The Justice Department sent a letter to Florida Secretary of State Ken Detzner Thursday evening demanding the state cease purging its voting rolls because the process it is using has not been cleared under the Voting Rights Act.
http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2012/images/06/01/20130601.florida.letter.pdf
Rick Scott responds to the DOJ, stating that they will not stop the voter purge.
QuoteFlorida challenges Washington over voter purge effort
Reuters) - Florida on Wednesday disputed a Justice Department claim that its controversial voter purge efforts may be illegal and said it was the federal government that appeared to have run afoul of the law.
"The Florida Department of State has a solemn obligation to ensure the integrity of elections in this state," said Florida Secretary of State Ken Detzner in a letter to the Justice Department.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/07/us-usa-voting-florida-idUSBRE85600J20120607
Fortunately, Rick Scott can't compel local elections officials to actually remove anyone on his list.
This should get interesting.
QuoteThe push to crack down on the way Floridians vote, and how they register to vote, is viewed by some as an effort to single out Democratic voters, many of them black and Hispanic. Florida has been accused in past elections of unfairly trying to remove from the rolls former felons who are eligible to vote.
The new scrub of registered voters is no different, said Howard Simon, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Florida.
“It’s a purging process that is based on what the state already acknowledges to be inaccurate information,†Mr. Simon said. “It really raises questions as to whether or not this is yet another partisan effort to scrub the voting rolls. We know it’s inaccurate because people from as far away as Pensacola to Miami have come forward to say, ‘I am a U.S. citizen. I am eligible to vote.’ â€
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/18/us/florida-attempts-to-scrub-illegal-voters.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all
It's really sickening to be honest. Voter suppression at it's finest.
The story about the 90 year old WWII veteran born in NYC is probably the worst example I have seen so far.
How is purging illegals from the voting rolls suppression? Scott cannot do anything 3 months before the election, hence the push now before his time runs out.
Lots of nothing, just filler before the Supreme Court rules on Healthcare later this month.
^^exactly! Those evil Republicans! darn them.
If the state were claiming they had solid information about who should be removed from the rolls that would be one thing. They are not even pretending that they are not removing many of our fellow citizens from the lists.
The problem is not the purging of illegal aliens, the problem is the process by which they are going about it. They aren't verifying their data when they attempt to purge the records. They're just matching against a list of known illegal aliens and sending letters to anyone with that name.
San your name is Juan Pablo Escobar, but you were born here in Jacksonville. Does your name match? You're getting a letter, and if you don't get that letter, or you do and don't respond to it, you're automatically removed from the voter rolls. Even if you registered last month successfully.. you know.. by proving you're a citizen and resident when you actually register to vote.
It's bullcrap.
QuoteSan your name is Juan Pablo Escobar, but you were born here in Jacksonville. Does your name match? You're getting a letter, and if you don't get that letter, or you do and don't respond to it, you're automatically removed from the voter rolls. Even if you registered last month successfully.. you know.. by proving you're a citizen and resident when you actually register to vote.
Burden of proof is on the voter, I don't see anything wrong with that. No different than your social security check going somewhere else because of a US Treasury screw up, the burden of proof lies with the individual, not the state.
This process is much less costly than having to go see and verify and track down the individual. You get a letter, you can always clear it up with the state.
Quote from: mtraininjax on June 07, 2012, 04:07:31 PM
QuoteSan your name is Juan Pablo Escobar, but you were born here in Jacksonville. Does your name match? You're getting a letter, and if you don't get that letter, or you do and don't respond to it, you're automatically removed from the voter rolls. Even if you registered last month successfully.. you know.. by proving you're a citizen and resident when you actually register to vote.
Burden of proof is on the voter, I don't see anything wrong with that. No different than your social security check going somewhere else because of a US Treasury screw up, the burden of proof lies with the individual, not the state.
This process is much less costly than having to go see and verify and track down the individual. You get a letter, you can always clear it up with the state.
"Burden of proof is on the voter" OK then lets take a thumb scan to vote? Anyone Republican or Democrat can get a fake ID. So lets do thumb print scans so if some Idiot votes in one place he or she can't go to another area because a thumb scan would show up that they have voted already!
