PA Voter ID law ruled unconstitutional

[Deacfreak07]

They should just make a mobile ID station like a Bookmobile or Bloodmobile and drive around cranking out IDs for several years then implement voter ID. I could get on board with that.

 

[Deacon923]

You sound like the MLB players' union a few years ago. No, we don't need any PED testing because there is no problem (because we don't test for it). Nevermind that anyone who has watched one of our games can see it with their own eyes.

Anybody who goes to a poll where they just ask for a name and address before voting (especially when they can see the names of their deceased relatives still on the rolls) can see how easy it is to make stuff up. How can the AGs say there is no fraud when they have nothing in place to ascertain fraud? Requiring ID is the most basic, unobtrusive safeguard imaginable. It makes no sense why anyone would oppose it.

And it would be even more easy to fill out a bunch of absentee ballots with your dead relatives info and hope some of them stick, and in fact most documented voter fraud in this country involves absentee ballots. Although VERY concerned about voter fraud, Republicans in NC want to make it easier to vote absentee. By some strange coincidence, a high percentage of absentee ballots vote Republican. Hmm. Let's have some basic safeguards and make those old doddering conservatives prove they are who they say, dammit!

 

[PhDeac]

Freak, that is a simple straightforward solution for those who want to curb fraud and increase voter participation.

 

[jhmd2000]

Blacks not voting. Voter ID and unregistered guns both help keep that number down.

Where is the evidence that voter i.d. laws disproportionately impact minorities (or are you extrapolating from your own biases)?

I guess we should wait for any evidence that these laws actually impact anyone at all, before we get to the question if they impact one group more than another.

 

[jhmd2000]

And it would be even more easy to fill out a bunch of absentee ballots with your dead relatives info and hope some of them stick, and in fact most documented voter fraud in this country involves absentee ballots. Although VERY concerned about voter fraud, Republicans in NC want to make it easier to vote absentee. By some strange coincidence, a high percentage of absentee ballots vote Republican. Hmm. Let's have some basic safeguards and make those old doddering conservatives prove they are who they say, dammit!

Military exceptions permit voters serving away from home to vote in their home communities. A good starting point for your research would be the federal law on point, known as UOCAVA. I will let you do the partisan math.

 

[Deacon923]

Where is the evidence that voter i.d. laws disproportionately impact minorities (or are you extrapolating from your own biases)?

I guess we should wait for any evidence that these laws actually impact anyone at all, before we get to the question if they impact one group more than another.

By "anyone", you mean other than the 300,000 people in Pennsylvania that voter ID defenders testified do not have compliant IDs?

 

[PhDeac]

Where is the evidence that voter i.d. laws disproportionately impact minorities (or are you extrapolating from your own biases)?

I guess we should wait for any evidence that these laws actually impact anyone at all, before we get to the question if they impact one group more than another.

Yeah, we should pass the laws first to see if they hurt anybody. More evidence of jhmd's callous toward the disenfranchised.

 

[WFU71]

They should just make a mobile ID station like a Bookmobile or Bloodmobile and drive around cranking out IDs for several years then implement voter ID. I could get on board with that.

Virginia DMV has at least one of these.

Edit: make that five of them.

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

And it would be even more easy to fill out a bunch of absentee ballots with your dead relatives info and hope some of them stick, and in fact most documented voter fraud in this country involves absentee ballots. Although VERY concerned about voter fraud, Republicans in NC want to make it easier to vote absentee. By some strange coincidence, a high percentage of absentee ballots vote Republican. Hmm. Let's have some basic safeguards and make those old doddering conservatives prove they are who they say, dammit!

Great. So what does that have to do with whether or not requiring ID for in-person voting is a good idea?

 

[jhmd2000]

By "anyone", you mean other than the 300,000 people in Pennsylvania that voter ID defenders testified do not have compliant IDs?

Let's put side the Penn Law's definition of "compliant ID" (and how that could be amended) and further assume that the voter rolls are accurate (miraculously, since they're not actively maintained, as we well know in this state). Even if true, "currently have" =/= "could obtain".

