DOJ suddenly interested in FLA voter rolls

posted at 8:01 pm on June 3, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

Our friend Andrew Malcolm, over at Investors Business Daily, highlights an interesting story coming to us from Washington, but involving the Sunshine State. It seems that Florida’s recent efforts to conduct a thorough review of their voter rolls and purge the ineligible or the … er… dead, have drawn the Attorney General. And what might the Department of Justice have to say about this record-keeping audit? Clearly, this has to be stopped.

Washington has ordered Florida to end its effort to remove ineligible voters from the state’s voter rolls. This is breathtaking. It couldn’t be clearer that the government is actively promoting voter fraud.

Somehow, the DOJ has determined that purging illegal voters — felons, noncitizens, the deceased — from the rolls is a violation of the 1965 Voting Rights Act as well as the 1993 National Voter Registration Act. According to the Miami Herald, the department’s lead civil rights attorney, T. Christian Herren Jr., sent the state “a detailed two-page letter” on Thursday demanding that Florida’s elections division shut down its pursuit.

So… it’s a violation of the Voting RIGHTS Act to make sure that everyone voting is actually eligible and has the RIGHT to vote, eh? But if Florida is running around purging a bunch of eligible people from the rolls and depriving them of their fundamental rights, I can understand how Eric Holder would feel the need to intervene. So, Andrew, how many people are being purged from the rolls thus far?

What’s missing from Herren’s complaint is the fact that no one is actually moved off the rolls until they are found to be ineligible. Simply sending names to county elections supervisors to confirm eligibility, which is what Florida officials are doing, discriminates against no one. Either the person is eligible to vote or not.

No one is harassed or summarily tossed off the voter rolls. There is no poll tax or literacy test.

Groups on the left could find “discrimination” on Mars. So of course they declare that Florida’s attempt to certify the integrity of its voter rosters is discriminatory. They lament that requiring the voters in question to prove they are eligible is a burden on voters rather than on government.

Florida has responded, saying they’ll answer Washington in the coming week.

I had pretty much the same discussion with a liberal correspondent on Twitter this weekend and I always find it frustrating. Believe it or not, I understand some of the concerns and fears expressed by people objecting to both voter ID and a review of voter rolls. It’s far too easy for government at any level to attempt to “fix” a problem and wind up making it worse through incompetence or overreach. I would hope that nobody wants to see a Poll Tax imposed on voters or revoke the voting rights of those eligible to participate. But at the same time, could we not all agree that if someone casts a fraudulent vote a crime has been committed? And does the government not have the authority – and obligation – to prevent the commission of said crime? These are the answers I can never seem to get from people crying about Republican efforts to “suppress the vote” or “keep minorities from the polls.”

One last point is that this discussion in Florida highlights a key issue which the various states and the nation will have to address sooner or later. We do a fairly good job of recording citizens who are born, when they enter the work force and where they live. (At least every ten years.) What we don’t seem to have any mechanism for, however, is recording when they die. I’m not sure how we tackle that or how such a process would be viewed in terms of constitutional law. But I’m open to suggestions.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

petunia on June 3, 2012 at 8:55 PM

Petrollia! Where you been?

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 8:57 PM

4Grace on June 3, 2012 at 8:54 PM

Thx, I just got up and waiting for some meds to kick in..thus my out of sorts. Moving slow. But my Florida girls are rockin per usual.
Appreciate it Grace.

I am hunting hog later..gotta be ready. :)

bazil9 on June 3, 2012 at 8:57 PM

We also don’t do a good job of recording moves. I could have voted in one state long after I was registered in another. I know because my parents told me I was still on the rolls.

It won’t happen because the Dems rely on this kind of fraud but there really should be a national registry for voters.

Happy Nomad on June 3, 2012 at 8:50 PM

Funny you should mention that. When I moved to PA two years ago, the census was being taken. I had already been recorded in the state which I moved from. After living in PA for over a month, I had a census worker knock on my door. While I explained that I had already been counted, she replied that it didn’t matter if I was counted twice. So much for accurate record keeping.

chewmeister on June 3, 2012 at 8:58 PM

Oh God…its the flower.

bazil9 on June 3, 2012 at 8:58 PM

I drink lots of soda and I vote.

ardenenoch on June 3, 2012 at 8:58 PM

You’re no capitalist piglet.

But at least you ain’t corporate hog either.

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 8:53 PM

Very astute of you, Lanceman.

Bmore on June 3, 2012 at 8:58 PM

We are the Gunshine State

And the rolls need to be purged. IDs are required for just about any other aspect of your life, so it seems to me that anyone who is doing practically anything will have an ID unless they are just hanging around the dumpster by McDonalds or something.

It seems to me that if exercising your franchise is that important that there would be plenty of ways to get your ID.

It is beyond obvious that the real reason for no ID for voting is to perpetuate voter fraud. It has happened. It has been prosecuted. And Al Franken is a Senator because of it, from what I’ve read.

Libs/Dems have no scruples about having the dead/illegal vote. Cons to date at least seem to have a scruple about it.

And yes, Holder should be impeached. Now.

ProfShadow on June 3, 2012 at 8:59 PM

Hmmm, it makes one wonder about Bush/Gore.

petunia on June 3, 2012 at 8:55 PM

Yes, imagine how badly Gore would have lost by.

