Texas Voter ID on Life Support
Third, knowledgeable courtroom observers tell me that at least 2 of the 3 judges on the panel have clearly made up their minds and will rule against Texas. Judge Robert Wilkins seems to be “looking for ways to start working on his opinion against Texas,” one tells me.
Fourth, and finally, the Supreme Court doesn’t offer much hope for this sinking ship. These cases turn on complicated statistical facts and circumstantial evidence of intent. Trial courts make factual findings and appellate courts are bound by those findings. Section 5 is a fact-centric law, and therefore the trial courts have enormous power to determine outcomes. Apart from an outrageous ruling in the district court, the Supreme Court may have little to say on Voter ID because factual findings will drive the outcome, not errors of law.
Other states can learn a lesson from what is happening in a Washington, D.C., courtroom to the Texas Voter ID law. Take as much time as you need to prepare the case. Keep the constitutional challenge close in time to the trial on the merits. Don’t generate statistical data that hurt your case. And most of all, be prepared to wage war in a battle of experts. Otherwise the burden shift of Section 5 will be the undoing of other state Voter ID laws.
Another state for Obama. Look for a large “graveyard” vote.
That’s laughable. Texas is one of the few states which didn’t need to resort to this to feel confident Obama won’t get the delegates.
Also, not to get too far out there, but maybe we were all a bit obvious about this, this year? Should have focused on a few tight states, and maybe not given the media so much material on “voter suppresion.”
Graveyard vote, maybe. Paid-off drunks and illegals vote more likely. But Texas voters, as a whole, will never go for the Democrat in a presidential election. No chance for Obama in Texas.
There is no way Obama will win Texas so this whole thing is moot. Unless Obama finds a way to bring in a few hundred thousand ineligible voters.
Good notes on how not to do it from Mr. Adams. Let’s see if other states are smart enough to follow.
Frankly, I see this as a good thing. I’ve seen no convincing evidence that voter fraud is a major (or even a minor) factor in the US at this time (historically, of course, that has not always been the case). Without such evidence, then even if only one person is prevented from voting who should have been able to, this law is unjustified.
So if even one person might be prevented from voting “who should have been able to” then it’s better to have early and often Chicago style voting. I’m sure Obama would give that his highest approbation.
And I suppose you would say it’s better to have 1,000 12 year olds sold beer than to have one 21 year old refused.
If you can show me that anyone IS voting “early and often”, I’ll support the bill, FeralCat. I’ve seen a lot of hysterical screeching on the issue, but the actual facts I’ve seen don’t support it – that we’re talking a couple of disputed votes per state. And that just isn’t worth disenfranchising even one person for.
As to your apples and oranges – well, everyone knows that such comparisons are quite useless.
Every illegal vote disenfranchises one person who voted for the opponent.
Yes. But 1 vs 167 000? By this bill’s own supporters, that’s the number that would be either discomfited or disenfranchised.
This bill isn’t worth promoting. It causes more problems than it solves…if it solves ANY. It has no value to the people or the political system of Texas or the US.
“Actual facts I’ve seen”….Sure. You and your fellow blind students choose to review stories that support your case. When IN FACT, there are dozens of stories highlighting attempts to game the system; mostly by those on your side of the fence. Isn’t it ironic that those testifying have to have I.D.s to get into the hearings. Talk about hypocrisy. We are facing the most important election in our lifetimes, and we make changes through the election process, but we make voting the ONLY thing in our society that does NOT require us to prove we are who we say we are. Wow. Now that IS a lot of screeching. Get a clue.
“Dozens of stories” just means “ongoing meaningless drivel”. Get this, please: anecdotal stories prove exactly nothing. Facts and figures have meaning – and I’m perfectly open to any such you can provide. So far, no one has even tried, which makes me strongly suspect that there aren’t any facts that support this point of view.
Believe what you like – I honestly don’t care. But when you want to make your beliefs the basis of legislation, get some facts to back it up.
Mr Cross,
What source do you use for your current facts and figures?
The official figures posted by the voting commisions of the various states. There may be other good sources, but I don’t live in the continental US at the moment – I have limited data sources.
If you can give me solid facts and figures that contradict this position, I will listen, I will consider, and if the data is compelling, I will change my view and support the legislation. I don’t think I’m being unreasonable about this – and I am trying to keep an open mind. But I don’t trust anecdotes, and I usually find that “what everybody knows” is dead wrong. So, give me some links to other data, or locations I can go to check it up. Prove your case. If voter fraud really is this much of a problem, that shouldn’t be difficult.
According to Mr. Cross. We have to wait for proof of a crime having been committed before we take steps to prevent that crime? I would suggest that, right now, many people feel as though the game is rigged and pointless. Anything we can do to regain confidence in the system is a good idea.
By the way, the Constitution leaves voter qualification to the states. It proscribes denying the vote based on race, gender or age (if 18 years or older) and proscribes a poll tax but does NOT identify the vote as a right. Now, the national government, in another overstep of its authority, is putting its nose in another place it doesn’t belong.
Did you miss the vote trucking scandals in the last few elections? I recall one incident where the only reason it became news was because the party stiffed the people they’d hired to be bussed.
And did you forget about the party white guy who managed to walk off with Eric Holder’s ballot?
You have seen no evidence, yet dozens of your people are currently sitting in a jail cell for their participation in voter fraud all across the country.
I find your standards of “no evidence” to be a little suspect.
If it is true and 2 million people in Texas don’t have ID that is 2 million people who can’t get a job, who can’t apply for social services, who can’t rent an apartment, who can’t get credit or even open a bank account. Wouldn’t it then be to these people’s advantage if the state were compelled to give them a voter ID for free?
My daughter and her boyfriend both recently graduated and both were required to provide a passport to prove their identity and citizenship to their respective employers. Others starting jobs with them were foreign nationals who had to have all their visa documents in addition to a passport. My son took a simple manual labor summer job. He was required to provide photo ID and his SSN and was E-verified and background checked. We currently live in Texas.
