PDA

View Full Version : Voter ID's are racist!!!


slow06
04-30-2008, 09:17 AM
says the NAACP.

Supreme Court's Decision on Voter IDs is Akin to Voter Suppression

The NAACP is deeply alarmed by today’s U.S. Supreme Court decision that would allow the utilization of photo identification at polling places in upcoming elections.

In a 6-3 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court rejected a challenge to Indiana’s voter identification law, the most restrictive in the nation. The American Civil Liberties Union's case, Crawford v. Marion County Election Board — consolidated with Indiana Democratic Party v. Rokita — was an appeal of two lower court decisions that upheld the state's law requiring voters to present government-issued photo IDs in order to vote. The ACLU, NAACP and others argued that the Indiana law creates an unconstitutional burden on voting rights.

“As the dissent notes, Indiana’s law will sadly but predictably have its greatest impact on tens of thousands of voters in any state who are poor, elderly, belong to racial minorities, or have disabilities,” said NAACP Interim General Counsel Angela Ciccolo. “Many of whom are less likely to have or carry a photo ID or have the means to secure such an identification.”

“Mandated photo ID programs would create a modern-day poll tax for voters throughout the country,” said NAACP Washington Bureau Director Hilary Shelton. “This is both discriminatory and inconsistent with historic policies to eliminate poll taxes. Even if states provided everyone of voting age an ID at no charge, they could not guarantee that every poll worker would apply the mandates in a fully equitable manner.”

Such ID requirements also do nothing to address many of the actual, documented problems of election and voter fraud which continue to plague the electoral process and our democracy, including the improper purges of voters, distributing false information about when and where to vote, stuffing ballot boxes, and tampering with registration forms, most of which are perpetrated by corrupt election officials, not voters.

The NAACP asserts there are many other ways of establishing identification at polling places other than a photo ID, which creates potential for fraud among other difficulties. The NAACP urges state and local elected officials to consider the use of other methods that can be applied in a much more equitable manner at the polls, should identification be made mandatory in their jurisdiction

The Supreme Court's decision on the constitutionality of voter ID laws has broad national significance with the 2008 election underway. Indiana is one of more than 20 states that have passed restrictive voter ID laws, while other states are considering similar legislation. Voter ID measures are not unique to Indiana. The NAACP has successfully fought battles in Georgia and Missouri, for example, against unreasonable voter ID laws that are really designed to suppress the vote.

The added burden of requiring a government-approved photo identification before voting flies in the face of the Constitutionally guaranteed right to cast a free and unfettered ballot, as well as the intent of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, which prohibits state and local governments from establishing laws or policies which would have a discriminatory effect on the ability of certain groups to vote.

President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the act into law in 1965. It is designed to prevent barriers to voting such as: intimidation, voter harassment, the poll tax, voting instructions printed only in English, literacy tests, racial gerrymandering and other tools of disenfranchisement. The act further guarantees that no federal, state or local government shall in any way impede or discourage people from registering to vote or voting because of their race or color.

Plaintiffs in the ACLU's case included the NAACP Indianapolis Branch as well as organizations representing the elderly, the homeless, and people with disabilities, along with two elected officials.

Founded in 1909, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People is the nation’s oldest and largest civil rights organization. Its more than half-million adult and youth members throughout the United States and the world are the premier advocates for civil rights in their communities and monitors of equal opportunity in the public and private sectors.

--For more information contact: rmcintire@naacpnet.org

Discuss.

Vertnut
04-30-2008, 09:19 AM
If you can't prove you live here, you don't need to be voting.

slow06
04-30-2008, 09:22 AM
Let me clarify...

Someone explain to me how this is racist?
Are driver's licenses racist?

jones4stangs, where you at?

Vertnut
04-30-2008, 09:24 AM
Let me clarify...

Someone explain to me how this is racist?
Are driver's licenses racist?

jones4stangs, where you at?
It just opens the door to voter fraud, which is what the liberals want.

FSON
04-30-2008, 09:53 AM
Vote early and often!

slow06
04-30-2008, 10:30 AM
It just opens the door to voter fraud, which is what the liberals want.

How exactly does that open the door for fraud? You have to have a voter's registration card to vote, what the hell difference does it make if they require ID? Shouldn't that help deter fraud?

aceman85turbo
04-30-2008, 10:33 AM
How exactly does that open the door for fraud? You have to have a voter's registration card to vote, what the hell difference does it make if they require ID? Shouldn't that help deter fraud?

The same person could vote 10 times across the city...

MadMax404m
04-30-2008, 10:46 AM
“As the dissent notes, Indiana’s law will sadly but predictably have its greatest impact on tens of thousands of voters in any state who are poor, elderly, belong to racial minorities, or have disabilities,”

Do they not think there are poor, elderly, disabilitied white people? Why is it only the racial minorities make everything racist? Us white people have problems to!!

slow06
04-30-2008, 11:09 AM
The same person could vote 10 times across the city...

