Ohio bill would require photo ID at the polls (here we go.......)

[babsbunny]

Ohio bill would require photo ID at the polls

http://www.dispatchpolitics.com/live/content/local_news/stories/2011/03/22/22-voter-id-bill.html?adsec=politics&sid=101

Tuesday, March 22, 2011 08:19 AM

Associated Press
COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) - A state House panel is considering a bill that would require Ohio voters to show a photo ID before they can cast a ballot.

[Bluerthanblue]

1. same thing has been proposed here in NH.

:shrug:

It's a concerted effort-

[zbdent]

2. why is it that, if getting something done (which nominally might be considered

a victory for a Dem/Libs) took forever, was fought tooth and nail by Republicans/Cons, was attacked in the media, was considered "rammed down our throats" (by the "liberally-biased media"), since it had Obama's backing ...

and yet, the Republicans have done more damage to this country in their first 100 days of power, and nobody in the "liberally-biased media" calls it what it is ... RAMMING THEIR CRAP DOWN OUR THROATS???

edited to add:

Why is it that the price of gas jumps 30 cents a gallon right after the Republicans win the 2010 mid-terms, after hovering around $2.50 a gallon under Obama, even during the worst of the "oil crisis" of 2010, and nothing is really linked to them ... but they were allowed to take credit for a meager gain in the stock market/Dow after they won the 2010 midterms, and the "liberally-biased media" pretty much says nothing about how that "gain" pales in comparison to the gains that were made from the moment Obama took office? For the Republicans to have a similar effect on the Dow, it would have to be at 19K in 2012 ...

[inademv]

4. I think the gas prices might have

had something to do with the, now failed, proposal to cut oil subsidies. My tinfoil hat theory: The gas sellers jacked up the prices around the time that the bill was being brought forward to goad people into telling their rep to vote it down (not that they would need to since I can't imagine a Republican congress voting to end a penny of oil subsidy).

[Deep13]

3. Gottah keep poor people away from the polls somehow.

Fail to give them the day off? Check!

Disenfranchise felons? Check!

Abolish Acorn? Check!

Purge the registration lists? Check!

Photo ID requirement? Working on it.

Poll taxes? Literacy tests? Warrant checks? Ending secret ballots? Give us some time.

[Scuba]

5. Actually the bill is more explicit than that....

...it has to be a picture of a white male in front of property he owns, preferably a McMansion in a gated community.

[Deep13]

14. You forgot about the Republican campaign yard sign requirement.

Also he needs a certificate from his Christian priest or minister declaring him to be a member in good standing. (Sorry, no Jews or Unitarians.)

[Shiver]

44. Holding a bible, and with all his slaves in the background.

Slaves will preferably be negro, but any skin color is acceptable. Really, they just have to be poor and abused.

[mod mom]

6. OSU Election Law Prof: bill about DISENFRANCHISEMENT

Posted: March 21, 2011

Ohio's New Disenfranchisement Bill
Daniel P. Tokaji
Professor of Law; Associate Director, Election Law @ Moritz
Moritz College of Law
In 2004, Ohio became infamous for making it difficult to vote and have one’s vote counted. Much of the criticism was directed at then-Secretary of State Ken Blackwell. Remember his directive to reject registration forms on less than 80-pound paper weight?

Now, Ohio House Republicans are attempting to go further than Blackwell ever dared. In an obvious attempt to gain an advantage in the 2012 presidential election, they are attempting to rush through a bill (HB 159) that would make it more difficult for eligible citizens to have their votes counted. Ohio already has a tough voter ID law, but the proposed bill would make the burden on eligible citizens more onerous, requiring that in-person voters present one of four specified forms of government-issued photo identification.

“Disenfranchisement” isn’t a word to be used lightly. But it is necessary to capture this bill’s purpose and impact. Passage of this bill would restore our state’s unfortunate reputation as the nation’s capital of vote suppression. Yet so far, it has gone completely under the radar. This comment provides background on the problem, debunks the arguments in favor of the bill, and anticipates the lawsuits that can be expected to follow if it passes.

