DoJ approves new voter-ID law in Virginia

posted at 12:41 pm on August 21, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

The Department of Justice, which is currently embroiled in fights over voter-ID laws in South Carolina and Texas, has passed on an opportunity to pick a fight in Virginia.  TPM’s Ryan Reilly reports that the structure of Virginia’s regulation — which was opposed by Democrats when Governor Bob McDonnell signed it into law — made it difficult for the DoJ to fight it on Section 5 grounds.  However, that’s due in part to Virginia’s non-photo-ID options for voter identification, too:

The Justice Department approved changes to Virginia’s voter ID law Monday, suggesting there is a way forward for such laws — even in states that must have election laws pre-cleared under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act — so long as they’re written in a way the federal government will sign off on.

Unlike voter ID laws passed in South Carolina and Texas (both of which have been opposed by the Justice Department under President Obama), Virginia’s voter ID law allows voters do show a wide range of types of identification to cast a ballot. The law, labeled a “strict non-photo identification law” by the National Conference of State Legislatures, OKs types of identification more likely to be held by voters who lack a state-issued photo ID.

“Unlike other voter ID laws that the department has challenged in recent months, the Virginia law does not require a photo identification,” Justice Department spokeswoman Nanda Chitre said in a statement.

“Instead, this law actually expands the types of identifications voters may use at the polls, and the state is required to mail to all registered voters a voter card prior to the general election, which voters can use to vote, removing the burden of travel on many residents to obtain the necessary documentation,” she said.

That doesn’t mean that the DoJ will win their challenges in other Section 5 states.  They’re already pushing the envelope hard on those arguments in South Carolina, where the state adoped the exact same kind of photo-ID system that the Supreme Court approved in 2008 for Indiana, and in Georgia, another Section 5 state, in 2005.  In a 2009 case, the Supreme Court warned in another 8-1 decision that the days of Section 5 are numbered:

A second case offers a further glimpse into the High Court’s perspective on the modern use of Section 5. In 2009′s Northwest Austin Municipal Utility District v. Holder, the Court declined to decide the question of the constitutionality of Section 5, writing that while it imposes “substantial federalism costs,” the “importance of the question does not justify our rushing to decide it.” But the Justices didn’t stop there.

They also cast real doubt on the long-term viability of the law, noting in an 8-1 decision by Chief Justice John Roberts that it “imposes current burdens and must be justified by current needs.” That such strong criticism was signed by even the Court’s liberals should concern Mr. Holder, who may eventually have to defend his South Carolina smackdown in court.

The DoJ may lose their Section 5 oversight in their suit against South Carolina as it is.  If they pushed the envelope on Virginia, the court would probably take an even dimmer view of the prosecutorial oversight at DoJ in their stewardship of Section 5 states and move to dump it even more quickly.  I’d guess that this is the main reason why the DoJ doesn’t plan to take on Virginia.

Even with the wider acceptance of identification types, the new law in Virginia significantly tightens control at the polling precincts.  It eliminates the option of signing an affidavit attesting to one’s eligibility and identity as a permissible option.  McDonnell also issued an EO that requires Virginia to send out voter ID cards to all registered voters, which can be used as ID, a mechanism that allowed Virginia to argue that it had assumed nearly all of the burden of requiring positive ID at the precincts.  Even with that, some Democrats refused to endorse the law; the EO, said state rep Donald McEachin, was nothing more than “trying to put lipstick on a pig.”

Looks as though the law is at least pretty enough for Eric Holder’s DoJ to give it a kiss of approval, or at least choose to fight another day.


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

Heh

Schadenfreude on August 21, 2012 at 12:42 PM

The land is being cleaned up, one swine at a time.

I’m so sorry for the clean pigs.

Schadenfreude on August 21, 2012 at 12:42 PM

“Instead, this law actually expands the types of identifications voters may use at the polls, and the state is required to mail to all registered voters a voter card prior to the general election, which voters can use to vote, removing the burden of travel on many residents to obtain the necessary documentation,” she said.

