Federal Appeals Court Reinstates Texas Voter ID Law

[Dos Equis]

He is not using a rare example. It is a well-known example that is very common. The other ways to get an id are difficult and time consuming, which is the point of the law.

It is very common for someone to not have ever been issued a birth certificate, or a drivers license or other ID, and be unable (rather than unwilling) to get that resolved in the two to four years between elections?  BS.

Yes getting an ID is time consuming.  So what?  I stood in line for half an hour the other day to pay my car registration.  That was after I spent over an hour getting a mandatory safety check.  Dealing with the government at any level usually takes time.

[Al Doggity]

Says who?  You should have to prove you are eligible to vote.  And the failure to do so can have consequences, line Al Frankan's margin of victory in his Senate race likely being decided by ineligible felons who voted.

Even the Supreme Court that overturned the initial ruling doesn't agree with that. The ruling acknowledged that requiring ID is  likely a discriminatory practice, but that wasn't the basis of the case. It was whether or not it's too close to the election to reverse course.

[Al Doggity]

It is very common for someone to not have ever been issued a birth certificate, or a drivers license or other ID, and be unable (rather than unwilling) to get that resolved in the two to four years between elections? 

Yep.

Yes getting an ID is time consuming.  So what?  I stood in line for half an hour the other day to pay my car registration.  That was after I spent over an hour getting a mandatory safety check.  Dealing with the government at any level usually takes time.

We're not talking half an hour. We're talking years. Here's an article about the obstacles one woman has faced, and her story is not unique.

http://articles.philly.com/2014-03-28/news/48634147_1_certificate-viviette-applewhite-south-carolina

[Dos Equis]

Even the Supreme Court that overturned the initial ruling doesn't agree with that. The ruling acknowledged that requiring ID is  likely a discriminatory practice, but that wasn't the basis of the case. It was whether or not it's too close to the election to reverse course.

I didn't read the decision, but if they did say you don't have to do anything to vote then I disagree with them and you.  If you don't have to do anything, then you don't have to prove you live in the state, or the right district, or that you're not a convicted felon, etc., etc.  That doesn't make sense. 

[Dos Equis]

Yep.


We're not talking half an hour. We're talking years. Here's an article about the obstacles one woman has faced, and her story is not unique.

http://articles.philly.com/2014-03-28/news/48634147_1_certificate-viviette-applewhite-south-carolina

Thanks for the link.  Sad story, but she isn't precluded from having a BC created as the story says.  It's hard for her get her background facts straight.  She just has to work harder to get her stuff together.  Unfortunate, but not a reason to forego having someone prove their identity.  And certainly isn't the norm. 

By the norm we're talking about someone with no BC, no DL or ID, who is unable to remember her life history, and wants to vote.  These kinds of extraordinary situations don't really prove much.

[polychronopolous]

I hope I get to see a few of these losers get turned away when I go to the ballot box in a few weeks.

[Al Doggity]

Thanks for the link.  Sad story, but she isn't precluded from having a BC created as the story says.  It's hard for her get her background facts straight.  She just has to work harder to get her stuff together.  Unfortunate, but not a reason to forego having someone prove their identity.  And certainly isn't the norm. 

By the norm we're talking about someone with no BC, no DL or ID, who is unable to remember her life history, and wants to vote.  These kinds of extraordinary situations don't really prove much.

The question was not whether or not she was precluded from getting an id, but whether or not it was an issue that took years to clear up. And there was never any discussion or guidelines set down as to what "norm"we're talking about. Goodrum brought up a valid point and you claimed it was an exceedingly rare example. It's not. The article speaks to that and I can vouch for it myself. As I have posted about before on here, I volunteered as a homeless advocate in my early 20s and one of the main things I did was help clients get into programs and on social assistance. Even for someone living in NYC without a birth certificate of ID, it is a minimum 6 month process to get those things. There were clients  born out of state who were still waiting to have their shit sorted out throughout the entire year and a half I was there. This woman's story is not extraordinarily rare.


And even if it wasn't so common, that doesn't negate the fact that the law is bullshit. when you look at the ridiculous gerrymandering that goes on with these election maps, it's obvious that these sleazeballs are out to get any little advantage they can get. And this is not a small advantage. This is a stroke of evil genius designed solely to disenfranchise  lower income voters who would likely vote democratic.  

[Al Doggity]

I didn't read the decision, but if they did say you don't have to do anything to vote then I disagree with them and you.  If you don't have to do anything, then you don't have to prove you live in the state, or the right district, or that you're not a convicted felon, etc., etc.  That doesn't make sense. 