Well, I read an article yesterday that said voting in certain precincts in Philly exceeded 100% of the precinct population. How do you explain that? Also, James Burke of Acorn fame went to Eric Holder’s voting precinct and asked for his ballot. Even though Burke is a young white man and Holder is a famous older black man, the ballot was handed over immediately. How is that not an invitation to fraud?
Nobody is likely to be able to produce more than anecdotal evidence, Mr. Cross, but speaking for myself, I can state that I have a nephew who had a college girlfriend who boasted of having voted for Obama twice in ’08, once in her home town, and once in her college town.
And as a New Yorker, i’ve heard people on at least two social occasions boasting of having voted both in NY and in Florida, and laughing about how easy it is to do.
I’ve no doubt that my anecdotal evidence can be multiplied if not millions of times, then certainly at least hundreds of thousands of times.
Put simply, to not require photo IDs for voting is willful obtuseness bordering on the criminal (on the part of the Dems) or insane. Most likely a combination of both.
Well, finally someone willing to be reasonable. If the problem really is that widespread, I would agree, something needs to be done. Personally, I would say the next step is to take a look and see how big the problem is. I can think of several ways to investigate the problem – get the state police involved, do a full scale check for people listed in multiple counties, maybe some spot checks to ensure people voting live where they say they live.
Once we have a good grasp on the problem, then a reralistic and effective solution can be created. Maybe an ID card is the best system, or perhaps a more pro-active system of voter’s rolls. If we tailor the solution to the problem, we’ll have a lot fewer side effects. But to do that we need to gat what I’ve been asking for all along – facts and figures. I would CERTAINLY support initiating a process of doing so.
Your point is well taken regarding your dual voting example. College students vote in the town they are attending college as well as their home town via absentee ballot. Thus causing not only voter fraud but a disproportionate number in the youth vote count.
Considering that some cities have opted to have their votes counted by the Spanish firm there is no way to back track on those votes. I confirmed this information with both my senators office as well as my congressman. Not all states or cities will use this method only those that opt in. Check with your town or state for confirmation as to whether your vote will be counted in this manner. It’s a profoundly stupid concept if we are concerned about outsourcing.
In NH voter fraud is not an over riding problem yet we still passed voter ID overwhelmingly. It is not an imposition, it is a protection of the rights of legal voters. If one can’t get off their dead butt and get the necessary ID to vote in the next 4 months then their desire to vote is a hypocritical sham and wasted outrage.
Our grandson at 12 had a photo ID, necessary for school, travel, and opening a bank account. It’s no big deal. It’s also a good idea to carry it with you at all times in case of an accident.
How could we prove to you what is being done? You won’t let us check IDs!
You need photo ID to get on an airplane, cash a check, enter a federal building, enter a state courthouse, or attend an NAACP meeting with Eric Holder speaking. They are provided free for pedestrians who are on public assistance in most states already.
This is about enabling people to vote for registered voters who don’t show up. That’s what is happening, but the only way to either prove it or stop it is to require IDs.
You apparently never heard of the Al Franken debacle in Mn election….the 10,000 votes for Franken found in a back room of the polling station..Or more recently the bus loads of union workers from Michigan that came to Racine ,Wi to vote against the republican in the Walker recall election.Thank God Walker won in spite of all the democrat fraud that always is involved in elections.
Why would anyone object to showing a photo ID and who doesn’t have one? Those who wouldn’t be able to get one anyway?
Besides, it is a bit hypocritical for the Justice Dept. to go after states for wanting photo ID’s when you can’t even get into the Justice Department building without one OR any Obama event without one.
Key facts:
1) Voters are not being disenfranchised. One can still cast a provisional ballot.
2) It is extremely difficult to prove the full extent of voter fraud, but we know it occurs in documented cases where dead people and felons vote and when records show people vote in more than one state.
3) We know that dishonest people took advantage of per-vote financial incentives to submit fraudulent voter registration in South Dakota in 2002. Same story with Acorn in Ohio.
4) A reputable reporter, Byron York, tracked down cash being thrown around in the GOTV effort on an Indian reservation in the 2002 South Dakota Thune vs. Johnson election. Incentive appeared to be $10 per ballot cast.
5) John Thune lost in 2002. South Dakota passed a voter ID law. John Thune won in 2004.
“3. Kevin R. Cross
Frankly, I see this as a good thing. I’ve seen no convincing evidence that voter fraud is a major (or even a minor) factor in the US at this time (historically, of course, that has not always been the case). Without such evidence, then even if only one person is prevented from voting who should have been able to, this law is unjustified.
July 10, 2012 – 10:22 pm Link to this Comment | Reply
But when you want to make your beliefs the basis of legislation, get some facts to back it up.”
Neither have I seen convincing evidence that organized racial discrimination via the law is a major factor in the United States at this time. And yet we have this 2006 law.
You will yield on the Voter ID law.
There is only one reason for opposing voter ID, FRAUD.
What is wrong with the people that have no ID’s? This article mentioned Blacks and minorities will be the ones punished if there is a voter ID law. Why? Are they too stupid to figure out how to get an ID??? Are we to believe if not too stupid,they are too Lazy to get an ID??? Bull!!! Illegal alians are taking real paying jobs away from Blacks and Citizen minorities. These people should be the ones pushing for voter ID.
They already have plenty of ID. They need it when they get their Section 8, and when they get their EBT, and presumably when they are issued their subsidized cell phones.
No evidence, eh? Al Frankin?
Mr. Cross, perhaps you should search the YouTube videos of the woman who was “vote mining” in South Texas for a Democrat candidate. She was informed of the day that absentee ballots were mailed, and then, paid by the Democrat candidate, went to nursing homes and “helped” seniors, many of them with vision problems, cast their ballots.