Look, nobody likes a trip to the DMV, but you need a photo ID to do all sorts of things. It’s hardly a burden.

changer1701 on August 21, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Notwithstanding the above the border with Mexico is wide open to the wage/vote slaves and drugs along with ones of terror being hauled into the U.S. by the coyotes of the drug cartels for $.

The two party evil money cult in control of Washington D.C.’s federal goverment is the problem.

Keep in mind the Apache’s lost this same area of the southwest to these same people back in the 1800′s.

Unlimited illegal immigration ,, as of now make you Americans the new Apache.

Beware.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on August 21, 2012 at 12:47 PM

Exactly..

I am so tired of hearing lib talking heads on tv ramble on about how photo id laws “disenfranchise” minorities. They never say how it does this. Just that it does. They can never back it up. Then when that argument fails, they resort to the classic “well, there are no documented cases of fraud. It just isn’t happening!”

UGH… when will someone just say enough is enough?

johnnyboy on August 21, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Holder s/b in jail.

Schadenfreude on August 21, 2012 at 12:48 PM

Its legal to require photo ID to enter a government building. So just hold elections in government buildings only. Problem solved.

meci on August 21, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Look, nobody likes a trip to the DMV, but you need a photo ID to do all sorts of things. It’s hardly a burden.

changer1701 on August 21, 2012 at 12:44 PM

Thank you. You have quicker fingers.

If one is not willing to suffer the “burden” of traveling to the DMV, then one should be willing to suffer the “burden” of going to the Social Security office to sign up for food stamps.

If one is willing to suffer the burden of the latter, and not the former, after so many men died on the beaches of Normandy to lessen that burden, then no way in hell should one be allowed to vote.

A system where people only will suffer a “burden” to take taxpayer dollars, but refuse to suffer the burden of traveling to the DMV, cannot long survive.

cane_loader on August 21, 2012 at 12:50 PM

ANY voter ID requirement undermines Democratic Party fraud activities. This is still a win. You still need a body to show up and vote. The shenanigans are almost always in the counting process.

TheLastBrainLeft on August 21, 2012 at 12:50 PM

If one is not willing to suffer the “burden” of traveling to the DMV, then one should NOT be willing to suffer the “burden” of going to the Social Security office to sign up for food stamps.

FIFM

cane_loader on August 21, 2012 at 12:51 PM

This insane and offensive kabuki argument by Dems and the current administration to actually spend taxpayer dollars SUING over it is an abomination.

cane_loader on August 21, 2012 at 12:52 PM

Expect Republican voters to have unexpected driver license renewal snafus near election day.

faraway on August 21, 2012 at 12:54 PM

In fact Apache leaders (chiefs) made deals with the Spanish and Mexican Goverments without regard to the safety of their tribes.
Some even became “scouts” for the the Spanish and Mexican Goverments, not unlike what the currnet leaders (chiefs) in Washington D.C. are doing this very moment in time.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on August 21, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Having an ID without a photo is kinda like having an airplane without the wings.

Only a Commie-led government would be capable of such vulgar stupidity and pandering.

OhEssYouCowboys on August 21, 2012 at 12:57 PM

I just dont get it…..who wouldn’t have an id in this day minus the illegal immigrants

Do they receive any govt help….do they keep all their money in coffee cans

cmsinaz on August 21, 2012 at 12:58 PM

That such strong criticism was signed by even the Court’s liberals should concern Mr. Holder, who may eventually have to defend his South Carolina smackdown in court.

Eric Holder isn’t concerned with ‘the law’. For Holder, ‘the law’ is what he says it is.

GarandFan on August 21, 2012 at 12:59 PM

Its legal to require photo ID to enter a government building. So just hold elections in government buildings only. Problem solved. meci on August 21, 2012 at 12:49 PM

Thou winnest.

Akzed on August 21, 2012 at 1:00 PM

Do they live off the grid ….you have to show id to get your utilities and such

cmsinaz on August 21, 2012 at 1:02 PM

In fact Apache leaders (chiefs) made deals with the Spanish and Mexican Goverments without regard to the safety of their tribes.
Some even became “scouts” for the the Spanish and Mexican Goverments, not unlike what the currnet leaders (chiefs) in Washington D.C. are doing this very moment in time.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on August 21, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Mescaleros dealt with the Mexican Government?

oldroy on August 21, 2012 at 1:03 PM

Holder can say it’s a “burden” to get a photo ID.
He cannot say it is a “burden” to get your mail.
Good for VA.
Next, they should take a digital photo of anyone who presents that mailed card to vote. Then, send ‘em that. Viola ! Photo ID to vote and no burden to anyone.

