Voter ID law blocked in Wisconsin

[Peach]

They require IDs when purchasing a hand gun, yet there is no cry for infringement of second amendment rights. Why shouldn't voting, that is such valuable basic right, have safe guards that help guarantee that right from corruption?

The United States Supreme Court saw absolutely nothing wrong with Voter IDs

either bring a photo ID or sign a statement saying they can't afford one.
****************************************************
I would prefer the statement be available at the polling locations, but do not find this law unconstitutional. I ask why should there be so much concern about illegal voting as it is so difficult. Once again, how do the busloads of non registered voters get their names and addresses on the rolls?

That is obvious. They vote using someone's name that IS on the rolls. That is quite easy to do.

That is quite easy to do.
__________________
And if that person HAS voted, or appears later to vote, there will be media attention. I can see more verification required to REGISTER; the turn out for elections though, is not overwhelming, to put it mildly. I see some people brushing it off, if there is a LINE & waiting to vote takes "too much time". More requirements means more staying home or going home. Now, about the BUSLOADS, this scheme will take coordination.

 

[chanel]

I tried to see if there was a poll showing how many people in WI were in favor of this law.

I thought this was curious. Google search:

Poll: Most People Support Wisconsin Voter ID Law - Madison News ...
www.channel3000.com/news/30304025/detail.htmlCached
You +1'd this publicly. Undo
A move to require voters to show photo identification when they head for the polls has wide support from Wisconsin voters, according to a recent poll. Thursday ...

Yet when you click on the link: Poll: Most People Support Wisconsin Voter ID Law - Madison News Story - WISC Madison

Article Not Available
The story you are trying to view is no longer available through this Web site.

Are the thought police erasing history?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Will someone please tell me how asking a person to prove they are legally eligible to vote violates their rights or makes it more difficult to vote?

Anyone?

 

[chanel]

Well skull - apparently WI is the most restrictive. Most reasonable people favor reasonable laws, but often politicians go overboard. True story. Lol

 

[Peach]

Another poster AGAINST "big government" who demands MORE government regulations for voting.

They require IDs when purchasing a hand gun, yet there is no cry for infringement of second amendment rights. Why shouldn't voting, that is such valuable basic right, have safe guards that help guarantee that right from corruption?

The United States Supreme Court saw absolutely nothing wrong with Voter IDs

The court, voting 6-3, rejected Democratic contentions that the Indiana law will impose an unconstitutional burden on voters.

Writing the court's lead opinion, Justice John Paul Stevens said the risk of voter fraud is ``real'' and that fraud ``could affect the outcome of a close election.'' States, he said, have a ``valid interest in protecting the integrity and reliability of the electoral process.''

The Indiana law was enacted along party lines and signed by a Republican governor. Under the measure, voters who don't have a photo ID may cast a provisional ballot. To have their votes counted, they must visit a designated government office within 10 days and either bring a photo ID or sign a statement saying they can't afford one.

To obtain a photo ID, Indiana residents must present at least one ``primary'' document, such as a birth certificate, passport, certificate of naturalization or military ID.

Democrats contended that the new Indiana law will disenfranchise hundreds of thousands of voters, including a disproportionate number of minority, elderly and poor people.

Stevens said the evidence didn't back up those assertions. He said the record in the case ``does not provide any concrete evidence of the burden imposed on voters who currently lack photo identification.''

either bring a photo ID or sign a statement saying they can't afford one.
****************************************************
I would prefer the statement be available at the polling locations, but do not find this law unconstitutional. I ask why should there be so much concern about illegal voting as it is so difficult. Once again, how do the busloads of non registered voters get their names and addresses on the rolls?