Or maybe you could contact True The Vote and learn how many people were on the Harris County, Texas voter rolls that were a) dead b) illegals c) registered to vacant lots d) registered from 2-10 times at different addresses.
Voter fraud is rampant in Texas. Just ask Henry Bonilla who lost to Ciro Rodriquez after LaRaza and ACORN joined forces for a voter registration drive in that Texas district.
And maybe, just maybe, you should check your own states rules. You see, if you register by mail (under the MotorVoter Act) no proof of citizenship is required. Just check “yes” in the little box that says “Are you a citizen?” If the truth is “no” it doesn’t matter, if you get the voter registration card at your address, you’re good to go to the polls. But I am sure you think that everyone who has ever filled out the MotorVoter card is honest, right?
We have to end the process of vote mining, illegals registering and people getting multiple voter registration cards in Texas. And news flash, anyone who wants to rent a movie at Blockbuster must have a photo ID. But I guess renting a movie is more important to you than not having legal votes disenfranchise.
If you are an honest skeptic, you could do some research and find dozens and dozens of examples … confessions, convictions, etc of actual voter fraud. If however you are a dishonest skeptic you will stand your ground and keep telling others to do your research for you and, if no one does it for you, you will puff yourself up and believe you are right.
Getting a valid photo ID is so simple in this country that to not have one is only because the person doesn’t want to have one. And anyone who claims it is too difficult for some group is essentially saying that group is lazy or stoooopid. Are you saying blacks and latinos are lazy and/or stoooopid?
What evidence, exactly, do you expect to see? Unless the fraudsters are completely incompetent there will be no discernable evidence. The most you can claim is that there aren’t morons commiting voter fraud. I’m sorry but that’s not good enough for me.
Your premise is invalid, thus your conclusions are invalid.
There is no great onus in requiring people to prove their identity once or twice a decade. If you cannot be unassed to get yourself to the DMV at one point in the year how can you make any claim to being able to cast a reasoned vote. Voter ID improves the fidelity and the quality of the electorate.
Little evidence of voter fraud you say? Let me present Sen Al Franken, it only took them 5 months to “Find” enough votes for him to overcome incumbent Sen Norm Coleman. How about Harry Reid being 7 points down in the polls the night before the election, but ending up winning by 3 points. The State of Washington Gubernatorial election where the Republican had won on election night, but after several weeks, the Democrats had “Found” enough additional votes to win. Chicago–the capital of voter fraud. In Illinois, the current governor only won 3 counties, but he won the election. Unfortunately, vote early, vote often, vote Democrat is all too common.
I vote in Washington state (absentee more often than not, but that’s what my work requires) and I don’t have a problem with the Gubernatorial elections. It was unusual, but from my view (and I watched it closely) it was simply a case of the final vote going differently from the initial indications – and that happens often enough.
Exit polls are meaningless.
I don’t know about the Al Franken case. But I must ask – didn’t both sides have scrutineers? Observers? Were there not officials keeping watch? What did they say?
Your smug attitude is underwhelming. Ya’ know Kevin, if you believe that there is no voter or election fraud going on, then fine. Stupid is as stupid does.
We don’t have to prove sh#t for you.
1) You’re damn right you vote absentee more often than not. It’s the only way to vote in the state. Your ballot is mailed to you, has been for years.
2) Given (1) how, exactly, would an observer function in this state?
3) Even in a traditional polling state, what would a poll watcher be looking for to catch voter fraud? Sure, a poll watcher could concievably try to remember every single person who comes to their polling place and flag any duplicates. But that assumes the fraudsters aren’t registered in multiple preciencts, the poll watcher is the same person throughout the period polls are open, that the poll watcher has perfect memory, that the poll watcher isn’t compromised, and that fraudsters aren’t capable of casing the poll watcher and voting multiple times when he’s distracted.
You aren’t seeing evidence of a lack of voter fraud, you’re seeing a lack of evidence of complete idiots committing voter fraud. That tells me either you are an idiot, or you think all criminals are idiots, which makes you an idiot anyway. Not to mention the whole “Lack of evidence is not evidence of lack”
Come back when you’re willing to actually engage in logical thought.
I am engaging in logical thought. I seem to be the only one here who is, rather than making a bunch of assumptions and idiot ideology.
All I want is some truth. Facts. Figures. Not anecdotes, not “everybody knows” – because “everybody” is usually wrong. If you honestly can’t provide that, then I have to ask, why are YOU supporting this? Ideology? Fair enough, but it won’t convince others. Why else? Or are you just being led around like a sheep, and supporting what other people tell you to? I won’t do that.
Make your case, or get out of my face.
No, you’re not. You’re making an assumption as to the form of voter fraud and leaping that since the evidence of that form doesn’t exist there is no voter fraud. To anyone except a liberal that’s not thought, it’s rationalization.
Why do I support voter ID? Because in the course of about 30 minutes I figured out a way to allow myself to vote a dozen or so times under the current system, with no more investment than a couple of hours of my time. I assume there are people who wish to influence elections, are willing to commit fraud to do so, and are at least as intelligent as I am. I cannot disprove that fraud exists, therefore the conservative (in the engineering sense) assumption is that it is happening and the system should be modified to reduce it. I don’t for a minute think voter ID is going to eliminate fraud, but it will drastically increase the cost in time and money. Without significantly increasing the costs to legitimate voters.
I have been working on the voter registrations in our county. There are several people with registrations in two counties. There were several people with more that one ID. ID’s are not hard to find. You can still vote on a provisional ballot in many states without ID. I want my vote to count. I think that is as important as someone who doesn’t get to vote. Why don’t LULAC and ACORN get people the ID’s they need? They are spending energy just fighting.
