Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: We won one!

Posted 2 years ago on March 8, 2012, 9:44 p.m. EST by bensdad (8977)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Judge Bars Voter ID in Wisconsin Sandra Khalifa Thursday 8 March 2012

“The impact of the law hit disproportionately hard on the elderly, indigent and minorities.”
A Dane County judge has granted a tem­po­rary in­junc­tion against Wis­con­sin’s new voter iden­ti­fi­ca­tion law, which he called “the sin­gle most re­stric­tive voter el­i­gi­bil­ity law” in the coun­try.
Cir­cuit Judge David Flana­gan’s rul­ing Tues­day means the voter ID re­quire­ment would not apply for the April 3 pres­i­den­tial pri­mary and local gen­eral elec­tion.
A spokesman for At­tor­ney Gen­eral J.B. Van Hollen said the state likely would ap­peal, and other state elec­tion of­fi­cials pointed out that other as­pects of the law will re­main in ef­fect, such as hav­ing to sign a poll list.
The NAACP’s Mil­wau­kee branch and im­mi­gra­tion and worker rights group Voces de la Fron­tera had sued over the law last year. A trial on whether to grant a per­ma­nent in­junc­tion is sched­uled for April 16.
In grant­ing the in­junc­tion, Flana­gan found that the plain­tiffs likely would suc­ceed at trial and would suf­fer ir­repara­ble harm with­out the court’s inter ven­tion.
“It’s a solid vic­tory for vot­ing rights and all vot­ers in the state of Wis­con­sin,” said Richard Saks, at­tor­ney for the NAACP, at a news con­fer­ence Tues­day at St. Mark’s AME Church, 1616 W. Atkin­son Ave.
“It’s a win for the hun­dreds of thou­sands who have dif­fi­culty or find it im­pos­si­ble to get voter ID under Act. 23.”
Rep. Jeff Stone (R-Green­dale), a co-spon­sor of the voter ID law, said: “Ob­vi­ously, I’m dis­ap­pointed. It’s a good piece of leg­is­la­tion. It’s a good law. I’m look­ing for­ward to hav­ing the de­ci­sion ap­pealed, and I be­lieve at end of the day we will have a photo ID law in ef­fect in Wis­con­sin.”
With the pri­mary loom­ing, he won­dered whether con­fu­sion would ensue.
“Un­for­tu­nately . . . we will have our elec­tion sys­tem going back and forth,” Stone said. “But we will have to allow the legal sys­tem to work its way through to get an an­swer. We have con­sti­tu­tional law.”
Flana­gan’s 11-page order cov­ered the his­tory of Wis­con­sin Supreme Court rul­ings up­hold­ing votes even when they might have run afoul of tech­ni­cal pro­ce­dural re­quire­ments im­posed by the Leg­is­la­ture. He dis­tin­guished Wis­con­sin’s voter ID law from In­di­ana’s voter ID law that was re­cently up­held by the U.S. Supreme Court.
He also re­lied on the tes­ti­mony and re­ports of the plain­tiffs’ ex­pert, pro­fes­sor Ken­neth Mayer of the Uni­ver­sity of Wis­con­sin-Madi­son, whose work con­cluded there were more than 220,000 con­sti­tu­tion­ally qual­i­fied vot­ers in Wis­con­sin who don’t have the type of ID re­quired under the so-called Act 23 voter ID act, as well as af­fi­davits from 40 res­i­dents de­scrib­ing the costs and dif­fi­cul­ties they en­coun­tered while try­ing to ob­tain a photo ID to allow them to vote.
Na­tionofChange fights back with one sim­ple but pow­er­ful weapon: the truth. Can you do­nate $5 to help us? Flana­gan found the im­pact of the law hit dis­pro­por­tion­ately hard on the el­derly, in­di­gent and mi­nori­ties.
Not sur­pris­ingly, re­ac­tion to the de­ci­sion was split along party lines.
