Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
But, But ,But The disenfranchised.
While this is a compelling case, I would want to see how it is in other states, in cali it is 30$ for an ID, so Im just wondering if they tried that here if it would show a different.
Im weary of one case in one state, try it in others, I want to see.

I'm surprised that Cali charges for ID. I believe that North Carolina and Indiana (possibly Texas too) provide voter ID free of charge, and rightly so.

There's a difference between saying that you provide voter IDs free of charge and actually doing so.

But hey, it's not like I live in North Carolina and actually have experience in dealing with the NC DMV.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
There's a difference between saying that you provide voter IDs free of charge and actually doing so.

But hey, it's not like I live in North Carolina and actually have experience in dealing with the NC DMV.

Its not like I live in Indiana, and actually have experience dealing with the Indiana BMV (as recently as last week)

Are you trying to say that the law providing for free ID is not being followed and people are being charged for them? Or is it your usual track of claiming that no one has time off before elections, and that people who lost their original documents have to pay to replace those before a free ID can be obtained?

Not every DMV location offers ID services, not everyone has the time, etc.

Since you seem so dismissive of that as a "claim" though, I'll just tell you to keep imagining that the voter ID laws were totally put into place to prevent voter fraud and not as a member of the Republican party here in NC put it "to block people who vote Democrat".

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Not every DMV location offers ID services, not everyone has the time, etc.

Lets see, the Indiana BMVs extended their opening hours to facilitate voter registration, almost all locations provide ID for free, and the argument that no one has time to get an ID is not worth the pixels on my screen

The evidence shows that after this law voter turn out increased, and almost every reason advanced to prevent voter ID was proven false.

The argument that voter ID laws are to protect the "integrity of voting" is as laughable now as they are when you first started to tout the virtues of it.

And once again, what the Indiana BMV does is not relevant when you want to try to argue with me about what the state where I live and have lived for 26 years does.

If we're talking about proof, I'd like to see actual numbers of convictable voter fraud.

If you want to prove this is something which so direly needed to be protected from fraud, then it should not be hard to do.

And no citations of Fox News. Actual evidence.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:


Here's one from NC just for you;
http://www.hcpress.com/news/voter-integrity-project-of-nc-sboe-report-documents-475-vote-fraud-cases-referred-but-not-prosecuted.html

Sept. 5, 2013. Between 2008 and 2012, 475 cases of voter fraud in North Carolina were referred for prosecution, according to a new NC Board of Elections report obtained by the Voter Integrity Project of North Carolina (after repeated requests), which undermines claims that voter fraud in North Carolina is insignificant.

“This looks like an interim report, but it shows some disturbing numbers,” said Jay DeLancy, Executive Director of Voter Integrity Project-NC. “Because reports of voter fraud often don’t get referred for prosecution until the year after an election, the extent of potential fraud in the 2012 election still remains to be seen. The large increase in fraud referrals in 2012 over 2008 suggests that substantial fraud occurred in last year’s election, but the full numbers have not yet been reported. In any event, these numbers totally crush the lie that there is no voter fraud in North Carolina”

“Opponents of North Carolina’s new election law often point to the low prosecution rates to support their denials of voter fraud in North Carolina,” said DeLancy. “This report raises a more disturbing question: Why are District Attorneys in North Carolina so negligent in prosecuting election fraud?”

...Ohhhhhhhhhhh you.


Next time before trying to pull a "GOTCHA!" moment I suggest you actually do some research.
Educate yourself as to why. The "Voter Integrity Project-NC" is an offshoot of "True the Vote" and is run by Jay deLancey.

Also since you still do not seem to grasp what a lot of people are saying:
The fact is not necessarily that it is disenfranchisement. It is the fact that these laws were passed as a solution to a supposed epidemic of voter fraud--which doesn't actually seem to exist.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
ote]
...Ohhhhhhhhhhh you.


Next time before trying to pull a "GOTCHA!" moment I suggest you actually do some research.
Educate yourself as to why. The "Voter Integrity Project-NC" is an offshoot of "True the Vote" and is run by Jay deLancey.

Also since you still do not seem to grasp what a lot of people are saying:
The fact is not necessarily that it is disenfranchisement. It is the fact that these laws were passed as a solution to a supposed epidemic of voter fraud--which doesn't actually seem to exist.

