Lawmakers weigh technology-driven alternative to voter ID amendment

What do you think about the voter ID issue and it's impact on the Winona area?
****************

Lawmakers weigh technology-driven alternative to voter ID amendment
http://www.twincities.com/news/ci_20060827?source=rss

Sent by a friend via

Mobile Local News
www.mobilelocalnews.com

Sent from my iPhone

I think that proposals for voter ID laws, whether by requiring a voter to
present a photo id at the polling place, or by verifying through facial
recognition technology, leave many questions unanswered. Moreover, the
proposed new requirements seem to be a solution in search of a problem and do
nothing to actually resolve issues that potentially allow fraudulent voting in
Minnesota.

Among the questions not addressed are how new voter ID laws will affect
servicemen and women who are deployed overseas. Nor are potential issues of
voter fraud committed by those using absentee ballots addressed. Moreover,
unless there are actual photo ID laws on the books, this software will do
nothing to resolve issues some say exist with regards to voter eligibility.

In Minnesota, voter fraud charges have been brought against individuals who
were suspected of not being eligible to vote, due to felony convictions. Those
charged with voting while ineligible were found to have voted because they were
unaware that their conviction rendered them ineligible. Their probation
officers had not notified them of voter ineligibility nor had any other office
so notified them. Although individuals were charged with double voting,
underage voting, voter impersonation, or voting outside of their jurisdiction,
none--that is ZERO--were found to have committed voter fraud.

http://www.ceimn.org/files/Facts%20about%20Ineligible%20Voting%20and%20Voter%20Fraud%20in%20Minnesota_with%20appendix.pdf

It seems that what does need to be improved is notification of felons of their
voting rights or ineligibility to vote in elections and when/if eligibility can
be restored. Unfortunately, this is not being proposed, although surely it
would be the most cost effective method of addressing the real issue:
individuals not knowing that they are ineligible and when/if their voting
rights will be restored.

Two very significant groups oppose new voter ID legislation: The League of
Women Voters and military veterans:

http://www.lwv.org/our-work

http://www.startribune.com/politics/blogs/140876853.html

Facial recognition software could help in cases of suspected voter
impersonation; however there is no evidence to suggest that actual voter
impersonation takes place. Moreover, it would be an additional expense at
state, county and local polling places and would require additional training of
poll workers, who are volunteers. Certainly this would be well worth the
investment in funds and in time if there were actually a problem with voter
impersonation. However, no such problem has been shown to exist.

More importantly, such technology could only verify that the person presenting
him/herself at the polling place was the person registered to vote---within
limits of the capacity of the facial recognition software, assuming the
individual wasn't an identical twin or otherwise very similar in features. And
assuming that the individual was in possession of a driver's license or state
issued ID. Many older adults and newly eligible young voters do not have such
photo ids. Such software would be useless in these cases. While it is simple
enough for most healthy adults to obtain a state sanctioned photo id, those IDs
come with a cost to the individual. This cost can become significant to older
adults or those who were born overseas but who are now citizens and eligible to
vote if original birth certificates are not available (not uncommon for older
people) or not in the 'correct' format. For many older individuals, their
birth certificates were baptismal records, and in some cases, such records
contain inaccuracies in spelling, date of birth, or were lost in fires or
floods, etc.

The League of Women Voters estimates that 10 percent of persons with
disabilities in MN lack a photo ID. This translates in 27,000 individuals who
are faced with finding funds and transportation to obtain the necessary
documents for a photo ID. Given that disabled individuals and older
individuals and even the youngest eligible voters are more likely to have very
limited incomes, a disparate financial burden falls on these groups of voters.

While it seems reasonable on the face to require a photo ID to vote, just as a
photo ID is often required to write a check, purchase liquor or drive a car,
none of these activities are basic rights. Voting is a basic right, protected
under law and central to having a strong and vital democracy.

> Subject: [Winona] Lawmakers weigh technology-driven alternative to voter ID
amendment
> From: <email obscured>
> Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 07:34:09 -0600
> To: winona@forums.e-democracy.org
>
> What do you think about the voter ID issue and it's impact on the Winona
area?
> ****************
>
> Lawmakers weigh technology-driven alternative to voter ID amendment
> http://www.twincities.com/news/ci_20060827?source=rss
>
>
> Sent by a friend via
>
> Mobile Local News
> www.mobilelocalnews.com
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> Craig Brooks
> Winona
> About Craig Brooks: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/craigbrooks
>
> View full topic, share on Facebook and more:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4CiFmY39cWNm6sooXmp266
>
> Special News: Deep Dish Community Engagement:
http://blog.e-democracy.org/posts/1372
> Tell your St. Paul and Minneapolis friends to visit: http://beneighbors.org
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> To post: winona@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment
publicly.
> To leave: Put "unsubscribe" - or for digest write "digest on" - in subject.
>
> Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/winona
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting thanks:
http://OnlineGroups.Net

I totally agree with Terri Hyles' comments. The only reason that any lawmaker
is interested in this ammendment is to create confusion and distraction from
issues that really need to be addressed. There is no problem to solve so why
the energy and time is being spent on this issue and the marriage ammendment is
totally politically and diversinary in intent and scope.