The Problem

What’s so bad about voter ID? The basic problem is that many eligible citizens don’t have the types of ID that the bill would require. While it’s hard to say exactly how many will be discouraged from voting, we do know that some segments of the population will be especially hard hit – particularly young, elderly, disabled, and minority voters. These groups are much less likely to have the types of ID that Ohio’s new bill would mandate.

-snip

http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/comments/index.php?ID=8199

[Beacool]

7. I don't see the problem.

What's wrong with being asked to present some form of ID when going to vote?

A valid driver's license should suffice. For those who do not drive, most DMVs issue ID cards. Voting is for citizens only, it shouldn't be that hard to prove citizenship.

:shrug:

[mod mom]

8. Did you read the election law commentary saying it disenfranchises voters?

Here is a summary to help you better understand:


1. A Georgia analysis showed that 20% of all people over 60 and 35% over 75 don't have a driver's license;

2. U Wisconsin study in Milwaukee County found that 53% of Af-Am and 57% of Hispanics had no license vs 15% whites. The disparity was worse in the 18-24 age group: 74% Af-Am are without a license as are 66% Hispanic vs. 29% whites.

3. The 2000 census data provides evidence in terms of vehicle ownership in Cleveland and East Cleveland, where 32% of Af-Am households did not have a vehicle. Across the county, ownership of a vehicle is closely related to household income.

All these people will find it exceptionally difficult to vote. This bill is worse than a poll tax, it is an effective bar to hundreds of thousands.

[mod mom]

9. Contact the DoJ

<[e-mail]>

[Beacool]

10. Didn't you also read my comment stating that most DMVs provide IDs

for those who don't drive? When my mother stopped driving in FL I took her to the DMV and she got an ID card. It looks very similar to a driver's license. I frankly don't understand how a US citizen can go through everyday life without an ID being needed at some point in time.

Forgot to add, my 93 year old neighbor who never drove a day in her life, also has an ID. We live in NJ.

[mod mom]

11. Yes for a fee- That is called a poll tax.

[Beacool]

13. How do these people cash a check without an ID?

Please, it's not that big of a deal to obtain an ID and the cost is low.

[RC]

18. Maybe you need to get out in the real world for a while.

To cash a pay check, you need a job. With unemployment rates up to 50% in some places, it is kinda hard to be spending money for a photo ID. And that is that is the idea.

[Beacool]

21. OK, maybe I live a sheltered life.

But I've had some form of ID my entire life. As a child I've had a birth certificate and a passport. As an adult I've also had a driver's license since I was 19. I don't get how someone born in this country doesn't have some form of ID that proves who they are, with one caveat, I can understand someone who is homeless or has lost everything in a fire or natural disaster not having an ID.

[Snoutport]

23. me too...but, it does make sense...you can't vote unless you pay for a license

can't afford a license? then you can't vote.

I've never understood this issue...everyone should have an ID makes sense to me. But reading this post has opened my eyes a little bit. Everyone should have an ID but if you can't afford one or just lost it, or were robbed and it was stolen... these people should still have the right to vote.

[Beacool]

28. I guess..............

Maybe it's because I've lived in countries where an ID is mandatory. I just don't get how someone cannot produce an ID under normal circumstances (barring incidents such as theft, loss, fire, etc.).

[csziggy]

36. But the US Constitution does not require an ID

So how do these strict "Constitutionalists" justify requiring a picture ID to vote?

In fact my 9th grade Civics teachers taught us that one of the major advantages of the US over the Soviet Union was that US citizens did not have to carry ID just to walk around or to vote.

How things have changed since we "won" the Cold War!

Let's put this in practical terms - an a older person maybe living in an assisted living facility does not have a driver's license. In order to get a state picture ID they have to arrange for transportation to the local state office and pay a fee to get a picture ID.

Or a working person who takes a bus to work because they cannot afford a car so they have no renewed their driver's license must take time off from their hourly paid job to get to the state office to obtain an ID.

Forget about homeless people - without proof of place of residence, they cannot get either a driver's license or an ID card, so they are disenfranchised already. And students, whose living quarters are a dorm room more than six months a year, are being disenfranchised. Any other citizen who lives in a location more than six months a year is allowed to register to vote, why are students a special category?

Many of these battles are ones I thought had been won decades ago but the GOP is wasting time and money bringing them back for another round.