Ok... Well can you do that now? If so then the ID changes nothing. If you can't vote more than once now, why wouldn't they have those same measures in place?

slow06
04-30-2008, 11:11 AM
“As the dissent notes, Indiana’s law will sadly but predictably have its greatest impact on tens of thousands of voters in any state who are poor, elderly, belong to racial minorities, or have disabilities,”

Do they not think there are poor, elderly, disabilitied white people? Why is it only the racial minorities make everything racist? Us white people have problems to!!

Pshh, haven't you learned...White=Rich ;)

BP
04-30-2008, 11:11 AM
No photo ID? Must be an illegal alien. Start deporting them and I bet these poor, elderly and disabled folks will start paying the state $10 every 6 years for a photo ID.

MadMax404m
04-30-2008, 12:24 PM
Pshh, haven't you learned...White=Rich ;)

I wish someone would tell my wallet and bank account that lmao

Vertnut
04-30-2008, 12:32 PM
How exactly does that open the door for fraud? You have to have a voter's registration card to vote, what the hell difference does it make if they require ID? Shouldn't that help deter fraud?
There are scores of dead people that vote every year. Remember Cook County, and hell, even our own LBJ. It's important that we account for every legal vote. If Dems can go pick them up, take them to the polls, give them lunch, and show them which hole to punch, then they can DAMN sure get them an ID...

slow06
04-30-2008, 01:27 PM
There are scores of dead people that vote every year. Remember Cook County, and hell, even our own LBJ. It's important that we account for every legal vote. If Dems can go pick them up, take them to the polls, give them lunch, and show them which hole to punch, then they can DAMN sure get them an ID...

If they do that the ID thing is definitely not going to make it any easier though? It may not fix the problem, but on the surface it looks like a step in the right direction.

black01gt
04-30-2008, 10:07 PM
Anyone voting on the "up & up" has no reason to squawk about it. You have to show a picture ID for so many things these days that surely showing it to vote makes sense. I see no problem with it and my picture is a bad one (I was having a bad hair day :o ).

Dacotua
05-01-2008, 05:49 AM
Dead People vote each year... ID Will eliminate that.

People from New York Vote in NEW YORK AND FLORIDA (Snow Birds). By having a ID Requirement it will stop snow birds from voting in two different states.

It will stop someone from voting in Dallas County, Collin County, Denton County, Tarrant County, and Johnson County in the same election.

jones4stangs
05-01-2008, 12:31 PM
“As the dissent notes, Indiana’s law will sadly but predictably have its greatest impact on tens of thousands of voters in any state who are poor, elderly, belong to racial minorities, or have disabilities,”

Do they not think there are poor, elderly, disabilitied white people? Why is it only the racial minorities make everything racist? Us white people have problems to!!
?

jones4stangs
05-01-2008, 12:45 PM
Let me clarify...

Someone explain to me how this is racist?
Are driver's licenses racist?

jones4stangs, where you at?
http://www.aclu.org/votingrights/gen/35049prs20080428.html

Where in the article does it say requiring voters to show a photo id is racist?

The ACLU, NAACP and others argued that the Indiana law creates an unconstitutional burden on voting rights.

The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a challenge to Indiana’s voter identification law

I'm o.k. with the courts ruling. Thanks for asking though.

Casper
05-01-2008, 01:12 PM
The idea is that it creates a poll tax in situ.

That is partially true. The IDs are not free. If you can't afford an ID you are in effect barred from voting based on inability to pay a poll tax.

So the question really becomes, how much of the financial burden of voter authentication should be payed by the taxpayer? Constitutionally, all of it. But what check and balance is there for a pork project to install and maintain a retina scan, fingerprint, instant-online passcard style authentification system that is "perfect" and "free"? The states generally take the cheapest way out. Are they avoiding their responsibility? Probably, to some degree.

I think it would be better to just allow all candidates a random chance by drawing a bean from a box. The one who draws the winning bean serves the term and is forced to draw again the next election. The losers are burned at the stake along with their families, all on pay per view.

aceman85turbo
05-01-2008, 06:31 PM
The idea is that it creates a poll tax in situ.

That is partially true. The IDs are not free. If you can't afford an ID you are in effect barred from voting based on inability to pay a poll tax.

So the question really becomes, how much of the financial burden of voter authentication should be payed by the taxpayer? Constitutionally, all of it. But what check and balance is there for a pork project to install and maintain a retina scan, fingerprint, instant-online passcard style authentification system that is "perfect" and "free"? The states generally take the cheapest way out. Are they avoiding their responsibility? Probably, to some degree.

I think it would be better to just allow all candidates a random chance by drawing a bean from a box. The one who draws the winning bean serves the term and is forced to draw again the next election. The losers are burned at the stake along with their families, all on pay per view.

The Id is $15 every 6 years.... most people shit $15 a day on candy and junkfood


Renewing an ID Card
The fee for a Texas ID card is $15 for those under 60; this card expires every six years. In most cases, you may renew your ID card online for an additional $1 service charge. Those 60 and over get a break―an ID card costs only $5 and never needs to be renewed.

To change the name or address on the card, or to replace a lost ID, you'll pay $10; online changes will be assessed an additional $1 charge.