Federal judge overturns wisconsin's voter id law

[ttwtt78640]

Thats true, but what I said was that in Wisconsin the state was unable to demonstrate that voter impersonation existed, do you see that I'm talking about just the state of Wisconsin and just voter impersonation here?

Voter ID only addresses a certain type of voter fraud, it doesn't stop nor is it meant to stop all kinds of voter fraud. And the kind it is meant to stop had not a single example the state could put forward as to why they needed the law.

Well that is truly shocking. Since you cannot now require showing a valid, state issued, photo ID how the **** are you supposed to prove that person is not who they are voting as? He said his name was Joe Smith and, by golly, there was a Joe Smith registered - no possible fraud there.

 

[Wiseone]

So, this FEDERAL judge thinks, off the top of his pointy head that "virtually no voter impersonation occurs in Wisconsin", so we should just leave that part of the system wide open. Your loose definition leaves dead voting to be voter impersonation. Dead voting is indeed a problem and occurs everywhere, except Wisconsin according to this judge and you.

Well that is truly shocking. Since you cannot now require showing a valid, state issued, photo ID how the **** are you supposed to prove that person is not who they are voting as? He said his name was Joe Smith and, by golly, there was a Joe Smith registered - no possible fraud there.

clownboy cited that case of a women in Ohio voting 6 times under different names, clearly its possible to determine with other means that it occurs and if it is possible to determine that it occurs through other means shouldn't the state be required to demonstrate that it does occur before making a law against what might not be happening at all in their state?

I never thought I'd see a libertarian arguing that the government should make a new law, expand its powers, to stop something that hasn't even been demonstrated to have occurred.

Clownboy still doesn't understand that it was the state that failed to demonstrate any example of voter impersonation, it wasn't the judges opinion that they didn't demonstrate it was a simple fact of the case.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

I agree. The law was horribly discriminatory against people who wished to vote more than once. After all, who are people who only prefer to vote once to tell the rest of us how to vote?

If the one and true purpose of a voter ID law is to prevent voter fraud and nothing else, then it should include provisions for free ID documents. Several voter ID laws which lacked such provisions have been struck down (rightly so), and free ID documents do not in any way compromise election integrity.

 

[NGNM85]

By all evidence, voter fraud is virtually nonexistent. These voter ID laws are a transparent attempt by Republicans to stop poor people, especially blacks, and Latinos, from voting.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

These voter ID laws are a transparent attempt by Republicans to stop poor people, especially blacks, and Latinos, from voting.

I don't think that's the case where said laws include provisions for free ID documents.

 

[ttwtt78640]

clownboy cited that case of a women in Ohio voting 6 times under different names, clearly its possible to determine with other means that it occurs and if it is possible to determine that it occurs through other means shouldn't the state be required to demonstrate that it does occur before making a law against what might not be happening at all in their state?

I never thought I'd see a libertarian arguing that the government should make a new law, expand its powers, to stop something that hasn't even been demonstrated to have occurred.

Clownboy still doesn't understand that it was the state that failed to demonstrate any example of voter impersonation, it wasn't the judges opinion that they didn't demonstrate it was a simple fact of the case.

That same argument could be used to protest PPACA - just because Joe got sick and needed free ER care does not mean that Sam will. You do not need to wait until someone robs your store to decide that having a security system is a good idea. Discounting the existence of voter fraud because "sufficient" local examples are not present is no more valid than presuming that folks will be prevented from voting if required to present an ID; did Indiana suffer massive voter turnout drops after their voter ID law was enacted?

 

[Wiseone]

That same argument could be used to protest PPACA - just because Joe got sick and needed free ER care does not mean that Sam will. You do not need to wait until someone robs your store to decide that having a security system is a good idea. Discounting the existence of voter fraud because "sufficient" local examples are not present is no more valid than presuming that folks will be prevented from voting if required to present an ID; did Indiana suffer massive voter turnout drops after their voter ID law was enacted?