Re­pub­li­can Sen­ate Ma­jor­ity Leader Scott Fitzger­ald of Juneau said: “Photo ID is a rea­son­able re­quire­ment to make sure that your vote isn’t can­celed out by some­one else’s fraud. Fif­teen states re­quire photo ID for vot­ing, and 16 more re­quire some other form of ID. Our photo ID bill was based on an In­di­ana law that was up­held as con­sti­tu­tional by the U.S. Supreme Court, and I am con­fi­dent that the ap­peals process will once again strike down an ac­tivist Dane County judge.”
He added: “With as many ques­tion­able sig­na­tures, mul­ti­ple sign­ers and con­victed felons as we’ve al­ready seen in the re­call process, it makes more sense now more than ever to make sure our elec­tions are clean going for­ward.”
Cullen Wer­wie, a spokesman for Gov. Scott Walker, is­sued the fol­low­ing state­ment:
“Re­quir­ing photo iden­ti­fi­ca­tion to vote is com­mon sense – we re­quire it to get a li­brary card, cold med­i­cine and pub­lic as­sis­tance. Gov. Walker looks for­ward to im­ple­ment­ing com­mon sense re­forms that pro­tect the elec­toral process and in­creases cit­i­zens’ con­fi­dence in the re­sults of our elec­tions.”
He con­tin­ued: “En­sur­ing the in­tegrity of our elec­tions is one of the core func­tions of gov­ern­ment. We are con­fi­dent the state will pre­vail in its plan to im­ple­ment photo ID.” ‘Mod­ern-day poll tax’
De­moc­rats cheered the de­ci­sion.
Mayor Tom Bar­rett said, “As Judge Flana­gan states in his opin­ion: ‘The right to vote is a fun­da­men­tal, defin­ing el­e­ment of our so­ci­ety. The Wis­con­sin Supreme Court has de­scribed it as a “sa­cred right.’ “
U.S. Rep. Gwen Moore said, “This law does noth­ing but at­tempt to re­turn us to an era of Jim Crow pol­i­tics. Re­quir­ing strict photo ID at the polls is noth­ing more than a mod­ern-day poll tax.”
Moore added, “Our right to vote is one of the most pro­tected rights of any that we enjoy in our de­mo­c­ra­tic sys­tem. In fact, the Con­sti­tu­tion was amended five times over our na­tion’s his­tory to re­flect this Amer­i­can ideal.”
Chris­tine Neu­mann-Or­tiz, ex­ec­u­tive di­rec­tor of Voces, said: “Jus­tice has been served, but jus­tice doesn’t come easy, and we’re here to de­fend and en­sure vot­ing rights to all vot­ers.”
She and oth­ers in­volved in the case said, how­ever, that al­though they pre­vailed, the court bat­tle is not over.
Saks noted that the ini­tial re­quest for a tem­po­rary in­junc­tion was de­nied by Flana­gan. But then the par­ties asked for a hear­ing and after a full day of tes­ti­mony from Mayer and af­fi­davits and other ev­i­dence, the tem­po­rary in­junc­tion was granted.
Gov­ern­ment Ac­count­abil­ity Board Di­rec­tor Kevin Kennedy said the board will take steps to sus­pend en­force­ment of the photo ID re­quire­ment and dis­cuss im­pacts of the change with local elec­tion of­fi­cials and the pub­lic.
He noted that Tues­day’s rul­ing does not af­fect other parts of Act 23 – the re­quire­ment that vot­ers have 28 con­sec­u­tive days of res­i­dency and sign a poll list, and end­ing the prac­tice of al­low­ing some­one else to vouch for a voter with­out proof of res­i­dence.
A spokesman with the at­tor­ney gen­eral’s of­fice, which de­fended the law, said the of­fice was re­view­ing the rul­ing.
The League of Women Vot­ers of Wis­con­sin also has filed suit in state court chal­leng­ing the voter ID law. That suit is based on the equal pro­tec­tion clause of the state con­sti­tu­tion and says the Leg­is­la­ture never had the au­thor­ity to pass such a law.
On Mon­day, Dane County Cir­cuit Judge Richard Niess cleared the way for that case to pro­ceed by dis­miss­ing chal­lenges from the state that chal­lenged the league’s stand­ing to bring the case and the nam­ing of Walker in the case, said An­drea Kamin­ski, ex­ec­u­tive di­rec­tor of the league.
A hear­ing on the con­sti­tu­tional issue in the case will be at 1:30 p.m. Fri­day, she said.