Bmore on June 3, 2012 at 9:01 PM

And yes, Holder should be impeached. Now.

ProfShadow on June 3, 2012 at 8:59 PM

Who’s gonna do it? The Republicans?

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 9:03 PM

Sorry, strike the word by, petunia. ; )

Bmore on June 3, 2012 at 9:03 PM

I’m alive, not a felon and a citizen..can I vote?

How are those dead BP agent and Mexicans holder? WIll there be thugs with night sticks in Philly in 2012? How’s the Travon Martin case going…?

POS.

Remember this when you feel less then enthusiastic to vote Mitt people.

bazil9 on June 3, 2012 at 9:03 PM

Yes, imagine how badly Gore would have lost by.

Bmore on June 3, 2012 at 9:01 PM

+100

chewmeister on June 3, 2012 at 9:04 PM

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 9:03 PM

Laughing with you.

bazil9 on June 3, 2012 at 9:04 PM

Remember this when you feel less then enthusiastic to vote Mitt people.

bazil9 on June 3, 2012 at 9:03 PM

I think a silent commercial with pictures of Kagan and Sotomayor fading out to the caption of ‘Need we say more?’ would be good.

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 9:05 PM

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 9:03 PM

Then who……the mythical Paulonians?

dmann on June 3, 2012 at 9:06 PM

I think a silent commercial with pictures of Kagan and Sotomayor fading out to the caption of ‘Need we say more?’ would be good.

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 9:05 PM

Those would be helpful. People forget his administrations octopus of destruction.
Thats what I keep in mind.

bazil9 on June 3, 2012 at 9:08 PM

Sorry 4Grace and bazil, I had to break for dinner. Glad to see INC was here to help, as usual.

Thankfully none of these proposals would ever have a chance of becoming law, but still, it is disturbing that people would even want to prevent certain groups of people from voting.

theoddmanout on June 3, 2012 at 8:13 PM

Also thankfully that is not what the purpose is here in FL.

Ken Detzner: No One Has Been Denied a Right to Vote

But anyone, especially the Attorney General of United States, who thinks it is ok to leave dead and illegal voters on the rolls has only one reason for doing so – cheating.

About 53,000 dead people on Florida’s voter rolls

Florida says 180,000 non-citizens may be on voter rolls

Flora Duh on June 3, 2012 at 9:09 PM

Then who……the mythical Paulonians?

dmann on June 3, 2012 at 9:06 PM

About 40 more Teapublicans in The House should do it.

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 9:09 PM

It’s about time we had a racist, politically motivated justice department. What took so long? Can we give some money to political cronies in green energy now please – what’s the darned hold up?

Slade73 on June 3, 2012 at 9:09 PM

If Holder can tie this voter roll purge up, it will not be resolved until after the election, thereby letting the dead and illegal vote in another Presidential election.
All they need to do is get the process stalled and …..
Democrats can’t win unless they cheat!

Delsa on June 3, 2012 at 9:10 PM

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 9:09 PM

We can only pray…………..

dmann on June 3, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Flora..thx..we will allow you to eat. :)

bazil9 on June 3, 2012 at 9:12 PM

I know Slade, I have been waiting for a lifetime. Working out fabulous.

bazil9 on June 3, 2012 at 9:13 PM

Ds are required for just about any other aspect of your life, so it seems to me that anyone who is doing practically anything will have an ID unless they are just hanging around the dumpster by McDonalds or something…

ProfShadow on June 3, 2012 at 8:59 PM

Especially if you attended the MA Democrat Convention yesterday.

Irony or hypocrisy? Democrats require photo i.d. at convention

Flora Duh on June 3, 2012 at 9:15 PM

Mr B, if your lurking..I blew up your bloggy. lol

Catch yall in a bit.

qotd hopefully.

bazil9 on June 3, 2012 at 9:19 PM

Those dems who get into dissing Romney no matter the topic. We have one chance to get rid of this guy along with his boss, Barry.
This is from the Socialist Party cadidate for President – Norman Thomas said in a speech in 1944 and it hasn’t changed, but just as he predicted.

The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of ‘liberalism,’ they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, witout knowing how it happened.”
He went on to say: ‘I no longer need to run as a Presidential Candidate for the Socialist Party. The Democrat Party has adopted our platform.

Bambi on June 3, 2012 at 9:20 PM

About 53,000 dead people on Florida’s voter rolls

Florida says 180,000 non-citizens may be on voter rolls

Flora Duh on June 3, 2012 at 9:09 PM

Exactly. And Holder will fight for every last one of those dead and non-citizens. If Florida had found 312 dead people on the rolls, DOJ would have reacted in the same manner.

Their motto: Every vote counts…at least once.

4Grace on June 3, 2012 at 9:20 PM

First, if I ever hear a Democrat complain about politicizing the Justice Department again I’m going to scream. Secondly, Holder is trying to fix just one more election so, for those who really see what’s going on here, the idea will be to get the next election so it’s not close enough to steal.

Finally, and this is the important part, no Attorney General would do anything like this unless he felt the press would allow him to get away with it. Where is the MSM here? When it comes to Obama, they’ve been AWOL for 6 years nationally and for 9 years in the State of Illinois.

