Eric Holder says Texas ID law would harm minorities

[JohnR! 5,495]

100% agree with you but absentee ballot is another issue but that should not stop on enforcing of checking Id of the ppl walking into the Polling station.

The implication being that in the end, the law has absolutely no teeth, prevents nothing and accomplishes little. It must be an election year, when you see the legislative of a red State working so hard to come up with this kind of stuff...

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

It most certainly does not because anyone can get a DL.

Only in New Mexico, Illinois, Utah, and Washington: http://www.ppsla.org/docs/sb1070/States%20issuing%20drivers%20licenses....pdf

Edited July 11, 2012 by ☼

[Harsh_77 718]

It most certainly does not because anyone can get a DL. However, it will be very interesting to see what will happen when John Smith presents his birth certificate with no picture.

What if John Smith mails his ballot? Where, how and to whom will he show ID?

Mail or Absentee ballot is another issue as I responded earlier coz we cannot stop one does not mean don't check Id at the polling station.

Getting a DL is not plain simple now days, they validate few things before the issue a DL one thing that most state in south have been checking is one is legally in the country.

Fake DL, GC even a fake passport can be bought there is no argument to that, but checking the Id does hinder the fraudster it is one more barrier to prevent fraud.

Can 100% fraud be avoided? I dont think so does any of the state have 100% correct voters list, I don't think so, but anything that would reduce the fraud should be done.

Eric holder argument that it would he hardship for the legitimate voter just does not make any sense.

Edited July 11, 2012 by Harsh_77

[Ban Hammer 13,656]

It most certainly does not because anyone can get a DL.

you might consider visiting the "Moving Here and Your New Life In America" forum and see how many hoops the newly arrived immigrants have to jump through in some states. the local dmv office here would not issue to my wife. i had to call the office in another county that has oversight on this local office and speak to the supervisor there, who then called my local office and straightened them out.

in some states, the newly arrived immigrant has to aos first.

my wife still had to prove she was here legally - so no, it's not "anyone" can get a DL.

[JohnR! 5,495]

Mail or Absentee ballot is another issue as I responded earlier coz we cannot stop one does not mean don't check Id at the polling station.

Getting a DL is not plain simple now days, they validate few things before the issue a DL one thing that most state in south have been checking is one is legally in the country.

Fake DL, GC even a fake passport can be bought there is no argument to that, but checking the Id does hinder the fraudster it is one more barrier to prevent fraud.

Can 100% fraud be avoided? I dont think so does any of the state have 100% correct voters list, I don't think so, but anything that would reduce the fraud should be done.

As I said, the law accomplishes, prevents, affects and effects little, if anything at all. It has got to be an election year for the legislative of a red State to put so much time into pretending they are actually working.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

It definitely does stop fraud…. Someone cannot just walk in the polling station and say I m John Smith.

With new law John Smith will have to show a picture Id to prove that he is John Smith.

First, there has to be fraud for it to be stopped. There isn't a voter fraud problem out there. Second, whatever isolated occurences of voter fraud there are, these ID laws do not address them. John Smith does not need to set foot into a polling place to cast a ballot. The easiest way for John Smith to cast a fraudulent vote is to vote absentee. And that process has been left untouched altogether by all of the voter ID laws. Now you could sit there and say that this has nothing to do with the fact that absentee votes favor the very party that has been pushing the ID laws but that would mean that you're naive.

[JohnR! 5,495]

you might consider visiting the "Moving Here and Your New Life In America" forum and see how many hoops the newly arrived immigrants have to jump through in some states. the local dmv office here would not issue to my wife. i had to call the office in another county that has oversight on this local office and speak to the supervisor there, who then called my local office and straightened them out.

in some states, the newly arrived immigrant has to aos first.

my wife still had to prove she was here legally - so no, it's not "anyone" can get a DL.

My point is that if she were interested in obtaining a DL to commit electoral fraud, chances are she could have obtained a fake DL in any big city in Texas. It also seems to me that these restrictions on the issuance of DL were implemented in the last few years, which leave us with millions of DLs being issued to persons who should not be allowed to vote.

I do not question their initiative. What I question is the populist manner in which the Texas legislative is going about it. Unless the State positively identifies everyone and issues a voting card with picture ID or demands US passports as proof of citizenship, this new legislation accomplishes nothing.

One might be forgiven for thinking there aren't more pressing issues with which the legislature could better serve their constituency.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

In your case yes... it makes sense, but what Holder is fighting for is not for the cases like yours.

