Why Do "Desperate Democrats" Strongly Appose Voter Photo I.D. Requirement For 2012 ?

[Care4all]

Voting Rights Act.

Section 5 of the Act requires that the United States Department of Justice, through an administrative procedure, or a three-judge panel of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, through a declaratory judgment action "preclear" any attempt to change “any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting..." in any "covered jurisdiction."[

Voting Rights Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It would seem to me that even if a state passes such "qualification" laws they still must preclear them under the VRA before they are allowed to be put into practice. As to the "costs" of I.D.'s it would seem to me that many if not all states allow no cost ID's for those that cannot afford them and for Seniors and the disabled. I know that Arizona has such a provision at the MVD. Further, if someone in the year 2011 doesn't have a valid BC or is unable to obtain one, in many states there are alternate forms of ID that are allowed as well.
Any two of those

•Utility bill dated within 90 days of the date of the election. A utility bill may be for electric, gas, water, solid waste, sewer, telephone, cellular phone, or cable television
•Bank or credit union statement that is dated within 90 days of the date of the election
•Valid Arizona Vehicle Registration
•Indian census card
•Property tax statement of the person's residence
•Tribal enrollment card or other form of tribal identification
•Vehicle insurance card
•Valid United States federal, state, or local government issued identification
•Voter Registration Card / Recorder's Certification
•Any "Official Election Material" mailing bearing your name and address

Voter ID in Arizona - Identification Requirements for Voting in Arizona Elections

Again, if these ID law's are as many say they are, and indeed interfere with a person's right to vote then it WON'T get precleared under the VRA and will be struck down pretty quickly.

that's correct.

and in georgia, their plan was shot down due to it, once it reached a higher courts

5
In a case that some have called a showdown over voting rights, a U.S. appeals court yesterday upheld an injunction barring the state of Georgia from enforcing a law requiring citizens to get government-issued photo identification in order to vote.
The ruling allows thousands of Georgians who do not have government-issued identification, such as driver's licenses and passports, to vote in the Nov. 8 municipal elections without obtaining a special digital identification card, which costs $20 for five years. In prior elections, Georgians could use any one of 17 types of identification that show the person's name and address, including a driver's license, utility bill, bank statement or a paycheck, to gain access to a voting booth.
Last week, when issuing the injunction, U.S. District Judge Harold L. Murphy likened the law to a Jim Crow-era poll tax that required residents, most of them black, to pay back taxes before voting. He said the law appeared to violate the Constitution for that reason. In the 2004 election, about 150,000 Georgians voted without producing government-issued identification.

The Georgia ID law has been controversial from the day it was submitted in March. Conservative lawmakers said it was needed to limit elections fraud. Liberal lawmakers said that argument was a smokescreen masking another intent: to maintain Republican power in the state by diluting the minority vote, which typically goes to Democrats.

Liberal critics compiled statistics showing that far more white residents owned cars than African Americans. The law, they argued, gave an unfair advantage to white people while placing a burden on those who are black.



On top of that, the state recently reorganized the Department of Motor Vehicles, paring down the number of offices. After the reorganization, there were no DMV offices in Atlanta, a city with a wide black majority. The closest station is at least nine miles away. Fewer than 60 of the state's 159 counties have DMV offices.

looks to me like the INTENT of the GOP was to disenfranchise blacks....if this article is accurate?

more info: Voter ID Law Is Overturned

 

[Truthmatters]

SC voter ID law hits black precincts - Today's News - TheSunNews.com

 

[Truthmatters]

GOP Memo Admits Plan Could 'Keep Black Vote Down' - Los Angeles Times


NEWARK, N.J. — A Republican National Committee official calculated that a so-called ballot security program in Louisiana "could keep the black vote down considerably," according to documents released in federal court Friday.

The documents and court hearing were the latest developments in a controversy over the GOP's ballot program that Democrats maintain is aimed at reducing minority turnout. The Republicans say the program's sole purpose is to purge ineligible voters from voting roles.

 

[BDBoop]

The last 4-5 posts above me answer the question directly. We're not desperate. We THINK. We don't react, we don't go "Oh, grand (old party) idea, count me in!" We look at the action, and question what's behind it.

 

[Conservative]

SC voter ID law hits black precincts - Today's News - TheSunNews.com

from the linked piece...

