Supreme Court allows Texas voter ID law for now

[UncleBeer 244]

or concealed carry permit No other state will prove who you are

And

proof you are registered to vote in texas

and

you provide either

proof of citizenship in the for of passport or naturalization car

or

A certified birth certificate and another seconds form of id

As long as the names perfectly align and you haven't changed your

English please.

[UncleBeer 244]

_{My idea would be to not only make the photo ID cards "free" (so those liberals cannot say that a segment of people can't afford them), but to actually pay them to acquire these cards.}

They're already whining about the several thousand dollars these ID cards would cost. Imagine if you were able to explain the trillions of dollars their preznit has squandered!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Texas Ids are resistant to fraud already. Have been since 2009.

What about people who don't drive?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

They can easily put voter eligibility/ citizenship status etc. on state IDs. In fact in a lot of states, people only get driver's licenses for as long as their visa is valid. I've seen folks here complaining that they went to get a state ID while on a K-1 and it was only valid as long as their immigration status.

The only hypocrisy, is people that come up with off the wall reasons for not having an ID, when in reality they want people voting that shouldn't be. There's no other explanation. I don't think I've ever met someone that didn't have an ID. If people like that exist, I doubt they're voting anyway. I'm sure a poster will cite some obscure one off case of some 90 year old lady that doesn't have an ID. In the end, Texas has made provisions to get these folks IDs free of charge. They've also setup programs to go on the road to rural areas etc. to make sure folks that want an ID, can get one without traveling long distances.

As to your statement about the GOP stuffing ballots, please post some evidence. I'm sure you don't have any credible evidence though, as usual. Or maybe it's another failed attempt at humor on your part.

I doubt anyone here is arguing FOR voter fraud...

[Karee 4,191]

What about people who don't drive?

It's the same ID card with different endorsements.

[Rob L 3,811]

English please.

I can't the requirements for getting a voter id card spanned three pages

[Teddy B 17,252]

I'm in MA, so there were a lot of hoops to jump through to get a CC license. The rectal exam was a killer.

So much so you went back to have it done a second time.

[Rob L 3,811]

_{My idea would be to not only make the photo ID cards "free" (so those liberals cannot say that a segment of people can't afford them), but to actually pay them to acquire these cards. Even pay them for travel to and from the place of issuance. What then would be the lefty excuse against these cards???}

_{Yet I am sure they will come up with something nutty.}

The voter id cards are free in Texas... but are only available with the same evidence(and then some) you would need to produce to vote.

[Rob L 3,811]

It's not a big deal. That's why I don't get the resistance to the law. It makes me think that people are voting that shouldn't be.

It's not a big deal. ,

At what point does it become a big deal 1% legitimate voters not voting? 2?,3%? I prize my citizenship and my right to vote, I don't want any voter to lose that right due to a bureaucratic hurdle. The court didn't disagree that it was unnecessary and a hurdle, they just affirmed the states right to do it because it did not target certain groups, I believe that s the only purpose

That's why I don't get the resistance to the law

Say you are recently married woman, you show up to vote and your new name appears on your new dl , your maiden name on the voter role. You don't vote.

It makes me think that people are voting that shouldn't be.

We don't have evidence of that with two voter fraud cases in the state of Texas over 12 years. Out of 10 million voters.

Why is this new law needed?

[JohnR! 5,495]

It's just a diversion from the real issues afflicting Texans. While they talk about non-existent voter fraud, they keep the populace on the dark about the important issues.

It's not a big deal. ,

At what point does it become a big deal 1% legitimate voters not voting? 2?,3%? I prize my citizenship and my right to vote, I don't want any voter to lose that right due to a bureaucratic hurdle. The court didn't disagree that it was unnecessary and a hurdle, they just affirmed the states right to do it because it did not target certain groups, I believe that s the only purpose

That's why I don't get the resistance to the law

Say you are recently married woman, you show up to vote and your new name appears on your new dl , your maiden name on the voter role. You don't vote.

It makes me think that people are voting that shouldn't be.

We don't have evidence of that with two voter fraud cases in the state of Texas over 12 years. Out of 10 million voters.

Why is this new law needed?