Ohhhhhhhhhhh you
Crying about things being statistically insignificant, yet somehow not even reading your own link

Her name was one of nearly 30,000 across the state that volunteers with the Voter Integrity Project identified two weeks ago as potentially being dead but still registered to vote. The Voter Integrity Project is a North Carolina offshoot of True the Vote, a national movement that purports to combat election fraud by challenging the voter registration of those they believe should not be on voter lists.

"We're not really interested in partisan politics," said Jay DeLancy, a retired Air Force officer and director of Voter Integrity Project. "As an organization, we try to eliminate those kinds of biases in our research."

However, the subject of voter fraud is inextricably linked to the current political conversation. Republicans in many states, including North Carolina, have led efforts to pass laws that would require people to present picture identification when they go to the polls. That effort failed in North Carolina, but DeLancy recently appeared on a Fox News Channel show calling such laws "common sense". Democrats have generally pushed back against such laws, saying they would disproportionately affect elderly and minority voters.

Since DeLancy's group gave those names of potentially dead voters to the State Board of Elections, state and county elections officials have been investigating the list. Some names were already removed through regular list maintenance procedures, officials say. Others required further investigation. In Wake County, letters went to the families of 148 possibly deceased voters.

So far, 42 have sounded off that they're still among the living.

The argument for disenfranchisement was the one that was commonly brought up in each previous thread, along with accusations of racism. Both of which have proven unfounded. Now you're trying to argue the scale of fraud after it has been demonstrated that the numbers are skewed because DAs do not want to prosecute the crime, and that a bi-partisan group also stated that voter fraud is an issue.

"True the Vote" and the "Voter Integrity Project" are anything but a "bi-partisan group".

And once again you have missed what is actually important.

But Bartlett adds that neither the state nor any of the county boards have yet discovered someone who voted when they should not have as a result of the Voter Integrity Project's submission. Bartlett says he doesn't rule out the possibility it could happen, but he points out that election officials have access to Social Security numbers, birthdays and drivers license numbers that citizen groups cannot legally get. All of those pieces of information have been used to differentiate between those who are really dead and those who are expected to show up at the polls this November, he said.

"The takeaway so far is that our lists are pretty good," Bartlett said.

Would that be True The Vote that was targeted by the IRS?

Sure, and that's also "True the Vote" that has the tagline "If you see something at the polls that just doesn't seem right, record it." and was --surprise surprise--founded in Texas by a Tea Partier. Voter Integrity Project has the same ties to the Tea Party as well.

Oh, and congratulations. Your second link did nothing but prove that voter fraud convictions are so low because of serious hurdles to overcome, especially when non-citizens are having their illegally cast ballots protected. That and you ignored absolutely everything else that counters your argument.

No, I ignored everything unrelated to North Carolina. There's a difference.

Plus when you link from a source called "rottenacorn.com" about something relating to ACORN, it's kind of hard to take you seriously. It's like you are unable to sort the junk from the legitimate and keep going for the junk.

 cincydooley wrote:

 azazel the cat wrote:

cincydooley wrote:

 Peregrine wrote:

 VermGho5t wrote:
The "no time available" excuse for not acquiring an ID card is bs. MAKE the time, by getting of your lazy ass, and go and apply for one.

Why should anyone have to spend extra time to solve a "problem" which doesn't exist?

Because any responsible adult SHOULD have an id?

Does that mean that all those responsible elderly people SHOULD have an ID? That is, one that has not expired?

Who said anything about I it being expired or not? Not me.

And yes, all of those responsible elderly people should have some form of photo ID. Every adult should. For multiple reasons.

But here's the rub that Peregrine and I have been trying to get across in relation to NC's voter ID law.

As used in this section, "photo identification" means any one of the following that contains a photograph of the registered voter. In addition, the photo identification shall have a printed expiration date and shall be unexpired, provided that any voter having attained the age of 70 years at the time of presentation at the voting place shall be permitted to present an expired form of any of the following that was unexpired on the voter's 70th birthday. Notwithstanding the previous sentence, in the case of identification under subdivisions (4) through (6) of this subsection, if it does not contain a printed expiration date, it shall be acceptable if it has a printed issuance date that is not more than eight years before it is presented for voting

That is the wording of SL2013-381. There is a very specific provision for one section of people to vote with unexpired IDs, but nobody else.