I think there are a few narrow minded people out there that support either of
these issues and that the majority of us should stand up and be sure they are
shouted down.

We need to demand that both parties work on the real issues that are keeping
people down.

Joliene Olson

Thank you, Terri and Joliene. I also agree with you. The facts do not stand up
to the arguments pro-voter ID folks are making. College students (because they
move so often), the elderly (because they may never have had a state issued ID
or if they need to get an ID which will require transportation to the nearest
DMV to obtain said ID so it matches a current residence possibly at a nursing
home or assisted living facility), and women (because of name changes that
come with marriage and divorce) in particular as going to be particularly
disenfranchised.

An 84 year old woman in Wisconsin named Ruthelle Frank is suing the state
because this coming election will be the first one in her adult life she will
not be able to cast her vote. She does not have a birth certificate- she never
had one. There is a spelling error with her name at the Register of Deeds so it
could cost as much as $200 in fees to acquire the necessary documentation to
obtain a state issued ID to prove she is a citizen. Minimally it will be $20. A
nominal fee for most, but many people are on tight fixed incomes and $20 may be
grocery money for the month. Is this what we want MN to look like in 2014?

The voter turnout in MN is historically among the nation's highest and yet our
average voter turnout is still only at 69% or so. We should be ENCOURAGING not
DISCOURAGING voters--particularly young voters. I am very concerned what a law
like this would do for same day voter registration which obviously plays a big
role in the high turnout in MN. Many precincts throughout the state would not
have the capability to conduct any sort of on-the-spot database checking
required or it will come at great cost to cities and counties who are already
financially strapped. I sincerely hope our lawmakers think all the
ramifications through very carefully before impeding on our rights as citizens
to participate in our democratic system.

Tonya van Tol

The software folks have not been able to guarantee a reliable bug-free and
tamper-free automated balloting and voting process. And now they want to
control who does - and does not - get to vote?

I don't think so...

-Leslie Hittner

Rest of post

-----Original Message-----
From: terri hyle
Sent: Wednesday, February 29, 2012 1:20 PM
To: winona@forums.e-democracy.org
Subject: Re: [Winona] Lawmakers weigh technology-driven alternative to voter
ID amendment

I think that proposals for voter ID laws, whether by requiring a voter to
present a photo id at the polling place, or by verifying through facial
recognition technology, leave many questions unanswered. Moreover, the
proposed new requirements seem to be a solution in search of a problem and
do nothing to actually resolve issues that potentially allow fraudulent
voting in Minnesota.

Among the questions not addressed are how new voter ID laws will affect
servicemen and women who are deployed overseas. Nor are potential issues
of voter fraud committed by those using absentee ballots addressed.
Moreover, unless there are actual photo ID laws on the books, this software
will do nothing to resolve issues some say exist with regards to voter
eligibility.

In Minnesota, voter fraud charges have been brought against individuals who
were suspected of not being eligible to vote, due to felony convictions.
Those charged with voting while ineligible were found to have voted because
they were unaware that their conviction rendered them ineligible. Their
probation officers had not notified them of voter ineligibility nor had any
other office so notified them. Although individuals were charged with
double voting, underage voting, voter impersonation, or voting outside of
their jurisdiction, none--that is ZERO--were found to have committed voter
fraud.

http://www.ceimn.org/files/Facts%20about%20Ineligible%20Voting%20and%20Voter%20Fraud%20in%20Minnesota_with%20appendix.pdf

It seems that what does need to be improved is notification of felons of
their voting rights or ineligibility to vote in elections and when/if
eligibility can be restored. Unfortunately, this is not being proposed,
although surely it would be the most cost effective method of addressing the
real issue: individuals not knowing that they are ineligible and when/if
their voting rights will be restored.