46 Comments

46 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by pewestlake (947) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

Dear Haters: You conservatrolls are the most emotionally needy codependents on earth. You ain't fooling anyone, cupcakes. And none of you have managed to present a single relevant fact that shows alleged voter fraud to be either widespread or even happening much at all. And just to put your juvenile hysterics into "perspective" (<-- see what I did there, huh? huh?) even if voter fraud was as widespread as some paranoiacs imagine, given the numbers of votes in any given election and the average margins, the probability of such fraud actually making a difference in the outcome of an election is so close to zero as to be indistinguishable from it. Put that in your statistics pipe and smoke it, dumbasses.

[-] 2 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

Welcome to the Wisconsin voting Booth. Papers Please! Hmmm, they don't seem to be in order. Move away from the line. Next!

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

people should vote with theur names to be sure they are counted

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by slinkeey (244) 2 years ago

Can one thing be explained? How does being a minority make it harder to get an ID?

I find that demoralizing to say one ethnic group is not as capable as another.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

the minorities that find it harder to get IDs are the old such as a 90 year old widow with no driver's licence who cannot find her 70 year old marriage licence who has n o drivers licence or the young like a ny college student in tennessee with no tennessee id
IT IS VOTER SUPRESSION pure and simple

[-] 1 points by Normalperson1 (119) from Indianapolis, IN 2 years ago

And there is not one person on the left that is wants to help here get the ID, It is NOT voter suppression is it a lazy person that knows they need id and does not do anything to get it or ask for help from any one, then they show up to vote and act all surprised that they may not get to vote.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

Mr. koch troll: TELL IT TO THE LAZY MARINE:
Voting is an AMERICAN right
Do you support our veterans?
Willing to Die for Their Country, But Unable to Vote in It by Jon Sherman,

In Wisconsin, a veteran with only his or her Veterans Affairs (VA) ID card will be turned away from the polls. "Unjust" and "unconscionable" don't cover this — we need uglier words to describe the disfranchisement of citizens who've served.

I met Sam Bulmer (pictured above) in Milwaukee at VETS Place Central, a shelter which provides transitional housing to homeless veterans. Sam spent 13 of his 63 years in the U.S. Air Force, serving some of that time with the Air Force Training Command. In Iceland, he served as an instructor during preparations for the Iran hostage crisis mission. Sam has no accepted photo ID card for voting in Wisconsin, but he has his VA ID card hanging around his neck. And he can't get a state ID card for free? Actually, no. The Division of Motor Vehicles won't believe Sam is a U.S. citizen until he shows them a certified copy of his birth certificate from Kansas, a document he can't obtain because Kansas wants him to show ID to get it. Sam isn't living off the grid or on the margins — he's worked for General Electric as a trainer on nuclear power plant control room simulation and is currently interviewing for jobs.

Last November, I sat with over 60 veterans like Sam in the basement of VETS Place Central where we talked about Wisconsin's new voter ID law. The vets stood when they spoke. One wanted to know why a military service ID card is good under the new law, but a photo ID card issued by the VA isn't. The VA ID has the veteran's name, a photo, and, if applicable, a special eligibility indicator, such as Service Connected, Purple Heart, or former POW. I didn't have an answer for the soldier — I don't think anyone does. I could tell they were shocked and angry, and rightfully so. That veteran who asked the question hit the nail on the head. Walking back to my car, I scribbled his point down on my legal pad, and the next morning, it was a claim in our lawsuit. The ACLU brought suit to defend the right of veterans to vote with their VA ID cards, because of the outcry in that room.

