8
   

Texas passes voter ID law

 
 
High Seas
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 07:36 am
@BillRM,
BillRM wrote:

The problem is that as far as I am aware there had never been a showing that large numbers of ineligibility voters are voting.

You never read the 2008 USSC opinion on the Indiana law? Justice Stevens, as liberal as anyone, ever, had been an anti-corruption lawyer in Chicago before his appointment to the Supreme Court - so he knew something about those "large numbers of ineligible voters" when he wrote for the 6-3 majority:
Quote:
.... flagrant examples of [voter] fraud…have been documented throughout this Nation’s history by respected historians and journalists…[that] demonstrate that not only is the risk of voter fraud real but that it could affect the outcome of a close election.

High Seas
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 07:53 am
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

I don't think the Republicans have anything close to an open and shut case on this issue. And, I believe it has a decent chance of being overturned in court.

I was expressing far more than my opinion of Democrats.

At least that last sentence is true - you were expressing rank prejudice based on complete ignorance of the Supreme Court decision. Typical of Democrats.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 08:23 am
@High Seas,
Well High Seas how about giving links to scientific studies instead of a judge opinion?

Once more I seen no study that back up the idea that illegal voting is a problem just that voting by the lower class is a problem for the GOP.
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 08:34 am
@High Seas,
Wouldn't you continue by saying the most flagrant example of modern voting fraud was the 1960 election where corruption in Chicago and West Virginia delivered the presidency to the Democrats?
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 09:03 am
@panzade,
Quote:
Wouldn't you continue by saying the most flagrant example of modern voting fraud was the 1960 election where corruption in Chicago and West Virginia delivered the presidency to the Democrats?


Fifty-one years ago is a modern event?
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 09:07 am
@BillRM,
yup
0 Replies
 
H2O MAN
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 09:19 am
@BillRM,
Yes it is.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 12:34 pm
@H2O MAN,
Quote:
Yes it is.


Sorry guys an event that happen 51 years ago is a little old to try to justify laws who real reason is an attempt to disenfranchised lower class voters.

Once more let see a few links to scientific studies that voting fraud is currently a real problem that need to be address even at the cost of blocking some entitle voters from voting.
0 Replies
 
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 03:41 pm
I just figured something out Bill. You're the guy that keeps thumbing down posts that offer a contrary opinion to yours.
And you're thumbing your own posts up.
Do you derive some kind of pleasure from this little thumb exercise Bill?
Is it a vanity thing or are you just bored?
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 03:46 pm
In Florida the 2000 presidential election was riddled with voter fraud according to the Miami Herald's study Democracy Held Hostage:
Quote:
The Herald review of votes in 22 counties (with 2.3 million ballots) found that 1,241 ballots were cast illegally by felons who had not received clemency.
Of these voters, 75% were registered Democrats. And the Herald study counted only those who had been sentenced to prison for more than a year.

The Herald also found that it was a myth that many non-felons were removed from the rolls illegally in Florida. As the report says: “Instead, the evidence points to just the opposite -- that election officials were mostly permissive, not obstructionist, when unregistered voters presented themselves.”

County elections officials removed only one out of every five voters whom the secretary of state suggested were possibly felons, despite the media hysteria about this state list. The list was supposed to be investigated by the county officials who instead largely ignored it. The Florida Department of Law Enforcement received only eight valid complaints from voters who were misidentified as felons on Election Day.


In the 2004 Washington State Governor's race Democrat Christine Gregoire allegedly defeated Republican Dino Rossi by 129 votes:

Quote:
The Washington State Superior Court found that 1,400 felons voted illegally, along with illegal votes cast by 53 dead people, two non-citizens and 27 double votes. Since Washington State does not have party voter registration, there was no way of proving exactly how they voted, so the judge ruled there was not enough proof to void the election.


Here's a case where an election was overturned because of voter fraud. In a 2005 Tennessee Senate special election a Democrat beat the Republican challenger by 13 votes:
Quote:
The results were thrown out on a 26-to-six bi-partisan vote after allegations of election wrongdoing that included voting by felons and nonresidents of the district as well as three ballots cast by dead voters in one polling place according to the Knoxville News.


2004 Texas-Henry Cuellar won by 58 votes.
A newspaper reported that: primary voters in almost two dozen residences in one Cuellar stronghold (Webb County) had moved out of the district and had not changed their voter-registration address.