Two very significant groups oppose new voter ID legislation: The League of
Women Voters and military veterans:

http://www.lwv.org/our-work

http://www.startribune.com/politics/blogs/140876853.html

Facial recognition software could help in cases of suspected voter
impersonation; however there is no evidence to suggest that actual voter
impersonation takes place. Moreover, it would be an additional expense at
state, county and local polling places and would require additional training
of poll workers, who are volunteers. Certainly this would be well worth the
investment in funds and in time if there were actually a problem with voter
impersonation. However, no such problem has been shown to exist.

More importantly, such technology could only verify that the person
presenting him/herself at the polling place was the person registered to
vote---within limits of the capacity of the facial recognition software,
assuming the individual wasn't an identical twin or otherwise very similar
in features. And assuming that the individual was in possession of a
driver's license or state issued ID. Many older adults and newly eligible
young voters do not have such photo ids. Such software would be useless in
these cases. While it is simple enough for most healthy adults to obtain a
state sanctioned photo id, those IDs come with a cost to the individual.
This cost can become significant to older adults or those who were born
overseas but who are now citizens and eligible to vote if original birth
certificates are not available (not uncommon for older people) or not in the
'correct' format. For many older individuals, their birth certificates were
baptismal records, and in some
cases, such records contain inaccuracies in spelling, date of birth, or were
lost in fires or floods, etc.

The League of Women Voters estimates that 10 percent of persons with
disabilities in MN lack a photo ID. This translates in 27,000 individuals
who are faced with finding funds and transportation to obtain the necessary
documents for a photo ID. Given that disabled individuals and older
individuals and even the youngest eligible voters are more likely to have
very limited incomes, a disparate financial burden falls on these groups of
voters.

While it seems reasonable on the face to require a photo ID to vote, just as
a photo ID is often required to write a check, purchase liquor or drive a
car, none of these activities are basic rights. Voting is a basic right,
protected under law and central to having a strong and vital democracy.

> Subject: [Winona] Lawmakers weigh technology-driven alternative to voter
> ID amendment
> From: <email obscured>
> Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 07:34:09 -0600
> To: winona@forums.e-democracy.org
>
> What do you think about the voter ID issue and it's impact on the Winona
> area?
> ****************
>
> Lawmakers weigh technology-driven alternative to voter ID amendment
> http://www.twincities.com/news/ci_20060827?source=rss
>
>
> Sent by a friend via
>
> Mobile Local News
> www.mobilelocalnews.com
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
> Craig Brooks
> Winona
> About Craig Brooks: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/craigbrooks
>
> View full topic, share on Facebook and more:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/4CiFmY39cWNm6sooXmp266
>
> Special News: Deep Dish Community Engagement:
> http://blog.e-democracy.org/posts/1372
> Tell your St. Paul and Minneapolis friends to visit:
> http://beneighbors.org
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> To post: winona@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment
> publicly.
> To leave: Put "unsubscribe" - or for digest write "digest on" - in
> subject.
>
> Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/winona
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting thanks:
> http://OnlineGroups.Net

Terri Hyle

About Terri Hyle: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/6u5omPGA5R2Fja8Z9PMw15

View full topic, share on Facebook and more:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/3tzwx8JdUyjykGOel4cJRJ

Special News: Deep Dish Community Engagement:
http://blog.e-democracy.org/posts/1372
Tell your St. Paul and Minneapolis friends to visit: http://beneighbors.org

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To post: winona@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment
publicly.
To leave: Put "unsubscribe" - or for digest write "digest on" - in
subject.

Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/winona
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting thanks:
http://OnlineGroups.Net

-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4843 - Release Date: 02/29/12

With the ability of people to vote a month in advance of the election day at
city hall or the court house it is foolish to believe anyone is denied their
legitimate right to case their vote. As an election judge I have even seen a
person from the twin cities thought they could cast their vote at any polling
place in the state simple because they were in Winona on election day because
they didn't take the time to vote knowing they were going to be out of their
ward and precinct on election day.

Sorry folks it is not only your right but your responsibly to understand the
simple rules and the fact that everyone wants a honest count by those who
reside in the area covered by their polling place. If I or any of the election
judges don't know you from Adam or Amy then you best bring your ID because we
truly want you to be able to vote if you are at the right place.

Paul Double

Paul Double

Dear Paul,

Wow! That is all I can say....I do know people that live in isolated areas who
are disabled and it is very, very difficult for the them to travel - so these
folks on fixed income should hire a expensive handicap capable unit to get into
the court house and then to the polls?

I also am wondering about all the seniors I do know that do vote (registered)
but will now have to obtain this specific photo identification that will be
necessary to get the "new voter photo id" - not all have driver's license!

Also that tribal idendification that is legal in this state will be thrown out
(along with passports) for identification - and what about your soldiers
overseas?