Quote from: If_I_Loved_you on June 07, 2012, 04:15:31 PM
So lets do thumb print scans so if some Idiot votes in one place he or she can't go to another area because a thumb scan would show up that they have voted already!
Sounds like a solution in search of a problem:
QuoteBut the “threat†[of voter fraud] is very nearly non-existent. Tova Wang, an expert in election law, told U.S. News and World Report in April that the number of people who have been prosecuted successfully for voter fraud is “ridiculously low.†A 2006 report from the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law found documented examples of voter fraud to be “extremely rare†and likened it to one’s chances of being killed by lightning.
The idea that voter fraud is epidemic stems from the occasional high-profile exception and from stunts like GOP activist James O’Keefe’s sending some guy into a polling place to vote under the name of Attorney General Eric Holder. But stunts and high-profile exceptions do not disprove â€" nor even address â€" the statistical reality Wang and the Brennan Center describe.
http://www.thenewstribune.com/2012/06/03/2167207/a-ham-handed-solution-to-a-voter.html
Quote from: mtraininjax on June 07, 2012, 11:06:09 AM
How is purging illegals from the voting rolls suppression? Scott cannot do anything 3 months before the election, hence the push now before his time runs out.
Lots of nothing, just filler before the Supreme Court rules on Healthcare later this month.
Or purging 90 year old WWII veterans.
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/06/01/493500/meet-archibald-the-second-90-year-old-wwii-veteran-targeted-by-floridas-voter-purge/?mobile=nc
I don't agree with it at all. It seems a dangerous practice.
But I don't think we should spend our time trying to assign a motive to the Governor's actions - there simply isn't enough evidence or information to say for certain and our attempts to assign a motive (from any ideological perspective) simply reveals our own biases.
What words best describe this?
Irony?
Hypocrisy?
Poetic Justice?
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/14/us-usa-voting-florida-idUSBRE85D15R20120614 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/06/14/us-usa-voting-florida-idUSBRE85D15R20120614)
No one should be surprised..this is what right wing conservative republicans do..welcome to the great state of Florida...the nations leader in political idiots.
Quote from: Garden guy on June 15, 2012, 06:30:30 AM
No one should be surprised..this is what right wing conservative republicans do..welcome to the great state of Florida...the nations leader in political idiots.
Great Post :)
Quote from: If_I_Loved_you on June 15, 2012, 11:18:50 AM
Quote from: Garden guy on June 15, 2012, 06:30:30 AM
No one should be surprised..this is what right wing conservative republicans do..welcome to the great state of Florida...the nations leader in political idiots.
Great Post :)
its hot keyed he posts that to everything
Quote from: civil42806 on June 15, 2012, 02:11:37 PM
Quote from: If_I_Loved_you on June 15, 2012, 11:18:50 AM
Quote from: Garden guy on June 15, 2012, 06:30:30 AM
No one should be surprised..this is what right wing conservative republicans do..welcome to the great state of Florida...the nations leader in political idiots.
Great Post :)
its hot keyed he posts that to everything
^Hilarious!
I am going to assume most of you would have no problem with removing someone who is not eligible to vote from the voter rolls, what ever the reason, being undocumented, a convicted felon, someone who is dead.... There may not be that many over all but I don't care if it is one or 100,000. If they aren't eligible, get them off the roll.
So assuming you are in agreement with me, rather than continuous whining and crying because Republicans aren't doing it right, what would you suggest is the correct way to do it. Florida is trying to get a list from HLS to verify what they already know but they have been refused access to that list. So what else do you want.
TBH, it wouldn't matter what was done, most of you will bitch and moan just because.
Quote from: mtraininjax on June 07, 2012, 04:07:31 PM
Burden of proof is on the voter, I don't see anything wrong with that. No different than your social security check going somewhere else because of a US Treasury screw up, the burden of proof lies with the individual, not the state.
Just about anything with the government is done this way so what is the problem with this. If anything is screwed up, the taxpayer or voter is the one who has to prove them wrong. So why should this be any different.