1996 California Republican Congressman Bob Dornan was defeated by 984 votes
Quote:
an INS investigation in 1996 into alleged Motor Voter fraud in California’s 46th District revealed that “4,023 illegal voters possibly cast ballots in the disputed election


1996 Lousiana Senate seat race. The loser, Republican Woody Jenkins:“presented affidavits showing that more votes were counted in many New Orleans precincts than the number of voters who signed in, and testimony of campaign operatives, apparently from [Democratic Mayor Marc] Morial’s L.I.F.E. organization, ferrying people around to vote in one precinct after another.”

There's one state(New Mexico?) that wants to implement a proof of citizenship check at the ballot box. I'm not crazy about that. That would disenfranchise a lot of poor people who move around a lot.
But I don't see what's wrong with a photo ID.
Here in Florida you can't get anything done without one.
gungasnake
 
  0  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 03:53 pm
The basic problem is that the demoKKKrat party does not have any sort of a believable constituency. They never learned any new skills coming out of the depression and don't really even claim to do anything other than represent victims and, when nature fails to provide victims, they seek to create or import them. They are basically willing to do any amount of damage to this country in order to rule it and are a pure power trip with no redeeming features.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 04:04 pm
@panzade,
Quote:
with 2.3 million ballots) found that 1,241 ballots


That is some large number and well worth taking the right to vote from lower class voters. NOT

Hmm let me see that is .05 percents of the total vote.
BillRM
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 04:06 pm
@panzade,
Quote:
just figured something out Bill. You're the guy that keeps thumbing down posts that offer a contrary opinion to yours.
And you're thumbing your own posts up
.

Off you meds??????
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 04:12 pm
@BillRM,
Bill, you're very cavalier about the number of fraudulent votes.

What if I told you that the presidential election in 2000 hinged on one state:Florida.

And that the popular vote in Florida ended up
Bush:2,912,790
Gore:2,912,253

Would you still be so dismissive of the "small" number.?
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 04:14 pm
@BillRM,
Quote:
Off you meds??????


Is it a vanity thing or are you just bored????
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 04:22 pm
@panzade,
I live in florida and the reason why we had Bush was because of so call butterfly ballots in one county that cause thousands of votes to be caste incorrectly oh and the Supreme Court.

The norm error rate in counting votes is greater then .05 percents in any case.

Sorry I see not justication to turning valid voters away from the polls yet shown except to try to elect more Repulicains.

Side note the data base used to ID felons not allow to vote in Florida is full of errors and had resulted once more into turning valid voters away from the poll.
0 Replies
 
BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 04:34 pm
Thousands of people with the right to vote turn away by error and you wish to turn more valid voters away all to try to keep Republians in power.

Shame on you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florida_Central_Voter_File

Problems in the cleansing processAt first, Florida specified only exact matches on names, birthdates and genders to identify voters as felons. However, state records reveal a memo dated March 1999 from Emmett "Bucky" Mitchell, a lawyer for the state elections office who was supervising the felon purge, asking DBT to loosen its criteria for acceptable matches. When DBT representatives warned Mitchell that this would yield a large proportion of false positives (mismatches), Mitchell's reply was that it would be up to each county elections supervisor to deal with the problem.[4]

In February 2000, in a phone conversation with the BBC's London studios, ChoicePoint vice-president James Lee said that the state "wanted there to be more names than were actually verified as being a convicted felon".[5][6]

[edit] James Lee's testimonyOn 17 April, 2001, James Lee testified, before the McKinney panel, that the state had given DBT the directive to add to the purge list people who matched at least 90% of a last name. DBT objected, knowing that this would produce a huge number of false positives (non-felons).[7]

Lee went on saying that the state then ordered DBT to shift to an even lower threshold of 80% match, allowing also names to be reversed (thus a person named Thomas Clarence could be taken to be the same as Clarence Thomas). Besides this, middle initials were skipped, Jr. and Sr. suffixes dropped, and some nicknames and aliases were added to puff up the list.

"DBT told state officials", testified Lee, "that the rules for creating the [purge] list would mean a significant number of people who were not deceased, not registered in more than one county, or not a felon, would be included on the list. DBT made suggestions to reduce the numbers of eligible voters included on the list". According to Lee, to this suggestion the state told the company, "Forget about it".

