...The GOP's block the vote efforts
Given that...
~The concept of 'one person, one vote' is at the heart of Democracy and is a fundamental right of all American citizens ~
~The concept of 'one person, one vote' is at the heart of Democracy and is a fundamental right of all American citizens ~
and that...
~The "right to vote" is constitutionally ‘guaranteed’ by the 15th, 19th, 23rd, 24th and 26th amendments, that collectively restrict the tactics states may use to try to prevent people from voting~
It is an egregious violation of the job of elected politicians and borders on treason against the citizens of the United States when a political party intentionally tries to prevent people from voting .
Meet the new Tea Party GOP
(or, as I call them due to their constant nay-saying, negativity and noxious lies about President Obama "The Troll Party Republicans")
CONCLUSION BASED ON A PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE;
~The various Voter I.D. laws being passed have nothing to do with preventing
fraud but are instead intended to reduce Democratic votes by making it harder
for potential Democratic voters to cast a ballot. ~
{NOTE: A List of numbered footnotes is pasted at the end of this documentl}
1. GOP state Legislatures Are Passing Voter I.D. Laws (VIDLs)
~Generally, if a state has a Republican Governor they are signed into
law, if they have a Democratic Governor the Voter I.D. Laws are vetoed. Many of
the laws have been struck down by SCOTUS *{1}.
2. There is no voter fraud by impersonation
~Voter Impersonation Fraud is statistically zero (o%). *{2}
2. There is no voter fraud by impersonation
~Voter Impersonation Fraud is statistically zero (o%). *{2}
According to the Brennan Center, in elections across several states from 2000 to 2004 the documented fraud rate never approached the 1% mark.
There are numerous studies and reporting from virtually every state that all reflect the same reality, there has been virtually no voter fraud by impersonation. This is strong evidence that the
real purpose of VIDLs is not to prevent fraud. It simply doesn’t exist.
3. Voter
I.D. Laws are a Waste of Taxpayer Money
~Budget-conscious state officials would not spend money out of the State Treasury on what is at most a handful of questionable ballots unless there were some other benefit to do so. Winning elections is just such a benefit *{3} This is more strong evidence that preventing voter fraud isn’t the reason for VIDLs.
4. Voter I.D. Laws disproportionately affect black and other minority voters
~The I.D.s allowed in each state differ, and in every case the I.D.s allowed are ones Republican voters are more likely to have, and Democratic voters lack. A classic example of this is Texas, where a State College Student I.D. is not allowed, but a concealed weapon gun permit is. This type of variation in the methods and procedures is highly incriminating, the odds of it happening by chance and in every case favoring one party over another is, statistically-speaking, Vastly Improbable. *{4}. One claim commonly made about about voter I.D.s is that 'everyone has a driver's license' or 'if you can't produce a photo I.D. something is wrong with you'. Both of these are ignorant claims, as the evidence shows.
5. Voter I.D. Laws are a de-facto Poll Tax
~Budget-conscious state officials would not spend money out of the State Treasury on what is at most a handful of questionable ballots unless there were some other benefit to do so. Winning elections is just such a benefit *{3} This is more strong evidence that preventing voter fraud isn’t the reason for VIDLs.
4. Voter I.D. Laws disproportionately affect black and other minority voters
~The I.D.s allowed in each state differ, and in every case the I.D.s allowed are ones Republican voters are more likely to have, and Democratic voters lack. A classic example of this is Texas, where a State College Student I.D. is not allowed, but a concealed weapon gun permit is. This type of variation in the methods and procedures is highly incriminating, the odds of it happening by chance and in every case favoring one party over another is, statistically-speaking, Vastly Improbable. *{4}. One claim commonly made about about voter I.D.s is that 'everyone has a driver's license' or 'if you can't produce a photo I.D. something is wrong with you'. Both of these are ignorant claims, as the evidence shows.
5. Voter I.D. Laws are a de-facto Poll Tax
The VIDs required are not free, and
are often difficult to acquire. By
requiring an I.D. which costs the voter money, it has the effect of being a
Poll Tax, which would be a violation of the 24th Amendment *{5}. IN
addition to the racially discriminatory outcomes of VIDLs, they violate the
spirit of the Constitution, which tries to make sure everyone gets to exercise
their Constitutional right to vote.
6. In addition to VIDLs, GOP officials have used several other tactics to make it more difficult for Democratic voters to cast a ballot.