That isn't what I said or what I said they said. You do have to prove you are eligible to vote- by registering to vote. This is an effective system that is rarely tampered with.

[Dos Equis]

That isn't what I said or what I said they said. You do have to prove you are eligible to vote- by registering to vote. This is an effective system that is rarely tampered with.

That's exactly what you said:  "You SHOULDN'T have to do anything to vote."

[Dos Equis]

The question was not whether or not she was precluded from getting an id, but whether or not it was an issue that took years to clear up. And there was never any discussion or guidelines set down as to what "norm"we're talking about. Goodrum brought up a valid point and you claimed it was an exceedingly rare example. It's not. The article speaks to that and I can vouch for it myself. As I have posted about before on here, I volunteered as a homeless advocate in my early 20s and one of the main things I did was help clients get into programs and on social assistance. Even for someone living in NYC without a birth certificate of ID, it is a minimum 6 month process to get those things. There were clients  born out of state who were still waiting to have their shit sorted out throughout the entire year and a half I was there. This woman's story is not extraordinarily rare.


And even if it wasn't so common, that doesn't negate the fact that the law is bullshit. when you look at the ridiculous gerrymandering that goes on with these election maps, it's obvious that these sleazeballs are out to get any little advantage they can get. And this is not a small advantage. This is a stroke of evil genius designed solely to disenfranchise  lower income voters who would likely vote democratic.  

The issue is about whether requiring an ID is voter suppression.  It doesn't preclude people from voting.  It means some have to work harder than others.  That's life.

I have been doing volunteer work in poor communities for my entire adult life.  I'll be at an elementary school in Waianae in a couple weeks.  That's the hood.  Kids from that community have to work much harder to succeed than kids from higher income families who attend private school.  I don't see this ID situation as much different.

[Al Doggity]

That's exactly what you said:  "You SHOULDN'T have to do anything to vote."

Obviously, I meant this extra bullshit. I was just being glib in response to Shockwave's temper tantrum. For clarity's sake, I also think you should have to show up to the poll or at least vote by absentee ballot to have your vote counted. I don't think ballot officials should be expected to read your mind.

[Al Doggity]

The issue is about whether requiring an ID is voter suppression.  It doesn't preclude people from voting.  It means some have to work harder than others.  That's life.

I have been doing volunteer work in poor communities for my entire adult life.  I'll be at an elementary school in Waianae in a couple weeks.  That's the hood.  Kids from that community have to work much harder to succeed than kids from higher income families who attend private school.  I don't see this ID situation as much different.

  People shouldn't have to work harder to be able to vote.

[Kazan]

People shouldn't have to work harder to be able to vote.

Last time I checked you had to be a US citizen to vote, how exactly is that being verified?

[Dos Equis]

Obviously, I meant this extra bullshit. I was just being glib in response to Shockwave's temper tantrum. For clarity's sake, I also think you should have to show up to the poll or at least vote by absentee ballot to have your vote counted. I don't think ballot officials should be expected to read your mind.

The only obvious thing is what you said, but I'll accept your clarification. 

I take it you have no problem with illegal aliens, convicted felons, people who live outside of the district, etc. voting? 

[Dos Equis]

People shouldn't have to work harder to be able to vote.

That's silly.  One voter might drive a 2014 BMW and live one mile from the polling station.  Another might live in a rural area with no car or bus service.  Which person has to work harder to vote?  The facts of life are that some people have to work harder than others to enjoy the conditional rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Voting isn't any different. 

[Al Doggity]

The only obvious thing is what you said, but I'll accept your clarification. 

I take it you have no problem with illegal aliens, convicted felons, people who live outside of the district, etc. voting? 

Honestly, I'm not philosophically opposed to ex-cons voting, but there are other ways besides voter ids to verify people have the right to vote. With or without government issued ids, those measures have to be used.

[Al Doggity]

That's silly.  One voter might drive a 2014 BMW and live one mile from the polling station.  Another might live in a rural area with no car or bus service.  Which person has to work harder to vote?  The facts of life are that some people have to work harder than others to enjoy the conditional rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Voting isn't any different. 

This example is silly. First of all, there's not one polling station.
There are several. Why are there several? To make it as easy as possible to give the most people access. To limit the amount of work people have to do to vote. It would be impossible to have a polling station the same distance from everyone's home. It is not impossible to hold an election without attempting to disenfranchise voters along economic lines.

As for your comparison between voting access and the hard knock lives of lower income children, does your volunteer work entail intentionally making their lives more difficult? If there was a  way to even the playing field so that the kids you work with were able to get the same results from the same amount of work, wouldn't that be the better option? That's not something possible to enforce insitutionally. But it is possible to create as level a playing field as possible for a basic right.