If the Feds are right and 2 million people couldn’t vote then that is 2 million the Dems want voting for them. So it seems better 2 million people vote fraudulently than the sanctity of the vote. So those 2 million could vote often. Absurd.
You said you only wanted one case? How many cases do you need: 5, 20, 230? Do you want indictments, criminal charges or time served? What will it take for you to open your eyes and mind?
Here is a very small sample from Texas. All of htese situations would have been stopped with an ID. Oddly enough, all democrats. I discarded the cases where someone carried a ballot for someone else and didn’t know better or where the candidate had a box of blank ballots in his car.There are plenty more. Google. Other states have the same. Its epidemic.
- Dead voting in Texas
http://www.caller.com/news/2012/jul/06/allegations-voter-fraud-jim-wells-brooks-counties/
– Dallas illegal voting http://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime/headlines/20120227-former-dallas-county-jp-carlos-medrano-convicted-in-illegal-voting-case.ece
– Houston http://www.yourhoustonnews.com/woodlands/news/seven-indicted-for-voter-fraud-in-rud-election/article_fc1e9566-fc51-5d2e-8d93-056a8f4fd8dc.html
– Ft Worth Democrat Chairperson Voter Fraud http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/04/30/3924376/democratic-precinct-chairwoman.html
– Bowie County several persons and a Texarkana City Council member illegally possessed mail-in ballots of senior voters.
– Pecos Voter Fraud and intimidation of elderly https://www.oag.state.tx.us/oagnews/release.php?print=1&id=1620
– Alice ballot stuffing http://www.texaswatchdog.org/2010/05/illegal-vote-harvesting-south-texas-voter-fraud/1273422832.story
– Beeville resident pleasds guilty to voting in dead mother’s name
– Houston SEIU member files registrations but only 1,793 of 25,000 found to be legal so who will ever bother checking all the other registrations?
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=506_1285435654
If one sees no evidence, one is mimicking the 3 chimpanzees of Steve Allen vintage, who see no, hear no and speak no evil. The evidence, and I don’t pretend to offer a measurement, is overwhelmingly favoring the Democrats, meaning fraud by those casting ballots for Democrats.
If a state seeking passage of a photo ID law is offering ‘free’ photo IDs, including by mail, there is no hardship and risk of fraudulent voting is reduced, even if from trivial to less than that. Why should the burden of proof be akin to a murder trial?
there is so much fraud in minority majority districts in texas it’s not even funny. it’s open, it’s open, it’s admitted, it’s in biographies, it’s in reporters’ notes…..
obama stole the nomination from hillary in texas. democrats filmed documentaries about how he did it. democrats! not republicans!
any memoir of any big-wheel democrat in texas has heart-warming chapters about political fixing, back-room dealing, and vote finnoodling. and reporter-snogging. it’s all out in the open, retrospectively. catching them in the act? now that’s harder than it looks. but after they retire? the bragging to the tape machine starts.
and, dude, when the guy who wrote angela’s ashes writes heart-warming memoirs about voting multiple times, and how to do it? and still looks in the mirror to shave, rather than curling up with shame about peeing on the country that gave him refuge? that’s a problem. not just in texas.
It has become frighteningly clear, Barack Hussein Obama is utilizing DOJ to ram through as many anti-democratic, and possibly lawbreaking, edicts as he can. He has been doing so throughout his entire tenure, going back to the thuggish spectacle of Black Panther intimidation at the polling booths! In effect, an AG who refused to prosecute unlawful voter intimidation, is now fighting to suppress voter ID too. Outrageous.
The POTUS picked his AG very carefully, knowing full well that his racialist top law enforcement officer would be more than willing to usurp the law! In fact, Holder is not only gleeful about it, but contemptuous of the American people.
This is a tragedy of enormous proportions on many levels, but mostly because it has given law abiding citizens reasons to circumvent the law too. Lawbreakers will always do so, therefore, they do not require excuses.
For the above reasons, and so MANY more, it is incumbent, upon those who still hold dear the concepts of liberty and justice, to throw this corrupt gang out.Not doing so will have dire consequences, not only for the US, but for the free world.
My blog is chock full of running commentary, as well as my published op-eds on related subject matters-www.adinakutnicki.com
The Black Panther army may be out intimidating voters and no one will do anything about it. That’s the Holder/Obama DOJ for you.
went to your blog adina. good stuff. i hope to be visiting next year, if there are no bullets flying about.
this thing about people not having a legitimate i.d. to vote is laughable in our computerized society. i don’t even know anybody these days, white, yellow, red or black who doesn’t have several. there is nothing you can do in this country w/o one, and they are free. odd that this insanity should be an issue to d.o.j., but selling guns to murderous mexican drug cartel members w/o even attempting to track them seemed like a good idea.
the very fact that this even made it into court shows how far our whole system has fallen under our ‘most transparent administration ever’.
In relation to my previous posting (# 5), I refer the readers to one of the specific commentaries at my blog-’Leftist Dogma the Same World Over…..Freedom Loving People, Beware’.
http://adinakutnicki.com/2012/07/01/leftist-dogma-the-same-world-over-freedom-loving-people-beware-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki-32-2/
We (in Israel) feel, and relate to your (American) pain!
To paraphrase Adina: “We (in Canada) feel, and relate to your (American) pain!”
We have a bureaucratic, federal governmental cesspool called Elections Canada (EC), which is staffed by “progressives”. They use the power of their taxpayer-funded agency to both shill for the Liberals (our Democrats) and exempt them from rule after rule, while EC—in collusion with the consensus media—aggressively both manufactures infractions and pursues even a hint of Conservative (our Republicans) rule breaking.
E.g. Last April, in a “Let’s get out and vote!” initiative, an “irregular ballot” station was set up at the University of Guelph, so more students—guess whom they vote for?—could vote. About 700 students voted. Then what? The Conservative Party of Canada mounted a legal challenge to disqualify the votes, and although Elections Canada stated that the votes were valid [sic], it stated that further special ballots would not be permitted in the election. (So, if valid, how come other universities were not allowed to follow suit?)