These
measures include;
a) Limiting the hours the polls are
open;
b) Reducing the # of booths in Democratic polling
places;
c) Lowering the time in which
registration forms must be submitted
d) Reducing the number of offices
where VIDs can be obtained
e) Making it a felony to turn in a
registration with a false name on it (these two tactics virtually eliminated voter-registration
drives, which tended to register far more Democrats than Republicans);
f) 'Scrubbing' the
voter-registration rolls; and
g) Making robo-calls with incorrect
dates to 'remind people to vote' on the wrong day. *{6}
7. GOP Officials publicly stated VIDLs helped them in elections
~Various Republicans in state offices have said publicly that the VIDL law was the reason they did better in that state than predicted. *{7}
8. SCOTUS Eliminated protections against discriminatory laws
~In a 5-4 ideological split vote in 2013, the SCOTUS ended a
Constitutional requirement that some or all areas in 15 states get advance
approval from the Justice Department or a
panel of federal judges for all changes to voting laws, procedures and even
polling place locations. That provision was enacted because those states had
been found to discriminate in the past. *{8}
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
FOOTNOTES:
(Note to Troll Party Right Wingers (I won't insult real Republicans, whom we desperately need, by calling these fact-deprived tea partiers 'republicans'): this is how you present evidence for your claims. Yes, it's more difficult than just writing any old bullshit you can dream up, but it also stops you from sounding like an ignorant buffoon)
*{1}
______________________________________
State-by-state list of Voter I.D. Laws
In 2011, Republicans in 38 states introduced legislation
that would make state-approved photo-ID cards a requirement to vote. Seven
states signed it into law: Alabama, Florida, Kansas, Rhode Island, South
Carolina, Texas, and Wisconsin.
*{2}
_______________________________________
Allegations of double voting are
among the most common assertions of voter fraud. According to the Brennan
Center report, in elections across several states from 2000 to 2004 the documented
fraud rate never approached the 1 percent mark. (emphasis added)
In fact, for Missouri in 2000 and 2002 the documented fraud rate was 0.0003
percent; in 2004 it was zero in New Hampshire and 0.0002 percent in New Jersey;
in 2004 there were no substantiated reports of any intentional double voting in
Wisconsin; and in New York the documented fraud rate was 0.000009 percent.
“Vote Fraud, Intimidation, &
Suppression in the 2004 Presidential Election,”
Author Mark Hearne, American Center
for Voting Rights 2005
This 72 page document is the only
one produced by the highly-partisan ACVR, it
reported no documented account of any individual impersonating another at a
polling place. Yet it recommended that “states should adopt legislation
requiring government-issued photo ID at the polls and for any voter seeking to
vote by mail or by absentee ballot.” (emphasis added)
* {3 }_______________________________________
2012 Final Report
from the Voting Rights Institute
“We found that if each of these 35
states enacts photo ID legislation, taxpayers across the country will pay at
least $276 million and up to $828 million for this unnecessary legislation”
* {4}_______________________________________
The Wisconsin Legislative Fiscal Bureau, for example, found
that 20 percent of Wisconsin’s residents do not now have the identification
required to vote. That includes 70 percent of African-Americans under the age
of 25, 177,000 elderly people, 36 percent of young voters, and approximately
224,000 college students whose student ID cards fail to meet their state’s new
ID requirement. In brief: a lot of potential Democratic voters. Similar
biases against minority voters can be found in every voter-suppression bill
enacted across the country. (emphasis
added)
Prior to 2006, no
state required a voter to show a government-issued photo ID card in order to
vote.
The suppressive effects of these bills are well-documented:
11 percent of Americans—approximately 23 million citizens of voting age lack
proper photo ID and, as a result, could be turned away from the polls on
Election Day. Those without photo ID are disproportionately low-income,
disabled, minority, young, and older voters. Numerous non-partisan
organizations have debunked claims of widespread voter fraud, the purported
basis for these laws. (emphasis
added)
*{5}
_______________________________________
The 24th Amendment Section 1.
“The right of citizens of the
United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice
President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or
Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United
States or any State by reason of failure to pay poll tax or other tax.”
*{6} _______________________________________
Florida has reduced the number of early voting days, cut in
half the number of early voting hours, ended voting on the final Sunday before
the election, and imposed tough restrictions on civic groups conducting
voter-registration campaigns.