 Gentleman_Jellyfish wrote:
Ah yup, that's the gotchya! We're letting old people vote with expired ID's.

Although isn't the main issue not about expired ID's but not having an ID at all?

The issue, at least with NC's law, is that it was a Republican driven initiative for a problem that they claimed existed which has provisions for people who primarily vote Republican to avoid the restrictions imposed by the law that was passed.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cincydooley wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:

That is the wording of SL2013-381. There is a very specific provision for one section of people to vote with unexpired IDs, but nobody else.

They must think that people under 70 can more reasonably get off their asses and act like responsible adults and get an ID. Sounds crazy to me too.

I'm not saying it is crazy or unreasonable, mind you. I'm simply saying that they put in a provision for unexpired IDs for a group which traditionally votes Republican but at the same time went after methods that Democrats have traditionally gotten votes from(early voting and Sunday voting).

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Ouze wrote:

 whembly wrote:
So how come I don't hear you complain with the great state of Illinois or California Voter ID laws...eh? Oh... right... context matters eh? Doesn't matter in those blue state huh...

Wait what? Serious question, can you find a single post on this forum where someone attacked voter ID laws in a red state but subsequently defended them in a blue state? Or... anywhere else? Not a trap, I don't know the answer to this, but your tangent is so specific it sounds like maybe you do.

Perhaps the point Whembly is trying to make is not that anyone has argued that voter ID in a Red State = Bad, voter ID in a Blue State = good. I think the issue is more that when the discussion of voter ID surfaces it concentrates solely on the Red States and claims of racism and voter suppression. Any mention of voter ID in Blue States is not mentioned, which may come across as a lie by omission

Maybe you should try actually reading comments rather than assuming people are making such generalities?

Maybe because voter ID laws in California were not passed with several specifically targeted caveats written into the law cutting short things like early voting or removing Sunday voting?
Just a thought. If you were to go and read Texas' voter ID law, Pennsylvania's voter ID law, or North Carolina's voter ID law you might notice that there was a lot more in the legislation than just "You now need to present a photographic ID to vote".

 Alfndrate wrote:

The issue that Kanluwen has with the NC voter ID law is this:
1) He has a college ID that he can use to buy cigs and beer with, but under the new laws cannot use these to vote
2) It might be easy for you to get your ID from the DMV, but Kan does not drive and would have to rely on a relative (I believe his mother in this case) or the gak-tastic public transportation in his city to get to and from the DMV just to get a State ID
3) The NC Voter ID law is designed (his words, but I'm paraphrasing) to prevent out of state voters, college kids, and minorities from easily being able to vote. And these groups in the past have tended to vote for Democrats, something the Red State of North Carolina does not want.

But that is Kan's situation just like yours was a very easy time.

1) Is not that unusual as it is not a State ID

Stage college, with the DMV providing the equipment for the IDs. It's as much a state ID as a driver's license. But of course that clearly is not a state ID, huh?

2) Other Constitutional rights require you to jump through a lot more hoops, and we're told that is a good thing. So what happens if he wants to get a driver's license? He'll still have to go to the DMV

I can go to more DMV locations to get a driver's license than I can to get a nonoperator ID. Nonoperator, state issued IDs are supposedly available at all locations but from experience it requires going to the Cary DMV office which is an hour away. There are also several DMV locations in NC which are specifically for tag and license renewals and are in malls meaning that the office hours are tied to the mall hours.

3) I still haven't heard how exactly minorities are being targeted by this legislation. Is there a specific provision? The NC legislation is supposed to be in place for elections in a few years so those requiring IDs have plenty of time to get them, and it is not as if this legislation has been shrouded in secrecy. And are out of State voters even eligible to vote? I thought that you had to at least be a resident, in which case you can still get ID

SL2013-381 removed Sunday voting and shortened early voting--both of which are primarily utilized by Democrats, with Sunday voting being heavily utilized by African Americans through church groups providing transportation for the members of the church.

 Dreadclaw69 wrote:

 Kanluwen wrote:
Maybe you should try actually reading comments rather than assuming people are making such generalities?

