https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-georgia-republican-accused-voter-165220715.html https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cb...bus-bound-for-polls-stacey-abrams-brian-kemp/ Kemp, the republican nominee for Gerogia governor should have to resign from his post as secretary of state. He is abusing his power, using voter supression to stop Democrats from voting and attempting to tilt the election in his favor.
First, I don't know why African-Americans are disproportionately discriminated against by having state databases spell their name incorrectly. It seems as if everyone should have their name and birthdate recorded properly in the system. Why is it that only Democrats have their names spelled wrong? I agree with the author that it's unsatisfactory that that isn't fixed. (Going back to my disdain of the work of the bulk of gov't employees). But even if that's the case: so you can rest easy. No voter will be disenfranchised as long as they have a photo ID saying they are who they're supposed to be. You can't possibly think anything is wrong with that, right? Compare that with what's going on here in FL:
Man, do you know how much easier 5 letter names are to get right? Those 13 character names are difficult to spot a transposition.
Timing is very suspect as well as who much of this voter suppresion is targeting. Why now? If it's an issue then it should have been done a year ago so that those affected could have time to get it straightened out. How do you explain this one? https://ktiv.com/2018/10/18/iconic-dodge-city-moves-its-only-polling-place-outside-town/ and the one in Georgia where Kemp is leading the supresion where he is running for Governor.
Who are they supposed to be? If their name is spelled differently on two records, how do they prove that their photo ID shows who they are supposed to be and not who they are supposed to not be? May not based on what? Foreign sounding name? Registration as a democrat? I've got to say that BrianFromWA may not be a legal Florida voter - after all, look at his name, he's obviously FromWA. VOTER FRAUD! barfo
Crimes occur on sidewalks. Therefore, according to your logic, everyone should have to present picture ID to walk on a sidewalk. People abuse their freedom of speech. Therefore, according to your logic, everyone should have to present picture ID to use their freedom of speech. In the hierarchy of priorities, the right to vote trumps the lack of picture ID.
I hold to the high view of law and the Constitution. You don't get to vote unless you can prove you're eligible to. There are too many people in our country who cannot to be irresponsible about this. Doesn't seem too tough to me.
It specifically says that in the Constitution? What's the quote requiring you to prove it? I registered to vote so long ago that I've forgotten the procedure. Don't you have to prove your citizenship then,* so that proving it on election day is redundant? *birth certificate? drivers license? Social Security card? I don't remember, but only one of those three has a picture.
In FL, you have to have Driver's License or State-Issued ID, and your SSN to register. It's then checked at the booth to make sure the person coming in to vote is who they're supposed to be. Florida law requires identification, proof of date of birth, proof of residential address, and proof of social security number to get a Driver's License. Therefore, if you have DL or identification from the Licensing Office, you've already shown your citizenship and residency (both state and county). Requirements to Vote in FL
Nothing wrong with making sure only eligible people vote, but the way it is being done is in many cases intentionally very discriminatory. The whole system of voter registration is pretty lame - you could just use drivers licenses/state ids, and anyone who has one and is of age is eligible to vote. barfo
Okay, so the Constitution (Federal or state) doesn't specifically mandate ID as you implied. In Washington State, I just verbally told them my name and address, they crossed me off their list, and handed me a ballot. But since about 10 years ago, my county has required mail-in ballots. I miss the booth.
No, the Constitution mandates that only citizens can vote. In each of the Articles and Amendments dealing with voting (all of which deal with elections for federal seats, to be sure, so Portland's mayoral contest can be held however they want), the quote is "The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by..." and variously talk about sex, poll taxes, race, previous condition of servitude, age above 18, etc. And it says that "The Congress shall have the power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation." Because we have so many in the population who are here legally and ineligible to vote (felons, green-carders like my grandmother--while she was still alive--, foreign college students, etc) and cases of fraud (both sides), the method by which many states have chosen to enforce this at their level is by requiring photo ID. Again, I don't see where this is a problem. This is (IMO) why Shelby County v Holder started the run on "Voter ID" laws. There is no reason why anyone living legally in the US, citizen or not, should not have photo ID. (Slight Tangent: To go to Mexico and Canada for a week, my infant child required a passport.) We have government licensing set up all over to do that, and at least in MD, DC and FL (the last few places I've lived and worked) there are methods to get ID for free or "nominal" fees, and I know that my church helped a lady get an ID for (IIRC) $7. SCOTUS has continually stated that this isn't a poll tax. Now, I don't like the gerrymandering that takes place, but I've heard from both sides how it works and why they want it/want it differently/want a different line, and can see logic to both (and compromise). What Chris' article in the top insinuated (buses of people getting turned around to stop people from voting) is wrong if that was the case, and I think most would agree on that. However, working in DC (and having friends who are staffers and "political operatives" on both sides) I know full well that people are being paid handsomely to come up with whatever method they can get away with to get their people elected and their laws passed. Paying protesters. "Get out the vote" campaigns that exploit previous laws that were more in line with adding people to the rolls that taking off ineligible ones. For instance, I wrote to the State of WA to remove me because they were still sending me absentee ballots for military deployment--interesting, since I never got one during the 6 elections I was actually deployed--but when I bought my home and registered in FL I was still getting WA correspondence for jury duty, ballots and the like. They hadn't kept up with my move. Illegally, I could've easily sent in my WA ballot and voted in person in FL. And my guess is that there's a significant loophole for people who've moved from apartment to apartment--like my father-in-law--for years, getting registered at each address but not having their old addresses purged to get ballots sent and forwarded along the way. We have another lady at our church who I have been driving to her poll-worker training. Anecdotally, her recounts of the training are that they have to bend over backwards to ensure people can vote, because they don't want any cause for lawsuits, especially since Tampa (and FL) are very swing-y. What that means to me is that protections are only nominally in place for fraud (again, either way) in swing areas, even among people trying to do their job properly.