Testifying at a Senate Judiciary
subcommittee hearing on January 25, University of Florida political science
Professor Daniel A. Smith questioned the color-blind provisions in Florida’s
2011 law:
[Even though African Americans comprised only 13 percent of
total voters and 22 percent of early voters in Florida in the 2008 General
Election, they accounted for 31 percent of early voters on the final Sunday of
early voting. Hispanic voters, who comprised 11 percent of total voters and 11
percent of early voters in the 2008 general election, accounted for 22 percent
of the early voters on the final Sunday of early voting. By closing polling places on Sunday,
Florida shuts down the nonpartisan, church-based “Souls to the Polls” campaigns
in African-American and Hispanic congregations.
According to a
study from NYU's Brennan Center, 11 percent of voting-age citizens lack
necessary photo ID while many people in rural areas have trouble accessing ID offices.
(emphasis added)
*{6}
_______________________________________
Robo-calls by GOP to deceive
Democratic voters:
Arizona
http://gawker.com/5958045/robocalls-from-gop-congressman-send-democratic-voters-to-polling-places-miles-away-from-their-precinct
Wisconsin
Florida
Massachussetts
http://holliston-hopkinton.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/robo-call-says-election-is-wednesday
Maryland, Mississippi, and others
http://www.866ourvote.org/issues/deceptive/through-the-years
*{7}
_______________________________________
"Pro-Second Amendment? The Castle Doctrine, it's
done," said Turzai. "First pro-life legislation --
abortion facility regulations -- in 22 years, done. Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of
Pennsylvania, done."
(emphasis added)
(emphasis added)
Incredibly, the guy admits openly to 3 different tactics the
GOP is using to thwart the will of the majority in the USA. Abortions are a
right guaranteed in the Constitution, yet the GOP is doing everything they can to
make it de-facto illegal.
Not quite as egregious but still a fully bogus issue is the
continuing claim by Republicans that requiring I.D. and background checks for
purchasing a gun is tantamount to ‘taking away our guns”. No one has said anything about abridging the 2nd Amendment nor about taking away anyone's legal right to buy a gun, yet Right Wing talking heads and bloggers have used this lie to gin up opposition to even the most basic attempts to keep our nation safer from massacres by making it more difficult for unstable people to purchase military-grade weaponry.
It is interesting to note that the Troll Party Congressional rookies don’t want to require an I.D. to buy a sub-machine gun to try to prevent violent massacres of innocent people,
but are totally committed to demanding a photo I.D. to prevent non-existent voter fraud.
*{8}
_______________________________________
In a 5-4 ideological split vote in
2013, SCOTUS ended a Constitutional requirement that some or all areas in 15
states get advance approval from the Justice Department
or a panel of federal judges for all changes to voting laws, procedures and
even polling place locations. That provision was enacted because those states
had been found to discriminate in the past. Some of them in the recent past, like the last election.
Addendum:
As soon as SCOTUS ruled that the federal government needed to update the rule (and charged the heavily-partisan Congress to do so, which of course they won't), several states that had Voter I.D. Laws that had ALREADY BEEN FOUND UNCONSTITUTIONAL wasted no time in putting those same laws into effect. Keep in mind that SCOTUS didn't say those plans were OK, only that the power the Federal government had to require them to be submitted for approval had to be updated, so the Feds didn't have jurisdiction to demand oversight under the current plan.
So the states that had these Voter I.D. schemes blocked under the Constitution Texas for one, went head with discriminatory Voter I.D. Laws., thereby proving the need for such oversight, thereby proving that SCOTUS was wrong in their judgement. Incredible.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57595695/after-voting-rights-act-ruling-states-tighten-voting-laws/
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
RATIONAL THOUGHTS ON AN IRRATIONAL SCHEME
It shouldn't matter what your name is or that we identify voters by name, so long as you don't vote twice you should
get to vote if you are an American citizen.
If
everyone lined up in a big long line, no names would
be needed, just step up, mark your ballot and be done with it. The only
possible reason names are needed is to ensure the right person votes and
no one
votes twice. Since you must be registered to vote, you shouldn't need
tpo use your
name. You just need a way to link you to the registration (ie..voter #
183664). This thought experiment leads us to the realization that the
correct place to deter any kind of
Impersonation Fraud is in the registration process.
Even taking the time to research and write this blog post is spending too much time on the problem of voter fraud by impersonation, there is so little of it. It is virtually impossible for any level of voter impersonation to work to any significant level, because the person who was supposed to vote would then not get a vote. It's far too much work to get away with than would be other types of fraud. How is fraud by impersonation going to work? The answer is it won't, and that's one of the reasons there hasn't been any.