Sometime, after Obama is defeated in November, the MSM had better take a real good look at how they’ve conducted themselves since 1994 and figure out how they’re going to become deserving of 1st Amendment protections. There is no reason to protect a propaganda arm of a political party. It’s only proper to protect a free press. They should figure out the difference and try to make themselves, once again, into organizations that citizens, of both parties trust to be doing things in their best interest, not the interest of a political party.

bflat879 on June 3, 2012 at 9:20 PM

What we don’t seem to have any mechanism for, however, is recording when they die.

Funeral Homes in my state are required to report to the social security administration the names and SS numbers of the deceased. I suspect this is a law nationwide. to say that these could not be used for the screening of voter rolls boggles the mind.

I suspect the rules are in place so Identity thieves do not collect benefits of the deceased or like Obama use a dead persons number if they are not a legal citizen! Identity thief!

ConcealedKerry on June 3, 2012 at 9:20 PM

slickwillie2001 on June 3, 2012 at 8:41 PM

The Supreme Court originally approved on the basis that is was another tax not an insurance program. They also approved the right of congress to spend, no lock box, any excess money collected for any purpose they chose. Functionally that makes it a welfare program contingent upon congress funding it.

chemman on June 3, 2012 at 9:20 PM

Miss John Ashcroft yet?

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 9:21 PM

Mr B, if your lurking..I blew up your bloggy. lol

Catch yall in a bit.

qotd hopefully.

bazil9 on June 3, 2012 at 9:19 PM

; ) see you there!

Bmore on June 3, 2012 at 9:21 PM

I’m a registered voter in Florida – voted in 2008 and 2010, the two elections I was eligible to vote in – and an independent. (My beliefs, however, tend sharply toward the conservative side.)

That said, I’ve received government aid – Pell Grant, anybody? – and I likely won’t make enough this year to pay any income tax. (Quelle horreur!)

Some of you folks are talking about disenfranchising me, and I can’t say I appreciate that, though I can understand at least some of the motivation behind your beliefs. (I would suggest cutting the benefits themselves instead, though – every legal citizen in this country of a certain age should be allowed to vote; if you don’t like some of those voters feeding at the public trough then cut the flow.)

As for legitimacy, I would suggest that if you want to be taken seriously about voter ID laws – and it should always be a serious subject in this country – you should push to make State IDs free… either that or some other voting-only ID; whatever y’want so long as legitimate voters can get what they need to exercise their rights without too much hassle. Once you get that established, you can move on to stuff like purging the voter rolls every year/two years/whenever.

Aquarian on June 3, 2012 at 9:22 PM

bflat879 on June 3, 2012 at 9:20 PM

Hate to burst your bubble but this type of press bias goes back to at least the 60′s not just 94.

chemman on June 3, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Irony or hypocrisy? Democrats require photo i.d. at convention

Flora Duh on June 3, 2012 at 9:15 PM

You can’t enter Holder’s DOJ building without photo ID. Hmmmm

4Grace on June 3, 2012 at 9:24 PM

Holder and Axlerod have been going toe to toe. Apparently there is a war in the White House.

separated by the most manly person in there……well, val jarret of course.

ted c on June 3, 2012 at 9:24 PM

I think a copy of the death certificate should be sent to social security, matched with the social security number, verification that the person IS actually deceased should be performed, and then the information should be traced back through voter registration where that individual resided. We do have computers now. This sort of record keeping and data correlation shouldn’t be that difficult and it should be done in a timely matter. We need to make certain that we have full inter-agency cooperation and we need to mandate that all agencies are tasked with upholding existing law.

I’m in favor of a national ID and I think it should be biometric. I think fingerprints AND retinal scan, or DNA in lieu of retinal scan, should be required. This would allow everyone who is a citizen or legal immigrant to verify their status while allowing for maximum privacy… unlike microchipping or a barcode… and limitation of information available to the government or nosy and officious authorities. Those who were in the nation on a limited visa would be required to present their ID card and if the visa was expired, they would be required to leave the nation. We could tie the ID card to the use of their bank accounts.IF they tried to overstay their visa, no funds would be available to them until they presented themselves to authorities to make arrangements to leave in a timely manner. There would be no need to ‘build a wall’ around the nation. Persons who entered illegally would simply not be able to access funds or garner a drivers license and with mandatory national E-verify, they wouldn’t be able to work, either. This would save us the enormous amount of money we currently spend on illegal aliens and on border security. Combine this with legislation to redefine a ‘natural citizen’ as a person born in this nation whose parents are citizens and the reason for illegal immigration no longer exists. The children of legal permanent residents could apply for citizenship, if they chose, when they reached the age of majority.

thatsafactjack on June 3, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Aquarian on June 3, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Well, Aquarium, I’ll say this: There was once a time in this country when I was not eligible to vote.
If I fail the producer/parasite test, so be it. Just so long as it keeps the ‘rats away.

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 9:25 PM

I doubt the anti any spending that benefits the middle class but okay to spend as much as you want invading other countries crowd would approve of that.

Uppereastside on June 3, 2012 at 8:46 PM

Wtf?

chewmeister on June 3, 2012 at 8:48 PM

…HARVARD?