The analysis shows that among the state’s 2,134 precincts there are 10 precincts where nearly all of the law’s affect falls on nonwhite voters who don’t have a state-issued driver’s license or ID card, a total of 1,977 voters.
.004% of the precincts

The same holds true for white voters in a number of precincts, but the overall effect is much more spread out and involves fewer total voters: There are 44 precincts where only white voters are affected, or 1,831 people in all.
2% of the precincts

“This is disenfranchising huge groups of people who don’t have the money to go get an ID card.”

except the id's for voting are FREE.







.004% of the precints

 

[Conservative]

GOP Memo Admits Plan Could 'Keep Black Vote Down' - Los Angeles Times


NEWARK, N.J. — A Republican National Committee official calculated that a so-called ballot security program in Louisiana "could keep the black vote down considerably," according to documents released in federal court Friday.

The documents and court hearing were the latest developments in a controversy over the GOP's ballot program that Democrats maintain is aimed at reducing minority turnout. The Republicans say the program's sole purpose is to purge ineligible voters from voting roles.

October 25, 1986

 

[Care4all]

SC voter ID law hits black precincts - Today's News - TheSunNews.com

from the linked piece...

The analysis shows that among the state’s 2,134 precincts there are 10 precincts where nearly all of the law’s affect falls on nonwhite voters who don’t have a state-issued driver’s license or ID card, a total of 1,977 voters.
.004% of the precincts

The same holds true for white voters in a number of precincts, but the overall effect is much more spread out and involves fewer total voters: There are 44 precincts where only white voters are affected, or 1,831 people in all.
2% of the precincts

“This is disenfranchising huge groups of people who don’t have the money to go get an ID card.”

except the id's for voting are FREE.







.004% of the precints

the Devil is in the details

Previously-reported statewide numbers suggested that overall, the law’s impact would roughly affect white and nonwhite voters proportionally: 70 percent of the state’s 2.7 million registered voters are white and 30 percent are non-white; 66 percent of the 216,596 active, registered voters without state-issued photo IDs are white and 34 percent nonwhite.


But stepping below the state-level numbers offers a much different picture: Lacking state-issued IDs are 11,087 nonwhite voters in Richland County, 5,385 in Charleston County and 4,544 in Orangeburg County. That means half the voters affected by the law in Richland County aren’t white and in Orangeburg County it’s 73 percent.


Whitmire said the state is preparing a new round of data for the Justice Department. Once that is submitted, the agency will have up to 60 days to respond. South Carolina’s election law changes have to be cleared by federal authorities because of past voting rights abuses.

Read more: SC voter ID law hits black precincts - Today's News - TheSunNews.com
​

wonder what their PAST voting rights abuses were?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Actually, as I already showed earlier, the petition to the SCOTUS was brought by the Bush Cheney team.

If you're going to call someone stupid (not that he isn't, btw) you should at least make sure what you are saying is factually accurate.

My mistake, I cited Gore v Harris, clearly I meant SCOFLA, but I did type the wrong court.

 

[rightwinger]

This has nothing to do with Republican concern about barely existent voter fraud. It has to do with the large numbers of poor and elderly who do not have drivers licenses and how they can impede them from voting

A signature has always been good enough to prove your identity

 

[BDBoop]

This has nothing to do with Republican concern about barely existent voter fraud. It has to do with the large numbers of poor and elderly who do not have drivers licenses and how they can impede them from voting

A signature has always been good enough to prove your identity

A piece of mail with my name on it worked last time.

 

[Uncensored2008]

This has nothing to do with Republican concern about barely existent voter fraud.

It has everything to do with voter fraud - which you fear will stop. You depend on fraud.

It has to do with the large numbers of poor and elderly who do not have drivers licenses and how they can impede them from voting

Bullshit, as you know.

In those areas where picture ID is required, the ID must be offered free of charge. In most places, a utility bill is sufficient.

A signature has always been good enough to prove your identity

Fraud has always been a big part of the election strategy of the democratic party.