Jabberwock on August 21, 2012 at 1:04 PM

removing the burden of travel on many residents to obtain the necessary documentation

Oh shut up. Are you telling me these people never leave their homes? They never go to the store? They never go to a friend’s house? They just sit in their living rooms, unable to interact with the world? How exactly do they go to the polling places to vote then?

Shump on August 21, 2012 at 1:05 PM

APACHEWHOKNOWS on August 21, 2012 at 12:55 PM

Do the various tribes and pueblos have photo ID?

oldroy on August 21, 2012 at 1:05 PM

Okay, I’m usually opposed to extra governmental spending. But in this case, I say when someone registers to vote, you take their picture and send them a free photo ID good for voting. Voila. Problem solved.

Shump on August 21, 2012 at 1:06 PM

So we now know the DOJ issue is actually having a PHOTO, not an ID itself. Photos prevent fraud, pure and simple.

michaelo on August 21, 2012 at 1:07 PM

McDonnell also issued an EO that requires Virginia to send out voter ID cards to all registered voters, which can be used as ID, a mechanism that allowed Virginia to argue that it had assumed nearly all of the burden of requiring positive ID at the precincts.

But if the voter ID card has no photo, what is to prevent a voter from using it to vote, then passing it to a non-registered friend to voter later in the day?

If poll workers at the precincts are honest, they will cross off names of registered voters when they show up to vote in order to avoid duplicate voting. But when Democrats are involved, can we trust them to be honest?

Steve Z on August 21, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Viviette Applewhite, 93-year-old plaintiff in Pa. voter ID case, gets card amid appeal

Viviette Applewhite, who recalled marching for voting rights in 1960 with Martin Luther King Jr., was issued the temporary card on Thursday, the same day lawyers for her and others opposing the law appealed a judge’s refusal to halt the law from taking effect in the Nov. 6 presidential election.

Applewhite, 93, had trouble meeting the state’s documentation requirements to get a photo ID. For one thing, she did not have a Social Security card after it was stolen with her purse some years ago, she has said. Plus, she was adopted early in life, making the name on her birth certificate different from that on her other paperwork, and she did not have a record of the adoption.

Applewhite received her identification card after riding two public-transit buses to a Department of Transportation licensing office and presenting a clerk with her Medicare card from the 1990s, a state document listing her name and Social Security number in her own handwriting, and proof of her Philadelphia address, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported.

None of the documents, however, linked her birth certificate name of Viviette Virene Brooks to Viviette Applewhite.

PennDOT’s licensing bureau director Janet Dolan said Friday that clerks are able to make exceptions to the document requirements and work with applicants.

For instance, she said, PennDOT clerks are able to confirm somebody’s Social Security number with the Social Security Administration if they’re able to somehow show that the number belongs to them. But Dolan could not explain why Applewhite had been rejected before, saying she did not know what kind of documentation the woman had brought with her previously.

Still, PennDot’s official guidelines say a Social Security card is a must to get a photo ID, and a PennDot employee answering the agency’s voter ID hotline Thursday said the card is required.

Applewhite’s lawyers said she has been attempting to obtain a PennDOT-issued ID card for years.

“You just have to keep trying,” Applewhite said. “Don’t give up.”

Don’t give me that “it places a burden on minorities” BS.

Flora Duh on August 21, 2012 at 1:09 PM

No surprise here… I live in Virginia, and everybody knows McDonnell is an OG… Takes one to know one…

Mothers Finest on August 21, 2012 at 1:09 PM

If poll workers at the precincts are honest, they will cross off names of registered voters when they show up to vote in order to avoid duplicate voting. But when Democrats are involved, can we trust them to be honest?

Steve Z on August 21, 2012 at 1:08 PM

In Florida you have to sign your name in the register directly under your computer written name.