KOOLAID2 on June 3, 2012 at 9:30 PM

I wonder how many people here would be OK with a Democratic governor compiling a list of primarily Republican citizens, claiming they are supposedly “non-citizens,” and sending letters demanding proof of citizenship within 30 days or automatic removal from the voting rolls.

jd3181 on June 3, 2012 at 8:46 PM

As a resident of Florida, I would have absolutely no problem with it.

As for legitimacy, I would suggest that if you want to be taken seriously about voter ID laws – and it should always be a serious subject in this country – you should push to make State IDs free… either that or some other voting-only ID; whatever y’want so long as legitimate voters can get what they need to exercise their rights without too much hassle. Once you get that established, you can move on to stuff like purging the voter rolls every year/two years/whenever.

Aquarian on June 3, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Details of Voter Identification Requirements

Florida Acceptable Forms of ID

Florida driver’s license

Florida ID card issued by the Dept. of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles

U.S. passport

Debit or credit card

Military identification

Student identification

Retirement center identification

Neighborhood association ID

Public assistance identification

Flora Duh on June 3, 2012 at 9:32 PM

wildcat72 on June 3, 2012 at 8:17 PM

What Aquarian said.

The issue is not that people receive federal assistance and then vote. The issue is that people receive federal assistance.

The issue is not that people don’t pay any income tax and then vote. The issue is that people don’t pay any income tax.

The franchise in this country is not based on making a certain amount of income. I will note that that _was_ the franchise in classical Greece, and the Founding Fathers would have known that, either directly or through Montaigne.

Now, I could easily support putting the voting age back up to 21, but that is a far cry from saying that people have to _do_ certain things in order to vote. You have to _be_ a certain thing (specifically, a US citizen not convicted of a felony), and you have to be able to _prove_ you are that thing, but that’s it.

Scott H on June 3, 2012 at 9:34 PM

Flora: That makes me a little wary. That is not a very strong Voter ID Law. I live in Florida, and work at UCF, and the Student ID is very very easily faked.

Scott H on June 3, 2012 at 9:36 PM

I live in Florida, and work at UCF,

Scott H on June 3, 2012 at 9:36 PM

Which stands for ‘U Can’t Finish’.

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 9:38 PM

Lanceman: I am well aware of what it stands for. ;) I know several more that are, regrettably, not repeatable here.

But was there a point that you wanted to make?

Scott H on June 3, 2012 at 9:39 PM

My mother passed away today and in meeting with the funeral director–it was stated that the funeral home–by law,had to report her death.

lovingmyUSA on June 3, 2012 at 9:39 PM

But was there a point that you wanted to make?

Scott H on June 3, 2012 at 9:39 PM

Nah. But that is where I find the largest concentration of obama stickers. Even today.

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 9:43 PM

Scott H on June 3, 2012 at 9:36 PM

I agree. But it shoots a hole in the left’s argument that low-income voters are being discriminated against by requiring identification, because chances are if they are low-income, they are on public assistance, which means they have a public assistance identification card, which means if they are legally able to vote, they should have no problem being able to provide identification.

Flora Duh on June 3, 2012 at 9:44 PM

lovingmyUSA on June 3, 2012 at 9:39 PM

I am very sorry for you loss.

Flora Duh on June 3, 2012 at 9:45 PM

Lanceman: Which might explain why I have, for quite a while, been a bit less sanguine about conservative chances in November than some. ;)

Flora: Oh, certainly! Seen from that viewpoint, the fact that the law is so weak, and includes your highlighted item, rather underlines their real purpose. :)

I guess I was just startled that I could my old, very tattered student ID to vote. ;)

Scott H on June 3, 2012 at 9:47 PM

Florida has responded, saying they’ll answer Washington in the coming week.

Makes me wonder if Florida is going to tell this out-of-control attorney general and his entirely corrupt DOJ to shove it. I really, really hope they do.

Rational Thought on June 3, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Lanceman: Which might explain why I have, for quite a while, been a bit less sanguine about conservative chances in November than some. ;)

Scott H on June 3, 2012 at 9:47 PM

That’s because you’re living in a UCF bubble.

Believe me, I have spoken to obama voters. They either admit the mistake or else don’t want to talk about it.

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Makes me wonder if Florida is going to tell this out-of-control attorney general and his entirely corrupt DOJ to shove it. I really, really hope they do.

Rational Thought on June 3, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Of course they will. Holder has no Constitutional authority on how the several states pick their electors. If the Florida legislature wants the Harlem Globetrotters as the electors, it’s perfectly legal.

Back in 2000 when the Supreme Court(s) shenanigans were going on, Tom Feeney, then Speaker of the House was going to assemble the electors himself out of the Republican reps who are the majority, go to Washington and cast the electoral votes themselves. All perfectly legal.

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 9:54 PM

Washington has ordered Florida to end its effort to remove ineligible voters from the state’s voter rolls.

Orders? This is what FLA thinks of orders.

JohnGalt23 on June 3, 2012 at 9:56 PM

lovingmyUSA on June 3, 2012 at 9:39 PM

I am sorry for your loss! and they are correct in Iowa we have to report to social security and in some instances where their number and name don’t match the funeral homes social security calls to verify and it is usually a funeral home mistake or family member mistake , point is the dead are reported to the govt, to say the govt doesn’t know is to lie!

ConcealedKerry on June 3, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Lanceman: Well, even at UCF I’ve seen a distinct cooling (at least in my immediate vicinity) towards Obama. I’m cautiously optimistic right now that Obama will lose in November currently. This is mainly fueled by Romney’s effective campaign to date.

Whether or not there will be any meaningful change in the country’s trajectory is a completely different matter, but I have finally been brought around that ANYTHING is better than Obama.

Scott H on June 3, 2012 at 10:02 PM

Washington has ordered Florida to end its effort to remove ineligible voters from the state’s voter rolls. This is breathtaking. It couldn’t be clearer that the government is actively promoting voter fraud.

…corruption. Plain, simple and obvious.

TX-96 on June 3, 2012 at 10:03 PM

We need a civil war that pits the 50 states against the Federal Government. 300 million people vs. a bunch of bureaucrats.

ardenenoch on June 3, 2012 at 8:54 PM

If there ever is another civil war it will be between the parasites and the producers.

Or more specifically the urban government cheese distribution centers vs the less urban areas that actually produce things and get taxed to death to support the urban parasites.

wildcat72 on June 3, 2012 at 10:04 PM

Funeral homes are required by law to notify the feds of deaths. I have written to have the SS office in each region track and report to a federal registry all deaths so the pensions and SS benefits (as well a voter rolls) could be compared to payments being made to greatly reduce fraud. Also Florida and NY/NJ seemly have a problem with people voting in more than one state as the hearings for the Indiana Voter ID challenge, which the SCOTUS allowed to remain law, indicated is happening.

amr on June 3, 2012 at 10:05 PM

I’ll go out on a limb and suggest that this is inaccurate reporting – a result of Holder derangement syndrome.
Bet this will light up Malkin’s site.

verbaluce on June 3, 2012 at 8:12 PM

I’ll go out on a limb here and suggest that it wouldn’t matter to you whether the reporting was accurate as long as your point of view is defended. So of course anything negative about the moron in chief and his henchmen has to be wrong, right?

Night Owl on June 3, 2012 at 10:09 PM

And yes, Holder should be impeached. Now.

ProfShadow on June 3, 2012 at 8:59 PM

Nah. No one’s going to do it so let’s just wait until Romney is sworn in and indict him. Grassley and Issa should have plenty of evidence by then. Sometimes I think the F & F hearings seem to be moving slow for just this reason. If that fails I’m certain Mexico would like his presence.

Wolfen on June 3, 2012 at 10:13 PM

Florida has responded, saying they’ll answer Washington in the coming week.

Makes me wonder if Florida is going to tell this out-of-control attorney general and his entirely corrupt DOJ to shove it. I really, really hope they do.

Rational Thought on June 3, 2012 at 9:49 PM

That would be delicious; especially since AG Holder really does not have the authority to do what he is ordering. Would be rather interesting to see how Obama could call out the National Guard to the polling places to ensure that the dead and illegal aliens were allowed into the polling place.

AZfederalist on June 3, 2012 at 10:14 PM

Flora Duh on June 3, 2012 at 9:45 PM

Thanks…

lovingmyUSA on June 3, 2012 at 10:15 PM

In Colorado, the voter rolls were “purged” once a year—long before any new General Election (as of 4 yrs. ago, when I retired)! WHY is it so hard for other counties, within each state,to do this???

DixT on June 3, 2012 at 10:15 PM

ConcealedKerry on June 3, 2012 at 10:01 PM

Thanks…are you here in Iowa? I’m in Des Moines…

lovingmyUSA on June 3, 2012 at 10:20 PM

“Jazz”: (WTF kind of name is “JAZZ”, but I digress)

“I would hope that nobody wants to see a Poll Tax imposed on voters or revoke the voting rights of those eligible to participate.”

I don’t want a poll tax, but I want restrictions placed on people who vote. It’s not a right, it’s a privilege, and far too many people don’t merit the privilege.

Implement a free, easy, relevant civics/history quiz in order to obtain a voting permit.

-What are the three branches of government?
-Who was the first President?
-How many states are there in the United States?
-What is the nation’s capitol?
-From which nation did the original 13 colonies declare independence?
-Name one US ally and one US enemy in WWII.

Questions like that. Yes, I’m talking THAT easy. Such a minimum requirement would ensure that people undertaking among the most important civic duties in our republic are at the very least cognizant of the basic aspects of citizenship. Upon passing, a person would be given a voting permit. Simple. Fair. Better than the asinine practice of encouraging the most moronic people on the planet to vote.

And it would eliminate a hefty percentage of Democrat voters. The Leftists would be forced to educate voters on American history and civics, thereby rendering them more likely to vote conservative, or, lose their votes entirely because of their ignorance.

I think it’s an excellent plan.

IronDioPriest on June 3, 2012 at 10:21 PM

My mother passed away today and in meeting with the funeral director–it was stated that the funeral home–by law,had to report her death.

lovingmyUSA on June 3, 2012 at 9:39 PM

I’m sorry to hear that.

Night Owl on June 3, 2012 at 10:22 PM

lovingmyUSA on June 3, 2012 at 10:20 PM

Yes Northwestern

ConcealedKerry on June 3, 2012 at 10:31 PM

lovingmyUSA on June 3, 2012 at 9:39 PM

That, my friend, is messed-up. I’m dropping a prayer or three y’all’s way tonight. Rest In Peace, and comfort to those left behind…

affenhauer on June 3, 2012 at 10:40 PM

Scott H on June 3, 2012 at 10:02 PM

Yes, I have too. I was just saying, the concentration of obama stickers, anemic as it is, is highest in the UCF area.

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 10:51 PM

They should restrict the voting rights of the religious since they are stupid and inbred.

Your Mamma loves me on June 3, 2012 at 11:02 PM

Your Mamma loves me on June 3, 2012 at 11:02 PM

Uh-huh. Tell yo’ mutha’ I said Yo…

affenhauer on June 3, 2012 at 11:14 PM

The argument that requiring voter IDs is somehow unconstitutional or even unjust because a lot of citizens don’t have one is utterly wrong-headed and ridiculous. Where is it written that no effort must ever be required of a citizen in order to vote? If someone is too lazy to bother getting an acceptable ID of some sort to show he or she is a citizen then no one should care that he or she doesn’t vote. I for one am glad such a person doesn’t vote. An anecdotal story of some old war veteran not having an ID hardly makes the case. What next, the constitutional right of free transportation to the voting booth?

Chessplayer on June 3, 2012 at 11:18 PM

As for legitimacy, I would suggest that if you want to be taken seriously about voter ID laws – and it should always be a serious subject in this country – you should push to make State IDs free… either that or some other voting-only ID;.

Aquarian on June 3, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Hate to tell you, Aquarian, but in nearly every single state where a VoterID law has been passed or at least attempted in this push of recent years, a free StateID card for purposes of verifying voter eligibility has been a part of the bill.

But here’s the real kicker: even free state IDs are not free in the progressive worldview. See, to obtain a state ID, you usually need a birth certificate or something like it. Well, now the complaint is that people don’t have their birth certificate and they don’t have the twenty bucks to order a copy from the local registrar. So therefore Republicans are adding a “hidden” cost in order to “suppress voting” by asking people to show the single most basic piece of identification in existence – your birth certificate – to get a FREE ID card.

Never mind the eight billion other things in life for which you need a photo ID, birth certificate, social security card, etc, in order to establish your identity under law. Somehow these people are able to prove to the state they are living persons of US citizenship who are destitute to the point of needing state aid, but can’t get a FREE ID card in order to vote.

The Schaef on June 3, 2012 at 11:25 PM

theoddmanout on June 3, 2012 at 8:13 PM

There is a fair amount of evidence that young people have not finished their cognitive development. While there was a case for allowing those less than 21 to vote when there was a drafts( You have no say in the Government that can send you to war?), with no draft, much of the reason for allowing them to vote disappears.

If we can’t trust them to decide if they can have a beer, why trust them to vote?

OBQuiet on June 3, 2012 at 11:27 PM

thatsafactjack on June 3, 2012 at 9:25 PM

If you’re talking about RFID, that stuff is ridiculously unsafe and easy to steal. I don’t trust ANY government-produced card to safely and securely store my information.

Flora Duh on June 3, 2012 at 9:32 PM
Flora Duh on June 3, 2012 at 9:44 PM

I’ve seen some of Florida’s public assistance cards (EBT, Medicaid) but I’ve never seen one that could serve as photo ID… and unless the law changed since I voted in 2010 I know you need ID showing a photo and your signature, though they can be two different ones.

Lanceman on June 3, 2012 at 9:49 PM

Well, you’ve always got this (found on another site):

So I am in college retraining for a new
career, so taking on debt if I can’t finance it with ever more scarce scholarships. And I can’t refinance my greatly decreased in value home without a job, even though current interest rates are so good it would help lower my payment. I hate being an I-did-everything-right story that still is basically screwed and have lost all that I worked 20 years to achieve financially. No more savings, no more retirement, no more security, trying to hold on to the last things I have, a home and some dignity. It’s why I can’t go door to door and give give give to Pres. Obama. I have lost so much ground since he came into office and when I see corporations and criminals getting on with life and I can’t…well I will push the button to vote for him, but that is all the energy I can spare.

by prgsvmama26 on Sun May 06, 2012 at 09:15:12 PM PDT

OBQuiet on June 3, 2012 at 11:27 PM

You know, I actually support raising the voting age back to 21. (Amusingly enough, it would’ve stopped me from casting party line ballots for Obama and his ilk, not that either of ‘em mattered in the counties I voted in.)

IronDioPriest on June 3, 2012 at 10:21 PM

I really like that idea! Now if we could just add a provision about a mandatory 1-year military service term…

The Schaef on June 3, 2012 at 11:25 PM

When I got my first ID some years back I would’ve loved to have a free state ID, even if it was only good to vote – if for no other reason than to duplicate the feeling I got when I received my voter registration card in the mail. Still, I’ve lived here pretty much my whole (relatively short) life and I’m not aware of any Florida-sponsored “free voting ID” or whatnot. Closest approximation I’ve seen is the State ID, which is what I got as my first ID.

Aquarian on June 3, 2012 at 11:47 PM

More spending??

I doubt the anti any spending that benefits the middle class but okay to spend as much as you want invading other countries crowd would approve of that.

Uppereastside on June 3, 2012 at 8:46 PM

Yeah, you’re right. It was only the evil Rethuglicans who voted in favor of funding (obligatory disclaimer: “War Criminal”) Dick Cheney’s War Crimes.

(laughter)

Del Dolemonte on June 4, 2012 at 12:05 AM

Permanent ink on the finger like in many other countries. Plus requiring voter registration card. This doesn’t quite deal with non-citizen, but it’s a starting point. Perhaps some other form of residence as well.

I think a state should just go balls out, and do it. There will always be 100 or 1,000 left-wingers b!tchin about something, they just need to be ignored. It’s when they get attention that psuedo-populism arises. Thank the media and convictionless corrupticrats for the wishy-washy bs.

John Kettlewell on June 4, 2012 at 1:01 AM

Fraudulent voting is only a crime if the vote being cast is for someone other than a liberal progressive socialist.
—–your local liberal progressive piggies

Wolfmoon on June 4, 2012 at 3:46 AM

But at the same time, could we not all agree that if someone casts a fraudulent vote a crime has been committed?

Uh…no, apparently not. The left finds this statement to be indecipherable.

Jaibones on June 4, 2012 at 6:38 AM

We have “vapor voters” in MN – they show on Election Day, register to vote (can do so with just a utility bill or be vouched for by someone else who is registered in the precinct and one other way), register to vote, cast their ballot (it counts) and then they go away.

AFTER the election (and ballots have been counted) a post card is sent to verify their name and address. In 2008, over 17,000 of those verification cards were returned as undeliverable (no such name, no such address) – Senator COleman lost by 312 votes…….. In 2010 over 7500 were returned as unverifiable.

Minnesotans are required to show a valid ID to get reduced transit tickets for public transportation, along with library books, liquor, etc. as in most other states. Yet our Sec. of State appears to be campaigning against the Voter ID law that is up for a vote by Minnesotans this November.

Why is it, Democrat officials appear to be against Voter/Photo ID? Hmmmmm? I wonder.

MN J on June 4, 2012 at 7:20 AM

- Raise the minimum voting age back up to 21
- Take away the right to vote from people who are currently paying no income taxes
- Take away the right to vote from people who are on any form of government assistance (Food stamps, welfare, unemployment assistance, social security, etc)

Thankfully none of these proposals would ever have a chance of becoming law, but still, it is disturbing that people would even want to prevent certain groups of people from voting.

theoddmanout on June 3, 2012 at 8:13 PM

They are good suggestions that would go far in fixing the problem of people who vote for a living instead of working for a living.

Personally, there should be NO representation without taxation. Too many people have no skin in the game.

Robert Jensen on June 4, 2012 at 7:21 AM

The DOJ has absolutely no reason to do this, except to perpetuate voter fraud. According to PJMedia the state has a precedent and has precleared this purge.

Holder must be impeached.

dogsoldier on June 4, 2012 at 7:31 AM

Hey MN J, that’s the way it is in the People’s Republic, and why DemonRats want to protect it at any cost.

Defy the Dept of Injustice, states must reassert their constitutional rights or kiss them goodbye forever.

insidiator on June 4, 2012 at 7:37 AM

I always find it frustrating. Believe it or not, I understand some of the concerns and fears expressed by people objecting to both voter ID and a review of voter rolls.

I understand your fear about gov’t making a problem worse, but not your fear of a new “poll tax”. Don’t give the racist libs any credibility in claiming that obtaining a photo id is too difficult for minorities to accomplish, or even the claim that there is a significant, or even countable number of minorities currently living who don’t have a photo id. Such a claim is absurd. They know they are lying and they know their arguments are made for no other reason than a) to gin up more black enthusiasm to vote and b) to keep fraudulent votes a-comin’.

The id that requiring a photo id is equivalent, in any way, shape or form, to a poll tax is too silly to even acknowledge. Any liberal who makes that claim is either completely dishonest (very likely) and/or a complete idiot (also very likely).

And finally, if someone is too lazy or stupid to obtain a photo ID, they shouldn’t be voting anyway.

Monkeytoe on June 4, 2012 at 7:49 AM

What we don’t seem to have any mechanism for, however, is recording when they die. I’m not sure how we tackle that or how such a process would be viewed in terms of constitutional law. But I’m open to suggestions.

Doesn’t every county have a coroner’s office that must record a certificate of death? How difficult would it be to run matches on that database and the voter registration rolls?

Odysseus on June 4, 2012 at 7:49 AM

It’s time for a state to tell Bill Clinton’s little bagboy for bribes collections to fluke off.

MNHawk on June 4, 2012 at 8:33 AM

How about getting a referendum on a state ballot somewhere to remove any welfare recipient from the voter rolls. Then have conservative bloggers “suggest” ways to illegally vote. I wonder how the libs would feel about photo ID then?

Yeah, I know. The bloggers would be jailed in a federal supermax and the feds would declare that state to be new federal land.

TugboatPhil on June 4, 2012 at 8:42 AM

If the DOJ was really interested in votes being counted correctly, they would want a clean voter registration and would require an audit before every election. See how long the govt let’s you cash grandma’s SS check when she passes on. Oh, wait, they don’t have a way of knowing that, either.