Quote from: DDC on June 17, 2012, 02:17:02 PM
Just about anything with the government is done this way so what is the problem with this. If anything is screwed up, the taxpayer or voter is the one who has to prove them wrong. So why should this be any different.
This is different because there are laws in place to protect the voter from this exact scenario. I'm sure you aren't advocating Florida break the law.
I believe he is advocating for a change in the law that would allow states to have an honest voter list without violating the Voter Rights Act. Somehow, that seems to be impossible under current law/administration.
I know this is too much to ask of our Federal and State legislators, but could they just come up with a verifiable cohesive voter registration and maintenance process? I don't wan't either political party playing games with this process.
Quote from: stephendare on June 17, 2012, 03:30:34 PM
It's not very wise to presume to know what other people think or how they might react in a public forum, DDC. It makes you look like like a jerk, and since you've already prescribed people's opinions for them before they can respond, why on earth should anyone formulate a thoughtful response, whether they disagree with you or not?
Stephendare, point taken. However, if making an assumption that anyone here would be not be opposed to removing an ineligible voter makes me look like a jerk, then I am a jerk. I can't imagine a rational argument any one could use to justify that stance. Not saying they don't have that right to argue that point, they are perfectly free to do so.
Which takes me back to my point, if it is being done the wrong way, what is the correct way? The DOJ says that the way Florida is doing it is illegal, yet it is illegal for an ineligible voter to cast a ballot. So do we just throw up our hands and say "oh well"?
Quote from: Lunican on June 17, 2012, 02:41:55 PM
This is different because there are laws in place to protect the voter from this exact scenario. I'm sure you aren't advocating Florida break the law.
As I am sure Lunican is not advocating we allow ineligible voters to break the law. Oops, there I go again making assumptions.... :-X
Quote from: stephendare on June 17, 2012, 10:05:22 PM
Quote from: DDC on June 17, 2012, 09:24:42 PM
Quote from: stephendare on June 17, 2012, 03:30:34 PM
It's not very wise to presume to know what other people think or how they might react in a public forum, DDC. It makes you look like like a jerk, and since you've already prescribed people's opinions for them before they can respond, why on earth should anyone formulate a thoughtful response, whether they disagree with you or not?
Stephendare, point taken. However, if making an assumption that anyone here would be not be opposed to removing an ineligible voter makes me look like a jerk, then I am a jerk. I can't imagine a rational argument any one could use to justify that stance. Not saying they don't have that right to argue that point, they are perfectly free to do so.
Which takes me back to my point, if it is being done the wrong way, what is the correct way? The DOJ says that the way Florida is doing it is illegal, yet it is illegal for an ineligible voter to cast a ballot. So do we just throw up our hands and say "oh well"?
Quote from: Lunican on June 17, 2012, 02:41:55 PM
This is different because there are laws in place to protect the voter from this exact scenario. I'm sure you aren't advocating Florida break the law.
As I am sure Lunican is not advocating we allow ineligible voters to break the law. Oops, there I go again making assumptions.... :-X
How would you feel about it if the process were Ina different context. Suppose the department of motor vehicles decided to round up and arrest everyone who was driving a car without a completely up to date drivers lisense?
Would you have the same equanimity if everyone who had gotten a ticket within the past year was assumed to have an inelgible drivers lisense and you personally were arrested even though your ticket had already been paid?
Sure doesnt seem like arresting someone and removing ineligible people from a list is very comparable...
Quote from: stephendare on June 17, 2012, 10:05:22 PM
How would you feel about it if the process were Ina different context. Suppose the department of motor vehicles decided to round up and arrest everyone who was driving a car without a completely up to date drivers lisense?
Would you have the same equanimity if everyone who had gotten a ticket within the past year was assumed to have an inelgible drivers lisense and you personally were arrested even though your ticket had already been paid?
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 18, 2012, 06:46:54 AM
Sure doesnt seem like arresting someone and removing ineligible people from a list is very comparable...
