SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

JasperL · Oct 23, 2014

Dittohead not! said:
Do we want everyone to vote?

People who don't know what the role of government is, what Congress and the POTUS is supposed to do, who don't know what's in the Constitution, who don't understand the issues or know where the candidates stand on them, do we want them to vote? People who watch the political ads slack jawed and uncritically, then vote accordingly, is it any benefit that they vote?

Personally, I'd just as soon they stay home on election day.

Me too, which includes a bunch of uninformed morons in my area who vote for anyone with an R by their name. Seriously, just about anyone swayed by most of the ads I see in my area at least is almost by definition a political ignoramus, and voting based on some PR hack paid big bucks by political parties to strike a nerve with them.

Doesn't mean I support public policy that intentionally makes it hard for SOME of those morons to exercise their RIGHT to vote.

Grant · Oct 23, 2014

BWG said:
Why are conservatives so afraid of Americans exercising their right to vote..

After all this back and forth you still don't understand that the concern is for eligible voters exercising their right to vote. Why does this need constant repeating?

LetsGoBrandon · Oct 24, 2014

JasperL said:
I love the way you just disregard all facts in evidence - not only in Texas but in every state that has passed photo ID and estimated the number affected by the new rules! It must be wonderful to be unconstrained by any evidence at all! :lol:

I do not deal in estimated numbers. Everyone who is not a hermit living in a cave somewhere has an ID. I know why you do not want photo IDs and it has nothing to do with voter disenfranchisement. I am not buying the ruse the democrats are attempting to push.

LetsGoBrandon · Oct 24, 2014

JasperL said:
And when you're not disregarding evidence, you just create your own out of thin air! Fantastic....

Any ID keeps it honest enough so that in Tennessee there have been next to no cases of impersonation fraud in decades. The restricted forms add nothing to the "keeps it honest" efforts.

It should be valid and up to date ID...such as a drivers license or state ID card. I would also accept military ID.

LetsGoBrandon · Oct 24, 2014

JasperL said:
So let me get this straight. You make a claim of approximately zero that is contradicted by the evidence in Tennessee, NC, PA and Texas to name a few. In all those states the numbers affected are in the hundreds of thousand range, and you ignore them.

And then when I give a faithful effort of the 600,000 that was testified to in court, backed by extensive examination of the lists of registered voters versus the lists of those with acceptable Photo IDs (DLs, passports, etc.) and then have the intellectual honesty to recognize the number isn't exact but will probably vary some amount from the point estimate, THAT is the figure you "don't buy" but you do buy baseless assertions made by no one in court, EVER.

That's the number testified to in court by the former guy in Texas who headed up elections for a couple of decades or so. If you have a better estimate, please cite it! And then you should give that number to the State of Texas who can't seem to find that estimate either, and to the GOP in PA who recognized in court the number was roughly zero, etc.

Sorry, Jasper. I just cannot take your figures seriously when you post a margin of error of plus or minus 200K.

LetsGoBrandon · Oct 24, 2014

JasperL said:
None of that addresses my point, which is that payroll taxes increased, and SS ran up a surplus of nearly $500B which was used to offset the deficits elsewhere in the Reagan era budgets.

And of course tax cuts don't pay for themselves. They do juice growth, especially when paired with large deficits, but tax cuts reduce tax revenues....

Tax cuts certainly do pay for themselves. You really should stop thinking in terms of a zero sum game economy. Which part of lower taxes and more disposable income creates more investment and purchases in the private sector do you not understand? And you can stop trying to connect the deficit to it. Tax revenue and deficit spending are two different subjects.

LetsGoBrandon · Oct 24, 2014

j-mac said:
Yep, so the other 500K need to get their butt's down and get an ID. If they can't they can do a provisional ballot.

If your argument is that people can still cheat using absentee ballots, then you shouldn't be against Voter ID, because demo's will just use absentee to steal elections like they have recently in contests like Al Franken's win....

Liberals are just showing that they really don't want integrity of the vote...

Unfortunately for the democrats....some states are starting to require photo ID or witness signatures on absentee ballots.. The democrats ofcourse want voter fraud to be risk free.

LetsGoBrandon · Oct 24, 2014

JasperL said:
That's a deliberate, I assume, misstatement of my position. What I object to is the a belief that easy, gutless, cowardly decision to pair spending increases with tax rate CUTS requires someone to believe in a free lunch, a Tax Santa Clause, a Tax Fairy, magic - pick your metaphor.

Bottom line is society has a difficult task setting spending levels. If we want to spend MORE, we have to raise taxes. If we want to cut taxes, then some very painful decisions have to be made about spending CUTS. Right wing fiscal policy rests on the notion that if we want to spend MORE, then to pay for it, we give everyone another tax cut!

Yes, I understand what taxes I pay because I've done taxes for a living since 1988.

And like I said, we have a natural experiment in our lifetimes. On an inflation adjusted bases, tax receipts (total, individual, corporate, payroll) increased by 20% in the Reagan era. Receipts increased by 47% in the Clinton era. Real GDP growth during that time was roughly the same - about 33% for both periods.