The two other veteran-plaintiffs in the ACLU's case both come from Chicago. Rickie Harmon served in the U.S. Army. Since he got out, he's drawn designs for electroplating equipment, worked with the Salvation Army, packed IV bags at Abbott Labs, and cleaned dishes after recruit meals at Naval Station Great Lakes. He's now in a work therapy program trying to make the transition to a permanent housekeeping position at the VA medical center. The law tells someone like Rickie that being a veteran isn't enough to vote in this country — he needs a seal of approval from the same agency that administers driving tests. Carl Ellis lacks a copy of his birth certificate. He's been living on food stamps, dealing with medical issues, and can't spare the money to pay for a certified copy of his birth certificate. He's told us: "If I can serve my country, I should be able to vote for who runs it."

This issue is coming to a head. Gil Paar, an Air Force veteran in Mt. Pleasant, Wis., recently took a stand. Even though he had a Wisconsin driver's license, he went to the polls and insisted on using his VA ID card to vote. It looks like he caught the attention of some state legislators, and we hope they come to their senses. The men and women who have served this country will be watching.

[-] 1 points by Normalperson1 (119) from Indianapolis, IN 2 years ago

You can re-post that forever and is not not change anything from what i stated.

[-] 0 points by center93 (12) 2 years ago

"Can one thing be explained? How does being a minority make it harder to get an ID?"

I'd like to know that answer too. I'm a minority and I had no problem getting mine.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

So would you mind a voter ID law to help push away voter fraud as a minority

[-] -1 points by slinkeey (244) 2 years ago

Does it bother you having a group of people telling you that you are too dumb to get an ID?

[-] -1 points by center93 (12) 2 years ago

I've never been bothered by the insults of children... they're children, after all. They know not what they do.

However, I do see it as indicative of a much deeper pathos in the collective mind of the United States which I find disappointing, to put it mildly.

[-] 0 points by slinkeey (244) 2 years ago

Good way to put it..

[-] -1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

We have voter ID laws in Indiana and im happy for that. It push away voter fraud

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

And before those laws were in place, how many people were convicted of voter fraud? Seriously - do you know ANY statistics about this issue? ANY at all?

[-] 1 points by Normalperson1 (119) from Indianapolis, IN 2 years ago

When you get elected by a large margin then no one cares if there was fraud and will not look for any, But when you get elected by lest then 1% a little fraud one way or the other can win or lose the election. It is better to have the rule to protect the right to vote then to let fraud take that right away.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

it doesn't matter. like DKA said we need to make it more efficient way of voting. In the old days the reason we didn't have ID laws was because IDs weren't around till the 20th century. IDs are provided free and we have to have them to have jobs, buy drinks, drive, get into movies, use banks/credit unions, libraries, video games school the list goes on and on. So why shouldn't we have and ID when we vote. It helps the system know that the people who are voting are true voters. In Indiana i might add the voter cards are free see here (http://www.in.gov/bmv/2837.htm) so whats the big deal it helps the system become better and we need a better system. I personally have 10 photo IDs from work school drivers license etc. Voter fraud is real happened in Wisconsin and my home town

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

I personally have 10 photo IDs from work school drivers license etc. Voter fraud is real happened in Wisconsin and my home town AND
you are proving your own voter fraud!
FYI
If you own a gun, are you a murderer?
sorry if I'm overly logical.

[-] 1 points by DanielBarton (1345) 2 years ago

No and No

[+] -7 points by DKAtoday (23964) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

It is not something that is much noted or talked about.

It might lead to a better system.

This is the thing about any system - They take maintenance and need continuous improvement. Weed out the loop-holes ( defects ) while inviting enhancing participation ( encourage strength ).

[-] -1 points by Normalperson1 (119) from Indianapolis, IN 2 years ago

You can not get a job with out ID and yet the left wants you to vote and not prove you are how you claim you are.

