Posted on 12/23/2011 1:43:16 PM PST by ruralvoter
The Justice Department on Friday entered the divisive national debate over new state voting laws, rejecting South Carolinas measure requiring photo-identification at the polls as discriminatory against minority voters.
The decision by Justices Civil Rights Division could heighten political tensions over the new laws, which critics say could depress turnout among minorities and others who helped elect President Obama in 2008. A dozen states this year passed laws requiring voters to present state-issued photo identification, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
HOW??? EVERYONE needs one regardless of race, color, or creed if one is an American Citizen and ALLOWED to LEGALLY VOTE!?! I’M WHITE, and I have to have one to pay taxes, to cash a paycheck, to have a bank account, to have a Driver’s License, to purchase alcohol, to get a job, and to abide by a locale’s non-vagrancy rules.
How is it racist to require the same of ALL PEOPLE regardless of race, color, or creed? How is it discriminatory towards minorities? As for funds - well Photo ID (here in Wisconsin) is FREE. So, there is honestly no excuse. If one doesn’t have a birth certificate there are always ways to acquire a copy of one - even without a bank account, or a credit card, or a telephone, etc...
You’re either being irresponsible and not taking care of your business, or you are behaving in a wantonly criminal manner for whatever reason, if you don’t have a valid ID in these days and times (or you are not in the process currently of resolving any pending problems preventing you from obtaining one). There should be no questions even asked about needing to have an ID for voting.
Who wouldn’t have one if they wanted to vote as a US Citizen and an honest participant in the democratic process anyway? It’s not like they are preventing people from voting on the basis of gender, or race - we just want you to prove that you have the right to cast a ballot before we let you participate. And, checks and balances are essential in this day and age. RATIONAL people realize the impetus to commit voter fraud revolves around the HUGE receipt of power and privilege that come with being elected, or controlling a seat as a representative of a party. Therefore, we must do all we can to combat the use of fraud to obtain those positions. It’s definitely NOT too much to ask.
It seems to me the US Constitution is pretty clear about leaving the electoral process up to the states.
I do hope the states that want to implement voter-ID laws fight this until the “Justice Department” looks like the proverbial hamburger.
If they think that this is going to help them, holder and his racist band of lawyers is way off base.
The WaComPost’s discussion forum is loaded with lefty morons lying about the reasons for their objections to voter ID. I stated that since it applies to everyone it is not discriminatory.
I’ll check beck to see how many names I get called...
Hey, you wouldn't understand... it's a Black thing!
That's telling him... Darth!
If red X above go to http://morrisonworldnews.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/Us-Attorney-General-Eric-Holder-Photo-AP-500x375.jpg
So, when Obamacare kicks in and gives free health care to everyone and his pet dog and cat, will it be discrimination to make them show photo ID?
Perfectly said.
Perfectly said.
Perfectly said.
"Section 4 - Elections, Meetings The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Place of Chusing Senators.
Did you catch that second part? That says Congress can change the rules!!!! That's for Senators and Representatives.
Amen. Why does the GOP persist in failing to frame this debate?
As you recall from Gore v. PEOPLE OF FLORIDA, the Supreme Court had jurisdiction. Apparently the Democrats hadn't checked on that part ~ but Congress had acted several times regarding election laws involving Presidents so there you have it (there's a similar clause for Presidential elections).
What Leander Perez racist cousin is doing here is, of course, mindless, but so is he. The Supreme Court said it was constitutional to require a photo ID. BTW, you show up in their court you'd better have one on you too. Same for getting on an airplane.
And the DOJ.
And as we all know the Justice Department is a branch of the Congress.
Photo I.D. AND sticking a thumb into a pot of purple indelible ink would be a great idea. I wouldn’t mind that - ‘course, I’ve never wanted to vote twice before the last election. Now, it might be a counter-move some places!
Thanks for the ping; post; and GREAT thread. FUEH, FUBO.
When other states have the same law how can SC be singles out and called discriminatory. They need to remove Holder and Obama.
Holder and the Justice Dept. are running amok. They, along with the open borders, the hordes of illegal aliens, and activist judges, pose the greatest danger to this country.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.