[uppityperson]

30. How about check at grocery store? Not a pay check, but just writing a check?

at least that's how I took the check comment.

[Duer 157099]

45. Checking account? You assume everybody has one?

First of all, there are plenty of people who exist in a strictly cash economy. Checking accounts cost money. For poor people, every cent counts.

[uppityperson]

52. Why do you assume I assume anything? For those who have checking account, and money in it, and

happen to be trying to write a check to pay for something, and have a pen with which to write, and are able to write, and know how to sign their name, and aren't in a coma or otherwise physically incapable of writing, and the pen works, and they have their checkbook with them, in that case they might be asked for ID.

And you are wrong, that checking accounts always cost money. I have one at my credit union that doesn't beyond the checks I bought back when I was rich enough to afford them. My CU gave me a starter book of checks for free though, and told me they would make some more if I needed them. Hence, no fees, no charges, no cost.

[Duer 157099]

60. Since one needs ID to open a bank account, it's a moot point

There are people who do not use banks, for anything. They may be unemployed and/or homeless, there are hundreds of thousands of them.

[uppityperson]

61. My 6 yr old opened an account at our credit union. Didn't have photo ID.

So sorry, I forgot to put age in my qualifiers AND also forgot, shame on me, that the person needed to be at a store that accepted checks AND was open.

[Duer 157099]

62. C'mon, really? First off, we're talking about a checking account

Your child has a checking account? I'd be very surprised if someone, anyone, any age, could open a checking account without photo ID. But maybe I'm wrong.

[uppityperson]

63. He did. I was co-signer/co-owner but he had the capability of writing checks

if I'd give him the book. Now that he is an adult, I can remove myself and voila, he is the only one on the account and never had to show any ID.

[olegramps]

75. You know this sounds like bull. A kid with a checking account that he can't use.

[uppityperson]

78. He could and did, was quite amusing. Yes, I had to be there with my ID, but he could and did

write some checks to the amusement of all of us. Small town, local credit union, a couple checks to teach him how and what it was all about.

My point was that he was able to get a checking account without showing ANY ID beyond the parent vouching for him. That is all.

[Beacool]

48. Yep, that's what I meant.

I wasn't talking about paychecks.

;-)

[11 Bravo]

59. Well, princess, here's how it works in some parts of the District of Columbia.

There are scores of check-cashing establishments who will, for any where from 10%-20% of the value of the check, cash a payroll check. No ID required. Sound fair to you?

[Beacool]

66. What's with the "princess"?

My faithful subjects call me "Queen Bea".

:D


Nope, it's not fair. More the reason to have a bank account and ID. It's far cheaper in the long run.

[olegramps]

74. Are you serious?

This clearly designed to deny those who are in the lower economic range of citizens the right to vote by putting requirements on them that can not be easily met. You say it is no big deal for people to get a ID card. Well, you have very little compassion for older citizens who would have to take public transportation, which isn't even available in many cases, to get your easily obtained ID. Perhaps you would be available to provide transportation for these folks. God, I am getting sick of the dimwits.

[Beacool]

77. Oh please, so much drama.

Are you telling me that most seniors you know have no form of ID? Because that is not the case with the ones I know.

I have loads of compassion, but asking for ID is not an uncommon occurrence.

[badtoworse]

35. I'm all for anything that would help reduce voter fraud

The answer to your issues is to make it easier to get an ID Card rather than leave the system vulnerable to fraud. I worry about fraud with electronic voting, but I also worry that people can vote multiple times and that ineligible people are voting.

[csziggy]

38. Name some actual voter fraud cases that have been proved in court

Just a few, please. I see the GOP talking points trotting this out every time we protest restrictive procedures for limiting voters, but I have yet to see a real voter fraud case proven in court. Plenty of allegations, no convictions. So if you know of any convictions, please, PLEASE post a link to the case. I want to see how they got away with it.

[badtoworse]

58. Diebold was never convicted.

But it's taken for granted here that they rigged the voting machines. We need the process to be sqeaky clean so there is not even the appearance of wrongdoing. The fact that it is not prosecuted means nothing. The claims are usually brought by the losing side and it is not in the winner's interest to pursue it. Isn't that what happened with Diebold?