[-] 4 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

And why do you say "left"?
Voting is an AMERICAN right
Do you support our veterans? Willing to Die for Their Country, But Unable to Vote in It
Posted by Jon Sherman, Voting Rights Project at 4:36pm

In Wisconsin, a veteran with only his or her Veterans Affairs (VA) ID card will be turned away from the polls. "Unjust" and "unconscionable" don't cover this — we need uglier words to describe the disfranchisement of citizens who've served.

I met Sam Bulmer (pictured above) in Milwaukee at VETS Place Central, a shelter which provides transitional housing to homeless veterans. Sam spent 13 of his 63 years in the U.S. Air Force, serving some of that time with the Air Force Training Command. In Iceland, he served as an instructor during preparations for the Iran hostage crisis mission. Sam has no accepted photo ID card for voting in Wisconsin, but he has his VA ID card hanging around his neck. And he can't get a state ID card for free? Actually, no. The Division of Motor Vehicles won't believe Sam is a U.S. citizen until he shows them a certified copy of his birth certificate from Kansas, a document he can't obtain because Kansas wants him to show ID to get it. Sam isn't living off the grid or on the margins — he's worked for General Electric as a trainer on nuclear power plant control room simulation and is currently interviewing for jobs.

Last November, I sat with over 60 veterans like Sam in the basement of VETS Place Central where we talked about Wisconsin's new voter ID law. The vets stood when they spoke. One wanted to know why a military service ID card is good under the new law, but a photo ID card issued by the VA isn't. The VA ID has the veteran's name, a photo, and, if applicable, a special eligibility indicator, such as Service Connected, Purple Heart, or former POW. I didn't have an answer for the soldier — I don't think anyone does. I could tell they were shocked and angry, and rightfully so. That veteran who asked the question hit the nail on the head. Walking back to my car, I scribbled his point down on my legal pad, and the next morning, it was a claim in our lawsuit. The ACLU brought suit to defend the right of veterans to vote with their VA ID cards, because of the outcry in that room.

The two other veteran-plaintiffs in the ACLU's case both come from Chicago. Rickie Harmon served in the U.S. Army. Since he got out, he's drawn designs for electroplating equipment, worked with the Salvation Army, packed IV bags at Abbott Labs, and cleaned dishes after recruit meals at Naval Station Great Lakes. He's now in a work therapy program trying to make the transition to a permanent housekeeping position at the VA medical center. The law tells someone like Rickie that being a veteran isn't enough to vote in this country — he needs a seal of approval from the same agency that administers driving tests. Carl Ellis lacks a copy of his birth certificate. He's been living on food stamps, dealing with medical issues, and can't spare the money to pay for a certified copy of his birth certificate. He's told us: "If I can serve my country, I should be able to vote for who runs it."

This issue is coming to a head. Gil Paar, an Air Force veteran in Mt. Pleasant, Wis., recently took a stand. Even though he had a Wisconsin driver's license, he went to the polls and insisted on using his VA ID card to vote. It looks like he caught the attention of some state legislators, and we hope they come to their senses. The men and women who have served this country will be watching.

[-] 0 points by Normalperson1 (119) from Indianapolis, IN 2 years ago

I say the left because they want no proof at all. They do not care who votes where they come from and how many times they vote if given the chance. and you know i am right about that. Most of the voting mistakes but not all are on the left. I really like it when the dead vote.

Now saying that if the law is Voter ID then it should be free. You should NOT have to pay a tax to vote. Also if the government can find you to pay taxes then you should be able to get an ID. Also where are all the activist helping to get the ID for people that need it? Do they even care or that they simply using this as a issue to stop any voter ID?

[-] 3 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

Seriusly, have you looked at the number of voter fraud cases in America? Summary

  • Fraud by individual voters is both irrational and extremely rare.
  • Many vivid anecdotes of purported voter fraud have been proven false or do not demonstrate fraud.
  • Voter fraud is often conflated with other forms of election misconduct.
  • Raising the unsubstantiated specter of mass voter fraud suits a particular policy agenda.
  • Claims of voter fraud should be carefully tested before they become the basis for action.

