal]

The DOJ's logic is perfectly sound, and I don't see an effective way for the courts to overrule them short of overturning the VRA (which they have thus far seemed reluctant to do).

Perry's claim that the law

requires nothing more extensive than the type of photo identification necessary to receive a library card or board an airplane

is false, calling into question his familiarity with one or more of the activities he mentioned. While the preferred method of obtaining a library card or boarding a plane does involve producing government-issued photo ID, either may be done somewhat less conveniently without such ID. The Texas law is more restrictive.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The DOJ's logic is perfectly sound, and I don't see an effective way for the courts to overrule them short of overturning the VRA (which they have thus far seemed reluctant to do).

Perry's claim that the law

requires nothing more extensive than the type of photo identification necessary to receive a library card or board an airplane

is false, calling into question his familiarity with one or more of the activities he mentioned. While the preferred method of obtaining a library card or boarding a plane does involve producing government-issued photo ID, either may be done somewhat less conveniently without such ID. The Texas law is more restrictive.

How does one board a plane these days without a photo ID?

Federal LAW requires that ALL States ensure that all voters be properly identified as legally able to vote. FEDERAL LAW requires States to purge rolls as well. How exactly is requiring a photo ID going to prevent anyone from voting?

 

[Peach]

The DOJ's logic is perfectly sound, and I don't see an effective way for the courts to overrule them short of overturning the VRA (which they have thus far seemed reluctant to do).

Perry's claim that the law

requires nothing more extensive than the type of photo identification necessary to receive a library card or board an airplane

is false, calling into question his familiarity with one or more of the activities he mentioned. While the preferred method of obtaining a library card or boarding a plane does involve producing government-issued photo ID, either may be done somewhat less conveniently without such ID. The Texas law is more restrictive.

The laws must be sound however. Perhaps a more intelligent legislature would avoid the EXPENSE Texas incurred.

 

[ladyliberal]

How does one board a plane these days without a photo ID?

Federal LAW requires that ALL States ensure that all voters be properly identified as legally able to vote. FEDERAL LAW requires States to purge rolls as well. How exactly is requiring a photo ID going to prevent anyone from voting?

A bit off topic, but the answer to your first question is "additional screening" or "two forms of non-photo identification, one of which must have been issued by a state or federal agency": http://www.fodors.com/news/story_928.html. I hope this comes in handy if you ever lose your ID while traveling, as it did for one of my personal acquaintances.

As to how requiring a photo ID is going to prevent someone from voting, I'm not sure why this isn't readily apparent. After all, the stated purpose of such laws is exactly to prevent certain people from voting (ie, ineligible persons). Someone without a photo ID will not generally be allowed to vote. Some such people, who certainly exist (and include eligible voters) will certainly be prevented from voting. Note that to "prevent" something is to stop it from happening, not to make it impossible. So making something harder though not impossible can prevent people from doing it.

 

[Zander]

Dead people, convicted felons, vagrants, and cartoon characters across Texas are celebrating.

 

[Oddball]

The landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965 gives the federal government the power to oversee any changes in voting procedures in states and jurisdictions with a history of voter discrimination.

IOW, liberoidals are the ones totally stuck in the past.

 

[Immanuel]

The DOJ's logic is perfectly sound, and I don't see an effective way for the courts to overrule them short of overturning the VRA (which they have thus far seemed reluctant to do).

Perry's claim that the law

requires nothing more extensive than the type of photo identification necessary to receive a library card or board an airplane

is false, calling into question his familiarity with one or more of the activities he mentioned. While the preferred method of obtaining a library card or boarding a plane does involve producing government-issued photo ID, either may be done somewhat less conveniently without such ID. The Texas law is more restrictive.

Well, I am in favor of the right voter id law (one that provides free ids to those who need them) but I find that comment about boarding a plane hilarious. I mean, I realize the guy most likely travels on private jets or on charter flights and he has probably never had to get through a TSA inspection line. Well, if he has, he wouldn't have made such a stupid statement.

Immie

 

[theHawk]

The DOJ's logic is perfectly sound, and I don't see an effective way for the courts to overrule them short of overturning the VRA (which they have thus far seemed reluctant to do).