[csziggy]

64. True but there haves not been laws proposed to increase Diebold's accountability

Or to make voting machines auditible. Instead after every election, whether or not any cases of "voter fraud" have even been brought forward, there are new laws introduced to "prevent voter fraud" - but which in fact function to suppress voter turnout. Those laws in the last fifty years have nearly always been introduced by one party and the suppression of voter turnout would almost certainly favor that party's chances of getting into office.

That is why there is automatic suspicion among liberals about any law increasing the burden on the voter. If we want to increase the reliability of our elections, we need to increase the ability to audit the machines and the process to make sure that the votes are properly counted. Liberals and Democrats do NOT need to stick to GOP talking points about "voter fraud" - we should keep repeating that the voting machines need to be at least as verifiable as ATM machines!

So few cases of true voter fraud that have been found and prosecuted over the last forty years, it seems completely absurd for the Republicans to concentrate on this end of the election process. I can only think that it is a distraction from the real problem, voting machines that are completely unreliable for verifiable elections. And when I look at who the owners of the businesses that are selling those machines support I know why the Republicans are doing this. They are doing the bidding of their campaign contributors.

[rexcat]

55. Voter fraud is NOT AN ISSUE IN OHIO!

It might be in NJ where you reside but not in Ohio.

The current law is more than adequate and the number of cases over the years in Ohio have been extremely rare. I really can't remember when the last case was in Ohio but there have been several people caught over many years. Not enough to warrant a change in the law. Currently to vote in Ohio you can present a government issued photo ID or a utility bill (name and current address) or a letter from a federal or state governmental agency (name and current address). The voter has to sign the voter book. There is a scanned signature next to the box where you sign. If you don't have any ID or other acceptable correspondence you can vote with a provisional ballot. You can enter your last four digits of your SS# or your drivers license number. If there is a match the ballot is counted. If you don't supply one of these two numbers you have 10 days to present yourself to the Board of Elections in the county of residence and present proper ID and the ballot will be counted.

I have been a polling judge in Ohio since 2004 and have never seen anyone try to vote more than once. If the person voted with an absentee ballot there is a notation on the signature book stating so. A list of late absentee voters is also given to each precinct at the start of the election day. We typically work the same polling station and over the years get to know the voters in our precinct. That also helps.

The biggest concern in Ohio is election fraud. The republicans have tried it. In fact there are several republicans in the Cleveland, OH doing Federal time for election fraud. They were employees with the Board of Elections in Cuyahoga county.

This has to do with the suppression of voting, not voter fraud!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! The republicans want to limit the type of ID that can be used to vote. It would make it harder for the poor and students to vote because these groups typically vote Democratic Party.

:bounce:

[badtoworse]

57. Standards should be uniform across the country.

We need to elevate the election process so that there is even the appearance of impropriety

[mod mom]

72. THE MYTH OF VOTER FRAUD-PLS read the following:

EDITORIAL
The Myth of Voter Fraud


Published: May 13, 2008

-snip

There is no evidence that voting by noncitizens is a significant problem. Illegal immigrants do their best to remain in the shadows, to avoid attracting government attention and risking deportation. It is hard to imagine that many would walk into a polling place, in the presence of challengers and police, and try to cast a ballot.

There is, however, ample evidence that a requirement of proof of citizenship will keep many eligible voters from voting. Many people do not have birth certificates or other acceptable proof of citizenship, and for some people, that proof is not available. One Missouri voter, Lillie Lewis, said at a news conference last week that officials in Mississippi, where she was born, told her they had no record of her birth.

Proof of citizenship is just one of an array of new barriers to voting that have been springing up across the country. Indiana adopted a tough new photo ID voting requirement, over objections from Democrats that it would prevent eligible voters from casting a ballot. The critics were right. In last week’s Indiana primary, a group of about 12 nuns in their 80s and 90s were prevented from voting because they lacked acceptable ID.

-snip
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/13/opinion/13tue1.html

The Myth Of Voter Fraud


By Michael Waldman and Justin Levitt
Thursday, March 29, 2007
-snip

Allegations of voter fraud -- someone sneaking into the polls to cast an illicit vote -- have been pushed in recent years by partisans seeking to justify proof-of-citizenship and other restrictive ID requirements as a condition of voting. Scare stories abound on the Internet and on editorial pages, and they quickly become accepted wisdom.