Flora Duh on August 21, 2012 at 1:15 PM

“Unlike other voter ID laws that the department has challenged in recent months, the Virginia law does not require a photo identification,” Justice Department spokeswoman Nanda Chitre said in a statement.

In other words, it’s not a real voter ID law.

Ward Cleaver on August 21, 2012 at 1:15 PM

Hello North Carolina! How ’bout them Cavaliers!

- Stupid Joe

OhEssYouCowboys on August 21, 2012 at 1:16 PM

The Fox News obama +9 poll is about to drop out of the RCP average.

What poll will pop up an outlier to take its place?

crash72 on August 21, 2012 at 1:18 PM

But if the voter ID card has no photo, what is to prevent a voter from using it to vote, then passing it to a non-registered friend to voter later in the day?

If poll workers at the precincts are honest, they will cross off names of registered voters when they show up to vote in order to avoid duplicate voting. But when Democrats are involved, can we trust them to be honest?Steve Z on August 21, 2012 at 1:08 PM

Photo ID will not stop this type of cheating.

Jabberwock on August 21, 2012 at 1:18 PM

So now, to steal a vote in VA or vote a dead person, you have to at a minimum commit mail fraud… well, it is progress, anyway.

Dirty Creature on August 21, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Read.
1. “When the Corn Mother Died.” regarding the goings on in New Mexico and the southwest via the Spanish and Mexican Govt’s.

Research book.

2. Historical based novel by Will Leivington Comfort “Apache”, the life and times of Apache Chief Mangus Colorados.

Whiskey and Gold just as evil then as now.

APACHEWHOKNOWS on August 21, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Yeah. Uh. This is 2012. We have a black President. Section 5 needs to go.

BKeyser on August 21, 2012 at 1:18 PM

Taxpayers/producers have to show IDs to work.

Moochers don’t have to show any to be bloodsuckers.

It’s an upside down world.

Schadenfreude on August 21, 2012 at 1:20 PM

On Sunday August 12, the Washington Compost released one of their famous “polls”; this one had breathtaking results.

It showed that a vast majority of Americans actually are in favor of photo ID being required to vote.

As I recall, 84% of whites favored photo ID. And nearly 70% of “non-whites” favored it, as did 64% of Blacks and a more or less equal percentage of Hispanics.

And when they asked the same question solely based on political party, it was absolutely not surprising to see that the percentage of Democrats who favored Photo ID was the lowest percentage of all groups polled.

That’s because they know they can’t win elections if they’re honestly run. There simply is no other explanation.

Del Dolemonte on August 21, 2012 at 1:23 PM

I’m voting YES on the Voter ID amendment in Minny this fall.

The end of the Sen. Al Franken era begins on November 7…

Bruno Strozek on August 21, 2012 at 1:25 PM

Breaking News:

The Department of Justice has just approved ballots for all States, incorporating the photo of Barack Obamuh – only.

In a press conference, held earlier today, Attorney General Holder said that: In the past, the voters have been misled by non-photo ballots, and by ballots which included Republican candidates. The one candidate, one photo ballot will rectify this problem, and America’s past history of repression.

/ [for now]

OhEssYouCowboys on August 21, 2012 at 1:26 PM

>Taxpayers/producers have to show IDs to work.

Moochers don’t have to show any to be bloodsuckers.

It’s an upside down world.

Schadenfreude on August 21, 2012 at 1:20 PM

Love it. Outstanding analysis.

OhEssYouCowboys on August 21, 2012 at 1:27 PM

So how much will the rent for a voter card?

Curious Democrats will be wanting to know…

ProfShadow on August 21, 2012 at 1:31 PM

So how much will the rent for a voter card?

Curious Democrats will be wanting to know…

ProfShadow on August 21, 2012 at 1:31 PM

It’s gonna be free! [Paid for by the taxpayers]

;O)

OhEssYouCowboys on August 21, 2012 at 1:32 PM

Applewhite, 93, had trouble meeting the state’s documentation requirements to get a photo ID. For one thing, she did not have a Social Security card after it was stolen with her purse some years ago, she has said

LOL. Yes, the Social Security Administration only issues a person one card per lifetime. If you lose it, you can never, ever get a duplicate.