I have to agree with BridgeTroll on this as I don't recall any one being arrested on suspicion of being on the voter rolls when they are ineligible to vote. As far as I know, they have been notified by letter and are asked to respond.
Seems like a minor inconvenience to the voter IMO. But that is just me.
Quote from: DDC on June 18, 2012, 06:45:08 PM
As far as I know, they have been notified by letter and are asked to respond.
If they think there is an issue, how do they know where to send the letter?
Scott made a good point with the Voter Registration department showing him as DEAD when he went to vote. Love it or hate it, the system of registering to vote is in need of a major overhaul, so this would be a good pet project for Scott. I see the reasoning for it, the system is flawed and in need of new direction.
http://www2.wsls.com/news/2012/jun/18/bedford-county-dead-dog-receives-voter-registratio-ar-1996759/
QuoteBEDFORD COUNTY, VA --
Bedford County dead dog receives voter registration forms
When Tim Morris got his mail last week he found a pretty big surprise, a document asking his dog Mozart to register to vote.
Not only is Mozart a dog but he's been dead for two years.
"I opened it up and looked at it and I just laughed," Morris said. "I thought it was a joke at first and it turns out it's real."
The form is addressed to Mo, the family's nickname for the dog.
What amazed Morris is that if Mozart was human he would have been eligible to vote for the first time in 2012.
"He would have been 19 years old this year and he passed away two years ago," he said. "I still have no earthly idea how they got his information."
10 On Your Side looked deeper and found that the voter registration forms were sent by the non-profit Voter Participation Center, not the State Board of Elections.
So we contacted the Voter Participation Center and found that they purchase mailing lists from vendors and while they do try and check every name the organization admits that some do fall through the cracks.
The voter registration efforts are focused on groups like young people, minorities, and unmarried women.
This could help explain why the Morris' dog Mozart didn't receive a registration form until now, since he would have been 18.
The Board of Elections said they've received similar complaints but since the Voter Participation Center is a private organization they can't stop them from sending voter registration forms.
As for Morris he's hopeful the problem can be controlled so animals like Mozart won't be deciding elections anytime soon.
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 19, 2012, 03:18:54 PM
Bedford County dead dog receives voter registration forms
Seeing as how Mozart wouldn't actually be able to register, much less vote, because
A) he's dead
B) he's a dog
this shows, uh, what?
Quote from: mtraininjax on June 19, 2012, 10:44:19 AM
Scott made a good point with the Voter Registration department showing him as DEAD when he went to vote. Love it or hate it, the system of registering to vote is in need of a major overhaul, so this would be a good pet project for Scott. I see the reasoning for it, the system is flawed and in need of new direction.
There is NOTHING that can be done that will make the list flawless. It will ALWAYS be out of date/incomplete/inaccurate. People die every day, people move every day. Many people share the same name with someone else. The accurancy will never get but so high.
The REAL ISSUE is does a problem exist in which people who are not eligible to vote are actually voting (not registering, but VOTING)? Does this problem exist to such an extent that it is worth preventing eligible voters from voting?
If so, please provide that evidence.
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/poll-florida-residents-support-purge-of-voter-roll/nPbQN/ (http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/poll-florida-residents-support-purge-of-voter-roll/nPbQN/)
Funny thing about Florida Voters, you never know what they will support:
QuotePalm Beach Post Capital Bureau
Tallahassee â€" Florida voters overwhelmingly support Gov. Rick Scott‘s effort to remove non-citizens from the state’s voter rolls and they continue to back the “Stand Your Ground†self-defense law, a new Quinnipiac University poll says.
Take that Obama!!!
Quote from: mtraininjax on June 20, 2012, 11:01:51 PM
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/poll-florida-residents-support-purge-of-voter-roll/nPbQN/ (http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/poll-florida-residents-support-purge-of-voter-roll/nPbQN/)
Funny thing about Florida Voters, you never know what they will support:
QuotePalm Beach Post Capital Bureau
Tallahassee â€" Florida voters overwhelmingly support Gov. Rick Scott‘s effort to remove non-citizens from the state’s voter rolls and they continue to back the “Stand Your Ground†self-defense law, a new Quinnipiac University poll says.