What’s the same about “progressives” everywhere? They cheat 24/7/365, with no shame. Their object is to WIN at all costs. Kyrie eleison.
What we are seeing is that the citizens of non-favored states have no rights liberals will respect, and that they are not equal before Federal law.
As long as they are white, where they are automatically deemed racists *always* trying to put one over.
I guess, fairness, logic and the reasonable man have nothing to do the with the law anymore. Statistics from Universities, political correctness and affirmative action have taken their place.
By the way, down here in Texas, we’ve needed some type of voter I.D. reform since LBJ. Just sayin’….
Anyone opposing voter ID hasn’t read J. Christian Adams book Injustice. It goes into great detail on how voter fraud is done. Voter ID is just one of the things needed to stop it.
In order for me to purchase ammunition I must produce identification so as to prove that I am NOT a resident of Illinois (yes, you read that correctly) but if I were a resident of Illinois I would not have to produce identification so as to prove that I am a resident in order to vote. How do you like them apples?
Yeah, and lets look at the FDA requiring people to show id to purchase over the counter medications because some people use them to make meth. That is irony. The government makes ordinary law abiding citizens show id to buy these legal over-the-counter medications because people use them illegally but will not enforce an id law to keep illegal voters from voting. Oxymoronic is the name of our justice department.
Fly on the Wall:
Holder: Let’s stir the pot some more. Debbie, go on Rachel Maddow tonight and claim Speaker Boehner wants to require African-Americans to provide DNA evidence at the polls to prove they are who they say they are.
WASSERMAN SCHULTZ: Will do. I’ll also say Jesse Jackson told me last week he’s been hearing the voices of long-deceased African-Americans pleading for retroactive enfranchisement.
No voter ID – no ballot. Voter fraud is a felony, and requires jail time, so what is the problem? Go Texas, you are doing the right thing.
Shouldn’t the voter have some responsibilites as a citizen to be prepared to vote? Voter IDs meet the common sense test.
The “common sense test” will not be before the court in DC. The language of the law will be, and the posting describes that language.
This is the heart of the problem. Mr. Adams, an expert in these matters, educates us on the law, as it is written, enforced, and judged. Common sense and good intentions do not count, the issue will be decided by battling statisticians, focused on the word, “any” in a population of millions. As he has written, our current DoJ Civil Rights Division will not enforce the law, if the victims are white. Per their de facto policy, if this permits ballots among racial groups, which are illegal by unenforced laws, to be counted, so be it. As noted in the replies, if no experts will statistically prove that a problem exists, then no remedy can legally be allowed.
It is a Catch 22 reality, based on race. Our AG got a thunderous applause yesterday as he addressed the Texas NAACP on this issue.
For the majority of Americans who want a nation, free of racial hatred, and decent, honest elections, we must consider how to resolve this mess. It will start with a better class of national legislators, and a DoJ which upholds the law, as it was written, color blind. My deep sorrow is that the hope of Judge Sandra Day O’Connor, that our Civil Rights Laws, and racial hatred, are things of the past, is wrong. And the continuing reason? Our government.
“Mr. Adams, an expert in these matters, educates us on the law”
Mr Adams has proved to us that lawyers and legislators are not necessarily the brightest people in the room. I’ve heard and read some really dumb stuff in my life, (I’m 72 y.o.) but this really takes the 1st prize.
They may or may not be smarter than you, but in the end, what they do determines the outcome. Complain all you want, but the law is what it is, and the article here is accurate. Like a lot of things these days, the bombs were really planted over the past 20 years in innocuous-sounding legislation. Other egregious examples of candy-coated laws with nukes in them include the clean air act, the clean water act, and the violence against women act. Who could possibly oppose acts with names like that?
I didn’t say “smarter”, I said “brightest”, one can be smart and not be bright. Even a dumb person can intuit the right thing to do in most situations, a bright person can figure out solutions to problems.
The lawyer joke is that dumb lawyers become judges, the bright ones have brilliant careers and make lots of money.
It seems that the operant word is “any”.
Second, the biggest thing working against Texas is the burden shift and the 2006 Voting Rights Act reauthorization. The reauthorization required states to prove an absolute absence of any discriminatory intent or effect.
“Any” could include citizen or not, living or not, fictional or not. The constitution requires citizenship. It has not been specified exactly as to the need to be breathing, or not a cartoon. Let us see where the Roberts court can amend the “any” mandate.
If Texas is not willing to fight for such a basic measure of civility I’m going to lose all the respect for the USA.
Hey guys, all over the world a voter ID is the absolute minimum to consider an election a credible thing: and you let these “discriminatory” crap stand as a legitimate problem?!! Incredible, really.
Paolo Pagliaro, Italy
Where valid ID’s are required (Hint: Not when voting) FEBRUARY 21, 2012
http://www.mrconservative.com/2012/02/2072-where-valid-ids-are-required-hint-not-when-voting/
This makes me very sad.
Why would any rational human being object to presenting a photo ID to vote. It seems to me, any person too lazy, stupid or incompetent to obtain a photo ID should not be permitted to vote.
I find it unbelievably annoying that there are many people on the left raising a huge hissy fit about people having to show ID to vote, when it is legally I repeat legally impossible to go about normal day to day activities without having some form of ID. The list of even plain old everyday activities that require some form of ID is almost endless, so what is the hissy fit about liberals, what is your true motives (I know what they are: it begins with voter, ends with fraud and illegals are mixed in there somewhere) liberals, I know it might kill you, but try to be honest for once.