Yours is one of case... Eric holder is fighting where fradulent votes can continue to happen and as most of us know most fraudlent voter lean toward the democratic party and he is just trying to make sure his party is benefited out of it.

Just because I don't agree with Holder doesn't mean I support any and everything that he's against. My concern is how these types of laws will negatively affect law-abiding senior citizens.

For instance, one way to help would be for the DMV to be able to accept other forms of documentation as possible alternatives to things like marriage licenses from 80 years ago. My Grandma could've shown many, many current and historical documents with her married name (on bank accounts and other financial accounts, life insurance policies, property deeds, etc.) but these were not acceptable. They wanted a marriage license, and nothing else would do. This was the problem.

[Teddy B 17,252]

I don't believe that voter fraud is near as much a problem as politician fraud. They run for election claiming to want to help the country and it's people, but once elected you find out that the wool has been pulled over your eyes yet again.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

First, there has to be fraud for it to be stopped. There isn't a voter fraud problem out there. Second, whatever isolated occurences of voter fraud there are, these ID laws do not address them. John Smith does not need to set foot into a polling place to cast a ballot. The easiest way for John Smith to cast a fraudulent vote is to vote absentee. And that process has been left untouched altogether by all of the voter ID laws. Now you could sit there and say that this has nothing to do with the fact that absentee votes favor the very party that has been pushing the ID laws but that would mean that you're naive.

My district has copious verifiable fraud, however, California permits the parties to maintain their own voter rolls. Once a person is registered, there is no other mechanism to remove that person from the rolls, unless they fail to vote in consecutive general elections. We even have voters registered in multiple counties. I was a poll walker during a presidential election year, and I can tell to that in this 80% Democratic enrolled precinct, the dead and incapacitated account for about 20% of the votes in a precinct which has an unheard of 80% voter participation rate. I have witnessed the ballot stuffing myself firsthand when a special election was held to overturn the result of a previous election held a couple months before.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

My district has copious verifiable fraud, however, California permits the parties to maintain their own voter rolls. Once a person is registered, there is no other mechanism to remove that person from the rolls, unless they fail to vote in consecutive general elections. We even have voters registered in multiple counties. I was a poll walker during a presidential election year, and I can tell to that in this 80% Democratic enrolled precinct, the dead and incapacitated account for about 20% of the votes in a precinct which has an unheard of 80% voter participation rate. I have witnessed the ballot stuffing myself firsthand when a special election was held to overturn the result of a previous election held a couple months before.

Anecdotes. Nice. Everyone seems to be in on it too. Otherwise, there would be charges, trials and people would be sent up the river. Absent of any of that, this is a nice story you can tell your grandkids at bedtime some day. Evidence of rampant voter fraud it is not.

[rocks 494]

Correction it is not the Id of the person who is getting the BC, but it is the Id of the person who is sendin the forms requesting the BC.

So in normal case it would be copy of parent's Id when they are ordering the BC for kid.

I'm talking about adults. Only adults can vote. Try to keep up.

[rocks 494]

I addressed one of your arguments, transportation. Then you add in additional claims as the debate goes on. If we could address one at a time, things could be cleared at a faster pace, but your counter replies always raise new issues to muddy the waters.

Anyhow the topic at hand is Texas, not Mississippi.

You didn't address anything. You were your usual rude self, that is all.

I'm quite aware this is about Texas, Texas isn't that different from here, it's a southern state. It has small towns and people without an ID. I'm merely saying that they are imposing the same stupid rule here, another republican state, and it is being implemented to prevent people from voting.

I'm sure you can come up with some ridiculous way to ignore everything I've said and turn this into an insult. Can't wait.

[SMOKE 1,426]

You didn't address anything. You were your usual rude self, that is all.

I'm quite aware this is about Texas, Texas isn't that different from here, it's a southern state. It has small towns and people without an ID. I'm merely saying that they are imposing the same stupid COMMON SENSE rule here, another republican state, and it is being implemented to prevent people from UNLAWFULLY voting.

I'm sure you can come up with some ridiculous way to ignore everything I've said and turn this into an insult. Can't wait.

fixed that for you.

Edited July 11, 2012 by SMOKE

[Harsh_77 718]

The implication being that in the end, the law has absolutely no teeth, prevents nothing and accomplishes little. It must be an election year, when you see the legislative of a red State working so hard to come up with this kind of stuff...

If there were no implication Eric Holder and democratic party would had not been fighting it so bad.

They know the fraud does take place in polling station when someone can just walk in claim to be xyz and just vote as there is not Id check.

If there is a Id Check this kinda fraud would not happen.