"The people who worked on this (for DBT) are very adamant... they told them what would happen", said Lee. "The state expected the county supervisors to be the failsafe." Lee said his company will never again get involved in cleansing voting rolls. "We are not confident any of the methods used today can guarantee legal voters will not be wrongfully denied the right to vote", Lee told a group of Atlanta-area black lawmakers in March 2001.[8]

[edit] Errors in the listFlorida has re-edited its felon list five times since 1998 to correct errors.

The first list DBT Online provided to the Division of Elections in April 2000 contained the names of 181,157 persons. Approximately 65,776 of those included on the first list were identified as felons.

In May 2000, DBT discovered that approximately 8,000 names were erroneously placed on the exclusion list, mostly those of former Texas prisoners who were included on a DBT list that turned out never to have been convicted of more than a misdemeanor. Later in the month, DBT provided a revised list to the Division of Elections (DOE) containing a total of 173,127 persons. Of those included on the "corrected list", 57,746 were identified as felons.

Examples:

Thomas Cooper, Date of Birth September 5, 1973; crime, unknown; conviction date, January 30, 2007
Johnny Jackson Jr., Date of Birth, 1970; crime, none, mistaken for John Fitzgerald Jackson who was still in his jail cell in Texas
Wallace McDonald, Date of Birth, 1928; crime, fell asleep on a bus-stop bench in 1959
Reverend Willie Dixon, convicted in the 1970s at the latest; note, received full executive clemency
Randall J. Higginbotham, Date of Birth, August 28, 1960; crimes, none, mistaken for Sean David Higginbotham, born June 16, 1971
Reverend Willy D. Whiting Jr., crime, a speeding ticket from 1990, confused with Willy J. Whiting who have birthdays 2 days apart
[edit] Demographics of the purge listAccording to the Palm Beach Post, among other problems with the list, although blacks accounted for 88% of those removed from the rolls, they made up only about 11% of Florida's voters.[9]

Voter demographics authority David Bositis, a senior research associate at the Joint Center for Political and Economic Studies in Washington, DC, reviewed The Nation's findings and concluded that the purge-and-block program was "a patently obvious technique to discriminate against black voters". He noted that based on nationwide conviction rates, African-Americans would account for 46% of the ex-felon group wrongly disfranchised.[10]

[edit] Pre-election cleansing
Florida Secretary of State Katherine HarrisBetween May 1999 and Election Day 2000, two Florida secretaries of state, Sandra Mortham and Katherine Harris, distributed the scrub lists produced by the cleansing process to counties and ordered the 57,700 people identified as "ex-felons" to be removed from voter rolls. Together the lists comprised nearly 1% of Florida's electorate and nearly 3% of its African-American voters.[citation needed]

At the time of the election, the purge list contained a number of false positives — people identified as felons who were not actually felons.

[edit] Details about the errorsThere were many specific problems with the purge list regarding the verification of felons, including over 4,000 blank conviction dates, and over 325 conviction dates dating in the future.[11]

Nearly 3,000 out-of-state ex-felons with voting rights restored, as well as voters linked to felonies in states which do not remove felons from voting rolls or that automatically restore voting rights, were included on the list. According to a 1998 ruling by the 2nd District Court of Appeals, they cannot then be ruled ineligible by another state.[citation needed]

DBT had decided in March of 1999 not to include felon lists from South Carolina or Texas, which automatically restore voting rights, but that was overruled by the head of the Florida Office of Executive Clemency, Janet Keels, who ordered inclusion of any felon who did not have a written order of clemency, even from these states, wrongly placing 996 voters on the felon list. Florida did not restore their voting rights until three months after the election.

Additionally, a number of persons listed as felons had been convicted of misdemeanors only, and therefore were eligible by law.

Greg Palast, who has investigated this issue and identified occurrences of these problems, provides a sample of 23 names as they appear on the Florida 2000 felons list, with five examples of these erroneous listings highlighted (this represents a minimum rate of inaccuracy of 22% in this sample). Thomas Cooper, the second one in the list, was listed as being convicted on January 30, 2007.

[edit] AnalysisThe Georgia Bureau of Investigation has said that the national figure for "standard" margin of error for legal disenfranchisement is about 2%.[citation needed]

Database experts consulted by Greg Palast (including DBT's vice-president) told him that in order to obtain 85% accuracy or better, one needs at least the following three things:

Social Security numbers;
Address history;
A check against other databases.
ChoicePoint, in contrast, used virtually no Social Security numbers, did not check address histories, and used no database cross-checking, although it had 1,200 databases that could be employed for the task.