YOU “know it begins and ends with fraud, with illegals thrown in there somewhere” and yet you can provide no real evidence of a huge amount of people committing voter fraud. NOt voter registration fraud, but actual voter fraud. In spite of religions the world over, it is no virtue to believe in things without evidence. Believing that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction without evidence to back that up got thousand of Americans killed. Way to go people without critical thinking skills.
Mr. Adams, it seems you might be missing something. Granted, Section 5 gives Texas a big problem and the DoJ a lot of leeway. But it isn’t as if the Supreme Court hasn’t set precedence on voter ID laws, since they did a few years ago when they ruled 6-3 to uphold Indiana’s voter ID law. Obviously, Indiana isn’t covered by Section 5, but that doesn’t mean the Indiana precedent isn’t relevant if Texas wants to push this, provided there’s time to get this quickly to the Supreme Court.
Crawford has very little relevance to this case, the extent of which is beyond a PJ Media article.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/11/texas-trial-day-one
from article
By Monday when the trial started, DOJ’s claim about the number of Texans without a photo ID had changed once again. This time, Elizabeth Westfall, the DOJ lawyer leading the charge against Texas, claimed that “at least 1.4 million registered voters in Texas lack any form of state-issued ID accepted under SB 14, and those voters are disproportionately Hispanic and black.”
Westfall failed to mention to the court the hundreds of thousands of ineligible voters that DOJ, Catalist and Ansolabehere deliberately left on its list. The expert hired by the state, University of Texas Professor Thomas Sager, analyzed the DOJ’s list of those who supposedly lack photo identification and found:
More than 57,000 of the voters were listed as “deceased” in the Texas Department of Public Safety’s driver’s license database.
More than 290,000 of the voters are over the age of 65 — and therefore able to cast mail-in-ballots without having to show any photo identification.
More than 260,000 voters are listed as “in suspense” on the Secretary of State’s Voter Registration List because they had moved or left the state — and therefore are ineligible to vote.
More than 450,000 were successfully matched to state-issued photo identification records — an obvious, plain, and grievous “error” by DOJ.
The last mistake proved to be quite embarrassing to DOJ on the first day of trial. Two of the individuals listed by the Justice Department and its collection of “experts” as not having a photo ID included Texas Election Director Keith Ingram and his wife, both of whom have Texas driver’s licenses, as Ingram testified on the stand. DOJ and Ansolabehere also made other mistakes that led Sager to conclude that more than 1.45 million voters were incorrectly listed by DOJ as not having an ID.
***************
seems the doj numbers are not adding up.
now that doesn’t mean the court will actually care..
that was written by Hans A. von Spakovsky , iirc you mentioned him in your book.
I live in Fort Bend County, Texas which is adjacent to Houston/Harris County. On 3/30 and 4/5, voter registration cards destined for heavily Republican areas went missing. Thousands of them. There is currently an investigation underway. Failure to implement Photo Voter ID is going to jeopardize legal voters. Whoever has illicitly come into possession of these ORIGINAL voter registration cards, can steal their vote. All they have to do is beat them to the polls. No one knows what they look like. Blockage of Texas’s new Photo Voter ID laws will simply enable Obama and the Democrats to steal another election.
Many of these Hispanics do not have photo ID because they are here ILLEGALLY and should not be voting anyway. This is a metropolitan area. No way anyone should not have photo ID. I am married to a Hispanic.
Okay, so if this goes against Texas, why can’t they just call for an immediate referendum or the state legislature calls an immediate special session (whichever would be appropriate) and declares all voter ID cards shall be free? Can’t Texans do that? As a conservative who hates higher taxes, I would nonetheless HAPPILY pay any additional taxes required to fund free voter ID cards if it meant illegals would be prevented from voting. I bet a majority of Texans would, too. Bring it on.
That would not protect the voters of Fort Bend County that have had their registrations stolen. Only Photo ID will do that. Many more than needed to flip the County Democrat.
Okay, that would be great as long as you make sure they don’t have to pay for their birth certificate also. Because in texas, to get the FREE id, you have to pony up for a copy of your birth certificate, and if you are a married female who took her husbands name, you need a copy of your marriage license. So make sure all those are free too, and then provide transportation to all those who need it to go the office to get these documents then transport them to the DMV. Nicki Haley famously said she would take anyone in here state that needed a ride to the DMV. Some took her up on it…and she declined to give them the ride. A liar as well as a Republican who can now only win elections by keeping the other side from voting.
Just ignore the federal courts and go ahead with your plan to dump dead voters.
It was the states in a convention that created the federalist system.
The states did not create the federal 10 mile square district to :
over turn our elections.
over turn our laws.
sue the states.
have federal judges sit in judgement of the state. there is NO constitutional basis for the feds to interfere with the states. they are empowered to rule on Federal issues, not state issues.
pass one size fits all.
tax the people and deny the return of such by penalalties.
print fiat $ and raid the treasury of our country.
put our national debt into a death spiral by unconstitutional spending.
own vast tracts of land in the 50 states and territories in violation of the consitutional definition of federal ownership of facilities.
institute a 2 party system of privilege thereby negating any real elections in our republic.
issue laws and regualtions by non-elected agencies.
give federal law enforcement jurisdiction in the 50 states.
there is more, but i only have so much space here
harv
Taxi4nia
push 1 for English ONLY in the USA
The burden shift seems absolutely un-American. There must be something similar in CA in the treehugger cases, because as soon as the huggers FILE a suit, for example in the Delta Smelt water issue, the water is immediately shut down. They have never proven beyond a reasonable doubt that water is an issue to the smelt, let alone THE issue. Nor have they proven ANYTHING, because the case was only FILED, not decided based on evidence garnered from proven scientific fact. (If I’m wrong and the case was decided, just use this as an imaginary example).
