Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
There are two problems with the argument: number one, there's been no showing that there's any significant problem with voter fraud in the 50 states. There certainly is no showing that non-citizens are rushing to try to vote: this is a solution in search of a problem.
The second problem is that historically disenfranchised groups - minorities, the poor, the elderly and the disabled - are most affected by photo ID laws. Let me give you a few statistics, overall 12% of voting age American do not have a driver's license, most of whom are minority, new U.S. citizens, the indigent, the elderly or the disabled. AARP reports that 3.6 million disabled Americans have no driver's license. A recent study in Wisconsin this year found that white adults were twice as likely to have driver's licenses as African Americans over 18. In Louisiana, African Americans are four to five times less likely to have photo IDs than white residents.
Now, why won't poor people be able to get photo IDs or Real IDs? It's simple. Because they cost money. You need a birth certificate, passport or proof naturalization and that can cost up to $85. Then you need to go to the state office to apply for a card. That requires time off work, possibly a long trip on public transportation assuming there's an office near you. Imagine if you only vote once ever two or four years, it's not very likely you'll take time off work, take a bus to pay $85 just so you can vote. That is not something that most folks are going to be able to do.Carter-Baker commission in 2002-2004 said fraudulent votes make up .000003% of the votes cast. That's a lot of zeros. Let me say it a different way. Out of almost 200 million votes that were cast during these elections, 52 were fraudulent
do you agree w/ him?
what's next if u have 2 kids and you're a single mom don't try to find a job b/c it will take 30 min riding a bus and the mom will have to spend 6 hours away form her two kids, resulting into a child who never knew who is mom was?
do you agree w/ him?
what's next if u have 2 kids and you're a single mom don't try to find a job b/c it will take 30 min riding a bus and the mom will have to spend 6 hours away form her two kids, resulting into a child who never knew who is mom was?
Well dang...how are all these elections getting stolen (as the Dems so often claim)?
do you agree w/ him?
what's next if u have 2 kids and you're a single mom don't try to find a job b/c it will take 30 min riding a bus and the mom will have to spend 6 hours away form her two kids, resulting into a child who never knew who is mom was?
I was thinking the same thing. Can they still claim "Stolen" now?
ATLANTA Following hours of racially and politically charged debate, the Legislature passed a law Wednesday requiring Georgians to show a government-issued picture ID when voting. It will go to Gov. Sonny Perdue for his expected approval, then to the U.S. Department of Justice where a green light is also anticipated.
If all of this sounds familiar, it should.
It's a dramatic story line that's so far featured angry rhetoric, walkouts, Washington insider politics, and accusations of fraud, racism and power-grabbing all centering around the core of American democracy: voting.
"It's like rewinding the movie and starting all over again," said state Rep. Tyrone Brooks (D), who maintains that requiring photo IDs of voters is a Republican ploy to suppress voting among the Democratic base of the elderly, poor and minorities.
Republican leaders thought they had put the matter behind them last year, when they successfully pushed House Bill 244 requiring photo ID at the polls. They said the measure was needed to combat voter fraud. But a federal judge ruled in October that requiring people to purchase a photo ID to vote was akin to an unconstitutional poll tax.
So Republicans came back this year and with lightning speed passed Senate Bill 84, which still requires photo ID, but provides them free for anyone who needs one to vote. Perdue will sign the new law "soon," but did not give a specific date, a spokeswoman said.
Opponents of the bill vow to challenge it on the same constitutional grounds, said Neil Bradley, associate director of the ACLU Voting Rights Project.
Bradley is one of several lawyers who successfully challenged last year's bill, HB 244. U.S. District Judge Harold Murphy temporarily struck down the photo ID provision in the bill, saying that it appeared unconstitutional. In addition to saying a fee to get an ID card amounted to a poll tax, he noted that few counties have facilities to grant the IDs, making them inaccessible to many Georgians.
Republicans believe offering a free voter photo ID card to anyone who needs it will help the new legislation withstand legal challenges. Also, the bill requires that all 159 counties in Georgia maintain a location where the photo IDs can be obtained.
"I think we addressed the concerns," said House Majority Leader Jerry Keen (R). Keen and other Republican leaders have repeatedly defended the photo ID requirement, calling it a common-sense measure that will reduce the possibility of voter fraud.
On gaining approval by the U.S. Department of Justice which must sign off on any changes to voting laws in states with a history of discouraging blacks and other minorities from voting Keen said: "I can't imagine why they would not." Bradley also expects Justice Department approval, but believes removing the charge for the ID does not render his case moot, because requiring people to show an ID to vote is still an unnecessary impediment to people who otherwise meet all of the requirements of voting.
"The thing we were suing about was being required to show an ID," he said. "That's the constitutional violation. There was a secondary level of that in that they were charging money to get this ID."
