This was struck down by a Federal court, the PA law was upheld by a state court and a Federal appeal is probably in the works. Further, the rules in Texas are different because the State of Texas was sanctioned under the 1964 Voting Rights Act because it used district maps to disenfranchise minorities. One of the requirements of that act was to district fairly, and since Texas hasn't done that, the Federal judge based his ruling on that fact

Take that.......Republicans in Texas.........

Can't say for sure, but perhaps the history of prior voter discrimination in Texas put them under more of a microscope than Pennsylvania.

This article is specific to the redistricting maps. The maps were redrawn in such a way as to minimize the latino vote in certain key districts.

Basically the burden of proof was on the legislature to prove that the redrawn map was not drawn in such a way as to dilute the latino vote. They failed to provide the evidence necessary to draw that conclusion.

Looking at any of these maps would tend to give you the answer you seek. They show no logic in the districts as drawn, and the way the map was voted on was just bizarre.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/05/31/980877/-The-Official-Texas-Map

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/06/01/981009/-Texas-Redistricting-GOP-map-released

Yes, since Texas has a history of disenfranchising minority voters through the use of voting laws, we are one of the states that has to have changes to our election procedure OKed by the federal government. PA, on the other hand, doesn't have that history, so they can do almost whatever they want. It doesn't matter (apparently) that the ID law disproportionately affects minorities and other voters that prefer the Democratic party, as lons as it is applied in a "non-partisan" fashion. Even the Republican's in the state have acknowledged that the votor ID law will "enable Mitt Romney to win the state", showing that they know that it will reduce voters that favor the Democratic party. how the PA law withstood scrutiny is beyond me.

Well the same thing has been done here in Maryland. By the Democrats. The districts are sooooooooo gerrymandered any Republican vote is negated.

lol lulu, please cite evidence to sustain the claim..then take into consideration how many GOP legislatures have enacted tough voting laws designed to suppress minority votes...then, check out True The Vote, a tea party partisan group..of which a few sec of states that have been found to suppress votes are a part of..THEN, come talk to me about your maps in MD.

@david saint. The fact that you think Dems never do stuff like this shows you have your head up your a$$.

www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-to-end-gerrymandering-in-maryland/2012/07/28/gJQAbQ1kGX_story.html

Due to petitions, this has been placed on the Nov. ballot.

Anything to screw the average Joe, the Republitards will do it. They think they are screwing minorities, but what they dont understand is; they're screwing everybody...scum of the earth...

So these guys gerrymander their districts in attempt to fracture the hispanic vote, and then wonder why they're losing hispanics.

Bush got 44% of the hispanic vote in 2004. After two years of tea-party binging on anti-immigration policies, demanding papers from everyone from brown schoolchildren in Alabama to brown drivers in Arizona, and openly and loudly blaming just about all our problems on lazy Mexican welfare queens, everyone wakes up bleary-eyed with a headache to find Romney polling in the low 20s.

See, contrary to popular belief among the GOP rank and file, your problem is not with illegal hispanics voting for democrats, your problem is with legal hispanics voting against republicans. As one convention strategist said today in Tampa: if Romney can't boost his numbers with hispanics, stick a fork in him, he's done.

The Voting Rights Act of 1965 specifically states that states and counties in "covered jurisdictions" may not alter any voting law or procedure without the approval of the Department of Justice. The reason Texas was sanctioned was because of their long history of discrimination and denial of voting rights to blacks and Hispanics!

Now, the state of Texas KNEW that before it redistricted the maps AND before they pass the Voter ID law. The court upheld the Obama voiding of those things according to the Voting Rights Act. Things are going very wrong in America with these Republicans willing to violate the law to win elections. Extremism has taken over in the GOP!!

That is why Im saying to anyone who will listen: do NOT listen to ANYTHING that ANY republican says... WATCH what they DO, HAVE done and PLAN to do!! They are rapidly becoming a danger to the United States as we know it and at least some are actually bent on starting another Civil War. I honestly feel that if this version of the Republican party had the chance, they would repeal both the civil rights act and the voting rights act. Sen. Rand Paul R-KY all but said so in an interview before he was elected to the Senate.

The GOP controlled Arizona legislature is trying to do the same thing. We voted for an "independent" group to draw the lines a few years ago and the GOP continues to try to take it over. These people will stop at nothing to gain control.

Texans vote where they live.... for anyone to come in & design a map to pig-trail itself around to create artificial Democrat or Republican voting districts is assinine....

Creating a "special district" just so one group can think they are voting thier convictions makes no sense.

If I live HERE, I want to VOTE here.... if the community is Democrat, then so be it... if it's Republican, that's fine.... the next election we'll run another candidate of our choice, speak out for our values & let the votes be caste where they may be caste......

I am getting sick and tired of the move by the Far Right to hinder voting by minorities. I don't know if the US attorney is sitting on his hands but constitutionally, all US citizens have a right to vote and it is in the country's best interest to have as many of them able to do so.

This is not, or should I say, not supposed to be a totalitarian state wherein elected or unelected public servants can on their own make law or policies that are not vetted and voted on by the people.

I, and most, understand that Democracy is a difficult thing to deal with because of the many voices but it beats the hell out of some self annointed A Hole to take it on himself and his cronies to find ways to gain power and most of the wealth outside of the will of the majorirty.

It seems to me the voter suppression movement is treason against the USA and definitely against the Constitution and those engaged in it should be removed from power and tried in a court of law.

It is clear that most politicians are ignoring their sworn duty. These people we put in high office have sworn an oath the same as those that have to testify in a court and ignoring that oath and going against their word TO SERVE is perjury.

It sure is easy to see that the so-called Law and Order Party is full of crap.

So, Pippo tell us how you really feel.

Gee, do We really want people ( REPUBLICANS ) that clearly show their bias towards minority to RUN our country I can see the 60's coming back do you people really want to be back in those days, because that is what the REPUBLICANS want, $1.60 an hour wages, no health insurance and a whole lot of other things if they can STEAL this election !!!!!!!

people, you don't see the real truth behind all this crap. there were never problems with the Latino vote until all these people from mexico started showing up in this country demanding equal rights even though they are not U. S . citizens. I 'am Latina and was born in the U.S.A. and had never seen this problem before , the politicians want you to believe that we are being discriminated against and that it is also a problem when it comes to the Latino vote, that is not true I have never had any problems showing an i.d. when I go to the poles to vote, the only ones that will are the illegals even the blacks have never had any problems voting, I'am in Texas so I don't see where the problem is that these politicians are talking about. don't be fooled.

...

Ahh… The American Taliban in action!!! God damn it, what happen
to the GOP, how did they allow their party to be hijack and ultimately destroyed
by a minority of religious zealots that think and almost behave as the afghan
Taliban? Wake up guys the American Taliban is taking you down with them. WAKE UP!!!!!! Can’t you see? The only difference between the American Taliban/Tea Party, and the Afghan Taliban is that one uses “Allah” as an excuse to blatantly subjugate, and destroy their people and their country, while the Tea Party/American Taliban unjustifiably uses “Jesus Christ” to hurt our country and our people. WAKE UP before is too late to save your ever diminishing party!!!!!!

Sandra the Pro Troll----Did you really say "The Blacks" have never had any trouble voting in TX ? I am kinda paraphrasing so you tell me.........................Do people besides Trump actually believe and try to sell this ?

A straight up " News night with Will McEvoy " ( Newsroom on HBO )...... TROLL

Thou Shalt not Teabag-------Now That sounds like The character Will on the show himself with the American Taliban stuff.................And how I agree.......

sw philly

A straight up " News night with Will McEvoy " ( Newsroom on HBO )...... TROLL

#1.21 - Wed Aug 29, 2012 1:46 AM EDT

Hey Philly, are you calling me a Troll? I hope you aren't just check my post from 6-7 months ago, I started calling the Tea Baggers the American Taliban right around the time they caused the first downgrade in the U.S. credit rating. That was way before the news room aired, way before my friend.

Sandra
BS
I live in Austin. The new maps tried to,put my district with San Antonio. They were specifically drawn to get rid of Lloyd Doggett, a very popular democrat. We went through this 10 years ago (it happens with every census) and at that time they tried to draw my district in such a way that I would be voting with folks in the Valley, 400 miles away.

I have lived in Austin since '77 and I see this every 10 years. Abbott is not sueing to get the Feds to remove the oversight. And he may just win. Then you will see real discrimanation.

As for voter ID it would have impacted my mother. She wouldn't have been able to vote. She had no ID since we took her DL and she had no need since she lived in a small town. Her birth certificate doesn't really exist because she was born in 1922 in a house with no doctor. The voter ID laws impact more than just minorities, the impact the elderly the most.

Just ask yourself, why, with no real proof of voter fraud - ever, did the Republican states decide that we suddenly need voter IDs? Why now? The answer should be obvious.

LuLu, Please read the latest reports/studies that show while there has not been a single conviction for voter fraud in this country, only the states with a Republican Majority suddenly make it their life ambition to save the rest of the country from voter fraud. It has been proven that the Reps (under guidance from ALEC) made it their goal to get these things passed before this election. Like in PA where poor granny in the nursing home has to come up with a birth certificate with a raised seal? How many of you have a copy like this? I know I don't. Then they start doing away with early voting. In one state, they cut it back to where it is only the MONDAY a week before the election thus cutting out one of two Sunday's that have been popular for get out the vote drives for people who work, etc All of this in the name of voter fraud.

It is nothing more than the Reps doing anything at all costs to win this time around.

As for district manipulation, yes, both sides do it when they control the redistricting. It is always a power grab. We should all use what a few states do and set up a non-partisan group to draw the map and they have to pass it all or nothing.

League of United Latin American Citizens? This isn't LATIN AMERICA and "Latino" isn't a race.

How about CITIZENS OF THE WORLD UNITED AGAINST EVIL LATIN AMERICA?

or CWUAELA?

Simple answer to all of this is computer driven software that draws the maps depending on population density. It would be easy towrite and make all states the same. The way it is now rural America is running the country while the dense big city people are being shafted. Prnnsylvania for instance has three major cities that are densely populated and tend to vote democratic. The rural areas like most states are the Republicans so they put in an id law did not advertise the need for it and went to court to keep the law. texas going to the Supreme court will get thiers overturned because the right wing owns the court just like Grover norwuist the lobbyist owns the republican party who are the biggest voter frauds in America.

the only ones that will are the illegals even the blacks have never had any problems voting

@Sandra...your post kind of misses the point. No one disputes that there are millions of eligible hispanic voters in this state, and that most will be able to show ID and vote. And the notion that somehow "illegal" immigrants are showing up to the polls and voting is crazy. Why would they risk deportation just to vote? The point is that the voting districts were drawn in such a way as to disenfranchise hispanic candidates who tend to be democrats. One look at the district map will reveal this insanity. Make no mistake that if the districts were drawn rationally, the GOP dynasty would be threatened, and the latino populations would have more representation in the legislature. This is what the GOP fears, so they rig the system against you. As for Voter ID, because you have an ID, you may be familiar with the 3-4 hours wait (during business hours) to get a DL or ID renewed. And if you happen to live in a more rural area, you may not even have a district office within 100 miles or more. This is nothing more than a sham to keep eligible "minority" voters from voting.

people, you don't see the real truth behind all this crap. there were never problems with the Latino vote until all these people from mexico started showing up in this country demanding equal rights even though they are not U. S . citizens.

I guess this started in 1965 then, which is when the law was implemented!

The desperation of the right to keep minorities from voting is disgusting and I can't believe that some don't see it. We, as American's, ALL have the right to vote. It is sickening that the RIGHT and the GOP are pulling such criminal stops as hindering the voters. After hearing their platform of hate and slavery to the rich white men of this country, I am frightened and hope no one takes it for granted. We all must vote to keep Mitt and the REICH out of the White House. They are scary and are trying to take us back to the dark ages.

OK all you very smart people who don't live in Texas answer these questions for me. What freaking congressional district do I live in now? You want us to use the maps the federal court in DC threw out? We have already had the primaries for these districts. You mean my vote didn't count? But you say you believe in protecting voting rights. Just not my voting rights. Now it took 7 months for me to get a voters registration card and now you say it might not be valid because it has the wrong congressional district on it.
Great way for the democrats to keep Texas from having a congressional delegation at all. Good job liberals disenfranchise an entire state in the name of equal representation.

The article is not about voter ID laws, those still stand. It is about re-drawing district lines to benefit minorities. In this case, Latinos.

dsb

I also live in Texas. It is BS about not being able to get an ID for non driving elderly. We took away my fathers car due to Parkinson's. But we did get him a state ID very easily. Even in small towns where every one knows you, you do need an ID of some sort. I live in a rural area and most retail establishments and banks in the town near me know me. But I do still need to show my ID occasionally. The state IDs are not expensive; there is little hassle to get one. But it is worth it if even ONE non qualified voter is stopped from voting. Really, to vote in the US, it is very easy, be over 18 and a citizen of the United States. I see no issue with protecting the RIGHTS of the whole US by making voters prove WHO they are.

Texana,

There is no voter fraud. The Brennen Center for Justice found a rate of .0002%. This is a solution in need of a problem. Completely manufactured.

http://www.brennancenter.org/content/section/category/voter_id

Furthermore, your personal story and experience is not applicable to the citizenry in general. In fact, your experience is applicable only to you. In reality, these laws have been proven through comprehensive studies to disenfranchize large sections of our population.

http://www.democracynow.org/seo/2012/8/28/as_id_laws_risk_disenfranchisement_intimidation

Also, we already have to ID ourselves prior to voting, and with a voter fraud rate so low it's negligable, the system we have in place now, seems to be working. What is the compelling governmental interest then, to make the ID standards higher? Remember, we don't expand government power and limit rights just because we MIGHT one day have a problem. We need evidence to do that, otherwise the government could pretty much trample ALL of rights, using that same mentality.

Finally, this is about redistricting, not ID, and Texas is subject to the Voting Rights Act of 1965. They have a piss poor history, and sorry, are still subject to the federal government.

Texana Deb said:

The article is not about voter ID laws, those still stand. It is about re-drawing district lines to benefit minorities. In this case, Latinos.

Actually, it doesn't benefit minorities. See Robert 619's post below at 3.5 for an explanation of how this hurts, not benefits, minorities.

Texana deb said:

I see no issue with protecting the RIGHTS of the whole US by making voters prove WHO they are.

And that 'proving who you are' is the sticking point for many. Many of the elderly were born back before birth records were kept or were not born in a hospital. If your birth record was on paper and in a natural disaster prone area, chances are the records could be lost or damaged--look at New Orleans, look at the flooding, do you think the people who are being rescued have their birth certificates/ if their houses are totaled by Issac they may not have all their paperwork together in time for the elections in November.

And you also have people like me, abandoned as an infant with no documentation, so I have no idea how old I really am, and I have no original birth certificate to get a DL with--I am absolutely relieved that I got my DL back when I turned 18 and an original birth certificate wasn't required--I have an adoption certificate that shows my adoptive parents as my parents, and at the time that was enough for the DMV.

It is not anymore, but as long as I don't allow it to expire, renewals can be done over the mail and I don't have to show up or try to explain why I don't have a BC. I don't have to show ID to buy a bus pass, don't need to show ID to get on my bicycle to bike to work, do not smoke or drink so never had to prove age for age-restricted purposes. If I were to allow my DL to expire and then tried to go in to get an ID or another DL, I would be unable to do so because I don't have an original BC.

I have a coworker who was born in Puerto Rico. They used the BC as a means of identity everywhere with the result that many of those BCs were stolen and used in identity theft cases, to the point where the Puerto Rican government finally just scrapped the old birth certificates, revamped the format etc., and reissued them, but many Puerto Ricans living on the US mainland didn't know about the invalidated birth certificates. My coworker had her passport revoked because her original birth certificate has been invalidated by the government of PR, and now she can't travel on business until she gets that reissued BC. She knows she's not going to have that process completed before the elections this year, and she's also hesitant about traveling to any of the Southern States where ID is checked because she's afraid she'll be mistaken for an 'illegal' and detained. She has a DL, an SS card, passed eVerify here at work, but at the moment she doesn't have a valid BC or passport.

And Homeland Security, during the recent Supreme court hearings on the 'papers, please' immigration check laws, said they don't have a national database of who is and is not a citizen. The only way to prove you are a citizen is through the passport registration system...and according to the State Department, only 117 million people in this country have passports, out of a population of 312 million people.

Passports are not cheap, and people like me, like my coworker, can't get one.

Sarah! Missed you! Welcome back!

Amanda,

Thank you! I was busy relocating to DC, in order to better implement my evil, liberal, agenda.

So minorities are predominately Democrats. Democrats redraw the lines and they're trying to help minorities, right? No, they're trying to get votes and win seats.

But when Republicans redraw lines in predominately minority areas they're trying to get votes and win seats, right? No, they're RACIST!!!

And I guess when Republicans redraw lines in predominately non-minority areas to get votes and win seats, it's because they're....they're...well...evil...yeah, that's it...they're EVIL!!!

(Whites are a minority in Houston.)

Since when has the party in power not drawn the maps to their advantage? Are you telling me the Democrats that have been doing this all along are racists when they don't put a proportionate number of whites in a district? What would that do to the whites, asians, etc in districts that are a majority other skin color? Does that just make their vote not count because of their skin color?

Why can't we get beyond this politically correct BS that's holding us in the 1960s of viewing everyone by skin color alone? Only racists or ethnic supremacists view everyone in this manner.

One ID, one vote, one nation of united people. Until we get there, we'll all just be a color divided by our politicians. Stop holding progress back!

Allen,

Progress will never be made, by ignoring the impact our history plays on current sociological issues.

Only in a perfect society, would seeing everyone as "the same", be ideal. We will never be perfect. I think that means we need to readjust how we view "fair". Fair, is everyone getting the opportunities they need, not being treated all the same.

We do and should see our and aknowledge our differences, what needs to change is that we learn to ACCEPT those differences.

Koodos for the Feds to MESS WITH TEXAS - The Republicans think that they can ignore the 1965 Voting Rights Act! The Rebublicans are all for Big Business and the Wealthy. Those that support the Rebublican party that are Middle class and Poor class are only cutting their own throat. I wish in one way that they get what they voted for, but I cannot vote Republican as their evil ways will effect me and I cannot afford the cuts in Social Security & Medicare that I've been paying into for 30+ years and I will be elligible for in 10 years and I cannot afford the Increase of Insurance they propose. I cannot afford the cost of Insurance now that do not cover much and what they do cover is less than the cost I pay for Insurance now. It was nice to see that the only thing that the Elected officials in Washington have done was to Block bills that have only hurt the working class and support those that give our hard earned Tax Dollars to the Wealthy. They think that the Middle and Poor classes have TOO much wealth and they will not be happy until they have our wealth and live in "POOR HOUSING". I guess TEXAS wants us to live that way, SO DOWN WITH TEXAS!

It's the way the changed (gerrymandered) the voting district lines. If there is discrimination in the design of the districts, then you can't grant the voter ID which is more stringent in as well.

Private Citizen @3.1: "I must have a slightly lower-than-pedestrian understanding of what the problem is."

Obviously. If you haven't figured it out, though, I doubt I could help you with only a Newsvine post.

May I recommend something besides Faux News....? That'd be a start.

Private Citizen-3665152

Soooo....blacks and hispanics were discriminated against because....they can't get one of the six forms of identification in the district in which they live?

I must have a slightly lower-than-pedestrian understanding of what the problem is.

this case has nothing to do with voter registration or voter ID laws.

What it has to do with is changing state and federal congressional district maps for the state of Texas - the boundaries that say you have district 1 congressman as your man, instead of district 2 congresswoman.

And what happens OFTEN is the party in power will try to alter the boundaries so that areas that are more likely to vote in thier direction have a majority within as many districts as possible, thereby resultin in more elected politicians of the favored political party. this happens so often that it has a very old name: Gerrymandering.

And it's been said for YEARS that the Texas districting map has been rigged in favor of Republicans.

Both parties have been known to do this in various states across the country at various times - so it's not just a right wing republican thing - but in Texas, where republicans have had the power for quite some time, it is very much a republican specific thing.

And of course the party that is at risk of losing elections always raises hell about it. Sometimes the feds step in if it's really, really blatant and so obvious that even old timey chicago politicians would cringe.

Yep. You apparently do have a misunderstanding of the problem referred to in this article. Its about gerrrymandering, not voter ID. I share your puzzlement about why voter ID is such a problem to some, but do think that the redistricting in Texas might be problematic.

Manipulating districts is a way to minimize the political power of minorities. By drawing districts strategically, you can put most of the minority voters in a single district, so that even if they all vote for their own candidate, they still only have one representative and one vote in the legislature. If the minority voters were distributed over several districts, their votes, along with those of other opposition party voters, might elect several legislators more favorable to their interests.

I must have a slightly lower-than-pedestrian understanding of what the problem is.

You are correct you are more than dense if you do not know how this works.

It's a Constitutional right to Vote, If you try to make me go BUY somedefined form of identification it is called a poll tax and you can't charge me to vote. There is no fraud there is only a failing republican party that has known for some time that they can't win on merit alone so every subversive tactic must be employed to ensure they return to power where the Richest 11 people in the us will dictate what when how and where for eveyone else. Sounds fair doesn't it.

FormerMarine you are right. I distinctly remember the Democrats doing this very thing in the early '90's in Texas. If they were in power, they would be doing the same thing.

August...I believe you can get a FREE ID in Texas. No one has to buy one. But let's see, ACORN and other such groups can organize mass 'get out the vote' campaigns, spending my tax dollars to register Democrats and then provide transportation to get them to the polls, but for some reason I simply cannot fathom, the same people can't get someone without an ID to a place to get a free one.

hs do your homework. ID are not free in Texas. Honestly, it isn't so much the price as what is required to get one. A Birth Certificate with a raised seal for one. You have one? I know I don't. Are you so old you were born before BC were the norm? Where you born in New Orleans where all the records were ruined by Katrina? Where you adopted? LOTS of problems getting what is required if you are say over 75 and perhaps don't have family around (which a lot don't after they are dropped into a nursing home). But this story is about districting. Yes, both parties do it. It should be done by computer or a non-partisan group. The worst of this practice is when the party in power puts two districts together pitting two dem politicians against each other so that one has to lose. It is an abuse of power.

I don't show my ID at either of those places ever.

Eric -Nor dor I.

Maybe Cassandra lives in some police state where you are constantly harassed to prove that you're supposed to be there.....like Arizona.

Oh, wait! I look like a white guy, so I don't have to worry about that sort of thing.

Shopping and seeing your doctor are not rights obtained through citizenship in the USA. Voting is.

Any law that attempts to diminish, in any way, a free US citizen's fundamental right to vote is an attempt to destroy the USA. That is terrorism at its core.

The state has never challenged the law until Obama took office. They have had these laws for many decades, but decide to change them when a black is running for re-election. The judge saw right thru them. The GOP is trying to change the law because they are worried about losing. Money talks and *ullshi walks". Right republicans?

@ Fred:

Oh, wait! I look like a white guy, so I don't have to worry about that sort of thing.

Well-said

Cassandra - to obtain a legal ID, you have to pay the government for it. Paying to vote spits in the face of everything that is American. If you wish to enact voter ID laws, then everyone should get the same kind of ID and it should be free. In America, we do not pay the government for the privilege of voting for our government.

Since when do you need to show ID to shop or go to the doctor? You are intentionally leaving out part of the story in order to be deceitful or you have fabricated the entire scenario.

Hmmm...Someone that has to lie to defend her anti-American views. Do I smell tea???

I never have to show a photo ID when shopping I pay cash don't have to show my doctor any photo id either .. I can buy wine and booze without a photo ID , I can buy smokes without any ID can do all that without a photo ID because I am an elderly citizen and I look it I never relized that republicans can be so stupid

Repuglican'ts are the party of STUPID. Studies have been done, show them as lazy thinkers, unable to move between choices, so stick to one path, unable to distinguish whether it is a good path or not. They have only one news source, faux news, and never test the accuracy of what they hear. Hook, line and sinker, never verify.

fred the evil, that was a dumb comment " I look white so I don't have to worry " , seriously ? because there are no Canadians, British , Swiss, White Africans, etc ? that may be here illegally ? but there are more illegal Latinos here.

Really? You have to show ID to buy groceries or be seen by the doctor? The only time I have to show my ID is when I use my credit card. Has nothing to do with buying my groceries or getting medical care. If I pay by cash or debit, no ID required. Love how teabaggers love to "spin" the truth.

I think the GOP will be quite surprised after they fail to get the effect they want so badly. Pennsylvania wants to stop voter fraud so they say. In the last election for president in the entire state there were 4 cases of voter fraud that got looked at. 3 were incorrect and only one had any merit at all. Any court in the land should repeal these laws because since a person must buy the id's it is a poll tax which is illegal. Texas drawing wierd laws to get Republicans elected? Same old same o

Sandra @4.9: "fred the evil, that was a dumb comment " I look white so I don't have to worry " , seriously ? because there are no Canadians, British"

No, honey -It's because I don't look black or Hispanic, the two ethnic groups that bear the brunt of these laws.

You knew that, so try not to make such a public spectacle of your feigned outrage.

boogablu...do you think this woman is a terrorist?

This woman nullified the votes of 10 people. Do you think that’s in injustice?

Mississippi NAACP leader sent to prison for 10 counts of voter fraud

By Matthew Vadum - 7/29/2011

While NAACP President Benjamin Jealous lashed out at new state laws requiring photo ID for voting, an NAACP executive sits in prison, sentenced for carrying out a massive voter fraud scheme.

In a story ignored by the national media, in April a Tunica County, Miss., jury convicted NAACP official Lessadolla Sowers on 10 counts of fraudulently casting absentee ballots. Sowers is identified on an NAACP website as a member of the Tunica County NAACP Executive Committee.

Sowers received a five-year prison term for each of the 10 counts, but Circuit Court Judge Charles Webster permitted Sowers to serve those terms concurrently, according to the Tunica Times, the only media outlet to cover the sentencing.

“This crime cuts against the fabric of our free society,” Judge Webster said.

Sowers was found guilty of voting in the names of Carrie Collins, Walter Howard, Sheena Shelton, Alberta Pickett, Draper Cotton and Eddie Davis. She was also convicted of voting in the names of four dead persons: James L. Young, Dora Price, Dorothy Harris, and David Ross.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/07/29/mississippi-naacp-leader-sent-to-prison-for-10-counts-of-voter-fraud/#ixzz23hzDhseR

Not that it's relevant to the article, but it should be noted that voter ID laws do not fix the issue that hs321 highlights in his repeated postings.

In a word, Gary, 'No' it doesn't mean any such thing.

Let me just say, initially I was very much in support of these Voter ID laws. After all, what's wrong with having to properly identify yourself when voting? It seems like a common sense kind of thing. Right?

That was until I started learning that as many as 10% of currently eligible voters don't have any kind of 'valid' ID to present, and that most of that 10% are in fact poor and minority voters. Add to that the fact that there have been only a dozen or so documented instances of actual voter fraud in the past 10 years, this seems to me be a solution in search of a problem, unless the problem it is actually trying to solve is "How do we keep the poor and minority voters from voting."

Gary @5.0:

According to the same legend, they show up here and get Social Security benefits, Medicaid, buy firearms, and have three or four terrorist/anchor babies.

For the record, only one of the five issues is actually based on any facts, and it's not 'voting,' 'SS,' 'Medicaid,' or 'anchor/terrorist babies.'

What's next from the brilliant minds in the Republican Perty? Banning unicorn grazing in State parks?

Just more voter suppression.

Nope, Texas already has ID laws, they are just trying to make them more stringent.

Texas isn't a swing state anyway.

First, can we recognize that Hispanics are no longer a minority in Texas? Second, 10% of 10% is a very, very small percentage of the overall population. And, using your numbers, it means that of the 10% who do not have a "valid ID", 90% are not poor nor in the minority. I don't understand how you can say that the only logical conclusion is that the state is trying to keep the poor and minority voters from voting. Further, voting is a privilege for citizens of the United States of America. It should not be a political argument that proof of citizenship be required.

More UNICORN-LOVING SOCIALIST LIES FROM THE LEFT!

Beware! Unicorns are having same-sex weddings and ripping up their voter ID cards!!

BEWARE!

First, the right to vote is a privilege of citizens of the United States. Let's not be naive and think that plenty of illegal immigrants aren't living in Texas. Second, by the percentages given out above, you're saying that of the eligible Texas voters, 10% do not have access to the required voter ID. You further state that of the 10% without the required voter ID, 10% are poor and/or a minority. I'm sorry but 10% of 10% isn't very much to sway an election or try to disenfranchise the poor or minorities when, by your numbers, more than 90% have access to the six types of voter ID required. This shouldn't be a political argument for those screaming about Republicans. It should be about making sure those who cast a ballot are eligible to do so. Is it perfect? Maybe not, but it's hardly the big bad wolf gobbling up the sheep.

Gary-2545132

Go back to Fixed News. They are missing one of their sheep. Republicans are trying their best to disenfranchise the elderly, the minority, the poor and the lower middle-class. The only courts that have agreed with them are the republican sheep appointed by Reagan, Bush I, or Bush II.

The big bad wolf gobbles the sheep one bite at a time.................

Read the pennsylvania law and make your decision. I just saw a FEDERAL judge knocked it down. The feds are a higher authority than the state judge.

HRHAyleigh, are you seriously arguing that 10% of the vote isn't important? We already know that those who show up to vote are who they say they are. Voter 'fraud' is a lie and has been disproven many times over.

In 2000, with some 146 million voters, there were 2046 cases of 'reported' voter fraud. Of those, 10 were found to be valid. Let me repeat that. 10 out of 146 million voters.

Think about that.

http://www.usatoday.com/USCP/PNI/Front%20Page/2012-08-20-PNI0820met-voter-fraudPNIBrd_ST_U.htm

I was wondering if I read that right, DJ! HRH's basic argument is that the minority vote doesn't count because, well....they are in the minority.

In the United States that I grew up in and live in, all are created equal and every vote counts...regardless of what they tell you on foxy-notsy news.

Gary - Give us one incident where a foreign national sneaked into the United States and cast a vote. It baffles me that you can sit on your thumb and cry over voter fraud by invisible foreigners, yet it doesn't bother you a bit that dirty Chinese money is being funneled through a sleazy Vegas casino owner into Mitt Romney's coffers. If you truly care about foreigners influencing American elections, you need to look no further than the Republican Party.

I just recently became disabled and I have to go see a social secutiy doctor. In the letter it said for me to bring my ID. I called and ask if I could use my voter registration card because I have no picture ID( I actualy do have ID this is just an example). They said no sir you need a picture ID. Now Im broke and cant afford to get a picture ID. So I guess the social security disabilty adminstration has suppressed me. Of course I will have to come up with the money somehow and then I will be able to vote as well.

HRHAyleigh , your statement "First, the right to vote is a privilege of citizens of the United States..." is pure hogwash. You don't understand that there is a distinction between a Right and a Privilege. A Privilege is an ability to do something that someone gives you. A Right is something you intrinsically have. The government can regulate rights to a small degree. Like driving a car is a right that is regulated, not a privilege inspite of what DMV books and some near illiterate judges say. The State/Government is not in the business of granting Rights - we have those. The real question, in the required IDs case is is the administrative/regulatory function of govenment exceeding its constrained role. In Texas the issue is more clear = the Texas GOP violated the law.

No, this court upholds the constitution that says you have a right to vote! The legislature is republican controlled and wants to disenfranchise the poor and disabled who usually vote Democratic.

Umm - so Democratic party members are not Americans? You people (Ann Romney's words) are creepy.,

Not as creepy as the right wing moral majority who use every code word they can, without saying the words they really mean.

Where does it say in the constitution that you have to show ID to vote. UHH....it doesn't!!!!!!!!!!

Looking at that map the attempt to divide the minority populations was so blatant anyone with a shred of decency would be embarrassed to present such a plan. I guess you have to lose your sense of right and wrong to be a politician.

Well by your way of thinking then it must be ok that the republicans work for the monied interests and not ALL the American people. Oh wait, I forgot fleabaggers don't think.

@ joe - not every concept has to be supported by reems of evidence. Some are just not that difficult to put in the common sense category. Based on your logic, are we to believe that the # of speeders on the highway is equal to the # of tickets issued or do you think that # might be a little higher. Do the # of people who smoke weed equal the # of occupied prison cells or might that # be a little higher? Do the # of shoplifters in this world equal those caught? The list of examples is endless. Just because there isn't documented proof of impropriety doesn't mean it doesn't exist and to believe otherwise is just plain naive. What's wrong with simply requiring that the populace responsible for electing our governance be Eligible! Party affiliation notwithstanding, allowing anything else is simply stacking the deck.

not every concept has to be supported by reems of evidence

You're... you're joking, right? You think that it's OK to pass just any old law, even if it's claims and reasoning are grossly lacking in any type of viable evidence?! And you're comparing voting to smoking weed, shoplifting, and speeding tickets? Might I remind you that voting is a right, where as the things you are comparing it to are, in fact, crimes? Truly, though, I'm no longer surprised by you and others in the conservative wing who think this way. Instead of facts and evidence, you operate on rhetoric and religion, two things that have no place in our government.

Voting ID requirements is what is stacking the deck. As other commenters have pointed out, this law specifically targets and discriminates against minorities and the very poor, who, no matter how much you disdain them, have the same rights that you do.

2 cents Common sense should tell you that the party that dislikes government intrusion and regulation

(the GOP) wouldn't pass a law like this if they didn't think it would benefit them. The reality is, this is a law looking for a reason, and that reason does not exist. The constitution says all citizens have a right to vote and Texas has a particularly bad record in that regard; hence they were sanctioned by the 1964 voting rights act and this law to change voting regulations was shot down because of that sanction

my2centsworth --- for each and every example you listed a correlation can be made. There is surveilance, followed by actuall people being caught. Now, can you list the surveilance and actual people caught in voter fraud in the last 10 yrs --- only about 20 people TOTAL through out all of the US. Percentage is about .0001%. Now what is the percentage of ELIGIBLE voters that may be restricted due to not being able to comply with the new demands (unable due to time constraints, paperwork, cost of getting the paper work, etc). Closer to 10%. Most of them minorities. And if these people are poor how is paying $25 to get the correct paperwork not a poll tax (albeit indirect). The issue as I see it is....there is NO proff or correlation for voter fraud.....that makes it a distraction and unrealistic threat (a boogieman)....but the RECENT clamp down on voter laws does poss a REAL threat of disenfranchising real ELIGIBLE voters. You want ID fine....allow a couple of years for it to take effect. Educate the populace on what is needed and have them prepared to vote.....allowing anything else is simply stacking the deck.

@ preceded - Hello! Joe made the argument that the size of the problem is directly related to existing evidence. My comparisons were clear. Are you suggesting that an ineligible voter is not also committing a crime? Let me try again - If I have a license, drive sober, etc,..... I am within the laws of this country to be on the highway. When I break that law, I potentially am jeopardizing my right to drive and am exponentially threatening the possible outcome to you and surrounding citizenry. If I am an eligible citizen, it is my right (duty) to vote. If I break that law or vote with ineligibility I am again threatening the possible outcome to you. It's really no different than checking an ID for age to purchase alcohol. If I'm not eligible, I can't buy it! Granted, it's every citizens right to vote, just show me you are a citizen and can otherwise prove you can exercise that right. You claim this argument exists to suppress votes. Only votes anyone is trying to suppress are the ineligible ones. You voice conservative leanings about me but what about ones advocacy of rounding up all those voters by hook or crook who typically vote and lean to the left. Does that make you their designated driver?

In Texas , only 81 of Texas' 254 counties even have DMV offices where people can get IDs. Oddly enough, those areas that are predominately Hispanic just happen to be counties without DMVs. Funny coincidence, isn't it? In at least one area, people have to travel over 176 miles roundtrip to get a an ID. An photo ID is free, but if you have to have a copy of your birth certificate to get one, and they cost $22.

http://www.texastribune.org/texas-politics/voter-id/feds-reject-texas-voter-id-law/print/

Since several Republican leaders have now stated that the purpose of the voter ID laws is to discourage minorites from voting, what more need be said?

http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/opinion/perspectives/masters-of-voter-suppression-republicans-employ-many-techniques-to-keep-low-income-voters-away-from-the-polls-648218/

PrecededByNone -

You missed what mytwocentsworth was trying to point out - no he's not comparing voting to criminal acts. He was comparing number caught to number possibly happening - that haven't been caught. Your reasoning is - well we haven't caught anyone so it can't be a problem! And everyone knows that voting is a right! Yeah, got that. Every CITIZEN has a right to vote and every CITIZEN should be able to provide who he or she is. If you are walking down a road and a cop stops you and asks for your ID (which you are supposed to have on you BTW) what do the very poor and minorities do? If you can't provide ID to a cop what? He pats you on the head and let's you go? How is getting an ID and showing it when you vote discrimination? If you require everyone to have it? Oh because the minorities and very poor won't go get an ID? WTF why not? It's too hard? They can't provide any type of paperwork to prove who they are? Really? Too expensive? No, if you can get a cellphone, you sure can afford an ID. And tell my who doesn't have a cellphone these days? But the big question I have for all of you posters is this - In this day and age, there are people out there that have no form of any kind of ID? Nothing to show when you buy cigarettes, liquor, cash a payroll check? Hell, just to do minimal functioning in this society you need some form of ID and you want us to believe the very poor and minorities don't have any? There isn't ANY reason not to have an ID.

@ joe #7.4 The last two sentences of your post IS the point! Why does everyone insist on putting words in my mouth. I don't care what ethnic, religious, racial, socio-economic background you come from, if you can prove you are an eligible voter, by all means, I encourage you to exercise that right. If you can't or won't, don't. There's no reason to try and spin it any other way.

As far as voter ID is concerned, one of the biggest arguments from the left against ID laws is that they will disenfranchise the poor and elderly. Yet, the poor and elderly normally recieve some time of federal monetary assistance, especially the elderly through social security. By the end of 2013, 85% of all social security recipients will be recieving their benefits via direct deposit to their bank accounts. And can any one of the left tell me what the bank requires to open an account...... You guessed it. A valid id. In fact, due to the Patriot Act, it is law that a valid government issued ID be presented to verify that person's identity when opening a new account at any financial institution. So, as far as the elderly are concerned, you telling me they can get ID's in order to open bank accounts so their social security can be direct deposited but they cannot get the same ID in order to vote?!

Why cant we use our voter registration card to get on an airplane? Why cant we use it to buy beer. Why cant we use it to get into the White House when on a tour? Could it be because it has our picture on it. I think that its a common sense approach to show picture ID for the most important right we americans have in this country which is to vote. I for one dont want a non citizen voting even if we dont have very many documenteed cases of it happening. Hell the social secutiy disabilty doctors even require picture IDs.

my2cents...Can you explain to me why American citizens should be required to pay the government for an ID to vote for that government?

Common sense dictates that every person that votes Republican is a racist, woman hating moron. Does the Republican party as a whole represent every racist, woman hating moron in the US?

Gerrymandering in Texas was a hobby of good ol' Tom Delay. Anyone hear what he's been up to lately? Is he still "dancing with Bubba on cell-block 8"??

my2cents / precededbynone --- Yes you have to have an ID to do many things in society today. But if you are older an don't drive the probability of not having an ID goes way up (same with other situations). Poll taxes and voter suppression are unconsitutional - settled many years ago through court cases and the Voting ACT of 1964 - do these new fees consitute a Poll tax; if the only purpose to get one is to vote? My2cents you said "Only votes anyone is trying to suppress are the ineligible ones." True but in TRYING to suppress "alleged" cases of voter fauds (of which there is no proff) what is actually happening is suppression of ACTUAL ELIGABLE VOTERS. I take it by your agruement (and precededbynone) that is perfectly fine with you. Suppress actuall voters today to perhaps caught the .001% of voter fraud (okay .002% for those "fraudulant votes" unaccounted for) Or are you claiming voter fraud is rampit - if so where is the proff - without it you only YOUR belife. I don't really have a problem with the ID thing....I just think that given the absence of factual based voter fraud, it should be given time to take effect to prepare the populace. As you said "anything else is simply staking the deck."

STL ... um, you ARE aware that the majority of people who are receiving Social Security opened accounts during a time when there WAS no photo ID requirement to open one, right? Or if they are receiving disability because they became disabled AFTER working the required number of quarters it means that they already HAD a bank account? You ARE aware of when the "Patriot Act" went into effect, right? Let me clue you in ... it happened AFTER a certain NYC landmark was demolished. That means that the ONLY people who have needed a photo ID to open up a bank account have opened one in the past ELEVEN YEARS. So ... if someone opened a bank account in August of 2001 they did NOT have a Federal requirement to have a photo ID. Maybe you're just someone who is below thirty, but you really don't seem to grasp WHY the photo ID laws are a problem.

See, even in the 1950's there existed something called a POLL TAX which was money that black people were required to PAY in order to exercise their RIGHT to vote. The SUPREME COURT ruled that Poll Taxes are a violation of the constitution because voting is a RIGHT. ANYTHING that requires someone to PAY MONEY in order for their RIGHT to vote is UNCONSTITUTIONAL. If a person has to pay even $5.00 for their birth certificate in order to get a "free" photo ID (which isn't free where *I* live, btw) it's a POLL TAX.

http://www.dmv.state.va.us/webdoc/citizen/id/adult_id.asp

Adult ID Card

• Issued to an individual age 15 and above who does not hold a learner's permit or driver's license issued by any state within the United States.
• Requires two proofs of identity, one proof of legal presence and proof of Virginia residency. (Only one primary identification document is required if you are under age 19.) Use the interactive document guide to determine which documents you will need to bring to DMV when you apply, or refer to "Acceptable Documents for Obtaining a Driver's License or Photo ID Card" (DMV 141).
• Does not require proof of legal presence if you were born in 1937 or earlier and DMV can verify that you have held a Virginia driver's license or ID card that is either valid or has not been expired for more than 5 years. (You may be required to provide proof of your old license or ID card.) Proof of legal presence is required for persons who are temporarily authorized by the federal government to be present in the U.S.
• Your ID card expires the last day of your birth month once you have reached an age divisible by 5; e.g. 20, 25, 20 etc.
• Individuals required to register with the Virginia State Police Sex Offender and Crimes Against Children registry (Virginia Code Chapter 9 of Title 9.1) will be issued ID cards valid for five years.
• Costs $10.00.

Then there's the cost of the birth certificate:

http://www.vdh.state.va.us/vital_records/

There are three ways in which to obtain a CERTIFIED VITAL (BIRTH, DEATH, MARRIAGE, DIVORCE) Record in Virginia. Choose the method that best suits your needs

Mail — The Division of Vital Records is now in our peak season for mail-in requests. The turn around is estimated at 2 to 4 weeks for CERTIFIED VITAL RECORDS from the day the request is received IN THIS OFFICE. However, people are urged to allow sufficient time for delivery of all CERTIFIED VITAL RECORDS. Full instructions>>

Walk-in - Same day service is available to walk-in customers. This is the fastest way to obtain a certified vital record. When you arrive, you will complete an application, pay the $12 required fee, and show the processing clerk a valid photo I.D. Full instructions>>

Express Delivery through the VitalChek Network - For your convenience, you can process online requests through an independent company that Virginia Department of Health, Division of Vital Records has partnered with to provide you this service; VitalChek Network, Inc. VitalChek can be reached through their website or toll free at 877-572-6333. An additional fee is charged by VitalChek for this service, and all major credit cards are accepted, including American Express®, Discover®, MasterCard® or Visa®. See VitalChek's Full instructions>>

Atom Ant,

Clearly you are way out of touch if you don't think that even $25 to get an ID isn't a stretch for a lot of people, mostly minorities & the very poor. There were months where I myself had to make do with $15 a week after basic living expenses. You have to provide basic proof of citizenship to register to vote, that should be enough. There is, I repeat, NO PROOF of mass voter fraud that warrants this kind of legislation. It is an utterly shameful waste of time and money when there are far more important things to be worrying about. I'm sorry that you have to live in fear of illegal immigrants taking over the nation, but maybe you shouldn't be buying into the right-wing rhetoric and fear-mongering. Check your facts instead. If you don't see the un-American, racist, xenophobic intentions behind the redistricting and voter ID laws, I really don't think there's anything further for us to discuss, because I don't waste time with people who don't look at the facts.

Stop making senseless comparisons between Voter ID and ____________. Not everything is as black and white (no pun intended) as you'd like it to be. This is not like driving, or buying guns or alcohol, or smoking weed. This is about blocking minorities & the poor from exercising basic rights, though they HAVE NOT committed a crime.

STLM...there are many debit card companies out there that offer direct deposit and, no, you do not need a valid ID to purchase or load money on to their cards.

Your entire argument is based on a lie...or you have no idea what you are talking about. Which is it?

one of the biggest arguments from the left against ID laws is that they will disenfranchise the poor and elderly

No one is saying they will disenfranchise the elderly, I don't know where you got that, but perhaps I missed something. (The elderly are more likely to vote Republican, but that might change in this election given Mittens proclivity to abolish Medicare). The very poor and minorities, however, will be affected. You say that the poor "normally recieve (sic) some kind of federal monetary assistance", however, despite what the conservatives will tell you, this is certainly not always the case. Not everyone qualifies for assistance, not everyone wants to take the assistance. There was a time myself where I had to make do with $15 a week after living expenses (this was only 6 years ago), I was not getting assistance. That is not enough to purchase an ID. IN ANY CASE, you have to provide proof of citizenship to register to vote, why do you need to show ID when you vote? The only reason I can think of is so that minorities can be stopped at the door. There are plenty of racist bigots out there, especially in Texas, who would be more than happy to kick a legal minority with valid identification to the curb, accusing him of not only fraud but identify theft, too. Why do you people insist on comparing voting IDs to showing ID when you buy a gun or purchase alcohol? It is clearly not the same thing, and you sound just as absurd as the liberals who insisted mandated health insurance was the same thing as required car insurance.

In order to get disablity stated you have to go to a social secuity doctor. You have to bring your ID with you folks. Also if your debit card is not working for any reason you have to go inside the bank to withdrawl your money. The bank teller will not give you the money unless you show ID and your voter registation card will not work. Most placeS that you go to work at require ID. Its just common sense folks just bring your ID when you come to vote. Only a complete iDiot would not be able to get ID.

high rolla....When you turn off the foxy-notsy news channel and start shaking and drooling all over yourself, you are going through withdrawl. You withdraw money from your bank.

Only a complete iDiot would withdrawl money from a bank.

...a required test in basic English grammar to vote would also be something teabaggers would never fight for.

High Rolla: You just proved who is a complete idiot !! I go to my banks drive-in and hand them a check and nothing else. Go look in the mirror and you will see who is the idiot. I can buy smokes or booze with out an ID for I look old enough to buy so shut your fool mouth up about ID's it is a Republican surpression of voting rights

I can tell you right now, in some states, such as AK, EVERYONE, regardless of age is REQUIRED BY LAW to show a vailid photo ID to byuy booze or smokes. So please let me hear more about Rebulicans suppression of voting rights.

@ shocked #7.11 Your logic makes no sense. Can you tell me why American citizens should be required to surrender to a police officer whose very salary I pay through my taxes?

@ joe #7.12 No, I am not fine with suppression of actual eligible voters. I also don't buy into that occurence.

It's real simple - if I want to drive a car, I have to be willing and able to put gas in it, provide proof of insurance, and abide by the rules of the road. If it's worth that much to me, I will do whatever it takes to fulfill those responsibilities. If I am unwilling to fulfill any of those resposibilities, I cannot nor should not be able to drive.

All this horse hooey about people being unable or unwilling to do what it takes to obtain an Id and otherwise show proof of eligibility in order to exercise that right to vote, must feel it's not worth it. To suggest that obtaining that proof is too much of hardship, unfair, etc. is continuing to bottlefeed someone who doesn't take their responsibility that goes with that right.

my2cents...You can give us all of the irrelevant hypothetical scenarios that you want. Can you, at least, explain why anyone should have to pay the government to vote for that government? How is it not a poll tax?

Charging people to vote is unconstitutional. Did you read the Constitution before you wiped your bum with it?

By the way - you do realize that this article is about gerrymandering in Texas and not voter ID, right? Did you read the article before or after you read the Constitution?

@ cat #7.13 - agree with you on the poll tax but if you take that logic one step further, I could argue that the polling place is blocks away from my house and therefore I must pay money to get there in order to vote. Assuming resposibility that goes with my rights has to be a given. Complaining because the ability to exercise my rights wasn't handed to me on a platter smacks of entitlement once again.

No bank teller can give you money without ID unless they know you personaly. My god fool I could cash your check and take your money. I have an ID so I paid the poll tax already. Only a complete moron couldnt get an ID to vote. My god they must be some dumb ass people in this country. Even if it is a poll tax anybody who wants to vote can and will. Its not like they are asking you for 500 bucks when you walk in to vote. Only a complete moron would complain about having to show ID.

@ my2cents ---- so let me get this straight you "buy into" voter fraud, for which there is NO proff but you do not "buy into"voter suppression because of these laws for which there is ample PROFF (the elderly or medically disabled who do not drive but do vote, etc.). I get you on the license and it seems simple enough (like a said I don't have a problem with it in principle) but in application it does not work out as smooth. Also if all is needed is a driver's license what would you say to the fact that I used to date an immigrant from Mexico who was here illegally who had a valid Arizona driver's license....(true story) she never voted though. Fact is in each and every document case of voter fraud these types of ID demands would not have prevented it. If you are truely concerned about voter fraud you would recognized that the CURRENT arguements are bulit on assumptions, boogie men, and very little fact. You should want to take care of this issue with little to no effect for the ELIGABLE voter. Would it not be more purdent to fade in such requirements over time rather than crunch them right before an election? Like I said....were is the proff that would justify suppressing even one vote to try to caught the "not yet happened...but might...and I BELIEVE it to be true....so damn the rest" mentallity.

@ high rolla 7.24 Sounds like you're finally gettin it!

@ joe 7.25 Couldn't agree more about the timing. Of course, it should come as no surprise that either party will do whatever it takes to gain any sort of advantage - Which is the point! As I stated in my first paragraph of 12.10. I don't believe eligible voter supression outnumbers the possibility of ineligible voter participation. I believe the opposite has a higher liklihood. Simply because with no ID, where would you look and for whom to prove fraud. And just because eligible Aunt Martha didn't vote doesn't necessarily prove eligible voter suppression. Cynical? Guilty

@ shocked 7.22 Yea this whole conversation kinda took a life of it's own and went off on a different tangent. Apparently this is where we might have to agree to disagree. I guess the things I find important or relevant, you find irrelevant and hypothetical. And before you go off about my post, please show me where I ever said that someone should have to pay the gov't to vote for said gov't.??

@my2cents --- "where would you look and for whom to prove fraud." Well let's see...voter registration records, voter prescient records, varification of address, records & names of other at other prescients, just to name a few. Oh and....registering Micky Mouse on voter registration records does not a voting fraud make - if Micky Mouse actually votes, then yes. Regional, Local, State and Federal agencys are available for such analysis and do such analysis when required. How do you think we have the convictions we do have? If voter fraud was rampant (especially with the latest political endeavors) you would think they would be trumpeded cases by the hundreds or thousands just for show and for example......but it can not be done because it is not as prevalent as some would have you to believe - it rarely happens. With a 50 something voting percentage, we have problem of not getting enough to vote. So.... what you are left with........the AFFECT of the ACTUAL LAW and NOT protection of our voting system. You want to change voting requirements.....fine.....do it so it is proper, agreed upon, allows time to emplement, prepares the public for the change, exhaust most legal challenges, etc. Those who are doing it NOW are doing it for the ACTUAL AFFECT to....stack the deck...if I could borrow a phrase....and it is not right in my opinion.

@joe 7.28 What don't you understand? If I am an inelegible voter and have no ID, etc., how could there be any voter registration records, etc. on me? Maybe we're on different pages in terms of definition. I am saying one form of voter fraud is when someone who cannot prove they are an eligible voter is in fact allowed to vote. If said person was not req'd to prove his eligibility, how could you ever prove after the fact fraud did or did not occur? What you have is a legitmate ballot with no one to tie it to. At the end of the day, your ballot count should equal the number of eligible, registerd voters on your list, should it not?

If I can have my ballot counted without the benefit of having to prove my elegibility, then wouldn't voting twice as an eleigible voter be essentially the same thing? And how would you prevent that from happening, you say? - having an ID so I can check your name off the list before I give you a ballot. It seems to me that allowing anything else is stacking the deck.

@my2cents......Verification happens today. At 18 if you are a man with a SS# you register for selective service and perhaps to vote. Men or women outside of selective service registration, fill out voter registration forms and provide other types of verification (such as SS#, brith cert, etc.) which is then verified. After that they recieve their voter's card and their information is added to the voting district registary. A review of "after the fact" voting records does not reveal any significant voting anomalies or fraud. And with your example....the voting twice thing....one of the very few cases on voting fraud caught a man doing just that....voting in two seperate districts....I cann't remember the actual case name though. Verification is being done and very very very very few cases have come up.

@joe 7.30 I agree with what your post but unless I'm missing something, what you just described is the necessary steps one takes to become an eligible voter of record. That is not the ineligible person I am describing which is the crux of my point. Many of others posts that suggest voter suppression this and disenfranchising the poor and elderly that are IMO actually moot.

All I'm saying is that if all eligible voting citizens are req'd to produce that proof (by whatever means is fair and equitable) to receive a ballot, then who has a complaint about voter fraud? If you don't have a key, guess you won't be getting in the lockbox.

@my2cents --- We appear to agree that an ID is not a bad thing....I just don't think the means justify the end. There is NO PROFF within "after the fact" verification of records remember....there are only unfounded allegations based on a "boodie man" arguements. If you will agree that this CURRENT arguement is not based on emperical facts....then I will conceed the the want/need to have an "ID BEFORE you vote" rule. I just think it is best done outside of the election cyle (and best if it is given time for proper prepaidness). As such, I reject the attempts to employee it now --- where it is clearly a ploy to suppress the vote. Without emperical evidence, you wil not be able convince me that there rampant is voter fraud and a "need" for such laws. As such I reject any attempts to "clamp down on it" because it does not exist. And recent attempts to create "new" procedures appears to affect ACTUAL ELIGABLE VOTERS. Gut feelings and intuition is not proff of fraud. Thus all that is left with these recent attempts is the affect of establishing these laws within an abreviated timeframe --- which is to say voter suppression on statistically specific groups and they should be recognized as such. Establish them now if you wish but them allow time to take effect. If that was done we woudl see real quick who ae "truely concerned" vs. the "need them now to suppress the vote and win" folks.

My point is in each election cycle there may be 3.5million people voting in that election. And with elections as close as they are today a 1% tick in either direction can effect the out come. 1% of 3.5 million is 35,000....are you emplying that somewhere arround 35K people in each state (one state or all) are fraudulant voters. That is a hell of a lot.

Many vivid anecdotes of purported voter fraud have been proven false or do not demonstrate fraud. Although there are a few scattered instances of real voter fraud, many of the vivid anecdotes cited in accounts of voter fraud have been proven false or vastly overstated. In Missouri in 2000, for example, the Secretary of State claimed that 79 voters were registered with addresses at vacant lots, but subsequent investigation revealed that the lots in question actually housed valid and legitimate residences. Similarly, a 1995 investigation into votes allegedly cast in Baltimore by deceased voters and those with disenfranchising felony convictions revealed that the voters in question were both alive and felony-free.

Many of the inaccurate claims result from lists of voters compared to other lists - of deceased individuals, persons with felony convictions, voters in other states, etc. These attempts to match information often yield predictable errors. In Florida in 2000, a list of purged voters later became notorious when it was discovered that the “matching” process captured eligible voters with names similar to - but decidedly different from - the names of persons with felony convictions, sometimes in other states entirely. A 2005 attempt to identify supposed double voters in New Jersey mistakenly accused people with similar names but whose middle names or suffixes were clearly different, such as “J.T. Kearns, Jr.” and “J.T. Kearns, Sr.,” of being the same person. Even when names and birthdates match across lists, that does not mean there was voter fraud. Elementary statistics students are often surprised to learn that it is more likely than not that among just 23 individuals, two will share a birthday. Similar statistics show that for most reasonably common names, it is extremely likely that at least two people with the same name in a state will share the same date of birth. The ostensible “matches” may not represent the same person at all.

Other allegations of fraudulent voting often turn out to be the result of common clerical errors, incomplete information, or faulty assumptions. Most allegations of voter fraud simply evaporate when more rigorous analysis is conducted.

Voter fraud is often conflated with other forms of election misconduct. It is extremely rare for individuals to vote multiple times, vote as someone else, or vote despite knowing that they are ineligible. These rare occurrences, however, are often conflated with other forms of election irregularities or misconduct, under the misleading and overbroad label of “voter fraud.u201D Some of these other irregularities result from honest mistakes by election officials or voters, such20as confusion as to whether a particular person is actually eligible to vote. Some irregularities result from technological glitches, whether sinister or benign: for example, voting machines may record inaccurate tallies. And some involve fraud or intentional misconduct perpetrated by actors other than individual voters: for example, flyers may spread misinformation about the proper locations or procedures for voting; thugs may be dispatched to intimidate voters at the polls; missing ballot boxes may mysteriously reappear. These more common forms of misconduct are simply not addressed by the supposed “anti-fraud” measures generally proposed.

@ Joe 7.32 I have a tendency to agree with you. As I said in an earlier post, the timing is suspect. Regardless of what either political party is trying to accomplish on any given election cycle, the introduction of their reasoning always tends to lend itself to the "appearance of impropriety" when done so just prior to that election cycle. Whether or not fraud is a percieved, real, or nonexistent problem, IMO some form of Voter ID in the future would greatly reduce or eliminate any fraudulent voter attempts. I think in this case, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.

I am still unclear on how you think ID's would have a reverse effect on eligible voters. In what measurable way?

@my2cents 7.35 --- I believe the requirements for an ID (without proper preparedness) will disenfranchise some voters. If 100 people are not allowed to vote because they lack the new "proper ID", then that is more that all of the voter fraud cases in the last 40yrs combined. And that presents a "real and immediate" harm...not just a "supposed" harm of voter fraud for which there is no emperical fact. Now, if the facts were the other way and one could show that there is significant "real and immediate" harm by not having such requirments in place then....yea sure...make the requirement immediate. But that is not the case. Measureable effects would probably be someone being placed in office that otherwise should not be (meaning if all were able to vote then they would have lost). You might try to say the same about voter fraud.....but once again there is no evidence to support such claims; while there is significant evidence to support the opposite - which is the arguement I am trying to make. As of now in most states that are making the requirements their are TENS OF THOUSANDS (or more) that DO NOT HAVE THE NEW REQUIRED ID. So that means if they cannot get it by election time they WILL NOT BE ABLE TO VOTE even if they have voted before within the same district. That is the harm! And that is a LOT more and a LOT different then the .001% of the "fraudulant votes" you are "trying" to avoid. For within these ID requirements are people who have voted but NOW because of the new law lack the "PROPER ID".

@Joe 7.36 I can see your point. It seems we are looking at essentially the same issue from opposite ends of the spectrum. In your example, voter ID could (and IMO should) be accomplished, but would need to probably be initiated at some point just after a major election (although local elections seem to occur annually) and citizens be given a defined period of time to comply.

I do realize it may be a hardship to some, but like many other things in life, if it's worth doing, it will get done. If you don't comply, I guess it can be assumed voting wasn't that important to you anyway. Someone else stated succinctly: absence of proof is not necessarily proof of absence.

Kinda like the person who complains about the current state of affairs but because they didn't vote, IMO have little or no room to bitch about it. Enjoyed the volley with you. Too bad these blogs become nothing more than a name calling competition instead of the exchange of ideas and perspectives.

@my2cents --- I too have enjoyed our back and forth banter. And while we may not agree on some aspects of this issue I think we agree on many. I just wish our leaders could display such grace and respect while trying to hash out things such as these. I will look for you on addtional post from time to time....as I know we can communicate well. So....for now, Good Bye and Good Luck.

my2cents, nobody is requiring you to drive yourself to the polling place in order to vote. You could hitch a ride with someone else, or even GASP WALK (I did for 11 years when living several blocks from the polling place). It is not a REQUIREMENT that you pay for gas in order to get to your polling place. REQUIRING someone to pay for their birth certificate to get the photo ID and THEN for a photo ID as a REQUIREMENT to vote IS REQUIRING someone to pay MONEY in order to exercise their RIGHT to vote. That makes it a POLL TAX and thus ILLEGAL.

In addition, you don't believe that there has been VALID voters have been suppressed? REALLY?

http://miami.cbslocal.com/2012/05/29/decorated-broward-war-hero-targeted-in-gov-scotts-voter-purge/

http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/world-war-ii-vet-battle-of-the-bulge-medal-winner-caught-in-florida-voter-purge/

Huh ... I guess that DECORATED WWII vet who was born in BROOKLYN, NY who was told that he was being removed from the Voter rolls in Florida was imagining the letter he received?

@ Cat 7.39 You seem to be one of those people who hangs your hat on the extremes or exceptions. Are they out there, sure. I don't disagree with you on the poll tax and understand it's implications.

Where I disagree with you is how you come to your conclusions and perhaps how you define a poll tax. You have stated that voting is a right and anything one has to spend to exercise that right can be considered a poll tax and is therefore, constitutionally illegal. You cite such examples as having to spend money on a birth certificate and photo ID's as requiring one to spend money before they can exercise that right. In other words, it's my right to vote and it damn well better not cost me anything to exercise that right. Sorry, I find that reasoning flawed, especially as you apply it to how a poll tax is defined.

Gun ownership is also my constitutional right. But in order for me to exercise that right, I first have to purchase it, buy ammo to use it, and depending on where you live, pay an admin fee for FOID card, etc. I can't apply your logic to this scenario ie. it's my right to own a gun and it damn well better not cost me anything to exercise that right. Ah, you say but there's no poll tax to own a gun - guess that depends on how you define it.

In order to exercise your vote, there are certain criteria needing met to do so. If you need to have proper documentation to prove your eligbility and that costs money to obtain, guess that's the breaks. If you are going to call that a poll tax, that's where we part ways in thinking.

To take your example to the extreme would mean that anyone who must spend money to vote (making it poll tax illegal) only opens the door to the opposite extreme - that anyone can vote without benefit of proof of eligibility simply because there happens to be a cost associated with it. That I oppose.

@ Joe 7.38 Agreed, thanks, and same to ya

Romneycare in Massachusetts. He was the republician governor. Wait, he had a committee that came up with the health care law. Your are right, can't come up with one republician idea.

Come on. Are you seriously that dense?

If you don't think racism isn't alive and well in the United States, especially Texas, you've been living under a rock. You know that they won't ask everyone for their IDs when they vote... they will certainly be profiling, and turning away or hassling the minorities, even if they have viable ID.

It's not a matter of obtaining the IDs, it's a matter of having to convince a racist, xenophobic bigot that you're actually a citizen just to carry out a basic right.

It's also the beginning of a slippery slope. Next thing you know we'll be making the minorities wear badges on their foreheads just to prove to everyone that they're citizens. Doesn't this remind you of anything? Hint: Think back to pre-WWII Germany.

I didn't understand what race has to do with it either, Sheryl, yet for some reason it does.

As many as 10% of currently eligible voters don't have any kind of 'valid' ID to present, and that most of that 10% are in fact poor and minority voters. Add to that the fact that there have been only a dozen or so documented instances of actual voter fraud in the past 10 years, this seems to me be a solution in search of a problem, unless the problem it is actually trying to solve is "How do we keep the poor and minority voters from voting."

Why don't these folks have ID? In a lot of cases it's because they don't own cars, and don't drive, so no driver's license, they can't afford to travel abroad, so no passport. Personally, I can't understand how someone in this day and age can get by without some sort of legal ID, but apparently there is a very large minority of individual who apparently do.

Perhaps it's time to bring back the idea of a national ID card?

Tell that to my 90 year old mother-in-law. Her driver license expired. She cant get a new one. She cant get to the DMV. So she is now disenfranchised. Last election she just showed her electric bill with her name and address. That was all she needed. Not this time.

HUN?????????????? She can get to the voting booth but she cant get to the dmv. Get off your butt and take her geese are you that sorry that you cant take her.

PrecededByNone -

They won't ask everyone for their ID, that they will profile/hassle/turn away minorities, that EVERYONE in Texas is a RACIST! Not only a RACIST but a xenophobic bigot! YOU KNOW THIS FOR A FACT DO YOU? Come on are YOU seriously that DENSE? Or are you just as bigoted? If racism is alive and well in the US, that means your state too. Or are you saying it is worse in Texas? Be careful your arrogance is showing.

Then you have the balls to say the next step is badges on their foreheads similar (?) to the jews in Nazi Germany? This a such a typical move - if you can't win, plaster them with a label SO @!$%#ING EXTREME that they won't fight back. You who are oh so educated, sophisticated and worldly!

Only a crooked court would think that an photo ID was easy for everyone to get It is the crooks thats taking away voters right by making it difficult to vote. Besides this article isn't about photo id's it about the district maps that was drawn up to benefit the republican party to keep the democrats from being voted in.

Shocking indeed. Especially after they kept showing that black Romney supporter and running that commercial showing a black supporter. Maybe he lives in a republican district.

There is none or none to zilch i should say. Republicans are trying every under handed trick in the book to put one of theirs in the White House,,put noting past them, they would sell their own mothers by the pound to get votes.

karenann/bobr50 -

Can any of you provide any evidence, surveillance, incident, etc. that voter ID laws stopped anyone from voting? Don't drag up @!$%# from the Old South. Anything recent? Anyone saying 'Yeah I would have voted but I didn't have my ID" instead of "Yeah I would have voted but didn't want to get off my dead ass to go to the polls". If you really want to kill the argument of no problem, no need for the law, then show that the law actually prevented someone from voting.

The constitution doesn't give you the RIGHT to beer or cigarettes (note spelling?). ALL citizens of legal age have the right to vote unimpeded (my word). Got it?

The right to vote is not the same as the right to buy a pack of butts,,cigarettes and booze are not mentioned in the Constitution,,the right to vote is !

Alright, then how about this, I must show an ID to purchase and own a firearm, WHICH if I'm not mistaken IS a constitutional right. Oh damn did I just trun the tables back on the left leaning jackwagons?

No, you didn't. Voting never killed anyone. (But apparently, in an interesting "turning of the tables", according to your constituency, dead people are somehow out there casting votes!)

Most felons cannot vote. Or buy guns. Seems fair to me. But perhaps you're suggesting that any old person right off the street could march up and buy a gun? That would be a different argument.

HowStupidAreYou @12.3: "Alright, then how about this, I must show an ID to purchase and own a firearm, WHICH if I'm not mistaken IS a constitutional right. Oh damn did I just trun the tables back on the left leaning jackwagons?"

No, you didn't, and you're not nearly as clever as your delusion would have you believe.

Guess what, jackoff: I don't have to have an ID to buy a firearm from a private seller. Some buyers will ask for one, but it's ONLY to document who they sold it to in case it shows up at a crime scene and NOT due to any legal requirement.

Anti-gun people refer to it as the "gun show loophole." I am not expressing an opinion 'for' or 'against' it, merely pointing out facts that you are either too lazy or too ignorant to understand.

Next time, learn what you're talking about before you open your piehole.

For everyone else: In a free society, I have a right to do as I wish as long as it doesn't infringe upon others. The government must find a compelling reason to limit my behavior. Not every right must be spelled out.

I have a right to walk through downtown Austin in combat boots, a tutu over biker shorts, nipple clamps, Elton John sunglasses, a spiked collar, and a mohawk, while carrying a poodle painted up to look like an alligator, a neon green briefcase, and a shotgun.....You'll never find that one spelled out anywhere, nor would anyone try to argue I have no right.

I get tired of the "you don't have a right" perspective. If it harms no one else, YES, I damn well DO have a right.

@ how stupid - I'm with you on this one. Preceded and Fred just don't get it and based on their logic, never will. Hey Fred - and I quote " I have the right to do as I wish as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others." If you are not an eligible voter, guess what, you are infringing on MY rights! (and everyone else's, for that matter)

Voting never killed anyone. Really? You seem to have a continual lack of understanding of the point.