How do you justify the timing? This administration has done very little if anything to ensure no voter fraud from Russia or any other outside source but now all of a sudden voter purging comes in right before the election and pretty much under republican control. You don't find that at all suspicious?
It's not "all of a sudden", and I think it's the other way around. These laws (FL, TX, NC, others) started being proposed and enforced at a much greater rate around the time of Shelby County in 2013. As you even pointed out before, FL was starting this crackdown in 2012. The "timing" is from those (mostly, but not exclusively) Democrats who don't like that rolls have been purged, and are trying to bring it up as an election issue. AFAIK, you could register in FL up until yesterday if, for whatever reason, you had been purged incorrectly. (EDIT: The date was Oct. 15) They advertise how to check your status on the Dept of Licensing and Dept of Elections websites. Why are you concerned about outside voter fraud from Russia (which is absurd on its face, but whatever) and not on actual ballots/votes being fraudulently cast and counted? AFAIK, no Russian showed up at the ballot box (at least, in a place that required picture ID) and voted fraudulently. Multiple Americans did. AFAIK, no Russian manipulated the count of a ballot box. The Democratic Party in PA did in 1994 and caused a federal judge to seat his opponent into the State Senate instead. Interestingly, to head off any memes of "only 0.0000002214% of votes were fraudulent"...even the Washington Post delineates between "fraud" and "registration fraud" and doesn't count the latter as voting fraud. Maybe, partially, because it would add credence to the concept that we need stricter controls on voting? From their 2016 election recap: Note, I'm not saying this is a (D) or (R) problem, or that one's worse than the other. I'm saying that, because there is abuse of the system, it must be controlled. With strict penalties for illegal activity. Can we at least agree on that?
So when did Georgia first start purging votes? and why was the only polling station in Dodge City get moved far away to make it more difficult for those that live in that area (mainly poor people without transportation). Why not offer up transportation then for those to vote? Also, to believe that propaganda from Russia didn't influence in one way or another (no, you don't need to actually vote to interfere) is only ignoring a serious issue. If advertising and promoting a message isn't effective then why do companies spend billions of dollars on advertising and why are the Russians doing it if it doesn't create an advantage? To just brush it off as a non issue is being extremely foolish.
Not everyone has a state sponsored photo ID. There is a vast disproportionate amount of Blacks, other minorities and young people without such ID. Do we disenfranchise them, valid U.S. citizens. Requiring that is similar to requiring a poll tax. As for spelling the name correctly, how about really simple errors like a missing hyphen? Then there's the issue of just how many illegal votes are cast in a typical election? I've given you a figure of 37 out of the last one Billion cast. Not much of a problem in my book. Disenfranchising over 100,000 US citizens from voting seems like a bit more of a problem, again, in my book. https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2014/08/07/31-in-a-billion-election-experts-report-shatter/200359 There's a Washington Post article saying the same thing but I can't post the entire article or the link to the article because they require a subscription.
Yes. Because there's a difference between the Lanny Smith that lives in Portland and the Lanny Smith who lives in Burns. And the Lane Smith who lives in Portland. And the Portland Lanny shouldn't get to vote twice, just because he still has a McMinnville address that gets one ballot and his "real" registry for his Portland address. And because if someone doesn't want to do the civic duty of registering themselves with the government, I don't have much sympathy. Again, that's me. YMMV. I posted the FL link for anyone to check to see if there's an issue with their registry, and how to rectify it. You're not disenfranchised unless you don't have any ID. And even the WaPo article I posted says that that's not how you should read the bolded. The FL article showed that almost 200k active registered voters, shouldn't have been registered voters. If you think that less than 37 of those 200k voted, then
I'm pretty sure that's what's been done by churches and activist groups (of both sides) for a long, long time. Including those from the OP. Except, it seems that they didn't quite follow the rules... I don't think so. People vote how they want to. Facebook influences what the voter sees. Fox/CNN/MSNBC (if anyone watches that anymore) influences what the voter sees. Taylor Swift influences what voters see. Canadian citizen Jim Carrey puts out messages that influence what voters see. George Soros-funded advertising influence what people see. You're chasing a boogeyman. If you're advocating that, since we can't trust people to not be dumb, we must restrict media, restrict voting for people shown to be under the influence of propoganda, etc, I'd agree but say that it's unconstitutional.