Uncertainty surrounds lawsuit
The question of how lawyers on either side of the complex case will proceed, and how the legislation passed Wednesday will affect the pending lawsuit, is unknown. There are several possibilities now that a voter photo ID is running on two parallel tracks a lawsuit involving HB 244 and passage Wednesday of SB 84.
The state appealed Murphy's ruling to the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, and a hearing is scheduled for March 1, Bradley said. Bradley said the options include informing the appeals court of the passage of SB 84, and asking the judges to consider it as part of their ruling, or requesting that the case be sent back to the lower court for consideration of the changes to the law.
Emmet Bondurant, another lawyer for the plaintiffs, said Wednesday he is planning to amend the lawsuit to have the courts consider the new legislation.
"They may think by making essentially cosmetic changes they have materially affected the case," Bondurant said. "They haven't even come close."
The state could ask the courts to dismiss the lawsuit on the grounds that the Legislature has addressed concerns of the law's constitutionality with SB 84.
A spokesman for Attorney General Thurbert Baker's office, responsible for defending the state's position, would not say what the state's next move might be.
Baker's office is responsible for sending the bill to the Department of Justice for approval. The Justice Department can take up to 120 days to consider the law. Bradley worries that could push any legal maneuvering back to late May just two months before party primaries in the governor's race.
Fraught with emotion
Wednesday's passage of SB 84 marks the latest turn in the voter ID saga. Last year during debate of the original bill, HB 244, African-American lawmakers testified sometimes tearfully of systematic racism that has affected them and their families and the struggle to earn the right to vote. In the House, lawmakers walked out singing civil rights songs. One African-American legislator dropped shackles on the desk of a Republican sponsor of the bill in protest.
Then in November, The Washington Post reported that career lawyers and analysts at the Justice Department recommended rejecting HB 244 because it was likely to discriminate against black voters. They were overruled by higher-ranking officials in the department, the newspaper reported.Brooks, who is president of the Georgia Association of Black Elected Officials, said he expects a similar outcome.
"I think Attorney General Alberto Gonzalesis going to get a call from Karl Rove and say 'You must approve this,'" Brooks said.
House debate quickly cut off
Other documents leaked to the Post summarized remarks made by state Rep. Sue Burmeister (R), sponsor of HB 244, that "if there are fewer black voters because of this bill, it will only be because there is less opportunity for fraud. She said that when black voters in her black precincts are not paid to vote, they do not go to the polls."
Burmeister has said she doesn't recall making those remarks and later repudiated them. But her alleged comments outraged black lawmakers, who said she exposed the true racist and political motivations behind the legislation.
The rancor continued until the bitter end. House members on Wednesday exchanged pointed words, each accusing the other party of political chicanery. But House Speaker Glenn Richardson quickly cut off the debate, which in the past had dragged on for six hours or more.
Randy Evans, general counsel for the Georgia Republican Party and a member of the State Election Board, said the passage of SB 84 should put the issue to rest, but he knows it won't.
Evans, like many Republicans, maintains the legislation is only about reducing the opportunity for voter fraud which he claims doesn't interest Democrats.
"I don't think this was ever about the voter ID bill," Evans said. "I think it was just about trying to preserve a system where dead people get to vote, illegal aliens get to vote, and people who could not confirm their identity get to vote. I think they were prepared to defend those voting who shouldn't have been voting."
Brooks, a veteran of the civil rights movement, said he views the twists and turns of the voter ID bill as just another act in a longtime drama.
"I'm resigned to the fact that the struggle is forever," Brooks said.
i heard that the id's will be free and sent out to people's home
do you agree w/ him?
what's next if u have 2 kids and you're a single mom don't try to find a job b/c it will take 30 min riding a bus and the mom will have to spend 6 hours away form her two kids, resulting into a child who never knew who is mom was?
A recent study in Wisconsin this year found that white adults were twice as likely to have driver's licenses as African Americans over 18. In Louisiana, African Americans are four to five times less likely to have photo IDs than white residents.
So in other words "African Americans" are two to five times more lazy than whites to go get a freakin ID card. Cry me a river.
So in other words "African Americans" are two to five times more lazy than whites to go get a freakin ID card. Cry me a river.
Sorry, the logic does not compute. From beginning to follow ups.
I don't like the carpetbaggers. I don't like Obama, he's bought and paid for by the machine.Hey Kat, are you regretting yet that you voted for that two-faced Osama dude?
imo, if people can't manage once in their lives to get themselves and maintain a suitable ID in order to vote, then they don't deserve to vote. Citizenship takes a little effort. It's the best way to prevent voter fraud and prevent the illegals from voting.
Maybe we should just go back to the old days when only property owners could vote....all they'd have to show is their mortgage papers.
Jennifer, need to include links to you infromation sources.