Perry's claim that the law

requires nothing more extensive than the type of photo identification necessary to receive a library card or board an airplane

is false, calling into question his familiarity with one or more of the activities he mentioned. While the preferred method of obtaining a library card or boarding a plane does involve producing government-issued photo ID, either may be done somewhat less conveniently without such ID. The Texas law is more restrictive.

The laws must be sound however. Perhaps a more intelligent legislature would avoid the EXPENSE Texas incurred.

The expense? Your excuse is that it would cost too much?

Maybe we should just suspend election day period because of the "expense" it would incur to the taxpayers.....

 

[Immanuel]

The DOJ's logic is perfectly sound, and I don't see an effective way for the courts to overrule them short of overturning the VRA (which they have thus far seemed reluctant to do).

Perry's claim that the law



is false, calling into question his familiarity with one or more of the activities he mentioned. While the preferred method of obtaining a library card or boarding a plane does involve producing government-issued photo ID, either may be done somewhat less conveniently without such ID. The Texas law is more restrictive.

The laws must be sound however. Perhaps a more intelligent legislature would avoid the EXPENSE Texas incurred.

The expense? Your excuse is that it would cost too much?

Maybe we should just suspend election day period because of the "expense" it would incur to the taxpayers.....

Please don't give them the idea.

Immie

 

[theHawk]

Dead people, convicted felons, vagrants, and cartoon characters across Texas are celebrating.

What the libs here are really worried about is that illegals won't be able to vote.

 

[Vel]

How exactly does the Texas law differ from our new Tennessee law that the Obama administration did NOT take aim at?

 

[Full-Auto]

The DOJ's logic is perfectly sound, and I don't see an effective way for the courts to overrule them short of overturning the VRA (which they have thus far seemed reluctant to do).

Perry's claim that the law



is false, calling into question his familiarity with one or more of the activities he mentioned. While the preferred method of obtaining a library card or boarding a plane does involve producing government-issued photo ID, either may be done somewhat less conveniently without such ID. The Texas law is more restrictive.

The laws must be sound however. Perhaps a more intelligent legislature would avoid the EXPENSE Texas incurred.

The expense? Your excuse is that it would cost too much?

Maybe we should just suspend election day period because of the "expense" it would incur to the taxpayers.....

I dont know my drivers license is spendy, especially needing one to purchase firearms. Then if I want it the same day, the cost of the CCW, brother that 60 bucks hurts

 

[The T]

The DOJ's logic is perfectly sound, and I don't see an effective way for the courts to overrule them short of overturning the VRA (which they have thus far seemed reluctant to do).

Perry's claim that the law

requires nothing more extensive than the type of photo identification necessary to receive a library card or board an airplane

is false, calling into question his familiarity with one or more of the activities he mentioned. While the preferred method of obtaining a library card or boarding a plane does involve producing government-issued photo ID, either may be done somewhat less conveniently without such ID. The Texas law is more restrictive.

The laws must be sound however. Perhaps a more intelligent legislature would avoid the EXPENSE Texas incurred.

By frivilous lawsuits?

DO Tell?

 

[ladyliberal]

The laws must be sound however. Perhaps a more intelligent legislature would avoid the EXPENSE Texas incurred.

The expense? Your excuse is that it would cost too much?

Maybe we should just suspend election day period because of the "expense" it would incur to the taxpayers.....

I dont know my drivers license is spendy, especially needing one to purchase firearms. Then if I want it the same day, the cost of the CCW, brother that 60 bucks hurts

If your point is that $60 is not a burdensome cost to impose as a requirement to vote, poll taxes of substantially smaller amounts have been ruled unconstitutional (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax_(United_States)).

 

[ladyliberal]

How exactly does the Texas law differ from our new Tennessee law that the Obama administration did NOT take aim at?

I'm not familiar with the Tennessee law, but the salient difference between the two cases must be that under the VRA Texas does require preclearance and Tennessee does not (Voting Rights Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).

 

[Vel]

How exactly does the Texas law differ from our new Tennessee law that the Obama administration did NOT take aim at?

I'm not familiar with the Tennessee law, but the salient difference between the two cases must be that under the VRA Texas does require preclearance and Tennessee does not (Voting Rights Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia).

Yeah.. I just looked that up. Basically, because of the VRA, Holder can screw around with Texas, S.Carolina and Alabama, even though there is no difference in the actual laws or the way they should work.