[Shockwave]

...but this IS the argument. You SHOULDN'T have to do anything to vote. The point of the law is to create a barrier to vote where there shouldn't be one.

thats retarded. Proving who you are helps ensure the voting process is fair by trying to keep everyone voting only for themselves.

Saying you shouldnt have to do anything is retarded.

[Straw Man]

Yep.


We're not talking half an hour. We're talking years. Here's an article about the obstacles one woman has faced, and her story is not unique.

http://articles.philly.com/2014-03-28/news/48634147_1_certificate-viviette-applewhite-south-carolina

Yep

Not unique at all

Here are a couple more from Texas

These disenfranchised voters seem a lot less isolated than the cases of voter fraud that are alleged (although we know phony) impetus for these laws.

Over and over the courts have concluded that these laws were not created to prevent voter fraud but instead intended to create obstacles to prevent ELIGIBLE VOTERS from VOTING...... PERIOD

Take the case of Floyd Carrier. An 84-year-old retiree, Carrier worked with his son to get a copy of his birth certificate. After a three-month wait, the birth certificate finally arrived. It was useless: His last name was misspelled, his birth date was wrong, and his first name was listed as “Florida.” To amend the document required more money, more months of waiting and more documentation, including – wait for it – a birth certificate. Several months later the amended certificate finally arrived. It said Floyd Carrier, which was an improvement, but the birth date was still wrong.

Or consider Sammie Louise Bates. Living on a fixed income, Bates has had trouble coming up with the $42 required to get her birth certificate. As she explained, “I had to put the $42.00 where it was doing the most good. It was feeding my family, because we couldn’t eat the birth certificate … [a]nd we couldn’t pay rent with the birth certificate, so, just wrote it off.” The new law, Ramos pointed out, “makes some poor Texans choose between purchasing their franchise or supporting their family.” An unconscionable choice.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/nicole-hemmer/2014/10/14/texas-voter-id-law-is-unconstitutional-and-discriminates-against-minorities

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

If an elderly person wants to vote, he or she should prove his identity just like everyone else.  And if they were never issued a birth certificate, which is likely extremely rare, there are other ways to get an ID. 

You cannot use examples so rare they are like unicorns to prove a point. 

There are 600,000 people in Texas who lack the proper ID by the state's standard to most.  The vast majority of them are poor, black, and elderly. 


The Republicans pushed for this law for political gain....nothing else.  Voter fraud is where your unicorn is.....there's nothing for anyone to gain from it.  People rob banks....not ballot boxes

[Kazan]

There are 600,000 people in Texas who lack the proper ID by the state's standard to most.  The vast majority of them are poor, black, and elderly. 


The Republicans pushed for this law for political gain....nothing else.  Voter fraud is where your unicorn is.....there's nothing for anyone to gain from it.  People rob banks....not ballot boxes

Nothing to gain from it 

[Archer77]

There are 600,000 people in Texas who lack the proper ID by the state's standard to most.  The vast majority of them are poor, black, and elderly. 


The Republicans pushed for this law for political gain....nothing else.  Voter fraud is where your unicorn is.....there's nothing for anyone to gain from it.  People rob banks....not ballot boxes

So what.  It's their responsibility to procure a photo ID.  They are adults and a photo ID is needed for most everything.  Stop treating blacks like children who are incapable of being responsible with their lives.   Why don't you donate your time and help people obtain IDs.   

[Vince G, CSN MFT]

So what.  It's their responsibility to procure a photo ID.  They are adults and a photo ID is needed for most everything.  Stop treating blacks like children who are incapable of being responsible with their lives.   Why don't you donate your time and help people obtain IDs.   

What a ridiculous statement.  You can't donate time to get ID's....and again, its just a sad ploy by Republicans to win elections which will seriously backfire on them eventually. 

[Shockwave]

What a ridiculous statement.  You can't donate time to get ID's....and again, its just a sad ploy by Republicans to win elections which will seriously backfire on them eventually. 

wow.

Excuses excuses excuses.

I got an ID today and it took 5 min and 10 dollars.

Holy fucking shit what a hassle to have something BASICALLY REQUIRED TO LIVE AND FUNCTION IN THE US

[Al Doggity]

wow.

Excuses excuses excuses.

I got an ID today and it took 5 min and 10 dollars.

Holy fucking shit what a hassle to have something BASICALLY REQUIRED TO LIVE AND FUNCTION IN THE US

Gee, if it was such a breeze for you, then certainly no one else's experience will be different.