 

[ImTheCaptain]

and he gets back up again, folks. increadible

 

[2&2 Slider To Leyritz]

Since it appears to have gone unnoticed, I will again post the fact that the expert who testified in defense of the PA voter ID law testified that at least 300,000 eligible-to-vote Pennsylvanians do not have compliant ID. That expert obviously was paid to minimize the problem and still came up with 300,000. Is that an insignificant number of citizens? There are 9,686,275 persons of voting age in PA http://www.dos.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/voter_registration_statistics/12725, so 300,000 is just over 3% of the electorate - in a closely divided swing state. I'd say that's a meaningful number of people who are being potentially disenfranchised.

Again, if PA or NC or whatever state wants to go to the time and expense to make sure all of its poor, elderly, and disabled citizens can get an ID, fine, but as the judge found in this case PA has failed to do so, and in the process is putting an unconstitutional (under the PA constitution) burden on the voting rights of at least 3% of its citizens.

So 97% of the population doesn't have to do a damn thing to be perfectly compliant. And the other 3% has to go get an ID. Wow, imagine if those numbers were applicable to Obamacare. China thanks us for our newfound LCD mentality.

 

[jhmd2000]

Yeah, we should pass the laws first to see if they hurt anybody. More evidence of jhmd's callous toward the disenfranchised.

No, we have to pass laws first to see what's in them. You're way ahead of the Pelosi curve if you want to find out their impact first.

No one is going to be disenfranchised by getting a free i.d. That's simply not a non-burden in the abstract, but if it is it doesn't come close to the individual mandate in scale, scope or impact. Again, big to small.

 

[DeacLaw05]

They should just make a mobile ID station like a Bookmobile or Bloodmobile and drive around cranking out IDs for several years then implement voter ID. I could get on board with that.

If that ever happened, how long would it take James O'Keefe to get undercover video of IDs being issued fraudulently? 5 minutes?

 

[BigTreeDeac]

No, we have to pass laws first to see what's in them. You're way ahead of the Pelosi curve if you want to find out their impact first.

No one is going to be disenfranchised by getting a free i.d. That's simply not a non-burden in the abstract, but if it is it doesn't come close to the individual mandate in scale, scope or impact.

You didn't wait until ACA was enacted before you decried it as an abomination of a law. How could you possibly make a judgement on that law before it was ever enacted? You surely have never read much, if any, of the actual law so all you have to go on is the impact it has had on citizens of this country which wouldn't even be clear this soon after "enactment"? So other than you liking one law (voting ID) and hating another law (ACA), would you care to explain why a person must take a "wait and see" approach to the first but not the second? If you find yourself stumped, you may want to consult the dictionary about what hypocrisy is. That will probably clear it up a bit

 

[Deacfreak07]

If that ever happened, how long would it take James O'Keefe to get undercover video of IDs being issued fraudulently? 5 minutes?

Wait, people can get fake IDs?!? I thought this safeguard was IRONCLAD? We've all been had by a ruse!

 

[jhmd2000]

Virginia DMV has at least one of these.

Edit: make that five of them.

Uptown white boys strike again.

 

[PhDeac]

Wait, people can get fake IDs?!? I thought this safeguard was IRONCLAD? We've all been had by a ruse!

What is Law05's solution to keep the poors from faking IDs and voting all the time?

 

[Deacon923]

Great. So what does that have to do with whether or not requiring ID for in-person voting is a good idea?

Nothing. It has a great deal to do with hypocrisy and transparent motives, though. Voter ID was never an issue until a whole bunch of blacks and poors and youngs turned out in larger than expected numbers and elected a black Democrat president.

We've done this thread before, rehashed all the arguments already on this thread, so I'm going to leave it there.

 

[jhmd2000]

You didn't wait until ACA was enacted before you decried it as an abomination of a law. How could you possibly make a judgement on that law before it was ever enacted? You surely have never read much, if any, of the actual law so all you have to go on is the impact it has had on citizens of this country which wouldn't even be clear this soon after "enactment"? So other than you liking one law (voting ID) and hating another law (ACA), would you care to explain why a person must take a "wait and see" approach to the first but not the second? If you find yourself stumped, you may want to consult the dictionary about what hypocrisy is. That will probably clear it up a bit

Perhaps because they are vastly different laws. I didn't realize we had to take identical positions on different pieces of legislation. I also didn't realize people who post on The Tunnels couldn't recognize the Nancy Pelosi quote on the ACA.