Though I admire Stevens, the dissents hit the nail on the head:
******************************************
Dissents

Justice David Souter, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, filed a dissenting opinion, which would have declared the voter ID laws unconstitutional. Souter argued that Indiana had the burden of producing actual evidence of the existence of fraud, as opposed to relying on abstract harms, before imposing "an unreasonable and irrelevant burden on voters who are poor and old."
Justice Stephen Breyer also filed a dissenting opinion arguing that Indiana's law was unconstitutional. While he spoke approvingly of some voter ID laws, he found that Indiana's procedures for acquiring an ID were too burdensome and costly for some low income or elderly voters.
The legislation's partisan motivations and implications fueled much of the controversy. While the majority conceded that Republican Party's partisan interest in reducing low-income voter turnout likely motivated the law's passage, it found that the law's valid neutral justifications "should not be disregarded simply because partisan interests may have provided one motivation for the votes of individual legislators."
[edit]See also

**********************************************
6-3, Souter remained a true civil rights advocate, until he left the bench.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Resist all you want, voter ID laws are coming.

Indeed. Just as soon as the taxpayers are willing to pony up for free ID cards for all Americans, the requirement to have one to vote will be in the same bill, I'm certain.

 

[Conservative]

Another liberal activist judge using the bench to usurp the will of the People.
Guess what Chrissie? This guy is pretty low on the judicial totem pole. His ruling will be overturned.
Wishful thinking on your part.

he also signed the petition his wife circulated to have Walker recalled.

Conflict of interest. He should have recused himself.

 

[Peach]

Will someone please tell me how asking a person to prove they are legally eligible to vote violates their rights or makes it more difficult to vote?

Anyone?

That is accomplished at registration Skull. The dissents in the Indiana case explain WHY photo ID makes THE RIGHT to vote less "easy" to exercise.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Yeah, God forbid they require that you prove you are who you say you are before you can vote. The lefts motives on this issue are so obvious it's laughable.

That's 'cause anyone who claims to be republican and can't afford the $50 it takes to get a state ID card is too stupidly proud to talk about it.

Those on the left want to exercise their right to vote in spite of personal economic conditions.

Hell, in the humble opinion of this average Joe, any citizen who doesn't maintain a US Passport is a fool. $90 every 10 years is only $9 per year on average.

 

[AVG-JOE]

Will someone please tell me how asking a person to prove they are legally eligible to vote violates their rights or makes it more difficult to vote?

There are some voters who literally can't afford the price charged for a state ID by their state.

That's the only excuse I'm willing to entertain. The fools that want to vote but are unwilling to have their picture taken by 'the man' get -0- sympathy from me.

 

[Conservative]

Will someone please tell me how asking a person to prove they are legally eligible to vote violates their rights or makes it more difficult to vote?

There are some voters who literally can't afford the price charged for a state ID by their state.

That's the only excuse I'm willing to entertain. The fools that want to vote but are unwilling to have their picture taken by 'the man' get -0- sympathy from me.

and since every ID law enacted or being enacted or being blocked by the Dems includes a free ID, it's a non-argument.

 

[Conservative]

Will someone please tell me how asking a person to prove they are legally eligible to vote violates their rights or makes it more difficult to vote?

Anyone?

That is accomplished at registration Skull. The dissents in the Indiana case explain WHY photo ID makes THE RIGHT to vote less "easy" to exercise.

And I can go someplace, SAY I am Fred Johnson (even though I am not), and vote in his place, since they will not ask for ID to PROVE I am the Fred Johnson who registered.

 

[Peach]

There are some voters who literally can't afford the price charged for a state ID by their state.