Fraud by individual voters is both irrational and extremely rare. Most citizens who take the time to vote offer their legitimate signatures and sworn oaths with the gravitas that this hard-won civic right deserves. Even for the few who view voting merely as a means to an end, however, voter fraud is a singularly foolish way to attempt to win an election. Each act of voter fraud risks five years in prison and a $10,000 fine - but yields at most one incremental vote. The single vote is simply not worth the price.

Because voter fraud is essentially irrational, it is not surprising that no credible evidence suggests a voter fraud epidemic. There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often.

Many vivid anecdotes of purported voter fraud have been proven false or do not demonstrate fraud. Although there are a few scattered instances of real voter fraud, many of the vivid anecdotes cited in accounts of voter fraud have been proven false or vastly overstated. In Missouri in 2000, for example, the Secretary of State claimed that 79 voters were registered with addresses at vacant lots, but subsequent investigation revealed that the lots in question actually housed valid and legitimate residences. Similarly, a 1995 investigation into votes allegedly cast in Baltimore by deceased voters and those with disenfranchising felony convictions revealed that the voters in question were both alive and felony-free.

Many of the inaccurate claims result from lists of voters compared to other lists - of deceased individuals, persons with felony convictions, voters in other states, etc. These attempts to match information often yield predictable errors. In Florida in 2000, a list of purged voters later became notorious when it was discovered that the “matching” process captured eligible voters with names similar to - but decidedly different from - the names of persons with felony convictions, sometimes in other states entirely. A 2005 attempt to identify supposed double voters in New Jersey mistakenly accused people with similar names but whose middle names or suffixes were clearly different, such as “J.T. Kearns, Jr.” and “J.T. Kearns, Sr.,” of being the same person. Even when names and birthdates match across lists, that does not mean there was voter fraud. Elementary statistics students are often surprised to learn that it is more likely than not that among just 23 individuals, two will share a birthday. Similar statistics show that for most reasonably common names, it is extremely likely that at least two people with the same name in a state will share the same date of birth. The ostensible “matches” may not represent the same person at all.

Other allegations of fraudulent voting often turn out to be the result of common clerical errors, incomplete information, or faulty assumptions. Most allegations of voter fraud simply evaporate when more rigorous analysis is conducted.

Voter fraud is often conflated with other forms of election misconduct. It is extremely rare for individuals to vote multiple times, vote as someone else, or vote despite knowing that they are ineligible. These rare occurrences, however, are often conflated with other forms of election irregularities or misconduct, under the misleading and overbroad label of “voter fraud.u201D Some of these other irregularities result from honest mistakes by election officials or voters, such20as confusion as to whether a particular person is actually eligible to vote. Some irregularities result from technological glitches, whether sinister or benign: for example, voting machines may record inaccurate tallies. And some involve fraud or intentional misconduct perpetrated by actors other than individual voters: for example, flyers may spread misinformation about the proper locations or procedures for voting; thugs may be dispatched to intimidate voters at the polls; missing ballot boxes may mysteriously reappear. These more common forms of misconduct are simply not addressed by the supposed “anti-fraud” measures generally proposed.

Raising the unsubstantiated specter of mass voter fraud suits a particular policy agenda. Voter fraud is most often invoked as a substantial problem in order to justify particular election policies. Chief among these is the proposal that individuals be required to show photo ID in order to vote - a policy that disenfranchises up to 10% of eligible citizens. But the only misconduct that photo ID addresses is the kind of voter fraud that happens as infrequently as death by lightning. Therefore, it suits those who prefer photo ID as a policy to lump as much misconduct in with “voter fraud” as possible, to create the impression that the problem is far more significant than it actually is. Moreover, to the extent photo ID is suggested as a solution to the perception that voter fraud occurs, it behooves those who prefer photo ID to reinforce the unsubstantiated perception that voter fraud exists.