[Merle 458]

At what point does it become a big deal 1% legitimate voters not voting? 2?,3%? I prize my citizenship and my right to vote, I don't want any voter to lose that right due to a bureaucratic hurdle. The court didn't disagree that it was unnecessary and a hurdle, they just affirmed the states right to do it because it did not target certain groups, I believe that s the only purpose.

I prize my right to vote also and nothing gets to me more than the thought of an illegitimate voter behind me in line at the polling station cancelling out my vote. Everyone talks about certain groups being disenfranchised by having to have a voter i.d. but when people that aren't supposed to be voting do so everyone is disenfranchised.

Say you are recently married woman, you show up to vote and your new name appears on your new dl , your maiden name on the voter role. You don't vote.

I like the "what if" game. Let's play. What if the voter card had biometric information in it? That information doesnt change no matter what you last name is.

We don't have evidence of that with two voter fraud cases in the state of Texas over 12 years. Out of 10 million voters.

Sounds like 2 too many to me.

Why is this new law needed?

[Karee 4,191]

Why is this new law needed?

The man in the white house has made it national policy to accept as many potential Democrats from south as the border as possible. Obama's policies have encouraged the flow of illegal immigrants to Texas. He has even stopped enforcing some immigration laws. Texas is taking steps to make sure people that shouldn't be voting, aren't voting.

Those reasons aside, the legislature with the support of the voters, has decided to require ID for anyone voting to make sure that people voting, are legal voters. Simple as that.

It's just a diversion from the real issues afflicting Texans. While they talk about non-existent voter fraud, they keep the populace on the dark about the important issues.

Wrong again. Not surprising, another post from you with no evidence. Just more made up declarations with no proof or anything resembling facts.

The moon is made of cheese because I say so.

[Merle 458]

Whatever the case, it really doesn't prove nor disprove the ever present yet elusive 'voter fraud' specter does it? Unless of course, you're implying the advantage you point out was achieved through ballot stuffing.

Unless there are a bunch of illegitimate voters voting Republican. I dont see that happening. My point was that Republicans are in control of the house despite voter fraud occuring, even if it is only in a small scale. Could you explain to me how a voter I.d. law will lead to GOP minion and teabagger ballot stuffing? Wouldn't everyone be required to show i.d. no matter their political views and affiliations? Maybe I dont understand what you mean by ballot stuffing.

[Rob L 3,811]

Unless there are a bunch of illegitimate voters voting Republican. I dont see that happening. My point was that Republicans are in control of the house despite voter fraud occuring, even if it is only in a small scale. Could you explain to me how a voter I.d. law will lead to GOP minion and teabagger ballot stuffing? Wouldn't everyone be required to show i.d. no matter their political views and affiliations? Maybe I dont understand what you mean by ballot stuffing.

I think you are missing the point

No one is saying that there is ballot box stuffing or fraud by any account. There is no evidence of fraud under the current law ( it works) and there should be none in the future law. The concern goes to one of our hardest fought and fundamental rights, access to the ballot box. This law is constructed to restrict some voters from access until they can prove who they are. That in and of itself is not against the law, unless the barriers are directed to one group of people.

My prediction is, this is a bigger deal than we understand as there is a shift toward purple in Texas , Georgia , Florida. The Republicans will have tougher elections after this cycle, this issue will grow in importance.

[Merle 458]

I think you are missing the point

No one is saying that there is ballot box stuffing or fraud by any account. There is no evidence of fraud under the current law ( it works) and there should be none in the future law. The concern goes to one of our hardest fought and fundamental rights, access to the ballot box. This law is constructed to restrict some voters from access until they can prove who they are. That in and of itself is not against the law, unless the barriers are directed to one group of people.

My prediction is, this is a bigger deal than we understand as there is a shift toward purple in Texas , Georgia , Florida. The Republicans will have tougher elections after this cycle, this issue will grow in importance.

Read post #349. JohnR! implied that somehow a voter I.d. law will ensure gop minions can stuff the ballots. Whaf does that mean? Does that mean a voter i.d. law will make it easier for Republicans to cheat? Or does it mean gop minions will be the only ones voting because no one else will go through the trouble of getting a voter I.d.?