Real tax data here: http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2015/assets/hist01z3.xls
I will find a real GDP link if you want to check that number.

So tax receipts, given similar increases in GDP, rose more than twice as fast (47 versus 20) during the Clinton era, following Clinton tax rate increases. And that's consistent with individual income taxes as a percent of GDP. During the Reagan years, that decreased from 9% to 8%. During Clinton years, that increased from 7.5% to 9.4%. This is baby math, and the GOP wants to argue with math. Tax cuts lower revenue, tax increases raise revenue.

If you have a point, make it. I'm not going to guess what that point might be. Several things happened in 1994. Other things happened in 1996. Etc.

If you have really done taxes for a living since 1988, you should have a much better understanding of the tax system then you are showing on this forum.

j-mac · Oct 24, 2014

BWG said:
You can continue to be dishonest and call it emotional, but being disabled was just one reason given and if they're disabled they still have to have certain paperwork that they not have, find and get to a DMV office. I don't think the DMV makes house calls.

Then you haven't been paying much attention...In most states the paperwork to ask for exemption is online, and even in some cases the DMV does absolutely go to the people....Don't give us that crap.

Why are conservatives so afraid of Americans exercising their right to vote. And don't come up with that BS about identifying themselves. There has been ID requirements to vote for a very long time. Probably the most recent was the HAVA act of 2002, signed into law by George W. Bush.

I'd say you have that backwards...It is liberals that are absolutely afraid that one person/one vote will be the rule not the exception in liberal circles...And in that case libs will probably lose every time.

JasperL · Oct 24, 2014

ObamacareFail said:
I do not deal in estimated numbers. Everyone who is not a hermit living in a cave somewhere has an ID. I know why you do not want photo IDs and it has nothing to do with voter disenfranchisement. I am not buying the ruse the democrats are attempting to push.

Can't tell if that's deliberate or not. Yes, almost everyone has AN ID, but roughly 600,000 in Texas don't have an ID that will allow them TO VOTE. Key difference.

JasperL · Oct 24, 2014

ObamacareFail said:
It should be valid and up to date ID...such as a drivers license or state ID card. I would also accept military ID.

Not sure why I make points when you ignore them. There is no evidence having a long list of acceptable ID increases voter fraud. Narrow lists just make it harder to vote for those (mostly) who don't drive.

JasperL · Oct 24, 2014

ObamacareFail said:
Sorry, Jasper. I just cannot take your figures seriously when you post a margin of error of plus or minus 200K.

Right, you are worried about my margin of error based in multiple estimates presented in courts, subject to discovery, cross examination, etc., and so you adopt an estimate based on nothing. Explain that logic for me.

JasperL · Oct 24, 2014

ObamacareFail said:
Tax cuts certainly do pay for themselves. You really should stop thinking in terms of a zero sum game economy. Which part of lower taxes and more disposable income creates more investment and purchases in the private sector do you not understand? And you can stop trying to connect the deficit to it. Tax revenue and deficit spending are two different subjects.

Well, heck, I guess to solve our current deficit, we just need to keep cutting tax rates till we close the shortfall. :shock::lamo

GOP Fiscal Platform: Yes, Virginia, there is a Tax Santa Clause!!

BTW, the deficit equation couldn't be simpler: Deficit (D) = Spending (G) - tax revenue (T). D increases with increases in G or decreases in T. Math.

JasperL · Oct 24, 2014

ObamacareFail said:
If you have really done taxes for a living since 1988, you should have a much better understanding of the tax system then you are showing on this forum.

Well, I have, and what I believe about the tax system is based on the evidence. I presented some of it above. What part did I get wrong?

Grant · Oct 24, 2014

JasperL said:
Well, I have, and what I believe about the tax system is based on the evidence. I presented some of it above. What part did I get wrong?

G does not necessarily decrease with T

JasperL · Oct 25, 2014

Grant said:
G does not necessarily decrease with T

Right, G and T are independent variables. D is the dependent variable, which is affected by BOTH G AND T.

Point in English is deficits are, according to math, affected by spending levels and tax revenues.

And I was responding to this false, but commonly accepted right wing talking point: "And you can stop trying to connect the deficit to [tax cuts]." GOPers cut taxes, revenues drop, they are too chicken s**t to cut spending, run up deficits, then tell their followers that the deficits had NOTHING to do with the tax cuts, deficits are caused by too much spending....

Removable Mind · Oct 25, 2014

Conservative said:
Supreme Court allows Texas to enforce new voter ID law for November election | Fox News

Again, TX gets it right. Liberals aren't going to steal an election in TX by having the dead vote

I'm sorry, and no disrespect intended. But Texas has, by a substantial margins, voted for Republicans in major elections since 1976. That said, the article you posted doesn't state the types of evidence uncovered, which establishes that substantial voter's fraud exist in such a way that it enables manipulation of election outcomes. Nor does the article state any specific methods used to engage in a voter's fraud schemes to alter election outcome.

Here's my position. If there is significant evidence, then I want those who are "behind the fraud schemes" to suffer severe penalties. Now, I would equate "severe punishment" to drug dealers taking the hit way more than the users, if you get my meaning. I want to see trials highly publicized of those who create and implement voter fraud schemes. And not to get draconian about it, but I'm talking about lock'em and throw away the key kind of punishment. That would hopefully send a message to other who feel compelled to manipulate the voting system.