Kissmygrits on June 4, 2012 at 8:54 AM

Holder is merely trying to save money or prevent the waste of good money already spent.

After all, it took a few million or so to print up the completed ballots for the 2012 General Election and they have already been filled out by thousands of ACORN, SEIU and DWS/DNC volunteers, ready for Election night or a day or two after the election should things go badly for Obama. (God, I pray so.)

To have to toss all those ballots into the trash heap…well, that’d be a waste of good money, right?

Florida is messing up the works…eligible voters? What is an eligible voter, anyway? If you are here, or want to be here, or were here and are now gone, or want to vote, want to vote so much that you want to vote many many times…and if you’ve been paid to vote many many times, shouldn’t you be allowed to vote?

Dammit, Florida…quit screwing things up for the rest of the states…how’s Obama gonna get re-elected by a landslide if voter rolls are purged and voters are required to show some form of legal, current photo identification when they request a ballot?

How’s the People Democracy of the Peoples Republic of Obama gonna keep on keepin’ on?

Stop it.

Dammit!

coldwarrior on June 4, 2012 at 9:03 AM

The Dead: The Silent Majority.

Axeman on June 4, 2012 at 9:06 AM

But how can the Dems win the election without felons, illegals, dead people and multiple voters voting for them?

THIS HAS TO STOP!

shick on June 4, 2012 at 9:25 AM

What I love about the left’s arguments against photo ID for voting, is that they are all so ridiculous.

Let’s look at the argument that we should not do anything to “limit a right”.

Where is that concern when it comes to the second amendment? Or political speech? Or religious freedom? Or property rights? Or the freedom of association?

The left has proven again and again that it cares little about limiting the ability to utilize one’s rights. At the very least, regulating voting to require photo identification – much like is required for the purchase of a firearm (2nd amendment right), is hardly beyond the pale. To engage in political speech, one has to file all kinds of paperwork with the gov’t. Voting should be at least as regulated, no?

The leftist would argue “no, because it is a ‘fundamental right’”. So, voting is somehow more fundamental than other rights? So fundamental, in fact, that we should not be allowed to protect the integrity of the ballot whatsoever?

Just a few seconds’ thought demonstrates how silly the left’s arguments are regarding voter identification for voting. They are not just baseless, they are absurd.

The argument that there is no proven wide-spread voter fraud is likewise without merit. Assuming for this argument only that such is true, wo what? When has lack of evidence of a problem or lack of evidence that their proposal will be good policy ever stopped the left from passing a law before? Never. Passing a law to protect the integrity of the ballot is hardly such legislative over-reach as to require mountains of evidence of fraud before doing so. The mere “appearance of impropriety” is enough.

Next is the argument that requiring photograph ID will “disenfranchise” voters. That is, again, absurd. Today’s world requires photo ID for many transactions and acquiring a state issued photo ID is very, very easy. The idea that this requirement would rise to the level of disenfranchising anyone other than someone who wants to be disenfranchised (i.e., the stupid and lazy) is absurd. We cannot set policy based on some incredibly small percentage of the population that refuse to enter the current century and who live as luddites. that is pure insanity.

So, as the left has no real, rational, fact based opposition to requiring photo ID, what is there real reason for opposition? The knowledge that the left for years has used voting fraud as one of its weapons to try and win elections. there is no other reason.

Monkeytoe on June 4, 2012 at 9:40 AM

Aquarian on June 3, 2012 at 9:22 PM

Actually, IDs in most states are free, or a very low cost. In VA, I believe it amortizes to $.50 a year for a non-driving ID. (Sorry, looked it up, and it amortizes to $2 – 5-year ID for $10.) And, in most states, there are all kinds of organizations (charities and voter groups) that would be more than happy to cough up a couple of sawbucks to get someone truly indigent an ID. Sorry, but No Sale on your concerns.

GWB on June 4, 2012 at 10:18 AM

My wife works with seniors to obtain government help for heating bills, medical program assistance and other services that are available. NO, I repeat NO, senior can receive ANY help without a photo ID. So she really has a problem understanding this administration’s and the Democrat’s position on Voter ID. She recently re-registered as a Republican after a 41 year run as a Democrat.

amr on June 4, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Somebody tell Holder that voter fraud is a felony and Florida and all the other states have the responsibility to clean up the voter lists.

Amazingoly on June 4, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Leftist concern about Republican “voter suppression” is not a fact-based concern, it is a religion.

You cannot use facts to persuade leftists that no such problem exists, or even that it does not exist in certain places or circumstances. Their belief that such an effort exists is an article of faith, not a response to any sort of factual data.

philwynk on June 4, 2012 at 10:54 AM

Questions like that. Yes, I’m talking THAT easy.

IronDioPriest on June 3, 2012 at 10:21 PM

Those questions would literally eliminate about 2/3 of currently registered voters. I am not kidding. I am not exaggerating.

Not that I disagree, mind you; I think we would all be far better off with a simple, fact-based voter fitness test. But let’s not kid ourselves about such tests. They really would eliminate most of the voters.

Read this blog post from 2008 regarding how ill-informed most voters were. http://www.plumbbobblog.com/?p=2226

philwynk on June 4, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3