But the notion of widespread voter fraud, as these prosecutors found out, is itself a fraud. Firing a prosecutor for failing to find wide voter fraud is like firing a park ranger for failing to find Sasquatch. Where fraud exists, of course, it should be prosecuted and punished. (And politicians have been stuffing ballot boxes and buying votes since senators wore togas; Lyndon Johnson won a 1948 Senate race after his partisans famously "found" a box of votes well after the election.) Yet evidence of actual fraud by individual voters is painfully skimpy.

-snip
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/28/AR2007032801969.html

THE MYTH OF VOTER FRAUD
Lorraine C. Minnite

In The Myth of Voter Fraud, Lorraine C. Minnite presents the results of her meticulous search for evidence of voter fraud. She concludes that while voting irregularities produced by the fragmented and complex nature of the electoral process in the United States are common, incidents of deliberate voter fraud are actually quite rare. Based on painstaking research aggregating and sifting through data from a variety of sources, including public records requests to all fifty state governments and the U.S. Justice Department, Minnite contends that voter fraud is in reality a politically constructed myth intended to further complicate the voting process and reduce voter turnout. She refutes several high-profile charges of alleged voter fraud, such as the assertion that eight of the 9/11 hijackers were registered to vote, and makes the question of voter fraud more precise by distinguishing fraud from the manifold ways in which electoral democracy can be distorted. Effectively disentangling misunderstandings and deliberate distortions from reality, The Myth of Voter Fraud provides rigorous empirical evidence for those fighting to make the electoral process more efficient, more equitable, and more democratic.

-snip
http://www.cornellpress.cornell.edu/cup_detail.taf?ti_id=5637



Posted: May 22, 2007
The Politics of Justice
Daniel P. Tokaji
Professor of Law; Associate Director, Election Law @ Moritz
Moritz College of Law

-snip
DOJ's actions are particularly difficult to defend, given the mounting evidence that claims of voting fraud have been greatly exaggerated by some on the right. As Professor Lori Minnite writes in a recent report entitled The Politics of Voting Fraud: "The claim that voter fraud threatens the integrity of American elections is itself a fraud." Professor Minnite's argument finds further support in the meager results of the DOJ's aggressive anti-fraud campaign, and the report of Tova Wang and Job Serebrov -- originally prepared for, but not released by, the EAC -- finding "widespread but not unanimous agreement that there is little polling place fraud."

The fact that air is quickly escaping from the voter-fraud balloon is confirmed by the abrupt disappearance of the American Center for Voting Rights. Formerly led by Mark P. "Thor" Hearne, who had served as National Elections Counsel to Bush-Cheney 2004, ACVR issued a lengthy and misleading report in 2005. As described here, this report sought to create the impression that fraud was rampant, especially in communities of color, based mostly on unconfirmed and specious media reports. But as Rick Hasen has recently observed, ACVR has now vanished as quickly as it appeared after the 2004 election.

There is also increasing evidence that the means most commonly suggested to target alleged voter fraud -- restrictive identification requirements -- are likely to have a disparate impact on certain classes of likely Democratic voters, especially racial minorities. That evidence includes this report from M.V. Hood and Charles Bullock, finding that African Americans, Latinos, and the elderly are less likely to have DMV-issued photo ID in Georgia. It also includes this one from the Brennan Center, finding that minorities, elderly people, and the poor are disproportionately represented among the more than 21 million U.S. citizens who lack government-issued ID.

-snip
http://moritzlaw.osu.edu/electionlaw/comments/index.php?ID=151

THE PROBLEM IS ELECTION FRAUD-NOT BY THE VOTER:

Princeton University Exposes Diebold Flaws

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aZws98jw67g


More linked here:

http://journals.democraticunderground.com/mod%20mom/1

[Obamanaut]

42. My MIL lives in a nursing home, is 95, has not driven in 25 years, has no

license - but has a photo id card issued by the state many years ago.

Not driving does not keep one from having an ID that meets the requirement.