In another case, the huggers decided to file suit claiming out of thin air that a 100+ year old practice of planting fish in streams/rivers/lakes/etc. is detrimental to the eco-systems, without any evidence what so ever to back it up. The mere fact that it had never been studied at all, by anyone ever, was enough to shut it down. There was no proof by them, or anyone, one way or the other because there was never any studies because there was never any problem. There still wasn’t a problem, but the huggers just assumed it’s probably not good because it’s not natural. That was their entire premise! But as is all too common now, the dept. of fish & game were guilty (of nothing) until they could prove their innocence. Like above, they had to prove it did NOT harm the systems, even though there was not one drop, not even a hint, that it did any harm what so ever! It was completely shut down when filed, until our tax dollars paid for studies to prove it did no harm, and then resumed some years later. Outrageous.
Always in these hugger cases, the events they don’t approve of that trigger their lawsuits, (water/logging/drilling/etc), are immediately shut down as soon as filed. The person/company/etc are always guilty until they can prove their innocence. This is bassackwards to the way our system of justice in this country is supposed to work! And whoever/whatever is being sued, or even harassed, as in someone filing bogus violation complaints to some local/state/federal agency(ies) if they don’t have the money to hire attorneys and pay for the proof they need, they are SOL! Many times it’s just too costly and the huggers have won by merely filing or complaining. That’s what they hope for.
The whole darn thing is truly un-American! Even ANTI-American!
Another recent example is the case of the landowners (from Idaho?) that just won their SC case, which only gave them “the right to sue” the out of control EPA who refused let them build their home on their own land. They’ve spent thousands already, and only have won the right to sue! They still have to now sue them, which will cost even more thousands. They too were/are essentially guilty until they can prove their innocence!
This is the opposite of freedom, liberty, the right to own property, be the driver of your own life, and definitely disastrous to the pursuit of happiness! Doesn’t this violate their rights in some way, thus making it illegal? This entire premise of being guilty until proving innocence needs to end up in the SC. Then it could nullify the practice everywhere it has infected. (Of course, if the SC were actually doing their job(s), we would NOT now have the most anti-American monster of all…obamacare!!!)
Is there any hope for us, or did they completely kill the experiment?
Every election, voters have a choice between the ballot box and the bullet box. America has been distinguished by having a political structure which dampens the strongest passions of the voters, such that in each election season, they resort to the ballot box. This is the genius of the structure of our government as created by the founders. For the past 100 years, democrats have done whatever they could to undo this.
The second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence says:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to ABOLISH it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by ABOLISHING the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new guards for their future security — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. — The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let facts be submitted to a candid world.”
This, by the way, is the real reason that democrats hate the 2nd Amendment.
I’ve been a registered voter for 40 years and have voted in every election it has been my privilege to take part in. This is the first time I’ve ever heard otherwise calm and reasonable people mutter under their breaths about the bullet box. That is a frightening trend, and it wasn’t conservatism that pushed them there. This is the direct result of the treasonous policies of an overbearing and autocratic presidency which no longer observes the Constitution except for use as toilet paper, and which has usurped the powers reserved for Congress by the Constitution. For its own part, this is the Congress which no longer observes the Founders’ intent in the Constitution, using the Commerce clause to exert power over the people for the thinnest of justifications. The only reason all of these charlatans get elected is because we keep HOPING that they will redeem themselves. But once they get to that den of thieves on the Potomac, they lose all interest in the people who sent them there, preferring instead the company of their own kind. They behave as if this is their right, to suckle at the public teat and grow fat on the backs of their constituents. WE, the voters, are equally guilty because we permit it.
The reason democrats support voter fraud is because that is what it takes to get themselves reelected, their policies wrecking everything they touch. They are criminals and they deserve to be turned out. Holder deserves prison, but it will never happen. H.L. Mencken famously said, “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want and deserve to get it good and hard.” He was right. This is why the Founders created a constitutional republic, where the rule of LAW, not MAN is the foundation for our political and legal heritage. Democrats practice divide and conquer politics. The voters forget that this is a constitutional republic, not a democracy, and they demand bread and circuses. Congress is all to willing to give it to them because it distracts them from the truly horrible way their government functions.
If Obama is reelected, it could take generations to undo the damage he does. At that point, it may become necessary to exercise the right of the people as stated by Thomas Jefferson to alter or abolish the government…….and it is Obama and the fundamentally irresponsible and illiberal policies of the democrat party which will have pushed us there.
I have no use for such people.
What no Roberts on this court to “find” something, for once, in our favor?
When are we going to wake up to the fact that the left owns the courts and at some point we may have to act outside of the law to save America. Remember the left always uses the courts and the Constitution against us because they know we believe in both and try to uphold both.
All this discussions about voter ID… that’s just crazy… IMO it’s absolutely clear and necessary that one must show a proper identification to vote. How else will you determine, that the person in front of you is really the person he/she says he/she is??? Everybody who is against voter-ID wants to cheat. Period!
In Germany it worked like follows (at least as I lived there): I received a postcard from my city with the details where my polling-station is, etc. Then I had to present this card and a photo-ID – unless the folks knew me in person and knew that I was the person on the voter-list. And that is how it should be.
If someone is “to poor” to pay for a photo ID (I understand, that some sixpacks beer and the i-pod and the new chrome-rims for the car are more important than a voter ID for 10 bucks), I would suggest, that people on welfare will get one free. The equipment at the motor-office is there anyways, the staff too, the material is maybe a buck. Give it for free to “the poor” and then there is no excuse. You don’t have a photo-ID, you don’t vote. Period!
Too much fraud already happened – usually by the leftists
Good. Now dead people, felons and Mexican citizens can vote. Republican I am certain.
Not only is it outrageous that the states are presumed guilty until proven innocent, nowhere does anyone make the obvious observation that whether or not an individual has an ID is the individuals’ responsibility. No one and nothing in the voter ID law stands in the way of obtaining one. They’re even provided free. This negligence is tantamount to a person who has an ID but chooses not to vote. If they choose not to vote, are they not to blame? Or is somone else to blame for not dragging them to the polling place? Must they be dragged to get an ID, too? If they are too stupid or indifferent to get an ID, even through the mail, why would anyone who believes elections are important insist that they vote?