I read an article the other day (dated 10-23-14), which stated at Greg Abbott, the Attorney General for state of Texas said that there's been 30 cases of fraud in Texas uncovered between 2004 and 2010, arrests made, 23 convictions out of the 30 have been made.

According to officials with the Texas Attorney General’s Office, there were 30 instances in which individuals were charged with illegal voting as either an ineligible voter or a voter impersonating someone else while casting a vote from 2004 to 2010. Of those 30, 23 were found to be guilty.

The combined voter turnout for gubernatorial, presidential and constitutional elections in Texas from 2004 to 2010 came out to approximately 29.3 million voters, according to the Texas Secretary of State website.

The resulting percentage of voter fraud in that time period comes out to roughly .00008 percent, which is actually inflated. The percentage would be lower if voter turnout from primary, municipal and school district elections were included.

The new photo ID requirements didn’t seem to have to an negative impact on voter turnout, officials have said.

The 2013 election in Texas was an off-year, constitutional amendment election, which typically draws far less voters than presidential or gubernatorial elections. Voter turnout in 2013, the first election the photo ID requirement was in effect, increased by about 63 percent over turnout in 2011 in comparable elections, according to raw numbers.

Supreme Court upholds voter identification laws | www.statesman.com

Is the above report by the Texas State Attorney General the alarming evidence that is so profound that it leads us to believe there is a mass conspiracy to control election outcomes in Texas?

Mind sharing what evidence you've come across (and sources, of course)?

BWG · Oct 25, 2014

Grant said:
After all this back and forth you still don't understand that the concern is for eligible voters exercising their right to vote. Why does this need constant repeating?

Most people realize that we're talking about eligible/legal voters, but for the true believers I even threw in "Americans" to keep most from veering down the conspiracy path. But unfortunately, it looks as though some need special coddling.

Fenton · Oct 25, 2014

I was standing in line listening to the low information voters behind me talking about how excited they were about Wendy Davis.

I realized how important my vote was.

Its wipes out at least one of their misinformed decisions completely.

LetsGoBrandon · Oct 25, 2014

JasperL said:
Can't tell if that's deliberate or not. Yes, almost everyone has AN ID, but roughly 600,000 in Texas don't have an ID that will allow them TO VOTE. Key difference.

Again...you are attempting to push that based on your previously quoted margin of error of plus or minus 200K. Do you really think anyone is going to take you seriously? Those few who do not have the right IDs can easily get them.

LetsGoBrandon · Oct 25, 2014

JasperL said:
Not sure why I make points when you ignore them. There is no evidence having a long list of acceptable ID increases voter fraud. Narrow lists just make it harder to vote for those (mostly) who don't drive.

I suggest that you try a little common sense. A valid ID should be one that is difficult to counterfeit. You just do not want to lose illegal votes going to the democrat party.

LetsGoBrandon · Oct 25, 2014

[/QUOTE]=JasperL;1063905817]Well, heck, I guess to solve our current deficit, we just need to keep cutting tax rates till we close the shortfall. :shock::lamo

Well, son. It would help if the idiots in congress (on both sides) and the idiot in the white house would curb pork barrel spending as well. Tax cuts increase revenue.....however when congress continues to spend a dollar and a half for every new dollar in revenue.....we will continue to have deficits. I don't know if you are just playing dumb or you are really that poor in math skills. The rest of your post was just lame taunts.

JasperL · Oct 25, 2014

ObamacareFail said:
Again...you are attempting to push that based on your previously quoted margin of error of plus or minus 200K. Do you really think anyone is going to take you seriously? Those few who do not have the right IDs can easily get them.

I notice your evidence for "those few" without proper ID is nothing.

It's one thing to reject evidence in favor of better or more convincing evidence, but quite another to reject studies presented in court, etc. for "my gut tells me."

Dittohead not! · Oct 25, 2014

ObamacareFail said:
I suggest that you try a little common sense. A valid ID should be one that is difficult to counterfeit. You just do not want to lose illegal votes going to the democrat party.

Do we want them going to the Republican party?

JasperL · Oct 25, 2014

ObamacareFail said:
I suggest that you try a little common sense. A valid ID should be one that is difficult to counterfeit. You just do not want to lose illegal votes going to the democrat party.

If there was some evidence of anyone counterfeiting IDs to vote, then you'd have a point. But you can't point to such evidence...

SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

JasperL

Grant

LetsGoBrandon

LetsGoBrandon

LetsGoBrandon

LetsGoBrandon

LetsGoBrandon

LetsGoBrandon

j-mac

JasperL

JasperL

JasperL

JasperL

JasperL

Grant

JasperL

Removable Mind

Irremovable Intelligence

BWG

Fenton

LetsGoBrandon

LetsGoBrandon

LetsGoBrandon

JasperL

Dittohead not!

master political analyst

JasperL

SC allows Texas to use New Voter ID Law

Irremovable Intelligence

master political analyst

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency