It’s difficult to figure out a headline for this story, one that accurately describes just how bolloxed the Republicans have made voting in Texas.
You can’t make this stuff up.
Friday was the last day of early voting for Tuesday’s elections in Texas. Some local offices, and about 2,000 amendments to the Texas Constitution. Okay, a half-dozen amendments to the Constitution. Texas’s Constitution is the greatest patch-work legal document on Earth, perhaps in our galaxy, and we’ve got a bunch of amendments this time, too.
Texas’s Kommissar of State Prosecutions, Greg Abbott, took advantage of federal court decisions and imposed the clumsy Texas Jim Crow/Diego Cuervo voting laws for this election. Although eligibility for voting, including citizenship, is checked when voters register, the new law requires that every voter present a state-issued voter identification card with a photo, again at the polls.
The law was originally targeted by Republican legislators to stop African Americans and Hispanics from voting, with a bonus that it stops senior citizens who may not have valid drivers licenses.
A lot of other people are getting snagged, too. A state judge was required to vote provisionally. State Sen. Wendy Davis, the leading candidate for the Democratic nomination for next year’s gubernatorial race, had to file a conditional ballot — she is within striking distance of Kommissar Abbott in current polls (he’s running for the Republican nomination). About a third of white women in Texas don’t have photo identification that matches their voting registration, due to moving, marriage, divorce, etc.
And Friday, in Fort Worth . . . well, you can’t make this stuff up.
You cannot make this stuff up.
- Texas refused to issue a voter ID card to a non-driving, 91-year-old World War II veteran.
- Winner of the Distinguished Flying Cross.
- Former Member of the Texas House of Representatives.
- Former Mayor of Weatherford, Texas.
- Former Chairman of the League of Texas Municipalities.
- 34 years a Member of the U.S. Congress.
- Former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, and third in line of succession to the U.S. presidency, Jim Wright.
No one questioned who he was. He just can’t vote with the ID he has.
If Jim Wright can’t easily get an ID to vote, who can?
If any other veterans of World War II don’t have personal assistants from their Congressional retirement benefits, who will help them vote?
From the Fort Worth Star-Telegram:
By Terry Evans and Anna M. Tinsley
tevans@star-telegram.com atinsley @star-telegram.com
FORT WORTH — Former House Speaker Jim Wright was denied a voter ID card Saturday at a Texas Department of Public Safety office.
“Nobody was ugly to us, but they insisted that they wouldn’t give me an ID,” Wright said.
The legendary Texas political figure says that he has worked things out with DPS and that he will get a state-issued personal identification card in time for him to vote Tuesday in the state and local elections.
But after the difficulty he had this weekend getting a proper ID card, Wright, 90, expressed concern that such problems could deter others from voting and stifle turnout. After spending much of his life fighting to make it easier to vote, the Democratic Party icon said he is troubled by what he’s seeing happen under the state’s new voter ID law.
“I earnestly hope these unduly stringent requirements on voters won’t dramatically reduce the number of people who vote,” Wright told the Star-Telegram. “I think they will reduce the number to some extent.”
Wright and his assistant, Norma Ritchson, went to the DPS office on Woodway Drive to get a State of Texas Election Identification Certificate. Wright said he realized earlier in the week that the photo identifications he had — a Texas driver’s license that expired in 2010 and a TCU faculty ID — do not satisfy requirements of the voter ID law, enacted in 2011 by the Legislature. DPS officials concurred.
But Wright and Ritchson will return to the office Monday with a certified copy of Wright’s birth certificate, which the DPS employees assured them would be good enough for the Texas personal identification card, designed specifically for people who do not drive.
“It can be used for anything, not just voting,” Ritchson said.
Photo ID alone doesn’t work. Legal identification cards don’t work. It has to be the magic, let’s hope you ain’t got one, kind of ID.
Former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Jim Wright shows the voter identification card issued to him by his home county — not enough to allow him to vote under new Texas voter ID laws. The World War II veteran was denied a photo identification card on Friday. Fort Worth Star-Telegram photo by Terry Evans
Former Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Jim Wright shows the voter identification card issued to him by his home county — not enough to allow him to vote under new Texas voter ID laws. The World War II veteran was denied a photo identification card on Friday. Fort Worth Star-Telegram photo by Terry Evans
More:
- Middle name is often the problem, in Texas — Bud Kennedy in the Fort Worth Star-Telegram
- A guide to the Voter ID law in Texas (miamiherald.com)
- Texas’ Voter ID law gets first statewide test (wfaa.com)
- Texas Attorney General Almost Disenfranchised By His Own Voter ID Law (thinkprogress.org)
- Texas’ Voter ID Law Creates A Problem For Some Women (npr.org)
- Wendy Davis outsmarts voter ID law (msnbc.com)
- State Senator Leticia Van de Putte Also Forced to Sign Affidavit To Vote Under Photo Voter ID Law (burntorangereport.com)
- Greg Abbott Can Still Vote, Thanks to Wendy Davis (burntorangereport.com)
- Texas’ Voter ID law gets first… (fox10tv.com)
Millard Fillmore's Bathtub 
They’re up to no good! Those Republicans are racists!
Republicans are people, so that means some people are racists and up to no good.
This logically proves some people who are headed to the polls, are up to no good, and will do anything to win…and are racists.
The logical conclusion is to make those voters prove they are who they say they are, since we know some of them are up to no good. That’s according to your own argument. I’m right about that, right?
LikeLike
Paging Messrs. Jim Crow and Diego Cuervo: Pick up the white courtesy elephant trunk:
LikeLike
What evidence have you presented? You keep claiming that if we just require voter ID, evidence to support your position that it’s needed will magically appear.
My goodness, Socrates would have fun with you.
Syllogism: 1. Republicans are up to shenanigans — anyone who has any doubts about this, go ask Ed Darrell, he claims he has proof. 2. All Republicans (Ed has trouble with this part) are people. 3. THEREFORE, some people are up to shenanigans. Anyone who says otherwise is mistaken, because again, Ed Darrell has proof.
Proceeding now to the other part of your argument: We M-U-S-T presume there is no vote fraud going on because people are inherently decent, and NO ONE would ever think of doing anything like that. This is the default premise and is to remain standing until someone presents proof. Which no one has and no one can! Since there is no such thing as a person, voting, who’s up to…shenanigans.
Ed Darrell, meet Ed Darrell.
Sorry, you don’t get to play the game of “My side wins because I have grapsed the benefit-of-the-doubt, because I’m quicker” — when your argument contradicts ITSELF.
LikeLike
What evidence have you presented? You keep claiming that if we just require voter ID, evidence to support your position that it’s needed will magically appear.
In contrast, when we look at the evidence, there is no need for the laws, and the evidence from those states where the laws exist show that Voter ID only substitutes for previous Jim Crow laws designed to screw Americans out of their right to vote.
Evidence? Obviously the word doesn’t mean what you think it means, if you think it means anything at all.
LikeLike
Except, the GOP confessed that they don’t want people to vote one time. Their goal is to stop from voting those groups who may vote against them — not only guilty until proven innocent, but guilty on account of age, skin color, gender, or Zipcode.
It’s fascinating watching you denounce all forms of justice in America, Morgan, as if democracy weren’t worth the trouble to keep it going. Fascinating like a train wreck.
LikeLike
How come there’s an opinion/commentary piece following your rant about looking at evidence? I expected, in context, ya know…evidence.
I think we should just stop with this false paradigm of any obsession of yours with “evidence.” The closest you’ve come to delivering, is repeatedly forgetting when I point out to you that security is all about proving the countermeasures, not the threat. That’s not just my opinion, it’s the way security is done. Any security expert will tell you the same thing. If you can find an exception to that anywhere, then find out what that professional is tasked with securing and get the word out to the crooks — that’s where they should be doing their stealing, where the security motto is “We have nothing to worry about, and how dare you suggest otherwise until you can prove someone wants to steal our stuff.” The Ed Darrell way.
Let’s just stop pretending you’re about evidence and proof, and admit the obvious: Everything you have to say has to do with shaming, in one way or another, people who don’t agree with you. Meanwhile, if you don’t like that Texas elections are being run by, ya know, Texans, change the law. Write your Congressman. Then write to Obama to pressure the Supreme Court to reverse their decision. He likes to rely on shaming, too. Maybe He can roast ’em real good during another State of the Union addresss.
LikeLike
Better bring some identification — and not just any identification, official though it may be — if you plan to vote in Republican-controlled states.
Classic case of Fox Butterfield syndrome. You only get to vote one time in Republican-controlled states, those rascals, and when you do vote you have to bring proof that you are who you say you are.
Maybe, just maybe, those states are Republican-controlled because they make sure everyone who wants to vote gets to vote, one time, and that those voters are who they say they are.
No need to go arguing on the Internet. Just establish that the voters are who they say they are. Then we wouldn’t need to argue about it, we’d know. That just makes sense, doesn’t it?
LikeLike
“Voter suppression as the new GOP tool.” Washington Post, commentary.
LikeLike
You keep ignoring the evidence, Morgan. Your refusal to open your eyes doesn’t keep the Sun from rising nor the sky from being blue.
Texas AG Greg Abbott ran a five-year campaign to find voter ID fraud. 20 prosecutions on technical violations of laws, but not a single one that involved any aspect of voter ID or which could have been prevented by voter ID.
Nationally, under the aegis of the Koch Bros. subsidiary ALEC, similar searches for violations turned up not a single case anywhere in the nation where voter ID could have prevented any fraud, nor any fraud involving voter ID.
We took the car for servicing, and the mechanic agreed. Yeah, things are going okay, and we don’t need to spend money for a left-handed cretis fan with automatic hobswitch* so long as the brakes are fine.
If the brakes were bad, we’d replace the brakes, and we still wouldn’t need the cretis fan.
* Substitute “Voter ID” for “left-handed cretis fan with automatic hobswitch,” the car runs as well. If you got that Voter ID from some state’s voting system, the voting system would run better, too.
LikeLike
Maybe Diogenes is dead.
Right Ed, right. If anyone disagrees with you it must mean the wheel may be spinning but the hamster is dead. Wonderful “teacher’s” outlook you have there, it must be so much more suitable for the lazy mind than seeing both sides of something.
Voter registration and poll judges. It’s worked well for more than 200 years, and especially well since ALEC’s and Jim Crow’s and Diego Cuervo’s friends have started talking about Voter ID.
What do you know about “worked well”? You’re the one who insists that, if I can’t prove fraud to your satisfaction, it must not be there — we are to presume everything’s good, and work very hard to prevent any ideas being introduced that would suggest otherwise.
“I haven’t taken my car in for servicing for a hundred thousand miles or more. The brakes, hoses and seals are fine!” So yeah, things are going alright just as you say, and there is nothing to worry about at all — if, and only if, we value ignorance above knowledge. The solution, now that Eric Holder is no longer calling the shots and the authority is regional, is to require ID. Then there’s no need for arguing on the Internet. We’d know.
It seems you’re displaying the ignorance-above-knowledge, everything’s-okay mindset that made the healthcare.gov debacle turn out the way it did. Ten One Thirteen.
LikeLike
Voter registration and poll judges. It’s worked well for more than 200 years, and especially well since ALEC’s and Jim Crow’s and Diego Cuervo’s friends have started talking about Voter ID.
LikeLike
I keep hoping Diogenes can find you in there and use his lamp to help you find the way out.
Maybe Diogenes is dead.
LikeLike
I’ve now explained to you — multiple times — why it doesn’t work the way you think it does. You don’t prove the threat. You prove the solution. Why are you so opposed to providing a provable solution?
LikeLike
I looked through your comment for any hint of any evidence of any problem that can be cured by voter ID. Maybe it was lost in the snark, but I couldn’t find any evidence at all from you justifying voter ID.
Did you forget to attach it?
LikeLike
Good security is immoral? How preposterous.
As far as the history, I’ve now explained to you — multiple times — why it doesn’t work that way. You don’t prove the threat. You prove the solution. Why are you so opposed to providing a provable solution?
In fact, I’m seeing a pattern here. You wish to bring up the controversy of teaching both sides in a classroom. You can’t allow this, because you’ll lose your monopoly…Texas can’t make and enforce its own voting laws like any other state, even though the Supreme Court says it must be allowed to, for if Eric Holder doesn’t have the final say on how things should work in Texas, your side might lose…your side might lose if we don’t take the steps to prove each voter is who s/he is who s/he says s/he is, and votes if they want to, exactly one time, so you can’t allow that. You have to draw false equivalencies to a “poll tax” from generations ago…or, again, you side might lose.
When your argument depends on control SO much and so often, and when it relies on the elevation of ignorance above knowledge SO much and so often — time to re-evaluate. Although I know you won’t.
LikeLike
I’d worry about someone casting a fraudulent vote, pretending to be someone else, if there were a history of that being a problem.
There is not.
Instead we have a history of Jim Crow laws that discourage people from voting at all by putting up hurdles to the ballot box — “literacy” tests, “logic” tests, poll taxes, threats of violence against family, actual violence against family, threats of bureaucratic hassles in daily life, and now, requests for identification forms that many voters simply do not have, and in many counties in Texas cannot get.
What’s the difference between voter ID and a poll tax? What’s the difference between voter ID and a “literacy” test? Only the form — according to sworn testimony from Texas and Pennsylvania and Florida officials, the voter ID laws are intended to discourage black and brown voters, and anyone else who may vote Democratic.
Immoral, Morgan. It’s immoral. Whatever happened to the old drive for moral values from the right wing?
Sold out for a chance to elect Louie Gohmert? Damn, not that it’s just immoral and crooked, but cheap and stupid, too.
LikeLike
Your mistake there is in thinking that voting is somehow protected, when it is expanded, including to people who haven’t proven they are who they say they are.
Have you really not thought this out? Ed Darrell, who really is Ed Darrell, casts one vote and one vote only; someone else casts an opposite vote, while pretending to be someone else. It is a fraudulent vote. Ed Darrell’s vote has just been cancelled out. Ed has lost his vote. It has been stolen from him.
With his blessing.
What’s your “sworn testimony” got to say about that, Mr. flying pig?
LikeLike
More denial of reality. Texas is one of those states for which the sworn testimony indicates the Voter ID laws are intended to slow or stop minority voters, not protect sanctity of the ballot.
But, clearly, reality is not something Morgan favors.
LikeLike
Presented with overwhelming evidence that “carding” is a waste of time, a huge waste of money, and an invitation to other voter fraud, rather than change course to prevent voter fraud, Morgan says “It’s time to start carding.”
Not only does Morgan not support expanding the vote to other people, and not only does he support policies which multiply voter fraud, he’ll gladly support policies that steal votes from older Americans, women, African Americans and Mexican Americans, in order to expand that voter fraud.
Bonus! Well, bonus to the crooks, anyway.
To be consistent, Morgan supports Federal Aviation Administration restrictions on pig farms, you know, just in case pigs fly. Bad science? “Bonus!”
LikeLike
No, I mean never been a problem by anyone’s definition.
If that’s what you mean, then your rhetoric has sprawled outside the perimeter of your understanding, & anybody else’s too. This is why I said, the logical thing to do is to stop arguing and start carding — then we wouldn’t have to argue, we’d know.
This is also why I made my snarky reference to the ObamaCare roll-out. It isn’t just snark. Proggies have an unfortunate habit of opining on future events as if they’re past events; seldom correct, never in doubt. If things really did work the way they thought, people signing up for O-Care would 1) be able to do so, 2) be doing so in large numbers and 3) save money by doing so. But reality, as usual, has other ideas. And liberals, as usual, are not paying attention to reality.
Then they want to slander anyone who does a better job paying attention to reality. Oh well, I’m sure you know what Socrates said about slander.
If you have evidence of massive voter fraud based on false identification being made at the polls, Morgan, feel free to present it. Call your state AG and the US Attorney in your area.
If you don’t, there’s zero justification for voter ID laws. Reality doesn’t care how I define it, you know?
I’ve already explained to you that this is not the way it works. I also explained why.
Now that Texas is no longer on a short list of states that have to do this checking with Eric Holder’s office before revising their laws, it would seem the ball is actually in your court. Lobby your congressmen and your senators to put Texas back in this 14th-amendment-violating “Mother may I” status. Make your case, and good luck.
LikeLike
No, I mean never been a problem by anyone’s definition.
If you have evidence of massive voter fraud based on false identification being made at the polls, Morgan, feel free to present it. Call your state AG and the US Attorney in your area.
If you don’t, there’s zero justification for voter ID laws. Reality doesn’t care how I define it, you know?
LikeLike
In 99.99999% of the precincts in the U.S., there has never been any problem caused by a lack of voter ID.
You mean…never been a problem demonstrated to your satisfaction, caused by a lack of voter ID. The inability to definitively state whether or not there has been a problem is, in and of itself, a problem.
There seems to be a good supply of contention here surrounding the unknown. The logical solution is therefore to require ID. Then we wouldn’t have to argue. We’d know. A lot of government business is already done that way.
Come to reality, Morgan. In the real world, we can solve real problems. And, we have better beer.
Is the ObamaCare rollout an example of this real-problem-solving?
Wow, what an easy rebuttal, it practically writes itself. I’m afraid, whether you know it or not, you lost about 90% of your arguing-tactic-stockpile on 10-1-2013. Permanently.
LikeLike
I’m not assuming anything that Voter ID advocates haven’t said under oath.
In the U.S., there is no significant problem caused by a lack of voter ID. In 99.99999% of the precincts in the U.S., there has never been any problem caused by a lack of voter ID.
Come to reality, Morgan. In the real world, we can solve real problems. And, we have better beer.
LikeLike
Your error is in presuming that no caught-crime == no crime.
Where did you get that?
LikeLike
Texas spent more than $10 million on voter ID this last election (probably double that amount, but the governor and AG are hiding the real numbers).
They caught not a single voter ID crime — nor have they caught any in the previous decade.
About 1.1 million votes were cast a couple of weeks ago. So Texas has spent about $9/vote just on voter ID, more than any candidate has ever spent in Texas. Divide that $10 million by zero (the amount of voter ID fraud), and you get the Money Wasted Per Election Average.
It’s immoral to waste tax dollars, I think.
LikeLike
People who work in security also know that there is a cost-benefit analysis that should be done. If the asset is extremely valuable — like, say, the Statute of Liberty — but impossible to steal, wise security people won’t spend a lot of money and time trying to block massive boats loaded with crews with cutting torches. Hypothetically, yes, someone could put a big boat up to Liberty Island, cut the statute free, and float off to Somalia with it.
Realistically, petty vandalism, wear and tear from visitors, and a real threat of terrorism are all places the wise security person will spend time and money, instead.
Is voting valuable? You treat it as if it were not so, Morgan. You devalue it by imposing blocks to the polls. Then you have the gall to claim you are instead protecting it from a baseless threat.
False witness in addition to larceny. Is there no patriotic virtue you and your fellow travellers will not trample, just to steal a few votes?
LikeLike
And, again, you offer nary a single instance of anyone voting twice (though there must be a handful of such instances).
Then I’m not sure what your rebuttal is. You say you insist on data to back up claims. But people who work in security know full well that that is not how it’s done; if the asset is worth protecting, the threats are to be presumed. It is the protection that has to be proven, not the threat.
This has all been explained to you already. You say you have yet to be convinced, but your argument is “don’t worry, 1.8 million is not that many, and I shall mock your ‘math skills’ mercilessly if you dare think otherwise.” That would necessarily mean you’re the one trying to convince me that 1.8 million is somehow a negligible number. It would also necessarily mean mocking my math skills is not adequate. As it is, that’s really just evidence that you’ve missed the point: Are these counted millions all of something, or merely a part of something?
You do need, now, to let go of this little comfort-zone idea you’ve had that progressives have some sort of exclusive lock on moving out of Mom’s house, knowing how the world works, knowing how to build things that serve some useful purpose, while the conservative retrogrades sit in their straw huts banging rocks together. Although I’m very sure you won’t. But this isn’t serving you well right now. The ObamaCare launch disaster is solid evidence that the reality is reversed from that. The legislation doesn’t have a single Republican fingerprint on it. It is the fairest test, since FDR’s rotten polices extended the Great Depression, of whether the American Left really knows what it’s talking about, whether it’s really here to make American’s lives easier. Best example in our lifetimes.
I hope you’re still around to peddle your nonsense forty or fifty years from now, Ed. Because if you are, your opposition will be bringing up 10/1/2013 — they’ll be quite right to do so — and you’ll be just as stumped for an answer to that then, as you are now.
LikeLike
I don’t teach political belief. But if I had a student doing a project on advocating a major change in laws that deal with civil rights, I’d want that student to demonstrate a solid reason for such a change, what we call in debate a prima facie case, one that makes sense on the first look. I also want the students, especially in debate, to think through the counter arguments, the significance of the problem, and the appropriateness of the solution, to avoid embarrassment in the Q&A session, if nothing more.
So if a student said, “There are more than 2 million dead people registered to vote,” I’d ask them why that was. If they didn’t know, I’d send ’em to the civics books, the statistical tables, and probably the county vote registrar, to understand the issue.
In short, regardless the political view, I insist on data to back up the claims.
If you taught, I fear you’d flunk anyone who argued for any liberal cause, no matter what the actual data say. If a kid argued that we should just shoot all 13-year old girls to obviate teenaged pregnancies, you’d give the kid an A+ for creativity, I fear.
In the real world, these students grow up to be parents, and voters. They need to learn how the world works. God almighty I wish someone had schooled so-called “libertarians” and snarky “conservatives” in this stuff. As one wag noted when the Supreme Court struck down campaign limitations, we’d feel better if there were at least one person sitting on that court who had run for county sheriff somewhere at some time and had some practical knowledge of how elections work, why voting is important, and understands how money affects elections.
Pie-in-the-sky libertarianism is interesting in college debates, but it doesn’t work in the real world. Forcing people to jump through hoops to vote cuts the number of voters, probably illegally and stupidly — certainly immorally. But you’re probably a Randian — what do you care about morality, eh?
LikeLike
Unlike conservatives, who live in their parents’ basements and never change addresses, a lot of Americans move every year. It’s not so great as it once was — pop sociologist Vance Packard got everybody het up back in the 1960s with a book documenting how many Americans switched states every year, giving fear to a rootless society (cue the old black and white movies of “rootless cosmopolitans” that helped give rise to the Fascist movements in Europe and Asia in the first half of the 20th century, but put disclaimers on the films so Morgan and his fellow travellers won’t get all concerned again over stuff that hasn’t been, for 90 years).
Let’s look up reality: 36.5 million people moved in 2012, up from 2011. At least 11 million of those moves were inter-county, which almost always would entail a change in voter registration. About 5 million moves are from one state to another (a subset of inter-county moves).
Some states — a minority, but some — have computer programs that check voter registration between precincts, allowing a catch of someone who is registered to vote in more than one precinct (remember, voter registrations last four years after they were last used). I’ve never lived in such a state. Florida keeps trying to do that sort of matching, but usually screws it up by somehow purging only black voters or brown voters, and so the federal courts shut down their efforts (if they’d try to remove dead voters, they’d get less trouble — but dead voters don’t vote, and so don’t vote against Republicans as much; Florida’s GOP politicians at least are clear on their goals, to stop people from voting against them, even if those goals are illegal).
Over the course of four years, with five million moving to a different state every year, assuming 50% of those five million to be registered to vote and knowing there is no formal means for notifying voter registrars of changes of address in most states, that means 2.5 million people live in a state different from their last voting address, every year. Again, this accumulates for four years — so there should be 10 million people registered to vote in two places every year.
Again, the total you give is just a fraction of that, less than 28% of what we’d expect.
And, again, you offer nary a single instance of anyone voting twice (though there must be a handful of such instances).
Not a good reason to waste millions of taxpayer dollars that could better be spent suing GOP apparatchiks who try to steal votes from people, or on food stamp fraud elimination.
You support such flagrant waste of taxpayer dollars that at some point, doesn’t it become inaccurate to call you “conservative?” “Libertarian” doesn’t fit well, either. “Libertine,” maybe?
LikeLike
I you’re trying to make a case that there is rampant voter fraud that requires we scare the hell out of old ladies so they stay away from voting, you’re not doing a good job of it. Even with the snarky ObamaCare response, you’re not convincing me of anything other than your being math challenged.
I’ll never convince you, and you know nothing of my math skills one way or another. I wonder if you flunk the students so quickly who fail to faithfully assimilate your political beliefs?
What a pickle. You want more democrats elected, but they don’t get elected when we make sure everyone votes, if they want to, exactly once. What to do?
LikeLike
So, Morgan, do you have any significant evidence of voter fraud, or are you still worried about numbers you can’t add?
That’s right: The numbers of “dead registered voters” is lower than we should expect it to be, and there is not an iota of evidence any of them voted fraudulently. It’s not a problem that requires we waste tens of millions in taxpayer dollars to fix. It’s not a problem at all.
I you’re trying to make a case that there is rampant voter fraud that requires we scare the hell out of old ladies so they stay away from voting, you’re not doing a good job of it. Even with the snarky ObamaCare response, you’re not convincing me of anything other than your being math challenged.
LikeLike
“That’s very low, and it’s no problem.”
Probably what the ObamaCare crowd said about web site errors before the launch. “Doesn’t crash much, and it’s no problem.” Everything is perfectly consistent: That thing, over there has to be absolutely, positively, proven beyond the shadow of a doubt, as if we were trying to send a man to the gallows; this other thing, over here need not be proven at all, there’s something wrong with anyone who asks to see any sort of evidence at all. Every attempt to identify anyone must have the worst possible motives attached.
Two questions arise: How do you go about deciding what must absolutely, positively be proven, versus what absolutely, positively must not be? And: Why so strident? How come it’s an all-or-nothing proposition?
One answer for both: F00k the fairness aspect of it, and f00k the right-to-vote. You just want more democrats elected, and democrats don’t get elected when we make sure everyone votes, if they want to, exactly once.
LikeLike
Probably not in Texas, no. GOP has taken it away, along with Muhlenberg County. Check the coal trains.
You’re in that liberal bastion of California, though, where voting is still regarded as a good thing for a democratic republic to do. Your vote is safer there. Thank a Democrat.
LikeLike
Morgan, the neo-con inexperience with the real world shines through your first complaint.
1.8 million deceased people on voter roles?
That’s very low, and it’s no problem.
By law in 50 states (not sure of the territories), voter registration runs four years. When a voter votes, registration is automatically renewed for another four years. A lot of people only vote in presidential election years, in those elections — and stay registered through their entire lives, if they don’t move.
Consequently, in any given year, we should expect people who voted in the last election, but died since, to remain on the voter roles — the county coroner nor the state vital statistics office, nor the Social Security Administration, do not notify the county voter registrars of deaths.
In the last 50 years there have been a half-dozen cases where one of these dead voters actually voted. In one case in Texas, the guy cast an absentee ballot, then died before election day — perfectly legal. In the other cases, it turned out to be a goof. John Doe, Sr., had died, but when his son, John Doe, Jr., showed up at the polls, the poll worker got the wrong name checked on the rolls.
None of these incidents resulted in prosecution, because there were no crimes committed.
But think about reality — I know that’s congenitally difficulty for a self-described conservative — and how many voters die every year. Remember, there would be four years’ deaths piling up across the nation, every year.
CDC notes about 2.5 million Americans die each year. Let’s assume standard statistics, about 50% of them registered to vote (probably higher, since most deaths are older), and that’s 1.25 million voters dying each year.
That means that in a given year, there likely would be 5 million dead people registered to vote, legally, skewing no elections.
You say the total is only 1.8 million? That’s 3.2 million missing dead people.
It appears counties are very efficient at getting dead people off the roles. Either that, or you are so bad at math that you can’t count.
Either way, you’ve tried to take a non-problem, mischaracterize it, and claim it as a problem — when the real problem is that you don’t appear to know how the world works.
In the real world, 2.5 million people die in the U.S. each year. In the real world, they stay on the voter roles for four years from their last ballot.
If there were 10 million dead people on the roles, we’d have to say there is a problem — but it would probably be with county records, not with voter fraud (not even you allege any of those dead people voted illegally — and you didn’t smell a problem with your argument?).
Instead, you’ve highlighted how well our current system, without voter ID, weeds out dead people from the voter rolls.
What other hoaxes you got for us this week?
LikeLike
More than 1.8 million deceased individuals listed as voters. 2.75 million voters registered in more than one state.
I register to vote with valid information, and then I vote exactly once. If someone else abuses the system — I lose my vote. Your logic is strewn with little perfect-opposite conundrums. We safeguard the asset by relying on the honor system, when we know, for a fact, there are millions of people lying. But don’t worry, Ed Darrell has all these rationalizations for why we should ignore the problem.
If I like my vote I can keep my vote?
LikeLike
Voter ID isn’t a solution to any problem, Morgan. It’s a waste of time, waste of millions of dollars, and a bureaucratic nightmare that tangles up voting, the spirit and body of our democratic institutions.
Every state already had rules on identifying voters, and every state has laws against voter fraud — laws that were not and are not being violated.
Votes are secure without voter ID. Once you close the barn door, you don’t need to shackle the horse (and doing so damages the horse).
I thought you were for conserving stuff, not wasting it. What happened to your philosophical bearings?
LikeLike
Right Ed, right. If you do security properly, you wait for the asset to be stolen first, then you safeguard it. Only after the threat is proven. Such an enviable mastery of the concepts you show!
Of course, it isn’t really *your* impression of how security should work; it’s what it takes — once again — to get more democrats elected. We’re seeing why the healthcare.gov launch went the way it did.
LikeLike
In Texas, we check identification at registration. Citizenship and right to vote is established at that time. Texas then issues a voter identification card which, ironically, is no longer sufficient identification to vote in Texas. Your assumptions are dead wrong, Morgan.
Each voter signs in at the polls, and voting in Texas is tracked by computer, to prevent double voting. Voter ID does nothing to improve that system, and offers no further protection.
No problem of vote fraud in the U.S. could have been prevented by voter ID. Our a-steamed attorney General, Greg Abbott, conducted a five-year project to find and stamp out voter fraud — not a single case of voter ID fraud was found, probably due to the previously-mentioned safeguards.
On the other hand, we have in Texas a couple hundred thousand, or perhaps a million, senior citizens who, prior to this law, had no OTHER identification for voting other than their state-issued, now-useless-for-identification Texas voter registration cards.
46 states have prosecuted voter fraud? Great bait and switch on your part. How many cases of voter ID fraud were found? Zero. (Check out the Texas case; it’s a vote solicitation case, not voter ID.)
So, were YOU concerned about vote fraud, why in the hell are you running this decoy operation to take the minds of voting station judges and law enforcement OFF of finding voter fraud?
Double bait-and-switch: You’re supporting the operation to allow voter fraud to run free and uninhibited by tougher law enforcement.
Your claims of hypocrisy, it appears, are to hide your own skullduggerous hypocrisy on vote fraud. You’re not opposed to vote fraud at all — you just want to make sure your vote fraud against blacks, browns, seniors and women, goes unnoticed.
Texas has more than 80 counties where suitable photo identification cards CANNOT be obtained, after spending more than $10 million to expand the DMV offices. Gov. Perry is afraid of making estimates of how many more millions must be spent to make the Voter ID conditions comply fully with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, but it’s likely to be another $20 million to get the offices out to west Texas counties, perhaps more.
And not a single case of voter ID fraud even alleged in Texas in the past 150 years.
I’m not sure what category of fraud your claims fall under. False Flag is way too tame. Simple hypocrisy just doesn’t carry the weight this assault on democracy deserves.
What is it you fear from the voice of the people? Dick Tuck once ran for office, actually, and lost. At the end of the election, he said, “The people have spoken, the sons of bitches!” He was joking.
I fear you actually consider most Americans to be sons of bitches, idiots and thieves. You’ve been defending a law that considers every voter guilty until proven innocent. You’ve supported flushing millions of dollars of taxpayer money down the toilet in an unholy effort that is designed solely to steal votes from American citizens whose sole “sin” is that they are over the age of 65, female, or “swarthy.”
No one is saying in Texas. It appears that as many as 100,000 votes from Texas citizens were trashed last week. Maybe more.
Shame on you. Shame on those who work to erode and destroy the foundations of our democratic republic.
LikeLike
True to form, Ed: It’s as if someone pointed out, “Liberalism is not only fault for causing conflict, it inexorably leads to conflict; and Mr. Darrell, could you please show us how this works?”
You have no plans at all for making sure people are who they say they are when they vote, or that they aren’t voting twice, or for preventing any of the other documented problems from happening again. Your solution is to do nothing. And, of course, to presume the very worst motives on the part of those who want to do something. Of course, that isn’t just your position, it’s the democrat party’s; good info to keep in mind, for anyone thinking of uploading their sensitive information to healthcare.gov.
Come to think of it, your attitude is probably a big part of the reason why that site’s rollout went the way it did. If everyone thought this way back to the beginning, we’d all still be living in caves. Nothing worth doing, and presume the very worst of anyone who wants to do something.
LikeLike
There’s not a shred of evidence that voter ID at the polls accomplishes any noble purpose. According to sworn testimony at trial in Pennsylvania and Texas, an slips of honesty from politicians in Florida, Texas, Indiana, Pennsylvania and other places, we know the sole purpose of voter ID is to discourage specific people from voting, blacks and browns, and women and seniors.
What is it you want proven, that you’re larcenous? Already done in court.
The only question is whether you and the Republicans will repent, perhaps to hold off a revolution. Not looking good for repentance, I take it — it appears you’re still in denial about the purpose and effects of the laws.
American Bar Association lesson plan on voter ID laws
LikeLike
Oh, so everyone who wants something proven is motivated by larceny?
I guess you just accused James of larceny. Along with yourself.
LikeLike
In Texas, the identity is verified at registration. Why allow people to register to vote, but not vote?
Poll tax. Jim Crow. Diego Cuervo. Trying to weasel around the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
No noble reason.
At least we know that larceny is your intent, now. (Did we doubt it before?)
LikeLike
You who will not extend that courtesy to your fellow Americans?
Chutzpah. Sorry to hear about your parents.
LikeLike
If the State of Texas won’t believe the State of Texas, the neo-conservatives’ anti-American, anti-Texas philosophies have way too much sway.
As always, if you don’t like the law, then work to have the law repealed. Call your representatives. Until you get that done, the law is the law. I’m right about that, aren’t I?
That would be the Boy Scout Way, the Texas Way, the Cowboy Way, the American Way, yes. American voters should be presumed innocent under the law.
Tells us a lot about the crabbed, misanthropic philosophies of modern so-called conservatives that you think that’s odd.
But…I’m an American too. I deserve to be presumed innocent. So why don’t you just believe me and take my word for it, that fraud can occcur unless steps are taken to resist it?
There’s the flaw in your argument, gentlemen, and I’ve pointed it out to you before: You demand absolute proof of one thing, while simultaneously asserting something else must be simply presumed, and there’s something wrong with anybody who doesn’t so presume. Poor James has been reduced to his standard stomp-foot grumpy-grumpy “I demand you present PROOF!” routine…on one thing…while simultaneously demanding some other thing need not be proven. And evidently he can’t see the irony.
Is proof good, or isn’t it? Reagan had a great way of expressing a proper balance, “trust but verify.” That’s great advice.
LikeLike
Oh, yeah:
Speaker Wright presented a current, state-issued Voter Registration card. If the State of Texas won’t believe the State of Texas, the neo-conservatives’ anti-American, anti-Texas philosophies have way too much sway.
Under federal law, under state law, under common law, under international law, the several different forms of identification, including current and valid voter registration and current and valid photo IDs, would be sufficient for all other purposes.
LikeLike
That would be the Boy Scout Way, the Texas Way, the Cowboy Way, the American Way, yes. American voters should be presumed innocent under the law.
Tells us a lot about the crabbed, misanthropic philosophies of modern so-called conservatives that you think that’s odd.
LikeLike
Sorry, I didn’t see your little challenge there, James. And I’ve been busy with a few, ya know, real things.
Let us say I cannot produce any examples, just for sake of argument. Is it your position that we should presume everyone is whoever they say they are, and check nothing? If so, are you taking a position that it should work that way everywhere, or only in elections…when it helps democrats to leave the IDs unchecked.
Also — in a nation “of laws, not of men,” is there something blog-worthy about a former Speaker of the House being inconvenienced by having to go get better ID, when what he’s presenting is a three-year-old driver’s license? Have you presented a three-year-old driver’s license somewhere, lately, and gotten good results? Think you can?
LikeLike
Five days now and still nothing from you, Morgan.
Here kitty kitty.
LikeLike
Hm, I asked that question of Morgan two days ago. It would seem to me that if voter fraud was so prevalent he would have been able to find some by now.
LikeLike
Not a single arrest for voter ID fraud in yet another election.
The last arrest seems to have been made in 1820, but records are fuzzy on that. Texas claims it’s inaccurate that the voter ID law cost the state $20 million to implement, but it refuses to offer an account.
LikeLike
Morgan, where is the evidence of widespread voter fraud? Your party has yet to produce any.
LikeLike
[…] Texas voter ID law blocks aged, World War II veterans from voting (timpanogos.wordpress.com) […]
LikeLike
[…] Texas voter ID law blocks aged, World War II veterans from voting (timpanogos.wordpress.com) […]
LikeLike
Ed,
Personal freedom is for those who earn it. The makers. Personal freedom is not for the takers.
What has Mr. Wright ever done for his country? What did 86 year old Paul Carroll of Aurora, Ohio ever do for ‘Murrica? Tell me, Ed…what on earth did Lincoln Davis of Tennessee do for this country? How about Clifford Glass? What contributions did he ever make?
Did Tennessean Tim Thompson ever do anything but “take” from ‘Murrica and ‘Murrica’s makers? And some 91 year old guy in Broward County, Florida — Bill Internicola — he was turned away at the polls just like the rest of these takers. But Ed, what contributions has he ever made?
Voting, Ed, is for makers. Not takers. If Clifford Glass couldn’t afford to pay the fee for his state-issued voter ID card, what does that tell you? Why didn’t he man up and display a gun permit? They would have accepted that. What a wuss. He doesn’t even own a gun! Hell, I bet he doesn’t even know how to use a gun. You can bet your copy of “The Virtue of Selfishness” a real man like John Galt would!
What does this tell you about these guys? In the case of Glass, it tells you he must not be a maker. Were he a maker, he would have money for the ID fee…or the money (and the stones) to own a gun.
He is, therefore, a taker. Just like Jim Wright. Just like the other no-accounts I listed.
‘Murrica for ‘murricans, Ed. We simply can’t lose sleep over those takers and malcontents who’ve been mildly inconvenienced by being denied a vote because they weren’t willing to jump through a few hoops. It’s not like they jumped or ran or slogged or struggled to keep ‘Murrica free or anything.
Again, I ask — what inconvenience did any of them ever endure for the sake of ‘Murrica?
Their record of laziness and mediocrity pales in comparison to the courageous, sacrificial contributions of great ‘Murricans like Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, Paul Ryan, Scott DeJarlais and Ron Johnson. I tremble to speak their names when I consider the weighty contributions each of these patriotic titans have made.
LikeLike
I notice you didn’t answer my question. I’ll restate it.
You have long been opposed to the provision of obvious safeguards to the integrity of the voting process, before Speaker Wright was inconvenienced in the same way you, I, or anybody else would be inconvenienced if we tried to prove our identities with three-years-expired DLs. Given that, what exactly is blog-worthy about this event? You’ve had stories before about this-or-that person being told nope, sorry, you need more paperwork. You’ve tried to stir up outrage about it before.
And if I can go down a bunny trail for a bit, here: Your examples just suck butt. You had that little old lady with a birth certificate issue who needed to pony up $20 to solve it, at the most? I never did get an answer to my question “How about instead of commenting on blogs about it, just kick in some cash and help her out?” Speaker Wright, according to your own source, seems to have had his little mix-up solved already. When do my heart-strings get pulled over someone’s truly taxing and frustrating and long-drawn-out unsolvable problem? It’s like you’re trying to stir up this outrage among people who’ve never waited in line at the DMV before, never had to talk to the IRS about a filing issue, who are wholly unaquainted with government-produced frustration.
But getting back to the subject at hand: A former House Speaker was told no, and it’s obvious you feel — that’s probably the issue, that word “feel” — there’s some special outrage there because he’s a WWII vet and a former House Speaker. Hey, I’m as grateful to Speaker Wright’s service as anybody else, but one of the things that make America work is that when the country labors under a bad policy of some kind, which you clearly think this is and I respect your opinion although I don’t agree with it — our tradition and our heritage are that the dreadful policy weighs down on EVERYBODY. Over the long term, that’s how bad policies get rolled back, or turned into good policies. Anybody who’s ever had to struggle with a problem that’s truly never-ending and dragging on and on, knows full well that what keeps it from being solved is that it is costless to everybody else.
Say what you want about voter ID laws, but this most recent post of yours is just sloppy; it proves the opposite of what you want proven. It shows that, at the very least, if it is a bad law then we don’t have to worry too much about it, because it isn’t inconveniencing the powerless anymore than it is equally inconveniencing the powerful. I see a big silver lining there. Why don’t you? Why do you hate the American way so much, Ed?
LikeLike
We’ve had the voter ID law for several years in Colorado, but it doesn’t matter because nearly all elections are by mail. So once you register, unless you visit a polling place in person, no ID is required as long as you opt in for permanent mail-in ballots. I love permanent mail-in ballots.
LikeLike
Morgan, voter ID fraud in Texas is zero. I think it’s a waste of taxpayer money and prosecutor time to set up a new barrier that so far has cost Texas nearly $20 million to make work, to catch zero crime.
On the other hand, the barriers DO STOP people from voting: White women, veterans, non-drivers of all colors.
I think anti-freedom laws like Voter ID should be repealed. I can’t imagine why you favor wasting money for no gain.
Is there a problem of ballot integrity? No. Why spend money and create a system that is costly, cumbersome and anti-freedom, then?
Justify it, Morgan.
Speaker Wright’s Texas voter ID was refused as adequate identification. Go fish.
LikeLike
And I thought you supported treating people equally. To be honest, I’m really having a tough time making out what the point is you’re trying to make here. You oppose taking any steps to safeguard the integrity of the voding process in any case, so how is the former House Speaker relevant to anything? It was bad before, but it’s really, really awful now, depending on who’s inconvenienced?
If I shared your suspicions about the process, and it was Speaker Gingrich who was turned away because he (somehow) thought an expired DL would count for something, my reaction would be something like this: I’m thrilled that the powerful are being inconvenienced by this bad law just like the hoi polloi. It means that if something is really bolluxed up here, it almost certainly will be worked out.
Do you want to live in the alternative universe, Ed? Where the poll workers whisper to each other, “Don’t enforce that rule, which you would enforce against anybody else, against that guy because he’s so-and-so. The rules don’t apply to him.” I thought you liked being an American, living in America, the nation of laws, not of men.
LikeLike
Is it necessary to shame women and aged veterans in order to catch no criminals and stop no voter fraud, at a cost to taxpayers of $15 million?
I thought you opposed wasting money, and supported personal freedom, Morgan?
Wrong on both counts, was I?
LikeLike
Former House Speakers should have the privilege of proving their identities with expired drivers’ licenses? And I dunno, maybe some old baseball cards too?
I always suspected the “let anybody vote without showing ID” movement was just an orchestrated attack on the American ideals of “We’re a nation of laws, not of men.” Now I know for sure. Can’t remember the last time a three-years-expired drivers’ license got me anywhere…but then, I never was Speaker of the House.
LikeLike
This is just shameful. If the Republicans had any shame, that is.
LikeLike