Mail-in ballots are available to people without vehicles. Prior to the last election, applications for such were sent to registered voters well in advance of the election.

All these difficulties are not really difficult at all.

[olegramps]

76. In Colorado to get a mail-in ballot you have to have proof such as a drivers licence.

[Bill McBlueState]

15. you're asking the wrong question

It shouldn't be, "What's the harm in amending the law to require a photo ID?"

It should be, "What's the justification for amending the law?"

If you're going to burden the voter with a narrower ID requirement, you need to have an actual reason, not just "What's the harm?"

[Deep13]

17. A solution in need of a problem. nt

[Beacool]

19. I would assume that it's to prove that the person voting is who he or she claims to be.

Other countries require ID before voting. It makes sense to me.

:shrug:

[Snoutport]

24. But mail in only go by signature matching...same as the polls now. why should in person voters have

a higher standard to be able to vote?

[Beacool]

26. Hmmm, that's a good point.

;(

[Snoutport]

27. yeah...i was real wishy washy on this until this thread...now i get it

[uppityperson]

31. I've a voter id card somewhere, used to get those in the mail and use for voting

With mail in ballots, they check signatures before opening envelope and putting ballot in second envelope into the box to tally later. If the sig is different, they hold the whole thing and check with you (happened to a friend whose sig changed). With walk in voting, we signed a check in list, then they could check sigs later but my vote was already counted.

[Beacool]

33. In my town (Hoboken, NJ) they compare signatures.

If you voted before they already have your signature on file. But, in 2008 for the GE people were asked to produce a photo ID. That was the first time I had been asked to do so. If someone forgot it, they had to go home and get it.

[uppityperson]

53. Seems they would have to then provide those ID's for free, like the voter reg cards

like I have lost somewhere at home. If you are going to require an id, whether card, sig or photo, then you have to make sure you can provide the people with one for free, as part of the voting process.

[Beacool]

67. Well, they didn't.

I know someone who didn't take her purse when she went to vote in 2008 and had to go back home to get her driver's license. They wouldn't let her vote without a picture ID. I'm not sure why they started doing it for the GE (they didn't ask for ID when I voted on Super Tuesday).

[uppityperson]

68. Change "would have to" to "should have to". That is wrong.

[Deep13]

16. Resident aliens have driver's licenses and state IDs too.

Presently, one may use a utility bill or some other non-photo ID. This is intended to throw up one more hurtle and the working poor with the least flexible schedules and budgets will be hit disproportionally. Suppose the DL does not match the current address. That happens all the time. The poor relocate far more often than more affluent people. It is also targeting students who live at school.

[Beacool]

20. Is it an address issue or an identification issue?

I assumed that they were trying to prove ID more than residency.

[Deep13]

25. Well no, they're trying to keep poor people away. ...

...Election fraud is just the pretense.

[Snoutport]

22. they don't require it of mail in votes. You can't have double standards

it is well known that older retired people vote heavily by absentee ballot and they tend to swing republican by a good majority. these voters will have no requirements on showing ID.

by requiring ID of people who vote in person it sets a standard that the group more inclined to vote in person has stricter voting rules than those who mail theirs in.

Is it right to demand that only one section of society show an ID while others do not?

[uppityperson]

39. Mail in votes sigs are checked before putting into counting box

At least in WA, we write on the ballot, put it in an envelope and seal it. Then put that envelope into an outer envelope, sign the outer one and seal it. The sig is checked with the one on file when registered and if the same, they put the inner envelope into a box. If different, they put it aside and check with you to see if you can sign the same way.

Hence there is a sig check system before the vote gets counted. When we used to walk in vote, there was a sig list at the check in table, then you voted. Your sig could be checked with the list later, but your vote was already counted.

[Obamanaut]

43. The only problem I can see is that this is just another 'outrage generator', and as

you said, state issued ID cards, with photo, are available in most places.

I voted at the Supervisor of Elections office last November, and every person who came to the counter was asked for a photo ID. No one seemed to be upset by this.

[Beacool]

49. It seemed a simple request to me.

But, I guess it isn't after all.

:(

[Modern_Matthew]

12. I will gladly show my photo ID if they switch to paper ballots. nt

[geardaddy]

29. They're trying to do that here in MN, too.

I signed a petition against it.