In less than 30 seconds, I just checked the Social Security website. A person whose card has been lost or stolen can download an application for a replacement card, and mail it (along with documents verifying their identity) to the SSA, and they will issue a replacement card w/in 10 days.

AZCoyote on August 21, 2012 at 1:39 PM

…I

……Hate

………Holder!

KOOLAID2 on August 21, 2012 at 2:04 PM

Applewhite, 93, had trouble meeting the state’s documentation requirements to get a photo ID. For one thing, she did not have a Social Security card after it was stolen with her purse some years ago, she has said

LOL. Yes, the Social Security Administration only issues a person one card per lifetime. If you lose it, you can never, ever get a duplicate.

In less than 30 seconds, I just checked the Social Security website. A person whose card has been lost or stolen can download an application for a replacement card, and mail it (along with documents verifying their identity) to the SSA, and they will issue a replacement card w/in 10 days.

AZCoyote on August 21, 2012 at 1:39 PM

She was part of the marches in the 60′s per her own admission. i.e, it is not a stretch to conclude that she was one of the 60′s radicals and is just continuing that behavior as she ages. She was deliberately used by the lawyers as a test case to try to use a ridiculous extreme to prove their point. They failed.

Virginia’s non-photo-ID law will probably screen out the stupid fraudsters, but will do nothing to prevent fraud by those registering multiple times under multiple names because they will just get multiple voter cards mailed to the addresses they provide. Would be interesting to find out the number of voter cards mailed to certain addresses.

AZfederalist on August 21, 2012 at 2:07 PM

Do they live off the grid ….you have to show id to get your utilities and such

cmsinaz on August 21, 2012 at 1:02 PM

Actually, you don’t need a photo id (or any other kind) to get your utilities. When I got my electric, cable and internet turned on for my new apartment when I moved down to Texas, I did it by phone on my rest stops as I was driving down here.

Mitoch55 on August 21, 2012 at 2:13 PM

This non-photo ID nonsense reminds me of an episode of M*A*S*H. A non-photo ID was being passed around by all the South Koreans so that they could get medical care. The name on the ID was Kim Luck.

At one point, Hawkeye asks a South Korean man, “Are you really Kim Luck?” And the guy verified his identity, “This is me.” To which Hawkeye responded, “Well, this must be our Kim Lucky day.”

So, let’s look forward to a lot of Hispanics flooding the polls in Virginia with the verification of their non-photo ID, “This is me.”

BuckeyeSam on August 21, 2012 at 2:27 PM

They are always talking about how having to get a photo id will disenfranchise some voters. Well, if fraud is allowed to continue, then we who are legal are disenfranchised.

Mirimichi on August 21, 2012 at 2:27 PM

A person whose card has been lost or stolen can download an application for a replacement card, and mail it (along with documents verifying their identity) to the SSA, and they will issue a replacement card w/in 10 days.

AZCoyote on August 21, 2012 at 1:39 PM

Perhaps you missed this:

Plus, she was adopted early in life, making the name on her birth certificate different from that on her other paperwork, and she did not have a record of the adoption.

and this:

Applewhite’s lawyers said she has been attempting to obtain a PennDOT-issued ID card for years.

The point is, if a 93 yr old woman can take 2 busses down to the DMV to get an ID, the argument that expecting people to show ID to vote is a hardship for minorities is shot full of holes.

Flora Duh on August 21, 2012 at 2:38 PM

Actually, you don’t need a photo id (or any other kind) to get your utilities. When I got my electric, cable and internet turned on for my new apartment when I moved down to Texas, I did it by phone on my rest stops as I was driving down here.

Mitoch55 on August 21, 2012 at 2:13 PM

I believe that’s probably true everywhere, but I suggest you had to give them an SS number which allowed them to do a credit check.

You need an ID to open a bank account though.

slickwillie2001 on August 21, 2012 at 2:42 PM

Hubby just today had to show photo ID to get blood drawn for cholesterol check.

skeeterbite on August 21, 2012 at 2:48 PM

In Florida you have to sign your name in the register directly under your computer written name.