If the GOP were truly interested in stopping fraud, there are plenty of other places to look, the 2000 and 2004 elections provided many opportunities for an investigation.
Another place to look for fraud would be the company called Voters Outreach of America, that the GOP hired to register voters in 2012, and that ended up throwing away reams of registrations of people who registered Democratic.
So there are types of fraud that do exist, but the one type of fraud that doesn't occur is voter impersonation.
Another strong clue to the GOPs' real intentions is the variety of types of ID acceptable in different states.
Even taking the time to research and write this blog post is spending too much time on the problem of voter fraud by impersonation, there is so little of it. It is virtually impossible for any level of voter impersonation to work to any significant level, because the person who was supposed to vote would then not get a vote. It's far too much work to get away with than would be other types of fraud. How is fraud by impersonation going to work? The answer is it won't, and that's one of the reasons there hasn't been any.
If the GOP were truly interested in stopping fraud, there are plenty of other places to look, the 2000 and 2004 elections provided many opportunities for an investigation.
Another place to look for fraud would be the company called Voters Outreach of America, that the GOP hired to register voters in 2012, and that ended up throwing away reams of registrations of people who registered Democratic.
So there are types of fraud that do exist, but the one type of fraud that doesn't occur is voter impersonation.
Another strong clue to the GOPs' real intentions is the variety of types of ID acceptable in different states.
A 'real, serious plan' to enact Voter I.D. at polling
place would take place
years ahead of time, with plenty
of
time for voters to be well-prepared. A single system, or perhaps one or
two
variances would be enacted, and the types of I.D. required would be any
reasonable I.D., with the intent to allow as many people to continue to
vote as
possible. The government would do an outreach program to assist the
poor, the
disabled and/or the elderly people who might have difficulty in
obtaining the
proper I.D. The thrust of the effort would be to make sure that people
weren't being disenfranchised.
That is NOT how the Troll Party GOP went about it.
One things that would NOT happen in an honest effort would be that in every case, the types of I.D. denied would not ALL be strongly Democratic. Without intent, such a result is statistically referred to as Vastly Improbable, which is to say impossible.
One things that would NOT happen in an honest effort would be that in every case, the types of I.D. denied would not ALL be strongly Democratic. Without intent, such a result is statistically referred to as Vastly Improbable, which is to say impossible.
The fact that it has ended up like that is a
telling clue to the GOPs' real agenda:
~Make it so hard for Democrats to vote
in some areas that you significanlty reduce the number of votes, possibly
changing the results of the election.~
If the Republicans were honestly trying to clean up elections, they would take a look at the way the 2000 and 2004 elections were run, things like Diebold installing last-minute software updates in Georgia voting machines, for instance, and how the statistically impossible happened when Max Cleland lost a race in which he was 14% points ahead the last few days before the election. Or the wide-scale disenfranchisement of voters undertaken by the secretary of state Katheryn Harris in Florid, where she 'scrubbed the voter rolls' to supposedly remove names that shouldn't be on the list, but in reality removed thousands of people who are qualified to vote. The process Ms. Harris used was to remove 'black' sounding names.
If the Republicans were honestly trying to clean up elections, they would take a look at the way the 2000 and 2004 elections were run, things like Diebold installing last-minute software updates in Georgia voting machines, for instance, and how the statistically impossible happened when Max Cleland lost a race in which he was 14% points ahead the last few days before the election. Or the wide-scale disenfranchisement of voters undertaken by the secretary of state Katheryn Harris in Florid, where she 'scrubbed the voter rolls' to supposedly remove names that shouldn't be on the list, but in reality removed thousands of people who are qualified to vote. The process Ms. Harris used was to remove 'black' sounding names.
Those are well documented incidents where real
fraud is highly likely to have taken place. There is simply no reason to enact
Voter I.D. laws other than it's a barely plausible excuse for legally
preventing thousands of Democratic voters from casting a ballot, if one is
willing to hold their nose and close their eyes and ears one can do things like this
It is
interesting to note (and aggravating to contemplate) that the troll party
congressional rookies don’t want to require an I.D. to buy an automatic weapon,
despite the very real danger from such weapons, but are totally committed to
preventing non-existent voter fraud. It
is virtually impossible to reconcile these two things with a straight face
unless one admits to the obvious, the Voter I.D. Laws do make sense because the
real purpose of them is to help the GOP win elections.
No comments:
Post a Comment