 

[Navy1960]

deterred discriminatory changes.
The Court will not shrink from its duty “as the bulwark of a limitedConstitution against legislative encroachments,” The Federalist No.78, but “t is . . . well established. . . that normally the Court will not decide a constitutional question if there is some other ground upon which to dispose of the case,” Escambia County v. McMillan, 466
U. S. 48, 51. Here, the district also raises a statutory claim that it iseligible to bail out under §§4 and 5, and that claim is sufficient to re-solve the appeal. Pp. 6–11.
2. The Act must be interpreted to permit all political subdivisions,including the district, to seek to bail out from the preclearance re-quirements. It is undisputed that the district is a “political subdivi-sion” in the ordinary sense, but the Act also provides a narrower definition in §14(c)(2): “ ‘[P]olitical subdivision’ shall mean any countyor parish, except that where registration for voting is not conducted under the supervision of a county or parish, the term shall include any other subdivision of a State which conducts registration for vot-ing.” The court below concluded that the district did not qualify for§4(a) bailout under this definition, but specific precedent, the Act’s structure, and underlying constitutional concerns compel a broaderreading.
This Court

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/08pdf/08-322.pdf


It would seem to me that the SCOTUS has ruled on the VRA sec5 issue as follows. that a county or parish has the right to set rules for local elections as they see fit, however they left in place all the provisions of Sec. 5 for those states covered under the VRA in elections such as Sen. and President. So in the case of a state like Georgia which as stopped by the VRA and rightly so, becaues the law was in direct contravention to this case and several others as well as the VRA sec. 5 it will be the same for most if not all those states that do the same.

Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Georgia, except for the city of Sandy Springs
Louisiana
Mississippi
South Carolina
Texas
Virginia, except for fourteen counties (Amherst, Augusta, Botetourt, Essex, Frederick, Greene, Middlesex, Page, Pulaski, Roanoke, Rockingham, Shenandoah, Washington and Warren) and four independent cities (Fairfax, Harrisonburg, Salem, and Winchester)

Voting Rights Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


That doesn't give all the others the ability to just do as they please though,


The 15th Amendment might have some issues as well.

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation

 

[rightwinger]

This has nothing to do with Republican concern about barely existent voter fraud.

It has everything to do with voter fraud - which you fear will stop. You depend on fraud.

It has to do with the large numbers of poor and elderly who do not have drivers licenses and how they can impede them from voting

Bullshit, as you know.

In those areas where picture ID is required, the ID must be offered free of charge. In most places, a utility bill is sufficient.

A signature has always been good enough to prove your identity

Fraud has always been a big part of the election strategy of the democratic party.

Voter fraud is in Republicans minds....

What little does exist comes from absentees and tallying of vote totals. Republicans are going after the elderly and poor to block them from voting

 

[Uncensored2008]

Voter fraud is in Republicans minds....

If that were true, you wouldn't be in a panic. You panic now because you DEPEND on fraud to swing elections.

What little does exist comes from absentees and tallying of vote totals. Republicans are going after the elderly and poor to block them from voting

Because everyone knows that the elderly are denied ID....

ROFL

 

[M14 Shooter]

If you support the requirement to show a photo ID to buy a gun, then you cannot, with any degree of honesty or intregrity, oppose a similar requirement for voting.

 

[Care4all]

If you support the requirement to show a photo ID to buy a gun, then you cannot, with any degree of honesty or intregrity, oppose a similar requirement for voting.

do you oppose a law to require a gvt photo id in order to purchase a gun?

 

[Foxfyre]

In our state, we are required to show positive ID before we can pick up a prescription containing a controlled substance. You can't buy beer, wine, liquor or cigarettes without positive ID. You won't be allowed into some businesses or public venues without photo ID and you can't board an airplane without photo ID.

Most states provide photo ID without charge or for a nominal fee to cover their costs. It is a small inconvenience to get a photo ID, but I would think it worth the trouble if you really take your responsibility to vote seriously.

Again, the ONLY reason I can think of that anybody would not want people to prove who they are when they vote is because you WANT more opportunity for fraud to exist.

 

[M14 Shooter]

If you support the requirement to show a photo ID to buy a gun, then you cannot, with any degree of honesty or intregrity, oppose a similar requirement for voting.

do you oppose a law to require a gvt photo id in order to purchase a gun?

No. Why? Do you?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Again, the ONLY reason I can think of that anybody would not want people to prove who they are when they vote is because you WANT more opportunity for fraud to exist.

There is no sound argument against it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

do you oppose a law to require a gvt photo id in order to purchase a gun?

I support it. Just like voting, the requirement for ID is reasonable and does not infringe rights.