Flora Duh on August 21, 2012 at 1:15 PM

That’s how we do it in Tennessee, as well. We also just got voter registration cards mailed to us a few months ago and were encouraged to bring them to the polls, but they weren’t necessary. A valid photo ID was, though. Now, if only we could get some actual Conservative’s in the Senate. /not understanding how Tennessee sends Lamar Alexander year after year. But that’s for another thread.

pannw on August 21, 2012 at 3:19 PM

But if the voter ID card has no photo, what is to prevent a voter from using it to vote, then passing it to a non-registered friend to voter later in the day?

If poll workers at the precincts are honest, they will cross off names of registered voters when they show up to vote in order to avoid duplicate voting. But when Democrats are involved, can we trust them to be honest?

Steve Z on August 21, 2012 at 1:08 PM

You’re only allowed to vote in one precinct at one polling place specified on the card. When you vote your name is checked off the list. You cannot vote twice. passing the card to someone else will not work. There are ways to cheat but it ain’t easy and that ain’t one of em.

Oldnuke on August 21, 2012 at 3:25 PM

But if the voter ID card has no photo, what is to prevent a voter from using it to vote, then passing it to a non-registered friend to voter later in the day?

If poll workers at the precincts are honest, they will cross off names of registered voters when they show up to vote in order to avoid duplicate voting. But when Democrats are involved, can we trust them to be honest?

Steve Z on August 21, 2012 at 1:08 PM

It’s a catch-22, Steve. The voter card will have the voter’s name and address on it. To verify it, the voter will have to show the poll worker another form of ID like a photo driver license of passport. Holder didn’t think about that. I want his job.

timberline on August 21, 2012 at 3:27 PM

But if the voter ID card has no photo, what is to prevent a voter from using it to vote, then passing it to a non-registered friend to voter later in the day?

If poll workers at the precincts are honest, they will cross off names of registered voters when they show up to vote in order to avoid duplicate voting. But when Democrats are involved, can we trust them to be honest?

Steve Z on August 21, 2012 at 1:08 PM

It’s a catch-22, Steve. The voter card will have the voter’s name and address on it. To verify it, the voter will have to show the poll worker another form of ID like a photo driver license of passport. Holder didn’t think about that. I want his job.

timberline on August 21, 2012 at 3:27 PM

There…that’s better.

timberline on August 21, 2012 at 3:29 PM

Don’t give me that “it places a burden on minorities” BS.

Flora Duh on August 21, 2012 at 1:09 PM

.
Not ethnic minorities, but handicapped (aged, injured, birth defect, etc).
I don’t disagree with you, Florah’. I’m just clarifying this because I have to deal with a family member concerning it, all the time.

In this family members eyes, aged and handicapped people have too much difficulty in maintaining vital documents.
They don’t drive (mostly), so why should they worry about a lost photo ID? Most of them have been getting by fine without it . . . . . . . until the EVIL PA State Government imposed this new ‘Voter photo ID’ law.
Suddenly (trying to be “dramatic”), these handicapped people who don’t drive have to run helter-skelter, trying to replace the other documents they lost (and figured they’d never need, anyway) to eventually get their photo ID.
This family member sees it as way too much burden to be put on handicapped people.
And besides:

“everybody knows this was a sleazy move on the part of Republicans, to try and suppress the Democrat vote”

That’s what I have deal with every few days.

Yeah, I know. “Cry me a river”.

There’s no convincing him/her that there’s a valid voting fraud issue being dealt with, here. ( s i g h )

listens2glenn on August 21, 2012 at 3:38 PM

But when Democrats are involved, can we trust them to be honest?

Steve Z on August 21, 2012 at 1:08 PM

No we can’t but there are two poll workers checking each list. Independent verification to prevent “mistakes”.

Oldnuke on August 21, 2012 at 3:39 PM

I’m voting YES on the Voter ID amendment in Minny this fall.

The end of the Sen. Al Franken era begins on November 7…

Bruno Strozek on August 21, 2012 at 1:25 PM

And there was much rejoicing . . . yayyy.

listens2glenn on August 21, 2012 at 3:48 PM

Holder s/b in jail.

Schadenfreude on August 21, 2012 at 12:48 PM

…I like the orange outfits better than the stripped ones, and I think he’ll look good in orange!