That's the only excuse I'm willing to entertain. The fools that want to vote but are unwilling to have their picture taken by 'the man' get -0- sympathy from me.
__________________
****************************************
No EXCUSES for the disabled I note. No thought of which Americans are most apt to be impacted; most important, NO indication that the US needs MORE people voting not less:

Dissents

Justice David Souter, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, filed a dissenting opinion, which would have declared the voter ID laws unconstitutional. Souter argued that Indiana had the burden of producing actual evidence of the existence of fraud, as opposed to relying on abstract harms, before imposing "an unreasonable and irrelevant burden on voters who are poor and old."
Justice Stephen Breyer also filed a dissenting opinion arguing that Indiana's law was unconstitutional. While he spoke approvingly of some voter ID laws, he found that Indiana's procedures for acquiring an ID were too burdensome and costly for some low income or elderly voters.
The legislation's partisan motivations and implications fueled much of the controversy. While the majority conceded that Republican Party's partisan interest in reducing low-income voter turnout likely motivated the law's passage, it found that the law's valid neutral justifications "should not be disregarded simply because partisan interests may have provided one motivation for the votes of individual legislators."
[edit]See also

 

[AVG-JOE]

The solution to the voter ID problem is to require an ID card that's issued for free, like a Social Security Card.

Of course it would be a whole lot more effective if the ID card itself were more secure than a flimsy piece of paper with a name and number.

Eh, ya get what ya pay for.

Do you mean like this?

Georgia law provides for the issuance of a free identification card to citizens eighteen (18) and over who are registered voters. In order to be eligible for a free identification card, the voter must have no acceptable proof of identity to use when voting. These free identification cards are issued at all Customer Service Centers and are valid for ten (10) years.

Georgia Identification Card for Voting Purposes

I am reasonably sure most other states that have picture ID requirements have this same provision. If the Wisconsin law does not have this requirement, they should amend it, but I will bet it already has it.

Not in FL - it's $48 to get a license and $25 for an ID card.
DHSMV: Motorist Services Fees

 

[Too Tall]

They require IDs when purchasing a hand gun, yet there is no cry for infringement of second amendment rights. Why shouldn't voting, that is such valuable basic right, have safe guards that help guarantee that right from corruption?

The United States Supreme Court saw absolutely nothing wrong with Voter IDs

either bring a photo ID or sign a statement saying they can't afford one.
****************************************************
I would prefer the statement be available at the polling locations, but do not find this law unconstitutional. I ask why should there be so much concern about illegal voting as it is so difficult. Once again, how do the busloads of non registered voters get their names and addresses on the rolls?

Though I admire Stevens, the dissents hit the nail on the head:
******************************************
Dissents

Justice David Souter, joined by Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, filed a dissenting opinion, which would have declared the voter ID laws unconstitutional. Souter argued that Indiana had the burden of producing actual evidence of the existence of fraud, as opposed to relying on abstract harms, before imposing "an unreasonable and irrelevant burden on voters who are poor and old."
Justice Stephen Breyer also filed a dissenting opinion arguing that Indiana's law was unconstitutional. While he spoke approvingly of some voter ID laws, he found that Indiana's procedures for acquiring an ID were too burdensome and costly for some low income or elderly voters.
The legislation's partisan motivations and implications fueled much of the controversy. While the majority conceded that Republican Party's partisan interest in reducing low-income voter turnout likely motivated the law's passage, it found that the law's valid neutral justifications "should not be disregarded simply because partisan interests may have provided one motivation for the votes of individual legislators."
[edit]See also

**********************************************
6-3, Souter remained a true civil rights advocate, until he left the bench.

What part of FREE did Justice Souter not understand?

The bill also permits an elector who is eligible to obtain a Wisconsin
identification card to obtain the card from DOT free of charge, if the elector
specifically requests not to be charged.

http://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/related/proposals/ab7.pdf

 

[AVG-JOE]

The solution to the voter ID problem is to require an ID card that's issued for free, like a Social Security Card.

Of course it would be a whole lot more effective if the ID card itself were more secure than a flimsy piece of paper with a name and number.

Eh, ya get what ya pay for.

Do you mean like this?

Georgia law provides for the issuance of a free identification card to citizens eighteen (18) and over who are registered voters. In order to be eligible for a free identification card, the voter must have no acceptable proof of identity to use when voting. These free identification cards are issued at all Customer Service Centers and are valid for ten (10) years.