Take that Obama!!!
I just wish it was actually an effort to remove non citizens. It is an effort to intimidate a group of legal voters. The backing the stand your ground law is just evidence this state is not very educated.
That said I don't mind verifying people as they register to vote. If there is a problem worth spending the money on but as we all know the "problem" is fantasy.
QuoteThe backing the stand your ground law is just evidence this state is not very educated.
Any poll is worth what you paid for it.
Quote from: JeffreyS on June 20, 2012, 11:11:43 PM
Quote from: mtraininjax on June 20, 2012, 11:01:51 PM
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/poll-florida-residents-support-purge-of-voter-roll/nPbQN/ (http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/national-govt-politics/poll-florida-residents-support-purge-of-voter-roll/nPbQN/)
Funny thing about Florida Voters, you never know what they will support:
QuotePalm Beach Post Capital Bureau
Tallahassee — Florida voters overwhelmingly support Gov. Rick Scott‘s effort to remove non-citizens from the state’s voter rolls and they continue to back the “Stand Your Ground” self-defense law, a new Quinnipiac University poll says.
Take that Obama!!!
I just wish it was actually an effort to remove non citizens. It is an effort to intimidate a group of legal voters. The backing the stand your ground law is just evidence this state is not very educated.
That said I don't mind verifying people as they register to vote. If there is a problem worth spending the money on but as we all know the "problem" is fantasy.
Is there any evidence for any of your claims? I actually participated in the Quinnipiac poll, and they asked for education level. That information should be available in the poll. I am constantly amused at the assumption of superior "intelligence" and "education" by those that have no valid debate points.
QuoteI am constantly amused at the assumption of superior "intelligence" and "education" by those that have no valid debate points.
You are in the right place here on the MJ board then, for sure! We have all kinds of people and intellect interacting with the forces of nature.
I am going to admit no evidence. I also have no evidence that the President's recent decision to stop ejecting some young illegals was politically motivated by an election year but it was.
Self defense laws are fine, stand your ground is dumb.
A quality verification of voter role is fine, just kicking people off with the caveat that they can go through twice what others go through once just before an election is not.
These are my opinions and they are correct.
QuoteSelf defense laws are fine, stand your ground is dumb.
Stand your ground is a self defense idea, so a contradiction so close to midnight? Some day, stand your ground in your own house, on your own property, may save your life, or you can choose to become a victim.
I choose mine and my family's life, so you can be sure I am "standing my ground" on my property. Off my property, whole new ball game, no one, to me gets to make that call except for City/State/Federal law enforcement.
I know stand your ground is an attempt to improve self defense but it is a failure on a practical front that is obvious. To have the standard be that you are afraid someone will harm you is just not good enough. Self defense is an affirmative legal defense that removes a presumption of innocence. You have to prove yourself needed defending and just being afraid does not qualify imo and if there is another way short of killing someone we should be required to take it. I hate that stand your ground has become politicized it is a dumb concept that we shouldn't be arguing over. Lots of good stuff you can bash my liberal ass over.
QuoteYou have to prove yourself needed defending and just being afraid does not qualify imo and if there is another way short of killing someone we should be required to take it. I hate that stand your ground has become politicized it is a dumb concept that we shouldn't be arguing over. Lots of good stuff you can bash my liberal ass over.
Until you walk a mile in a man's shoes......you know the rest.
Quote from: mtraininjax on June 20, 2012, 11:59:07 PM
QuoteYou have to prove yourself needed defending and just being afraid does not qualify imo and if there is another way short of killing someone we should be required to take it. I hate that stand your ground has become politicized it is a dumb concept that we shouldn't be arguing over. Lots of good stuff you can bash my liberal ass over.
Until you walk a mile in a man's shoes......you know the rest.
I am sure people really are afraid and I don't want to be in their shoes having to make the decision to shoot or not. However if you choose the responsibility of a gun no one is promising you it will be easy. Fear is real and powerful and not good enough you need to actually be in danger without other options imo.