Claims of voter fraud should be carefully tested before they become the basis for action. Researchers, reporters, public figures, and policymakers confronted with claims of potential fraud should carefully examine these claims before calling for action. Do the claims depend on matching information from one list to another? Is the matching process accurate? Does a match indicate an illegal vote, or is there a more plausible explanation? Is corroborating evidence available? If there actually appears to be a problem, can it be addressed by existing practices, or is a new solution necessary? If so, will the solution proposed - usually either a mass purge or photo identification - really solve the problem? Is the solution sufficiently burdensome that it becomes a greater problem than the problem itself? These basic questions are crucially important to evaluating claims of voter fraud, but are all too often unasked and unanswered.

THE WORK OF THE BRENNAN CENTER

  • National. Following the report of the 2005 Commission on Federal Election Reform (the “Carter-Baker Commission"), the Brennan Center and Commissioner Spencer Overton prepared a detailed analysis of claims of voter fraud, in the context of a proposed photo identification requirement.

  • Georgia. In October 2005, a Georgia federal court enjoined implementation of a law requiring photo ID. On appeal, the Brennan Center filed an amicus brief, arguing that the threat of impersonation fraud, which the law purported to combat, is extremely rare and could not justify the ID requirement.

  • Indiana. In 2006, the Brennan Center filed an amicus brief with the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, presenting evidence that impersonation fraud is an extremely unlikely and unsubstantiated occurrence. The brief also catalogued practices in other states that effectively curbed election fraud without resorting to restrictive identification requirements.

  • New Jersey. In 2005, a list of purported and potential fraudulent votes was delivered to the state Attorney General, with a demand that the voter rolls be purged. Together with a prominent political scientist, the Brennan Center demonstrated the flaws in the matching process used to generate the list, and proved that the vast majority of allegations in fact yielded no reason for concern.

[-] -1 points by Normalperson1 (119) from Indianapolis, IN 2 years ago

If there are those that need help getting ID then help them. I need to have ID to drive, and ID to buy beer, ID to cash a check at a bank, ID to to get a job, ID to apply to get a loan. ID when i see a doctor. So now we are moving to ID to vote. GET OVER IT.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

get over it - you are an Rs

[-] 0 points by Normalperson1 (119) from Indianapolis, IN 2 years ago

????

[+] -4 points by B76RT (-357) 2 years ago

i have to show a photo I.D. to change cable equipment. dems against a photo I.D. to vote is about insuring voter fraud.

[-] -2 points by sunstar (-14) 2 years ago

bensdad is what is considered a hard core Leftist and logic and facts don't mean a thing to him. Only feelings and Ideology,that's all that appeals to most all Leftist's.

[-] -2 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago
[-] 1 points by Normalperson1 (119) from Indianapolis, IN 2 years ago

My dad is a Vet and has ID, My Dad's dad was a vet and had ID, There is not perfect system, but do not stand in the way when we try to correct the errors it has. And i know this can also cause errors and that will be corrected. But doing nothing is stupid.

[-] -3 points by Perspective (-243) 2 years ago

Dumbass. What's your problem with proving who you are? If you're too lazy to get an ID I doubt you're going to vote anyway unless the Dems come around and offer you some cash to get on the bus and go vote. You're a moron.

[-] 3 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

tell it to the judge, sweetheart

[-] 0 points by Perspective (-243) 2 years ago

No,while I think its a stupid decision I'm asking you.What's your problem with proving who you are? Explain how this does anything other than prevent voter fraud?

[-] -2 points by BlackSun (275) from Agua León, BC 2 years ago

Good luck. He/she/it/a Marxist won't answer you with anything coherent. The Left knows that they are likely to get votes from people that are illegal aliens and not legally registered. In other words fuck the Constitution. We are right and the end justifies the means. That is why the Left is the enemy of everything decent and good in humanity. Liberalism poisons everything it touches.