Now I know why nations and empires collapse–they go mad and commit suicide.
I live in Texas and I can assure you that the major cities all have mass transit available. Here is a link to VIA, the system in San Antonio – http://viainfo.net/ Don’t tell me that she could not get her id. The mere fact that she was able to get to Washington, D.C. belies her statements. After reading the article by Hans Von Spakovsky, http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/11/texas-trial-day-one, I am more encouraged that Texas will at least be able to take the case to the Supreme Court. Holder and all the attorneys he has hired need to go.
This whole voter ID scam is laughable. I’d be willing to bet that all of the so called potential disenfranchised hold at least one photo ID in the form of a drivers license, credit card and I’m sure that most have a SNAP card. You know I have to show ID (albeit a copy of a utility bill will suffice) to access the Fort Worth dump. Having served twenty six years in the military I have had to produce my ID card on numerous occasions and was alway proud to do so because I believe those requesting it were protecting my rights and privileges. Why not for the right and privilege to vote. Talk about reverse discrimination! Too damn bad the Justice Department under the guidance of Withholder doesn’t invest its energy in real issues of law enforcement rather than trumped up election year issues. I guess it is really true that we have taken justice and hidden it in the law. This whole thing makes me sick as an American. Lets Hope for Change!!
If the court rules against Texas, so what do it anyhow, oBUMo does not care what the court has to say, so why should Texas. And as slow as the courts move it will be next year before they hear the case.
Texas is passing than law they donot need the GOP is afraid that people are going to vote Demoncrate this year. If I win than election by 100,000 vote and there are 3 case of voter faud I still win as it make no different at all. There are still tea bagger and GOP who refuse to believe that our current president is born inamerica and the refuse to accept any proof that he was.I watch 98% of the OJ trail on TV than I would have vote not guiely as the state didnot prove anything. The talking head on TV where only given sound bite to base they opion on. The Michael Jackson case I would have vote not guiely as no crime took place.
Brian, you’re a numbskull.
Just in case the ID thing is blocked, get out the inkwells and prevent multiple voting with that ink-stained finger that was successfully used in Iraq. I would proudly wear that ink stain to prove I had voted.
The South Carolina Voter-ID Case is the next adjudicated trial by a three-judge panel to watch to contest the December 23rd, 2011 DOJ preclearance objection asserting that the state did not sustain the burden of non-discrimination in suffrage on the basis of race or membership in a language minority, which denies consensual approval to implement Act R54 signed into law by Governor Nikki R. Haley on May 11th, 2011. The federal three-judge panel assigned by DC Circuit Chief Judge David B. Sentelle in that trial is composed of Circuit Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh (Bush 43 appointee), District John D. Bates (Bush 43 Appointee), and District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly (Clinton Appointee). The trial was originally scheduled for July 26-27 and August 1-3 with a rendered ruling by early September. The reason that trial is now delayed by seven weeks is that South Carolina submitted taped recordings and transcripts of the legislative session after the June 25th deadline in the second trial schedule. Under Act R54, a voter is obligated to furnish valid photo identification deemed appropriate by law to a poll worker. A registered voter who does not currently possess a valid photo identification may obtain a photo ID from the DMV or county election board office free of charge so it does not assess a prohibitive poll tax unduly burdening the right to vote in violation of the 24th Amendment under the Supreme Court ruling in Harman v. Forsennius 380 U.S. 528 (1965) or in violation of the 14th Amendment in Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections 383 U.S. 663 (1966). Act R54 replicates the GA Voter-ID Law (HB 244) signed in 2005 by then-Governor Sonny Perdue in the terms of how photo ID is distributed to conform to the Carter-Baker Commission on Federal Election Reform. Act R54 facilitates exemptions for religious reasons and reasonable impediments for obtaining a photo ID. Under Act R54, the five approved photo ID items, which are enumerated and defined appropriate for voter to furnish to the poll worker is a SC driver’s license, SC personal identification card, US passport, US military identification, and a county photo voter registration card. According to South Carolina, 178000 registered voters do not current possess a driver’s license or a personal identification card. Liberal Irvine Law Professor Richard L. Hasen, who endorses a biometric voter registration system that record fingerprints to identify voters after the Crawford v. Marion County Election Board 553 U.S. 181 (2008) decision, believes that this assigned three-judge panel is bad for South Carolina in terms of challenging the constitutionality of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. Circuit Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh authored an opinion affirming the constitutionality of the soft money provisions in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission on an assigned three-judge panel because only the Supreme Court, not lower courts, could reverse earlier precedent. District Judge John D. Bates authored two opinions upholding the constitutionality of the Section 5 preclearance obligation in LaRoque v. Holder (96-page opinion) and Shelby County v. Holder (151-page opinion). District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly authored an opinion on a three-judge trial panel upholding the constitutionality of most provisions the McCain-Feingold BCRA Statute in McConnell v. Federal Elections Commission. Paul Clement who argued as Solicitor General that the IN Photo Voter-ID Law (SEA 483) was constitutional in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board Indiana Democratic Party v. Rokita and that the individual mandate was unconstitutional in Department of Health and Humans Services versus Florida, will represent the State of South Carolina in the voter-ID case litigation. This case may be entertained by the Supreme Court on appeal, if the plaintiff or defendant loses the case. If SC, the plaintiff, loses the trial, then the state will likely appeal the rendered three-judge panel opinion on photo voter-ID preclearance of Act R54 to the Supreme Court alleging that the state is entitled to implement Act R54 and that the Section 5 provision defining the obligatory preclearance regime is unconstitutional as a violation of federalism and state sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment and Article IV of the Constitution.