QuoteHowever if you choose the responsibility of a gun no one is promising you it will be easy. Fear is real and powerful and not good enough you need to actually be in danger without other options imo.
I agree, look for other options when you have them, but if it comes down to your life or the intruder's on your property and all options are extinguished......Hence the need for the stand your ground, but with limitations, in the Zimmerman case, and I am no lawyer, I do not believe the law was meant to wander the streets looking to protect the community with a gun and shoot anyone who you perceive to be a threat. I bet Zimmerman wishes he would have stayed in his car and waited for the police to arrive, every day and every hour.
Isn't the point of stand your ground that you do not have or find other options or even prove more than that you feared for your life? No lawyer here either and we could probably find common ground on self defense.
JeffreyS, agreed, how do you like my new Avatar? I like the messiah look for a while, since he was new and we know neither candidate is pure as the first winter snow.....
Quote from: mtraininjax on June 21, 2012, 12:36:58 AM
JeffreyS, agreed, how do you like my new Avatar? I like the messiah look for a while, since he was new and we know neither candidate is pure as the first winter snow.....
I was going to say... LOL.. M-train .. Whats with the Obama/ Messiah Avatar ? :o
Well, I needed to change, Alvin is doing himself in, no need for anymore Hogan VooDoo, so now its time to put the hex on Obama with a replay of what we all bought into from 2008, Hope and Change, and where that has gotten us 4 years later, the self-appointed messiah has yet to deliver, but keeps on making promises, blaming others, not himself. Typical politician, but nice to see where he came from...
Could not agree more. On either count .
Quote from: NotNow on June 20, 2012, 11:23:06 PM
Is there any evidence for any of your claims?
Scroll back through the earlier posts and I posted evidence that the whole "voter fraud" issue is bogus.
Here's a listing of educational levels by state. Make of it what you will: http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0233.pdf
Quote from: finehoe on June 21, 2012, 09:37:32 AM
Quote from: NotNow on June 20, 2012, 11:23:06 PM
Is there any evidence for any of your claims?
Scroll back through the earlier posts and I posted evidence that the whole "voter fraud" issue is bogus.
Here's a listing of educational levels by state. Make of it what you will: http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s0233.pdf
Not very good evidence. You mean this??
QuoteU.S. News and World Report in April that the number of people who have been prosecuted successfully for voter fraud is “ridiculously low.â€
Perhaps because they choose not to? Perhaps because they cannot find the fictitious person after the fact? How do you prosecute a dead guy? or a dog?
If the issue is the method of voter verification then lets figure it out. If the feds have the most accurate information then they should provide it. If this happens to be too soon before an election... then lets pick it up after.
Of course none of this will happen... because the democrats don't want to enforce voter verification... just like immigration... they don't want to enforce laws against illegal entry to the country...
The pattern is pretty clear...
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 21, 2012, 10:15:01 AM
Not very good evidence. You mean this??
I mean this: Americans are more likely to be struck by lightning than to commit voter fraud. justin levitt, the brennan center for justice, the truth about “voter fraud†3, 23 (2007), available at http://www.brennancenter.org/page/-/d/download_file_38347.pdf (various studies of voter fraud in Missouri, New Jersey, and Wisconsin revealed voter fraud rates of 0.0003%, 0.0004%, and 0.0002%, respectively).
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 21, 2012, 10:15:01 AM
hey don't want to enforce laws against illegal entry to the country...
Yeah right: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/expatnews/8839100/US-deportations-reach-record-high.html
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 21, 2012, 10:15:01 AM
The pattern is pretty clear...
That pattern that is clear is that you have no evidence for the bogus claims you post as "fact". Quoting an article about a dead dog receiving a registration form is proof of nothing.
lol... no agenda at the ol brennan center... ::)
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 21, 2012, 10:42:12 AM
lol... no agenda at the ol brennan center... ::)
Typical fact-free response.
Typical "voter suppression" red herring. Finehoe... I want 100% of eligible voters to vote. Anyone attempting to keep people from the polls should be prosecuted. If the system to clean up the rolls is lacking correct information should we not attempt to get correct information?