Because some of the source databases used did not list race, the matching criteria did not require a match with the voter's race for inclusion in the felon list. However, the decision was also made to enlarge upon this decision, and rule as ineligible the voter in question even if there was an explicit disagreement between the races listed on the source database and the voter list. According to the Palm Beach Post, more than 1,300 registered voters were matched with felons although their races or sexes were different.[12]

Mark Hull, the former senior programmer for CDB Infotek, a ChoicePoint company, said the state and ChoicePoint could have chosen criteria that would have brought down the number of false positives to less than 1%. George W. Bush officially received fewer than 600 more votes in Florida than Al Gore (2000 presidential election).[citation needed]

The only reliable measure of accuracy of the felon list comes from Leon County (Tallahassee), whose in-house experts checked each name in their county one by one. Out of the 694 named felons in Tallahassee, they could verify only 34 of them, or 5%.[citation needed]

The Palm Beach Post reported that

"[C]omputer analysis has found at least 1,100 eligible voters wrongly purged from the rolls before last year's election. [...] At least 108 law-abiding people were purged from the voter rolls as suspected criminals, only to be cleared after the election. DBT's computers had matched these people with felons, though in dozens of cases they did not share the same name, birthdate, gender or race. One Naples man was told he couldn't vote because he was linked with a felon still serving time in a Moore Haven prison. Florida officials cut from the rolls 996 people convicted of crimes in other states, though they should have been allowed to vote. Before the election, state officials said felons could vote only if they had written clemency orders, although most other states automatically restore voting rights to felons when they complete their sentences. [...] Records used to create the felon list were sometimes wrong. A state database of felons wrongly included dozens of people whose crimes were reduced to misdemeanors. Furthermore, clemency records were incomplete."[13]
Additionally, there are other accuracy problems with the list. For example, Linda Howell, Madison County supervisor of elections, who is not a convicted felon and was never on the felon list provided by the Division of Elections or the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, erroneously received a form letter referencing a prior felony conviction from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement stating:

"The Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) received your Voter Registration Appeal Form. After reviewing your Florida criminal history, we have determined that you have a Florida felony conviction in our repository. FDLE will notify your supervisor of elections that we have data indicating that you meet the criteria of a convicted felon."[citation needed]
Ms. Howell recalled, "I had sent the letter to one of my voters and he sent in the verification form. Instead of picking up his name, they picked up my name and sent me the information."[citation needed]

[edit] AppealsIn time, an appeals process was instituted, but in some cases it required ordinary citizens to be fingerprinted in order to prove they were not the felons they were accused of being. In the end, out of 4,847 people who appealed, 2,430 were judged not to be convicted felons. As Civil Rights Commission attorney Bernard Quarterman put it during testimony in Miami on February 16, "They were guilty until proven innocent". At least 108 legitimate voters were not purged from the list until after the election.[citation needed]

Some voters on the list did not receive advance notice that they were ineligible to vote until they appeared at the polls. Some had even received new voters cards in the mail.[citation
panzade
 
  0  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 07:05 pm
@BillRM,
If you think I'm going to wage through pages and pages of unedited copy and paste you're crazy.

You asked for recent examples of voter fraud and I gave it to you. You ignored my post and started in with your LOLs and sorrys and shucks jive.

Florida was rife with voter fraud. That is a fact. I'm not saying it favored Bush or Gore. But the fact is that only 537 votes decided the presidential election. Demanding voter picture ID's is not going to bar Democrats from voting. Like max said, we have to find a balance.


BillRM
 
  2  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 07:30 pm
@panzade,
Bullshit with Florida having a large voter fraud problems in fact the problem had been that citizens who are as entitle to vote as any other citizen had been denial that right by errors in the data bases used to the tunes of thousands.

But those laws have nothing to do with filtering out non-voters but in interfering with the right to vote of the lower classes.

So let stop playing games as everyone know what those laws are for.
panzade
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 May, 2011 07:40 pm
@BillRM,
You must be pretty insecure to keep voting my posts down and yours up.

Honestly, debating with you is like arguing with an adolescent. You never acknowledge what I say you just keep throwin your bullshit against the wall hoping some of it will stick.

At least I attempt to read your posts.
The rape thread, the DSK thread, this thread, they're all the same.
I've had enough amigo! Adios!
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/02/2024 at 07:25:32