Maybe because voter ID laws in California were not passed with several specifically targeted caveats written into the law cutting short things like early voting or removing Sunday voting?
Just a thought. If you were to go and read Texas' voter ID law, Pennsylvania's voter ID law, or North Carolina's voter ID law you might notice that there was a lot more in the legislation than just "You now need to present a photographic ID to vote".

I thought that we were only talking about NC
I'm still looking for the quotes from people on these forums specifically critiscising California (or another Blue State) for implementing a poll tax for actually charging for ID (which neither Texas, nor NC, charge for), or claiming that California's voter ID is an example of institutional racism.

And speaking of actually reading comments - how are these free IDs not free again? And did you find that link that was from the non-partisan group that you missed earlier?

Which one? The one from the Voter Integrity Project North Carolina--which receives a hefty donation from Art Pope?

 Kanluwen wrote:
Stage college, with the DMV providing the equipment for the IDs. It's as much a state ID as a driver's license. But of course that clearly is not a state ID, huh?

And because the BMV provide the equipment that automatically makes it a function of the State? No. It is a college ID. In the same way that a card from a library (which also receives State funding) is not a State ID

Actually the fact that it is a State funded college and using state provided equipment, same as that being used for the photographic IDs which Republicans are claiming cannot be duplicated which would make it a state ID.

And really if you're trying to say that a library card is the same as a college issued photographic ID, you're being willfully ignorant.

 Kanluwen wrote:
I can go to more DMV locations to get a driver's license than I can to get a nonoperator ID. Nonoperator, state issued IDs are supposedly available at all locations but from experience it requires going to the Cary DMV office which is an hour away. There are also several DMV locations in NC which are specifically for tag and license renewals and are in malls meaning that the office hours are tied to the mall hours.

That is something that should be remedied to enable better access to free ID.

Right, but where will the funding come from? The DMV has already seen budget cuts this year.

 Kanluwen wrote:
SL2013-381 removed Sunday voting and shortened early voting--both of which are primarily utilized by Democrats, with Sunday voting being heavily utilized by African Americans through church groups providing transportation for the members of the church.

So they still have the same access to voting as everyone else?

If you cannot see why that is an issue, then I think we're done here.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 cincydooley wrote:
No. What he's saying is only minorities to to church and then vote afterwards. Right?

That's a poor way of putting it, but kinda?

In some of the more rural counties in NC, you have some primarily African American churches that will organize transportation for the more elderly members of the congregation to ensure that they would get to vote on Sundays before going to church.

 Jihadin wrote:

Then why not mandate that all people over 18 must possess some form of valid identification? I mean, if we're going to legislate morality, then we may as well for the gold.

Well all males at the age of 18 are required by law to fill out a certain form either online or pencil jam at a federal location. Which I wonder how many in the US over the age 18 have registered eh

You mean the selective service card?
Yup. Have it.

 Jihadin wrote:
Then you shouldn't have an issue with getting a proper form of ID then eh Mind you females do not need to registered for Selective Service. Yet no one screams discrimination eh

Bear in mind that, as I've explained before, registering to vote and Selective Service was actually done through my high school. At the start of each semester they asked if anyone had recently turned 18 and if they had, they were then asked if they filled out voting registration or Selective Service forms.

If you had not then you got a "get out of class free" card for home room as you were then sent to meet with your guidance counselor to fill out the forms. The school then sent the forms in and you received the Selective Service and voter registration cards in the mail at your home.

SLC2013-381 removed those programs so now students have to register on their own time and cannot register through the schools.

Since people have asked beforehand , here is Keesha Gaskin from the Brennan Center for Justice presenting before the North Carolina House Elections Committee.

And as a bonus so nobody can bitch and moan "You only posted a Democrat viewpoint!", this video contains two very different viewpoints. The Civitas Institute begins their presentation at 8:35 minutes in--with the eversopredictable shots at Keesha for being a lawyer and not having grown up in North Carolina.
Civitas Institute, by the way, is called the "John William Pope Civitas Institute, Incorporated". It is named for the father of Art Pope--who resigned from the Institute in December 2012 to become Pat McCrory's budget director.

Now you want the purely Democrat viewpoint? Here is Bob Hall: