Illegal aliens caught voting

Just stop already. You have the MOST ridiculous statements I've ever read ANYWHERE!

 

And I say to that

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=5hfYJsQAhl0

 

Hogwash. They have no problem dragging their carcass down to DMV to get a license (and pay for it), they have no problem going anywhere they want or need to (grocery store, mall, etc).

ID requirements should be just like driver's licenses...birth certificate. That simple. Don't have one? There are avenues to get one. If given enough lead time before enacting the laws for an election, no one has an excuse for not being able to meet the requirement.

I am sick and tired of hearing all the (*)(*)(*)(*) that the "poor" or "minorities" can't do. We all get it shoved down our throats all the time...and are more than well aware of what they aren't doing.

 

It was proven that hundreds of illegal votes happened in Orange County, CA years ago in the Dornan vs. Sanchez Congressional race.

http://www.nytimes.com/1997/02/16/u...-illegal-ballots-cast-in-upset-of-dornan.html

While the inquiry has so far uncovered dozens of potentially illegal ballots, it is unclear whether there are enough to make up for the 984-vote loss by Mr. Dornan, a Republican, to Loretta Sanchez, a Democrat.

Much of the attention is being focused on voters registered by Hermandad Mexicana Nacional, a local Hispanic rights group. A survey by The Los Angeles Times showed that the organization helped register 172 noncitizens who later voted in the Dornan-Sanchez contest.

''No one can seriously argue any more that there wasn't voter fraud in this election,'' said Michael Schroeder, Mr. Dornan's lawyer and vice president of the state Republican committee. ''It was pervasive.''

http://www.humanevents.com/2007/12/04/the-stunning-reality-of-voter-fraud/


In another case concerning a U.S. House seat in which voter fraud may have influenced the result, California Republican Congressman Bob Dornan was defeated by Democrat Loretta Sanchez in an upset, by the narrow margin of 984 votes in 1996. Dornan charged that Sanchez’s margin came from non-citizens, and an investigation by the House of Representatives found that 547 non-citizens had voted in the election, but not enough to void the election. Some believe that far more non-citizens who were not detected actually voted. John Fund, in his book Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy, says that an INS investigation in 1996 into alleged Motor Voter fraud in California’s 46th District revealed that “4,023 illegal voters possibly cast ballots in the disputed election between Republican Robert Dornan and Democrat Loretta Sanchez.”



Voter I.D. needs to happen. The Democrats already know how to steal elections with illegal votes.

 

Pathetic stereotypes noted.

You don't think Texas' proposed Voter ID law, which required people to pay $22 for an ID and, in some cases, travel up to to 200 miles to reach the closest office where they could get one, would deter some people from voting?

Hint: $22, or the need to travel *400 miles* roundtrip, is actually a significant burden to some people.

Plus, here's some research:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/study-voter-id-law-would-exclude-up-to-700000-young-minorities/


Using calculations based on turnout figures for the past two presidential elections, researchers at the University of Chicago and Washington University in St. Louis concluded that overall turnout this year by young people of color ages 18-29 could fall by somewhere between 538,000 to 696,000 in states with photo ID laws....

An analysis by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University's law school found that 11 percent of Americans lack a government-issued photo ID such as a passport, driver's license, state ID card or military ID. Nine percent of whites don't have such ID, compared with 25 percent of blacks and 16 percent of Hispanics, the Brennan study said.

"This is not about having ID. This is about having a specific type of ID. You can't show up with your Sam's Club card and vote," said National Urban League President Marc Morial....

Young minority voters, Cohen and Rogowski said, tend to be poorer and more transient, which means they are less likely to have a current address on their driver's licenses or other ID. Their licenses may be suspended or revoked due to unpaid fines, or they may not have access to the documents they need in order to get valid identification. Even if young voters are able to pull the necessary documentation together, the extra steps they must take to get an acceptable ID might prove discouraging, Cohen said.

"They have to find the appropriate office, bring the needed paperwork and pay the required fee, all to get an ID many don't know they need," she said. "It turns out that significant numbers of young people don't even know about these new photo ID requirements."


Disenfranchisement is real. And unsurprisingly, it disproportionately affects the young, poor and elderly.

 

More lame excuses.

Birth certificate.

Don't have one, then pursue the avenues to get one.

If you're working three low-wage jobs and don't have time to stand in line to get an ID, how in the hell are you going to have time to stand in line to vote? How did you find the time to stand in line to get a driver's license?

No reliable transportation...that might present an obstacle, not a particularly difficult one, but certainly not one that makes the task impossible, by any means.

Oh dear, some effort may be required, how pitiful.

Yes, every thing has a cost...but there are some things worth spending the money on...

 

You notice that throughout this thread I've provided links to stats and studies, and also supported my argument with logic and examples?

Whereas the conservative response has been almost exclusively "I don't believe it". Or attempted strawman diversions.

That's when you know that *they* know they're wrong.

Come up with a Voter ID law that works very hard to ensure that it doesn't unintentionally disenfranchise legitimate voters, and I'll support it.

But what we have now is blatant GOP efforts to use a nearly non-existent problem to justify broad voter suppression.

 

voter id wont cure these, this should be caught during voter registration

another voter fraud is rich people that own two houses voting in both locations, again voter registration should catch this before one ever gets to the voting booth

not to mention absentee ballots.. people voting for someone else that can't or doesn't vote... making absentee ballots require notarization before being valid would address this

.

 

Not always possible. Plus involves time and money.

By that logic, why not have me stand in *10* lines to get my ID?

Each additional requirement is an additional barrier. Voting doesn't necessarily involve standing in line, or traveling very far (my precinct is at the church up the road. I can walk there if I want, and there's seldom a line). And the polling booths open early in the morning and close late at night, so I can fit it in around my work schedule. But traveling to a DMV office during office hours is a different matter for someone with limited time or transportation.

But certainly enough of an obstacle that a certain percentage of otherwise eligible voters will be discouraged from doing so, and thus be unable to vote. That's my point: how many eligible voters are we willing to disenfranchise in order to prevent a handful of illegal votes?

So let's just bring back poll taxes, then, and who cares if the poor would rather spend the money on food?

 

The fix here would be pretty easy IF we had a real AG instead of a puppet.........

It's a Felony for an illegal to vote and if we had a real AG, he/she would take the ones they can prove, try, convict and put 'em in a Federal Prison for 5 years with deportation when the sentence is served. Then publicize it widely in the news and you'd see a lot of it coming to an end. Right now there is absolutely NO fear of repercussions so they are willing to do it.

 

and if people were honest and followed the law there would be no problem, but since they don't, well, you either let it go or you do something about it.

I'm already unhappy that our government refuses to enforce already existing laws and looks to actually reverse them in general. I'm not exactly exuberant that I have to keep paying more and more out of my pocket to support this horse s h it, so I'm certainly not going worry that someone might have to exert a little effort to get something as simple as an ID card to vote because if done right, it will significantly reduce any current illegal votes now and go a long way to preventing an increase in the future...at very little "cost" and would be well worth the effort and money spent to do it.

 

Those same services can take you to get a photo ID that take you to the doctor or to the grocery store.

How do people get to the voting both?

You and many other Libs make excuse after excuse of why your against getting a photo ID. Republicans has the same old, poor and young as Democrats, but you don't hear them crying like the Dems do. That's because you don't want to lose all those voting illegally. Plain and simple.

 

I bolded the relevant caveat in your statement. As I've said already, if there were a reasonable Voter ID law, I'd support it. The problem is that the current batch of Voter ID laws are thinly-disguised GOP voter-suppression efforts. That's not just me saying that: I've linked to studies showing the effect those laws would have. I've explained why and how.

Give me a law that requires the state to bend over backwards to get proper IDs to eligible voters, and I'll support it.

 

So a hundred people among millions upon millions is worth infringing on the multi-millions identities?

 

If the state were to provide such a service (or take steps to ensure that there were adequate private services, or use my idea, where they come to you in a mobile photo booth), I would have no issue with Voter ID.

That is totally wrong. Demographically speaking, poor, minorities and young voters are disproportionately Democratic. Which is why Republicans are trying to limit their ability to vote.

Elderly is more of a mix; they're more incidental victims than main targets.

 

It has everything to do with the tea in China, because you were the one chiming about "reasonable", and I got the answer I expected from you as a liberal. The difference from my perspective is I am in favor of enforcing all of our laws, not just the ones you liberals think to be unreasonable. It holds true to the same laws that apply to straw purchases of guns, every person I know that supports our gun laws on the books NOW, wants them enforced, not add a bunch more nonsense to the already existing laws. There are thousands of know straw purchases each year done illegally, and only a handful arrests and prosecutions made.

You continue to give a pass on one, and not the other, so any reasonable person cannot take your points seriously because it is only partisan BS that is fed to you, and then regurgitated

 

Ohhhhh, but requiring people to have ID would disenfranchise them from voting.

Sort of like how ID requirements disenfranchised people from buying firearms, using their debit card, and buying a beer.

 

Bronco, the comparison is still invalid.

In voter ID, you have a bunch of innocent people being wronged in order to prevent a single crime.

In Bundy, you didn't have that. You had government trying to enforce a particular law on a particular person. There were no innocent people being affected.

A more valid comparison would be to NSA searches: how much privacy should innocent citizens surrender in order for the NSA to catch a terrorist or two?

Or environmental regulations. How much should the government infringe on personal property rights in order to protect our water and air?

In all three cases, you're weighing the good of stopping a crime against the evil of infringing on the rights of innocent people.

One can reasonably disagree on where to draw the line. But at least understand what the line is.

 

That's your opinion. Mine says that it is incumbent upon the state to make the ID reasonably easy to obtain. To say "as easy as possible" is far too open ended.

Um, yeah...

and this is where you go off the deep end. Requiring someone to present a birth certificate at a government designated office(s) in order to get a voter ID most definitely does NOT "obviously" prevent thousands of eligible voters from voting. Not at all, not by a long shot.

"IF"...it still needs to be shown that it will, in fact, "disenfranchise" anyone.

Only if they have those services available, not all shut-ins get that. Not everyone has services to pick them and take them to the doctor...in fact, I'd say less have those services than do have it.

Some links would be needed here...otherwise it never happened.

Yes, yes, traveling to an office (already being touted as somehow significantly difficult), presenting a birth certificate (apparently that's just THE epitome of difficult), and receiving a card in return is defined as "significantly more involved" than traveling to a precinct (wonder why this isn't difficult like, say traveling to get an ID card somehow is), signing a registration sheet (oh snap! now I have to be able to write too?), operating a voting booth (somehow not as hard as lifting a piece of paper up the counter at the ID office) is somehow much more "involved"...

So does practically everything in life, unless you are a total recluse and have servants.

and #1 still does not present any real burden to a person.

 

25. Section 8 Housing
26. Cash a check
27. Go to an Obama speaking engagement
28. Take an AMTRAK Train
29. WIC program
30. Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program
31. Hospital Emergency Room

They forgot a few. Ray would have us believe a significant number of people don't do any of the above? I believe those folks would be considered deceased.

 

It's a proven fact that the majority of Republicans are older and being older is harder for them to get around. Still you don't hear Republicans complaining that it puts an undo hardship on them to get an ID.

Yes, there is probably more poor and young Democratic voters. Most who are running around with $200.00 cell phones and Michael Jordan shoes. It can cost more for the poor not to have an ID, as you can't rent a home, sign up to have utility bills turned on. As a matter of fact, how does the poor even pay their utility bills? Not by check or credit card. They can get a money order, but that cost money, so does the postage.to mail it. If they pay in person it cost gas or bus fare. Funny they can get to school, welfare office, grocery and drug store, department or goodwill store, but it's next to impossible for them to get an ID. Now you can see why most people don't get off welfare. You treat them like children. Make them feel they can't do anything on their own. You make excuses for their laziness. Well if Republicans can do it, so can Democrats.

 

Other than anecdotal comments, who has been disenfranchised by voter ID laws? A handful of people claim they have been suppressed, but the supreme court has twice struck down the opposition, so in other words, you are making up BS because there is scant evidence at best, otherwise the supreme court would have ruled in your favor.


http://spectator.org/articles/58835/much-ado-about-voting
If it’s hard to find examples of individuals who were disenfranchised by Voter ID, it may be because most people already have the necessary identification. A study by American University’s Center for Democracy and Election Management found that only 1.2 percent of registered voters lack photo identification. Given how ubiquitous showing ID is in everyday life, this shouldn’t be surprising. A photo ID requirement for voting was one of the election reforms proposed by the 2005 Commission on Federal Election Reform headed by James Baker and Jimmy Carter (also not a conservative).

 

Here are some homeless veterans who were disenfranchised in Wisconsin:
https://www.aclu.org/blog/voting-rights/willing-die-their-country-unable-vote-it

I met Sam Bulmer (pictured above) in Milwaukee at VETS Place Central, a shelter which provides transitional housing to homeless veterans. Sam spent 13 of his 63 years in the U.S. Air Force, serving some of that time with the Air Force Training Command. In Iceland, he served as an instructor during preparations for the Iran hostage crisis mission. Sam has no accepted photo ID card for voting in Wisconsin, but he has his VA ID card hanging around his neck. And he can't get a state ID card for free? Actually, no. The Division of Motor Vehicles won't believe Sam is a U.S. citizen until he shows them a certified copy of his birth certificate from Kansas, a document he can't obtain because Kansas wants him to show ID to get it.

Often, that ID must have your current address on it -- a ridiculous impossibility for the homeless, and a pain-in-the-butt for people who move frequently, like college students.

That logic makes no sense. The Supreme Court struck down challenges to voter ID laws, so nobody is disenfranchised by it?

Let's say you're right. In Florida, 1.2 percent of registered voters comes to 144,000 people. We should disenfranchise *144,000 people* in order to keep 100 illegal registrants from voting?

 

because standing one line, presenting a birth certificate and getting a voter ID card is not difficult, is not overly burdensome. 10 lines might be, but the strawman argument is noted.

Life is full of "barriers". Many are necessary in order to maintain an orderly society. The difference here is how each individual wants to place their opinion on what constitutes a barrier or to what degree. To that I will tell you that as long as examples exist of the things these same people are willing to "endure" (to follow with the narrative that it this is somehow insufferable) to get or do the things they "want" to do that are no less than what it would take to do the same to get an ID card, then the premise that it will "disenfranchise" anyone is ridiculous at best.

The fact your precinct is right up the road is irrelevant, because it would also be so for your neighbors and every other precinct station would be so for those locals as well. It's a lucky break for you and the others. I'm sure people who live within walking distance of their doctors feel lucky too, or the local mall, etc.

My local DMV offices are open on Saturday and weekdays, so still not sure how office hours are an excuse...in fact, I randomly chose some states (Flordida, Ohio, Pennsylvania) and in those cases, they too are all open on the weekend. Then again, for purposes of issuing voter ID cards, altering hours of operations for those that may not be open on weekends isn't rocket science.

You assume two things here:

1) Requiring an ID to vote will, in fact discourage anyone from voting. Perhaps the effort to get the ID might make some whine and may indeed cause some to just not bother...but just as you are so willing to let an unknown amount of illegals vote, I'm just as willing to not worry about the unknown number who won't bother to get an ID.

2). The number of illegal voters amounts to a "handful". The number reported in the media has been, to date, seemingly a few here and a few there, but that has been those they have found. I prefer to err on the side of caution and agree that numerically speaking, there are more. I have no idea how many more and I won't be stupid enough to try to exaggerate numbers. The fact it is happening is enough reason in and of itself.

Who says the poor are spending their money on food? As far as I know there are plenty out there eating on my dime. I mean, we've increased food stamp recipients by something on the order of 47 million since obama took office. Based on personal experiences just locally I could say that some would rather spend their money on unnecessary items and use yours and my money to actually eat or pay the basic bills.

- - - Updated - - -

It's illegal for them to just "be here"...why do we have to wait for them to start voting too?

 

No, the state should not have to "bend over backward". You, as a citizen, are also required to put in some effort.

In all things moderation.

Birth certificate is requirement.

Make sure people are aware of how they can get one and assist them in doing that if need be in cases where they don't have one.

Travel to a local government office (and all states have plenty around), present said BC, pay your fee (which shouldn't cost any more than, say the federalista's requirement for a class III firearms stamp) and get your card.

Short of freakin limo service to your door, it isn't going to get any easier or simpler.