GentDirkly: ginandbacon: GentDirkly: ginandbacon:

In fact, the DoJ is pursing action against several of these states. There have also been Congressional hearings on the issue. Now will you STFU?

Yes, one of those congressional hearings was in Tampa. Dick Durbin came down and presided over it. They considered the issue, asked a lot of questions having to do with the results of the new law (not the intent, VRA cares about results only), and ultimately they left the FL law alone.

What do you mean "they left the FL law alone"?

OK, I had heard something on the radio that they agreed to pre-clear and now I see that this is not true. Point conceded. But notice, it is the restrictions on registration drives that are the issue, not requiring photo ID. FL has required photo ID for over 10 years if memory serves.

Really? 10 years? Do you have a source for that?

My ignore list is experiencing some heavy traffic this morning.

PirateFreedom: robrr2003: When you have a party that's stated policy is that minorities are to stupid to figure out something as complicated as an ID or are all to poor to be able to afford one ... you'd think it might be a little time for reflection for those who claim membership in said party.

Fark em if they can't afford a car and thus don't have a drivers license, making them lose a days pay so they can bus over to some government office and wait in a line just so they can vote is what they deserve for being so goddamn poor they might not vote the straight plutocrat ticket.

If they weren't weren't useless drags on society with their low wage jobs they would already have a drivers license like real people do.

And black Americans who were born in the South who were never issued a birth certificate shouldn't be voting either because they should have known better than to be born down there.

winterwhile: Why does the cloaca call to me

gona fark that chicken!

all night long?

Best Part... .

feathers!

ginandbacon: My ignore list is experiencing some heavy traffic this morning.

Ignore is for the weak.

Brubold: registration by black and Hispanics in all 50 states?

Yeah, that's what I thought.

That's a good question, and I'm not really in the mood to research it at the moment. However, A couple months ago I did some reading into objections against Texas' updated voter ID laws. I mean, on the face of it, requiring proof of eligibility to vote doesn't seem like a bad thing.

Then I started reading about how political gerrymandering has placed ID centers in only some districts and rural areas remain hugely unserved by ID locations. This largely affects rural areas, many of which are primarily or largely comprised of (legal) Hispanic residents. Furthermore, several of the ID locations are placed such that it would require a full day of busing or several hours of driving to obtain the ID (note that documents such as SSID don't count, and previous allowances that permit utility bills stating residence, etc. are no longer accepted).

It turns out that not only were the distances prohibitive, the hours of operations for the ID locations also turned out to be restrictive (something like 10-5 M-F).

So who does this law effectively target? Poor and minority voters.

As I said, at first blush it seems perfectly reasonable. It was only after I started reading about how politicians have made fulfilling the letter of the law very difficult that I changed my mind.

ginandbacon: GentDirkly: ginandbacon: GentDirkly: ginandbacon:

In fact, the DoJ is pursing action against several of these states. There have also been Congressional hearings on the issue. Now will you STFU?

Yes, one of those congressional hearings was in Tampa. Dick Durbin came down and presided over it. They considered the issue, asked a lot of questions having to do with the results of the new law (not the intent, VRA cares about results only), and ultimately they left the FL law alone.

What do you mean "they left the FL law alone"?

OK, I had heard something on the radio that they agreed to pre-clear and now I see that this is not true. Point conceded. But notice, it is the restrictions on registration drives that are the issue, not requiring photo ID. FL has required photo ID for over 10 years if memory serves.

Really? 10 years? Do you have a source for that?

No? Could that be because you were lying wrong again?

tenpoundsofcheese:
so you are okay with not requiring any ID to vote?

I'm not sure how you determined that. I'd be okay with requiring photo ID so long as ID centers were placed to permit accessibility by all eligible voters. Failing that, perhaps a combination of two or more non-photo IDs indicating name and address would be okay.

Bag of Hammers: ginandbacon: Why don't they just attempt a coup? It would be so much more honest.

Tried it, didn't work

[freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com image 437x600]

That's not Raskob, who is it?

D'oh

</b>

GentDirkly: ginandbacon: ginandbacon: GentDirkly: ginandbacon: GentDirkly: ginandbacon:

In fact, the DoJ is pursing action against several of these states. There have also been Congressional hearings on the issue. Now will you STFU?

Yes, one of those congressional hearings was in Tampa. Dick Durbin came down and presided over it. They considered the issue, asked a lot of questions having to do with the results of the new law (not the intent, VRA cares about results only), and ultimately they left the FL law alone.

What do you mean "they left the FL law alone"?

OK, I had heard something on the radio that they agreed to pre-clear and now I see that this is not true. Point conceded. But notice, it is the restrictions on registration drives that are the issue, not requiring photo ID. FL has required photo ID for over 10 years if memory serves.

Really? 10 years? Do you have a source for that?

No? Could that be because you were lying wrong again?

I've lived here my entire life. I remember being in high school when all the letters to the editor were on the subject.

But, though I owe you nothing, I'll go ahead and search for it... here.

"Florida - Implementation
Local officials say they did not have any major issues or problems when the photo ID requirement started in 2001,"

http://www.lwvwi.org/Portals/0/IssuesAdvocacy/PDF/ISACA%20Voter%20ID% 2 0Report%20020211%20final2%5B1%5D.pdf

"Bad Request - Invalid URL"

Could you provide another source? Thanks.

GentDirkly: ginandbacon:

"Bad Request - Invalid URL"

Could you provide another source? Thanks.

http://tinyurl.com/77qrrhn fark adds spaces to long links for some reason. a bug, i guess.

Oh I see, you're referring to the ID law that allowed any of the following for voting at the polls:

Florida driver's license
Florida identification card issued by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles
United States passport
Debit or credit card
Military identification
Student identification
Retirement center identification
Neighborhood association identification
Public assistance identification.

Hardly the same law on the books today which explicitly targets those groups most likely to vote for Democrats. And BTW, the Justice Department under Bush was notorious for not pursuing any action that would defend voters rights. Thankfully, that has changed with the current administration.

Huh. I seem to have dropped an apostrophe there. I'll be in my corner.

Dancin_In_Anson: ginandbacon: My ignore list is experiencing some heavy traffic this morning.

Ignore is for the weak.

The only people who equate "putting up with threadshiatters" with "machismo" are threadshiatters. No surprise what your opinion is on the matter.