[myrna minx]

32. Have you seen the "Who is John Galt?" billboard on Hennepin?

:eyes: It's southbound on Hennepin where Hollywood Video use to be. It's the same "GreMar" company that did the tax billboard next to Lyles. I can't believe it hasn't been marked up yet.

[geardaddy]

37. Yeah, I just posted something about that in the MN forum.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=160x41556

I just noticed it this morning. How long's it been there?

I can't wait for somebody to mark that shit up!

[myrna minx]

40. I didn't see your thread - thanks for the link. I think it's been a week.

I can't believe it's lasted this long - our taggers are off their game. Perhaps GreMar can become the next Cotty Lowry. :rofl:

[geardaddy]

41. His current sign only has one tooth blacked out.

It's kind of disappointing compared to this one.

[myrna minx]

46. LOL - classic.

It hasn't been the same since Cotty's boards can be "sponged" clean. I have some photos of myself posting in front of some of the wilder ones from the '90's - sometimes it was really elaborate. :rofl:

My friend use to work at a photo processing place and police officers would often bring in their surveillance photos of tagging etc and she asked them about Cotty and they just chuckled and said they didn't bother watching that one, because "everyone" messed with that one. :rofl:

[Thunderstruck]

34. Texas is doing it too.

[Johonny]

47. Jim meet Crow

[WCGreen]

50. The idea that you are innocent until proven guilty is the right being abridged

in these cases...

Having to prove that you are not guilty by proving that you are indeed the person on the poll sheets turns the whole idea of justice on it's head.

This is particularly onerous because the onus is put on the citizen rather than on the government where it belongs.

[Obamanaut]

54. If stopped, one has to provide a valid license to prove one has the

privilege of driving on public roads. It isn't a case of "You are behind the wheel, so you must be licensed."

Why not proof that one presenting oneself to vote is the person on the voting role?

And it's the presumption of innocence when accused in the legal system. One is NOT innocent until proven otherwise. If you rob a store, you are in fact guilty - and your attorney probably knows it - but the legal system must prove it. But you are guilty.

[WCGreen]

69. Driving is a privilege and not a right...

[Obamanaut]

70. Yes, it is. I mentioned that in my post. Showing that you are the person

who appears on the voting roster ensures that your right to vote is not being usurped by someone else - an imposter.

[Southerner]

51. Here in Georgia...

...before the voter ID law was put in place, it seemed like the TV news always had voter fraud stories going for days and they seemed to be focused on heavily democratic precincts. Whether this fraud happened or not, it was very bad press. Now I almost never hear about fraud after elections in our state. To be honest, I don't think we DU'ers should spend another minute on this topic.

[rexcat]

56. We in Ohio don't have an issue with voter fraud...

The most recent issues had to do with election fraud in Cuyahoga County (Cleveland) and they were republicans (Board of Election members) who were convicted and are doing hard time in a Federal prison. There has been some rumors floating for years concerning another county (Claremont County) in Ohio with election fraud (republican dominated county) but nothing has been done to date.

Our laws regarding ID in Ohio are more than adequate without making it harder to vote. This is about the republicans wanting to suppress the vote. When the turnout is low the republicans in Ohio do better but when the turnout is good the Democrats do better.

[csziggy]

65. Of course there is no longer press about it - the Republicans won

I can remember when Georgia was more balanced in the number of Democratic and Republican politicians elected into office. Now, it is far weighted to Republicans and those elected are far to the right. And that may be correlated to when the Republicans won the public fight over claiming "voter fraud" and managed to get support for laws that act to suppress voting.

This is a fight that should have been put away forever when the last of the Jim Crow laws were repealed in the South. Just because it is now aimed at certain classes of people rather than certain colors does not make it any better.

I think we need to spend a LOT more minutes on this topic.

[nemo137]

71. You never hear about fraud because the people pushing those stories got what they wanted.

They wanted fewer people to vote, so they stirred up stories - like you say, real or not - and went "see, we need to impose these laws." And so now you don't hear about fraud because they kept their undesirables from voting.

So, yeah, you'll excuse me if I spend some time on this topic.

[bigwillq]

73. We do that already in Connecticut (nt)