Most elections are won and lost by pretty large margins. Is it any surprise that no one wishes to spend time and energy trying to find fraudulent votes? How few votes are you OK to lose by?
I simply want to improve the system... pretty simple... nothing evil or dirty... no ill intentions.
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 21, 2012, 11:17:59 AM
I simply want to improve the system... pretty simple... nothing evil or dirty... no ill intentions.
A goal you share with the Brennan Center, who you cavalierly dismissed.
The Brennan Center has proposals to improve electronic voting[1], modernize our registration system[2], and curb the possibility of fraud[3].
[1]http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/voting_system_failures_a_database_solution/
[2]http://www.brennancenter.org/content/pages/voter_registration_modernization
[3]http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/truthaboutvoterfraud/
awesome... so why the opposition from feds and democrats to florida's attempt to do that?
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 21, 2012, 12:47:18 PM
awesome... so why the opposition from feds and democrats to florida's attempt to do that?
Read the post that started this thread.
did that... so you will support the effort once the election is over. That is great news! 8)
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 21, 2012, 02:06:31 PM
did that... so you will support the effort once the election is over. That is great news! 8)
I have no issue with it if the Scott Administration can demonstrate to the DOJ that they neither have the purpose nor it will have the effect of discriminating on account of race, color, or membership in a language minority group. I just think it will be a lot of money spent to little effect.
Here are the requirements... so it really is not an issue... even now.
http://election.dos.state.fl.us/voter-registration/voter-reg.shtml
QuoteWho Can Register to Vote
In order to register to vote in Florida, you must:
1.Be a Citizen of the United States of America (a lawful permanent resident is not a U.S. citizen);
2.Be a Florida resident;
3.Be 18 years old (you may pre-register to vote if you are 16 years old, but you cannot vote until you are 18 years old).
4.Not now be adjudicated mentally incapacitated with respect to voting in Florida or any other state without having the right to vote restored;
5.Not have been convicted of a felony without your civil rights having been restored; and
6.Provide your current and valid Florida driver’s license number or Florida identification card number. If you do not have a Florida driver’s license number or a Florida identification card number then you must provide the last four digits of your Social Security Number. If you do not have any of these items, you must write “none†in the box or field.
I would endorse a modification to number 6 to require a valid picture ID.
Picture ID's carry fees to obtain, to get one costs a fee directly, and you have to present multiple other documents of your identification that all have fees attached before they'll issue it, thanks to Rick Scott, e.g. passports, utility bills, etc. What happens if someone can't afford to obtain a driver's license or government issued photo ID? They can't vote?
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on June 22, 2012, 08:27:21 AM
Picture ID's carry fees to obtain, to get one costs a fee directly, and you have to present multiple other documents of your identification that all have fees attached before they'll issue it, thanks to Rick Scott, e.g. passports, utility bills, etc. What happens if someone can't afford to obtain a driver's license or government issued photo ID? They can't vote?
They also often require you transport yourself somewhere (usually during "office hours") to get the ID. So there is an issue of transportation as well as possibly taking time off work.
I agree with you Adam, I think what you're seeing is a wholesale exercise in attempted disenfranchisement of underprivileged voters. Especially in areas like Jacksonville, where the DMV's are located in the suburbs and the only source of transportation for some people is JTA, you're limiting the voting pool to those who can afford the onerous ID requirements and who can afford to own a car to obtain the ID. There is a reason polling places are located within walking distance, by only allowing you to utilize one after you've been required to go to a bunch of places that aren't easily accessible to low income people, and forcing them to pay a bunch of fees that these people can't afford, you're just wrongfully disenfranchising voters.
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on June 22, 2012, 08:59:27 AM
I agree with you Adam, I think what you're seeing is a wholesale exercise in attempted disenfranchisement of underprivileged voters. Especially in areas like Jacksonville, where the DMV's are located in the suburbs and the only source of transportation for some people is JTA, you're limiting the voting pool to those who can afford the onerous ID requirements and who can afford to own a car to obtain the ID. There is a reason polling places are located within walking distance, by only allowing you to utilize one after you've been required to go to a bunch of places that aren't easily accessible to low income people, and forcing them to pay a bunch of fees that these people can't afford, you're just wrongfully disenfranchising voters.