Well with healthcare we know for a fact that everyone will use it at one point in their lives, and with robberies we know that robberies do occur. But with voter impersonation in the state of Wisconsin (not Indiana) a single case hasn't been demonstrated.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Well with healthcare we know for a fact that everyone will use it at one point in their lives, and with robberies we know that robberies do occur. But with voter impersonation in the state of Wisconsin (not Indiana) a single case hasn't been demonstrated.

Everyone will not use care that they cannot afford to pay cash for. Not a single case of denying the vote based on an ID requirement has been shown in Wisconsin either.

 

[Wiseone]

Everyone will not use care that they cannot afford to pay cash for. Not a single case of denying the vote based on an ID requirement has been shown in Wisconsin either.

Not everyone may use the ER, but everyone will use healthcare in their lives. Also the point of insurance is to address a situation where Joe may need a service that Sam won't ever need, the idea is that both pay into a system because you'll never know who will need it more than the other. But if you have insurance you shoudnt be using the ER as your primary care anyway.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

As for Wisconsin the judge ruled that the state placed an undue burden on exercising their right to vote on those without a photo ID, it was brought about by two individuals who had that burden placed on them. So just looking at the case itself there were people who had an undue burden put upon them, although they were not technically denied their right to right. No one is talking about denying the vote, we are talking about a burden placed on the person without a photo ID.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Not everyone may use the ER, but everyone will use healthcare in their lives. Also the point of insurance is to address a situation where Joe may need a service that Sam won't ever need, the idea is that both pay into a system because you'll never know who will need it more than the other. But if you have insurance you shoudnt be using the ER as your primary care anyway.

You're comparing apples and oranges.

As for Wisconsin the judge ruled that the state placed an undue burden on exercising their right to vote on those without a photo ID, it was brought about by two individuals who had that burden placed on them. So just looking at the case itself there were people who had an undue burden put upon them, although they were not technically denied their right to right. No one is talking about denying the vote, we are talking about a burden placed on the person without a photo ID.

Is that same "burden" not placed on those buying a gun, driving on a public roadway, cashing a check or boarding an aircraft?

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Is that same "burden" not placed on those buying a gun, driving on a public roadway, cashing a check or boarding an aircraft?

It's a burden that is prohibited specifically by a Constitutional amendment.

 

[ttwtt78640]

It's a burden that is prohibited specifically by a Constitutional amendment.

Nonsense. Calling positive identification a "poll tax" is absurd. Texas gives these IDs out at no cost and then the libtards complained that the "effort" to secure the underlying documents was a still a tax.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Nonsense. Calling positive identification a "poll tax" is absurd. Texas gives these IDs out at no cost and then the libtards complained that the "effort" to secure the underlying documents was a still a tax.

If you establish a legal requirement in order to vote, and it costs money to meet it, that is indeed a poll tax.

 

[ttwtt78640]

If you establish a legal requirement in order to vote, and it costs money to meet it, that is indeed a poll tax.

Going to and from a polling place likely costs money unless you walk barefoot and naked.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

Going to and from a polling place likely costs money unless you walk barefoot and naked.

Which is why it is appropriate to have polling places nearby -- but since a specific mode of transport is not called out in the law it is not a poll tax.

 

[AJiveMan]

If you establish a legal requirement in order to vote, and it costs money to meet it, that is indeed a poll tax.