KOOLAID2 on August 21, 2012 at 4:02 PM

Suddenly (trying to be “dramatic”), these handicapped people who don’t drive have to run helter-skelter, trying to replace the other documents they lost (and figured they’d never need, anyway) to eventually get their photo ID.
This family member sees it as way too much burden to be put on handicapped people.
And besides:


There’s no convincing him/her that there’s a valid voting fraud issue being dealt with, here. ( s i g h )

listens2glenn on August 21, 2012 at 3:38 PM

I don’t get it; don’t they need photo-ID when being admitted to a hospital or for other medical services? When picking up prescription medications on the FDA watch list? How can one function, especially when elderly or handicapped without one?

AZfederalist on August 21, 2012 at 4:02 PM

Why VA’s law but not Texas?
EM ‘EFFERS!

annoyinglittletwerp on August 21, 2012 at 4:13 PM

I’ve worked the polls in VA for the past 5 elections. Every time we are trained on what to do. Since I have been working you must show an ID preferably your voter registration card. There are other forms of ID that are accepted and one is the VA driver’s license. It is the most used form of ID used at the polls. The the voter registration card is the other. Most everyone carries their driver’s license and that is the one that most everyone shows. There are other ID’s that can be used and they all have pictures on them. As they come up to the desk they show their ID’s and have to state their complete name and address. It’s how we were trained.

The voting fraud that has been filmed usually has the voter going up to the desk saying a name and the poll worker hands them a ballot without showing an ID. The one I remember best was a couple of white guys going up and asking if there was an Eric Holder and the poll worker looking it up and handed him a ballot. WTH????

Our DIL votes in town and the last election she had her ID’s out to show the poll worker. The poll worker told her she didn’t need them and handed her a ballot. Another WTH moment.

So it appears that there can be much voter fraud in a sloppy check-in at the poll book. There are tons of others, but a consistent defense at the poll book would stop a lot of it.

BetseyRoss on August 21, 2012 at 4:16 PM

Seriously-Lee was from VIRGINIA-not Texas-so why is VA’s law okay but not Texas’s?!!

annoyinglittletwerp on August 21, 2012 at 4:19 PM

. . . . . . EM ‘EFFERS!

annoyinglittletwerp on August 21, 2012 at 4:13 PM

.
That’ll be enough out of you, young lady.

listens2glenn on August 21, 2012 at 5:00 PM

cane_loader on August 21, 2012 at 12:50 PM

My wife recently bought something at Michael’s, a craft store. I noticed on the bottom of the receipt that if you wanted to return something, you would need a photo id!

If you need a photo id just to return a craft item for a refund, then why is having one for voting such an issue? Isn’t preventing fraud on voting more important than preventing fraud on returning an item to the store?

BTW, I live in Indiana, and we’ve been showing a photo id for quite some time. No burden at all.

IrishEyes on August 21, 2012 at 5:09 PM

listens2glenn on August 21, 2012 at 3:38 PM

.
I don’t get it; don’t they need photo-ID when being admitted to a hospital or for other medical services? When picking up prescription medications on the FDA watch list? How can one function, especially when elderly or handicapped without one?

AZfederalist on August 21, 2012 at 4:02 PM

.
I suspect that most such handicapped persons stay in a given area; probably almost never change place of residence.
The local medical providers, pharmacies, and grocery stores all know these individuals from repetition, and “waive” the ID requirement.
They undoubtedly had an ID to get started at a given place of residence, but once the utilities are established there is no further need for an ID, regarding them.

But don’t get me wrong. For the purposes of voting, we should all have one. If anyone has a handicap that precludes them from being responsible in securing their own vital documents, I’d say they shouldn’t be allowed to vote.

It’s statements like this that generate the most sparks with the previously mentioned family member. : )

listens2glenn on August 21, 2012 at 5:16 PM

Vee must see your papers.
Remember, vee know ver you liv!

Another Drew on August 21, 2012 at 7:25 PM

There was a law passed in Mississippi, but it appears the DOJ can delay taking a position on it until after the election. So, of course, they will.

tom on August 21, 2012 at 7:58 PM