Once again, 2 cents, please provide proof of your problems. How many documented cases of voter fraud, particularly the ones that infringed on your right to vote, were there in the 2010 elections?

Preceded and Fred just don't get it and based on their logic, never will.

Actually, we do get it--you're the one who doesn't. You have yet to explain to me why, despite numerous studies and plenty of research that clearly demonstrates that voter fraud is NOT AN ISSUE, you think it's okay to waste time and money on useless legislation.

And please, enlighten me as to how the act of voting has ever killed someone. I'm sure you'll go off on a tangent about how electing so-and-so who supports the death penalty signed off on the deaths of some number of people, but that's because your type is really good at stretching the truth. You knew I was talking about the act of voting, punching the card, pushing the button, checking the box... get real. If that's all you have, we're done here.

If you are not an eligible voter, guess what, you are infringing on MY rights!

I completely agree. The problem, which you don't seem to grasp, is that these "ineligible voters" are nonexistent. Please, tell your party to start working on legislation for REAL issues and stop wasting so much freaking time & tax dollars.

TO How Stupid Are You;; WOW you sure are very very stupid indeed I can buy beer or smokes without any kind of ID I have gray hair that qualifys me but for some reason it doesn't when I go to vote. Voting rights no more under the republicans its been changed from a right to a privlege. They are rewriting the constitution

@ preceded #12.8 and shocked #12.7 I never said voter fraud was or was not an issue. I said any lack of evidence doesn't necessarily prove it doesn't exist. Maybe one of the reasons it "doesn't exist" is because its hard to prove. After all, if no ID is req'd, where would you begin to look, and for whom.

Once again, you entirely miss the point of "voting killing anyone" - those were your words and how you link voting and gun ownership is beyond me in your context. The point is current law (and yes, there are always exceptions) gun ownership and ammo purchase is a serious enough act that it usually necessitates and ID. Sure, it's a right, but does come with certain things you must do in order to exercise that right. All that was trying to be conveyed is that eligible voting should be no different. How you got off on the tangent you did and whatever correlation you were trying to make, I find bewildering.

2 cents waiting for change @12.6: "@ how stupid - I'm with you on this one. Preceded and Fred just don't get it and based on their logic, never will. Hey Fred - and I quote " I have the right to do as I wish as long as it doesn't infringe on the rights of others." If you are not an eligible voter, guess what, you are infringing on MY rights! (and everyone else's, for that matter)"

Actually, I DO get it...it is YOU that is oblivious to reality.

First, this article is about the abomination known as Texas redistricting. It's a joke, and now found unConstitutional by a federal court. That's what happens when efforts are made to disenfranchise an entire taxpaying segment of the population.

Second, Stupid tried to tie the purchase of age-restricted items to some sort of ID requirement. He failed. ID is NOT required to purchase those items, but it's understandable that children would get that impression. ID is only to prove age, not citizenship. Non-citizens buy those products all the time, and I AM NOT REQUIRED BY ANY LAW to present ID to buy them. In fact, I never get asked for ID.

Third, Stupid then decided to throw in the purchase of firearms, and how he needs an ID to do so. He is factually incorrect. My personal carry is a 92FS Baretta. I WAS NOT REQUIRED BY ANY LAW to present ID to buy it. He failed again.

Fourth, despite the article, this discussion has become about voter ID and ID in general. You children keep trying to equate the purchase of products (and you needed to prove your age) with citizenship. My driver's license DOES NOT prove citizenship, it only proves that I passed a driver's test and am legally able to operate a motor vehicle on public streets. Non-citizens get driver's licenses all the time, as do felons. So now YOU FAIL.

Fifth, My Voter Registration card proves that I am elligible to vote, not my driver's license. I can carry my VR card with me to the Randall's where I vote and I DON'T GET ASKED for ID. I can then shop at Randall's and buy alcohol and cigarettes, and pay with a credit card, ALL WITHOUT AN ID.

Your failure is complete.

Wow Fred, Do you feel better now?

First, you didn't address the right infringement thing at all, so here's a simple question for you: Do you feel the right to vote and elect our governance is important enough to require those voting to prove they in fact are eligible to vote?

Second and I quote "Stupid tried to tie the purchase of age restricted items to some sort of ID requirement. ID is not required to purchase those items." Ever heard of having to provide proof of age in order to purchase say alcohol? Your agument is lame.

Third, good for you, you were able to purchase a firearm without the benefit of an ID. Yippee. Given the fact that there just happens to be millions of non citizen illegals in this country, the possibility of them voting for our elected leaders is treacherous. Sorry you don't think so. They already suck off the system in many ways without ever contributing to it. Were I in their shoes and had the opportunity to vote for an administration that has proven they are for continuing that, how would you expect that to go? Am I still missing the reality part of things?

Fourth, I never suggested that a Drivers License is an acceptable form of voter ID. (See Above paragraph)I was using the Drivers license as an analogy to simplify the concept. You must not have got that part of it. I think a voter ID card should be in and of itself much like our state requires a FOID Card, or a Fishing license card - Something specific that identifies that and only that I am an eligible voter. How you arrive at that is another subject. You automatically assumed that the various ID's we carry are what would be req'd. I am well aware you can obtain various ID's fraudulently, DUH - that's why I am advocating something seperate and specific.

For something as important as our vote and it's longer range implications, why are you so lax in who can participate? You can whine and cry foul all day long about your cause and effect, but it still doesn't overshadow the fact that as much as voting is a right, it's a right of ELIGIBLE citizens of this country. If you can't prove you are eligible, then you have no right.

If you could please point out some examples of mass voter fraud by illegal immigrants, I'd really appreciate it. I don't seem to be finding any.

I also can't seem to find anything that backs up your claim that illegal immigrants were responsible for voting Obama into office. Last I checked, it was the electoral college who got him there.

It seems to me that, aside from your struggles with the English language, you also fail to grasp the most basic laws of our country. Are YOU an illegal immigrant?!

I sure hope so Tom,i hope everyone sees through the Romney Paul snake oil and smoke and votes for the President who is the only candidate that is working for all the voters and not just the top 2%. Vote Obama/Biden 2012.

Yes, you're sorry.

@ tom:

You meant to write "they're" not "their."

You meant to write "you're" not "your"

You sure have some strong beliefs for a person who is in such clear need of formal education. Maybe you know less than you think about politics and should strive to learn more?

Is that possible?

I used my gas bill (had my name and address) to vote about 20 years ago (my poll place was across the street in the neighbor's garage). It is just easy to show your driver's license because you always have it with you.

Tom VL - there is a distinct reason why the teabaggers are pushing for ID requirements to vote and not IQ requirements.

The reason you can use a CCW permit to vote is the fact that a very extensive background check is done to prove who you are. However to get a college ID you simply have to "register" for class and say "yes I live a this address".

Well stated Robin !

After reading your BS about the Beer buying I cannot really take you serious. You do know that buying beer is not a right, don't you.

"This redneck state is trying to let people vote with a CCW permit but not a College ID. Please tell me why you do not want College kids to vote. There is only one reason, the majority of them lean left."

This statement is ignorant. Educate yourself about the things you reference beofre sticking your foot in your mouth.

Maybe you should make sure you can spell BEFORE writing. Redneck.

Cal. they very well know that there is very little voter fraud,,they are desparate for votes and blocking Obama votes may be their only out.

You know what, I could give a rats ass if you're Republican, Independant or democrat. EVERYONE, (regardless or race, religion, sexual preferrence or whatever other "disenfranchising" crap you want to throw out there, should be required, by federal law, instead of the lack of federal law forcing states to do it themselves), be forced to show a federally recognized form of ID. Now if the Feds decide that a Student photo ID is acceptable, then so be it. Bottom line though, if you aren't going to come up with a solution to ensure those that have the right to vote are the only ones voting, then butt out and and let teh states do it themselves. I'm also NOT saying the is rampent voter fraud, however, i do believe that one instance is more than enough.

Howstupidareyou,

Actually, I would think you would be more outraged at the thousands of disenfranchised voters who will be unable to exercise their constitutional right, than the barely existant number of voter fraud cases! There is something in constitutional law referred to as laws that are over-broad. If laws, such as these, are negatively impacting more people than is necessary for the issue they are meant to respond to (disenfranchising many voters v the barely existant number of voter fraud cases), the law will be struck down! If you want some form of ID, as someone else mentioned, then there should be one form of id that will be provided free to every registered voter throughout the country WAY in advance of an election that every polling place will accept. That's a good use of your tax dollars for a barely-existant problem?

Why do you have to show id is'nt there just two of you that live there.

What about students or the elderly or poor who dont have what they would consider a valid or current ID? If they have to go purchase one, that's a poll tax and it's unconstitutional! That was decided in the last century! There's a whole group of seniors in PA who have voted in every election for the last 50 years who don't have a current ID (no driver's license, etc) who now won't be able to vote because of their new id laws!

GeorgiaJames -

Please don't cut and paste. We've read it before.

Question - What is a very large minority?

Yeah, illegal aliens are all just dying to vote.

Besides we have MUCH more important problems. The commies are about to invade Lubbock.

Not to be a party-pooper, CVP, and not that I haven't chimed in regarding the voter suppression laws, but you do realize that this article is about gerrymandering in Texas and not voter fraud, right?

Do you teabaggers even read??...or do you just jump on here barfing out whatever propaganda you're being told to be paranoid about today?

Gerrymandering....that would be manipulating the boundaries of legislative districts to favor one party over the other...a big hobby of that "upstanding Texas congressman" Tom Delay. Speaking of Tom Delay, the Republican poster child, can he legally marry his new prison "friend" in Texas?

reply to Davis M : You forgot to mention : and allowed to be legally armed and dangerous. When are the disarmed Democrats going to take a stand and say enough is enough. Is it time to let them know our know how and training is still there, even if the repub prosecutors have done their damnest to disarm us?