Georgia Identification Card for Voting Purposes

I am reasonably sure most other states that have picture ID requirements have this same provision. If the Wisconsin law does not have this requirement, they should amend it, but I will bet it already has it.

And you're absolutely correct about Wisconsin... check it:

FREE Wisconsin ID cards for voting

ID cards used for voting are FREE. If you are a U.S. citizen, will be at least 18 years of age by the next election, and require a Wisconsin ID card to vote, please check the ID for FREE box when completing the MV3004 PDF (405 KB) - Wisconsin Identification Card (ID) Application or when applying online. Otherwise, please pay the required fee. DMV service centers accept cash or checks only.

A free ID card is NOT available under the following circumstances:

If you currently have a valid, unexpired driver license (DL), you are not eligible under Wisconsin law to obtain an ID.
If you will not be at least 18 years of age on the date of the next election.
If you are not eligible to vote in Wisconsin.

Obtaining an ID card - Wisconsin Department of Transportation

 

[AVG-JOE]

That just begs the question: Should it be up to the individual states to decide who gets to vote for free and who has to pay for the soon to be required ID?

 

[Peach]

Anyone?

That is accomplished at registration Skull. The dissents in the Indiana case explain WHY photo ID makes THE RIGHT to vote less "easy" to exercise.

And I can go someplace, SAY I am Fred Johnson (even though I am not), and vote in his place, since they will not ask for ID to PROVE I am the Fred Johnson who registered.

And if Fred Johnson has voted, YOU are SOL. If he shows up later, the media will be covering it. The magical buses with thousands of illegal voters still have their work cut out for them. Now, along with SAYING you are Fred T., you must also know his address and bet he is not known by any one at the polling location. As we have learned, the rolls are not always updated quickly. Thus, you may show up at the wrong precinct. And of course, illegal aliens will YEARN to be near government buildings with lots of police around; no one will notice those buses, or question why question why they are there. If you speak with a Spanish accent, or are not in the age group of the DOB on the rolls, you may also be "caught". REAL SIMPLE.

 

[Truthmatters]

the right just keeps pretending the facts are not clear on this one.

why do you people insist on igonoring facts to back your partisan attempts to keep Americans from voting?

 

[Too Tall]

The solution to the voter ID problem is to require an ID card that's issued for free, like a Social Security Card.

Of course it would be a whole lot more effective if the ID card itself were more secure than a flimsy piece of paper with a name and number.

Eh, ya get what ya pay for.

Do you mean like this?

Georgia law provides for the issuance of a free identification card to citizens eighteen (18) and over who are registered voters. In order to be eligible for a free identification card, the voter must have no acceptable proof of identity to use when voting. These free identification cards are issued at all Customer Service Centers and are valid for ten (10) years.

Georgia Identification Card for Voting Purposes

I am reasonably sure most other states that have picture ID requirements have this same provision. If the Wisconsin law does not have this requirement, they should amend it, but I will bet it already has it.

Not in FL - it's $48 to get a license and $25 for an ID card.
DHSMV: Motorist Services Fees

Read this and tell me your problem with it.

Florida is a “pre-clearance” state, which means that it has a past record of voter discrimination, and must have any election law changes pre-cleared by the U.S. Department of Justice before they are implemented. In response to a question as to whether the issue of
ISACA Voter ID Report 020211 final.doc Page 13 of 14 ISACA Voter ID Report 020211 final.doc Page 14 of 14
Florida not providing free photo IDs to voters was a burden to and created disenfranchisement of voters, Florida Election Director Don Palmer said that it was not a factor. This is because the foundation of Florida’s ID requirements is not the photo ID, but the voter’s signature. Even when the voter is unable to show a photo ID and casts a provisional ballot, the provisional ballot will be counted after verification of the voter’s signature, without further photo ID requirements.

http://www.iowaauditors.org/index_files/ISACAVoterIDReport020211final.pdf