If the voter ID law is passed, the cost will be an estimated $7.5 million, not to shabby to hire extra people to train people at the polling places, reprint all the voter registration forms, reprint all the pamphlets, and all the other little incidentals which might follow. It should only take the state about 30 days to implement, surely they'll have everything ready to go for the midterms. :roll: and no voters who want to cast a ballot will be left out. :roll:

Then it'll be good for our economy too, people who live in the inner city will need to ride buses or taxicabs to the DMV, which will increase ridership, which means more fuel usage, and more money spent traveling to and from. It's be a windfall of profits. :roll:

Wisconsin: Walker Shuts Down DMV Offices in Democratic Areas After Passing Voter ID Law | FDL News Desk

Walker to close 10 DMV offices after passing voter ID law

Surely Walker will be able to make this all fit into the state budget, he'll just strip some more state government sector employees' insurance benefits, pay, and just cut a few more services statewide, we'll be able to handle it. :roll: Hell, he might even bust another union, I'd start with firefighters and police, they're overpaid anyway. :roll:

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

If the voter ID law is passed, the cost will be an estimated $7.5 million, not to shabby to hire extra people to train people at the polling places, reprint all the voter registration forms, reprint all the pamphlets, and all the other little incidentals which might follow. It should only take the state about 30 days to implement, surely they'll have everything ready to go for the midterms. :roll: and no voters who want to cast a ballot will be left out. :roll:

Then it'll be good for our economy too, people who live in the inner city will need to ride buses or taxicabs to the DMV, which will increase ridership, which means more fuel usage, and more money spent traveling to and from. It's be a windfall of profits. :roll:

Wisconsin: Walker Shuts Down DMV Offices in Democratic Areas After Passing Voter ID Law | FDL News Desk

Walker to close 10 DMV offices after passing voter ID law

Surely Walker will be able to make this all fit into the state budget, he'll just strip some more state government sector employees' insurance benefits, pay, and just cut a few more services statewide, we'll be able to handle it. :roll: Hell, he might even bust another union, I'd start with firefighters and police, they're overpaid anyway. :roll:

Okay. And?

 

[AJiveMan]

Okay. And?

And, Walker will be taking Wisconsin from the frying pan into the fire. Since you're a NY resident,.................How's NY's voter ID movement going killa?


Since cons, especially teabaggers hate gubbermint meddling into other people's lives, they're sure hugging up to the idea of taking away people's rights to vote by passing more gubbermint laws making free people less free.

I looked and NY doesn't have any voter ID requirements or laws, better get to work lobbying your state legislators there killa.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

And, Walker will be taking Wisconsin from the frying pan into the fire. Since you're a NY resident,.................How's NY's voter ID movement going killa?


Since cons, especially teabaggers hate gubbermint meddling into other people's lives, they're sure hugging up to the idea of taking away people's rights to vote by passing more gubbermint laws making free people less free.

I looked and NY doesn't have any voter ID requirements or laws, better get to work lobbying your state legislators there killa.

You seem to be under the impression that you have a reason to argue with me. Why is that?

 

[AJiveMan]

You seem to be under the impression that you have a reason to argue with me. Why is that?

From your short retorts, I'd need to conclude you are Pro voter ID, while I am not.

 

[TacticalEvilDan]

From your short retorts, I'd need to conclude you are Pro voter ID, while I am not.

I'm anti-voter-ID-that-costs-money. In other words, I'm opposed to poll taxes. I'm ambivalent on the subject of ID requirements. If they're free, reasonably easy to obtain, and are not imposed too near to an election, I'm not opposed. I'm also not hot to trot to put them in place.

 

[AJiveMan]

I'm anti-voter-ID-that-costs-money. In other words, I'm opposed to poll taxes. I'm ambivalent on the subject of ID requirements. If they're free, reasonably easy to obtain, and are not imposed too near to an election, I'm not opposed. I'm also not hot to trot to put them in place.

The part that concerns me here in WI, is if they push the voter id law through, there is going to be very little time for the state to reprint pamphlets and flyers to send out to every eligible voter, and short time to prepare and train poll workers enough to where they'll understand which types of identification to accept from a prospective voter.

In WI presently, there are several methods a person can use to prove who they are. The question of what forms of proof will be required for registrars to get them on the books in time for the midterms. What will be the other accepted variations of proof who a person is, any, all, none, one, or some?

I know, I know, people are already saying nobody hardly turns out during the midterms.