[-] 3 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

How many " votes from people that are illegal aliens and not legally registered." have been documented in the last ten years? convicted? On Rs voter official claimed 950 zombies voted in the recent state election - the legal investigation disclosed the closest they got to a zomie vote was one voter who died a few hours AFTER he legally voted.How many " votes from people that are illegal aliens and not legally registered." have been documented in the last ten years? convicted? Do you have the co urag e to prove me wrong? If you can, I'm sure the koch brothers will double your pay.

[-] -1 points by sunstar (-14) 2 years ago

Great post.

[-] -1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

Tell it to the Marines, troll:


NASHVILLE, Tenn. - This Super Tuesday marked the first time that Tennessee voters were required to show a Photo ID in order to vote. One local veteran believes that the new law imposes limits on voter rights, rights he fought to protect.

The Voter ID law passed in April 2011 and made Tennessee one of 15 states to require photo identification for voting. The new law has been met with controversy as some believe it alienates voters and makes it harder for minorities and senior citizens to vote. Supporters of the law believe it cuts down on voter fraud and provides more clear voting results.

Under the law, anyone who cannot show proper identification can only vote by provisional ballot. The law does not affect individuals in nursing homes or group homes.

When former marine, Tim Thompson went to vote on Tuesday he was asked for an ID and refused to show it. While Thompson does have photo identification, he refused to show it in protest of the new law.

"I've earned my right to vote, for them to not to let me vote because I don't have an ID .Don't get me wrong, but I refuse to show it. I refuse to abide by this law," he said.

Thompson said he feels that the Voter ID law prohibits the poor, many minorities and the elderly from the right to vote, a right that many have fought and died for.

"I've used this for 37 years," he said showing his voter registration card, "This was good enough for my father, it was good enough for my grandfather and I refuse to show you a picture ID,"

[-] 1 points by Normalperson1 (119) from Indianapolis, IN 2 years ago

When Indiana got the ID law you would have to live under a stone so NOT know what you need a photo ID to vote. It was in TV, Radio, newspaper, Hell i even saw a billboard on the highway about the it. So if you choose to not get any ID then you only had yourself to blame. But that was Indiana. I do not live in Tenn. This Vet choose to not show an ID that he had, well good for him, But in the end he choose not to vote it seems. Does he still NOT wear a seat belt in a car? it was not the law when for like forever but it is the law now. ( I not not know if there is a seat belt law in Tenn. but there is one here in Indiana.) the point is laws change.

[-] 1 points by bensdad (8977) 2 years ago

voting is a right IN THE CONSTITUTION driving a car is not

[-] 1 points by Normalperson1 (119) from Indianapolis, IN 2 years ago

Voting maybe a right but then who have the right to vote? So can i bring in boat of french citizens to vote? when the time to vote happens and they happen to be in America at that time. why can they not vote then. ?

[-] 1 points by SmeggitySpooge (78) 2 years ago

The same Nashville that make it a crime to occupy/camp out on public property not marked for camping? Offenders to be punished by fines and year in jail. Signed by Gov Haslam (D)

The same Nashville and state of TN that used to ship hispanics across the border, Sundquist (D) and Gaylord (Big Money Corp) and then passed laws allowing them to get no-document driver's licenses whil citizens that did not look hispanic had to jump through all the hoops.

Show the ID, not a problem.

It would seem the (D) succumbed to pressure of rational people sick of having their communities over-run with illegals.

[-] 1 points by Bonobobastic (8) 2 years ago

Not that it has bearing on your point but Haslam is actualy a member of the Republican political party. I imagine there inexhaustible reserves of (D)'s behaving conservatively. It is a tendency our species is quite used to, assuming there is enough xenophobia and non-specific fear to elicit it.

[-] 1 points by SmeggitySpooge (78) 2 years ago

They all look alike to me and it passed through TN's house with overwhelming support from both sides.