Absolutely.
Americans of voting age have a right to vote. I appreciate the need to make sure only eligible voters can vote, but we have to make sure that we're not putting voting out of the reach of people who have the right to vote.
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 22, 2012, 07:34:47 AM
Here are the requirements... so it really is not an issue... even now.
http://election.dos.state.fl.us/voter-registration/voter-reg.shtml
QuoteWho Can Register to Vote
In order to register to vote in Florida, you must:
1.Be a Citizen of the United States of America (a lawful permanent resident is not a U.S. citizen);
2.Be a Florida resident;
3.Be 18 years old (you may pre-register to vote if you are 16 years old, but you cannot vote until you are 18 years old).
4.Not now be adjudicated mentally incapacitated with respect to voting in Florida or any other state without having the right to vote restored;
5.Not have been convicted of a felony without your civil rights having been restored; and
6.Provide your current and valid Florida driver’s license number or Florida identification card number. If you do not have a Florida driver’s license number or a Florida identification card number then you must provide the last four digits of your Social Security Number. If you do not have any of these items, you must write “none†in the box or field.
I would endorse a modification to number 6 to require a valid picture ID.
What does this got to do with purging people who are already registered?
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on June 22, 2012, 08:59:27 AM
I agree with you Adam, I think what you're seeing is a wholesale exercise in attempted disenfranchisement of underprivileged voters. Especially in areas like Jacksonville, where the DMV's are located in the suburbs and the only source of transportation for some people is JTA, you're limiting the voting pool to those who can afford the onerous ID requirements and who can afford to own a car to obtain the ID. There is a reason polling places are located within walking distance, by only allowing you to utilize one after you've been required to go to a bunch of places that aren't easily accessible to low income people, and forcing them to pay a bunch of fees that these people can't afford, you're just wrongfully disenfranchising voters.
Really Chris?? The fee is $25... Really?? Make em free for all I care. Equating an ID requirement to disenfranchisement is silly.
Quote from: finehoe on June 22, 2012, 09:15:22 AM
Quote from: BridgeTroll on June 22, 2012, 07:34:47 AM
Here are the requirements... so it really is not an issue... even now.
http://election.dos.state.fl.us/voter-registration/voter-reg.shtml
QuoteWho Can Register to Vote
In order to register to vote in Florida, you must:
1.Be a Citizen of the United States of America (a lawful permanent resident is not a U.S. citizen);
2.Be a Florida resident;
3.Be 18 years old (you may pre-register to vote if you are 16 years old, but you cannot vote until you are 18 years old).
4.Not now be adjudicated mentally incapacitated with respect to voting in Florida or any other state without having the right to vote restored;
5.Not have been convicted of a felony without your civil rights having been restored; and
6.Provide your current and valid Florida driver’s license number or Florida identification card number. If you do not have a Florida driver’s license number or a Florida identification card number then you must provide the last four digits of your Social Security Number. If you do not have any of these items, you must write “none†in the box or field.
I would endorse a modification to number 6 to require a valid picture ID.
What does this got to do with purging people who are already registered?
Looking at the list... #2 says you must be a Florida resident. #4 says you must be mentally competant. And #5 says you must not be convicted of a felony.
There are 3 reasons to review the rolls of registered voters.
Wouldn't #4 disqualify most teabaggers? ;D
Quote from: finehoe on June 22, 2012, 09:41:24 AM
Wouldn't #4 disqualify most teabaggers? ;D
Probably to the same extent as those who think having proper ID to vote is too difficult... so it probably evens out... ;D
If you are going to require a picture ID to exercise your right to vote it should
1. Be free
2. Have many convenient locations to acquire the ID.
3. Have day, evening and weekend hours for obtaining the ID at least 14 hours a day.
4. Private groups looking to register people should be able to hire the ID services for for "Motor Voter" type events.