The way the bill reads now - they will have to be home to vote...oh yeah -
vouching for your cousin joe or your neighbor you have known for 20 years out
that goes as well in the bill - come on!

I am a taxpayer just like you (hopefully you are) - why pay for this added
expense the state will have to incur for the id's?

I am just a simple older woman who has been a election judge for years and I do
understand the rules. The voter id idea is frankly - stupid.

Audrey Thayer

Rest of post

I really like the 'solution in search of a problem' statement that was made
earlier, because to get at what's really behind this one has to be aware what
the 'problem' actually is.

For some, the most extremist few, the problem that really worried them was the
increase in youth and people of color turnout in the 2008 election. (Remember,
where the party of bank deregulation and wars of choice in the middle east was
run out of town on a rail?) So anything that can be done to reduce voter
turnout in those categories solves their 'problem' - which is that their
extremist candidates are having problems getting elected.

The recent rash of laws on Voter ID comes from the same source - the extremely
partisan American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC. For the rest of this
point, I will turn to the noted political writer John Nichols. (No relation, as
far as I know, to Jim and Ann)

"Republicans have argued for years that “voter fraud” (rather than unpopular
policies) costs the party election victories. A key member of the Corporate
Executive Committee for ALEC’s Public Safety and Elections Task Force is Sean
Parnell, president of the Center for Competitive Politics, which began
highlighting voter ID efforts in 2006, shortly after Karl Rove encouraged
conservatives to take up voter fraud as an issue. Kansas Republican Kris
Kobach, who along with ALEC itself helped draft Arizona’s anti-immigration law,
has warned of “illegally registered aliens.” ALEC’s magazine, Inside ALEC,
featured a cover story titled “Preventing Election Fraud” following Obama’s
election. Shortly afterward, in the summer of 2009, the Public Safety and
Elections Task Force adopted voter ID model legislation. And when midterm
elections put Republicans in charge of both chambers of the legislature in
twenty-six states (up from fifteen), GOP legislators began moving bills
resembling ALEC’s model.

At least thirty-three states have introduced voter ID laws this year. In
addition to Wisconsin, Alabama, Kansas, South Carolina and Tennessee have
passed similar bills. Only a veto by Democratic Governor John Lynch prevented
New Hampshire from enacting a law the Republican House speaker admitted was
advanced to make it harder for “liberal” students to cast ballots, and that one
state representative described as “directly attributable to ALEC.”

ALEC’s goal is to influence not just state politics but also the 2012
presidential race, to “give the electoral edge to their preferred candidates,”
as Cristina Francisco McGuire of the Progressive States Network pointed out in
March. “It’s no coincidence that they are waging the fiercest of these battles
in states that are also the likeliest battleground states in 2012, where
suppressing the youth vote could have a dramatic impact,” she wrote. The one
class of voters that ALEC seeks to protect with resolutions and model
legislation—overseas military voters—happens to be likely to vote Republican."

No one has ever been convicted of "voter impersonation", which is the only
thing that the current Voter ID bill will protect. Yet this bill will
cost us tax payers in the millions. The amount of fraud in our elections
is negligent. What we need are more voters, not more restrictions! --Ruth
Charles

On 3/1/12 12:00 PM, "Paul Double" <<email obscured>> wrote:

>With the ability of people to vote a month in advance of the election
>day at city hall or the court house it is foolish to believe anyone is
>denied their legitimate right to case their vote. As an election judge
>I have even seen a person from the twin cities thought they could cast
>their vote at any polling place in the state simple because they were in
>Winona on election day because they didn't take the time to vote knowing
>they were going to be out of their ward and precinct on election day.
>
>Sorry folks it is not only your right but your responsibly to understand
>the simple rules and the fact that everyone wants a honest count by those
>who reside in the area covered by their polling place. If I or any of
>the election judges don't know you from Adam or Amy then you best bring
>your ID because we truly want you to be able to vote if you are at the
>right place.
>
>Paul Double
>
>Paul Double
>Paul Double
>
>About Paul Double: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/pauldouble
>
>View full topic, share on Facebook and more:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/Sg9P7spXrRBsebNfpVPW5
>
>Special News: Deep Dish Community Engagement:
>http://blog.e-democracy.org/posts/1372
>Tell your St. Paul and Minneapolis friends to visit:
>http://beneighbors.org
>
>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> To post: winona@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment
>publicly.
> To leave: Put "unsubscribe" - or for digest write "digest on" - in
>subject.
>
> Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/winona
>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting thanks:
>http://OnlineGroups.Net

Well, John Slade made a very good point and since he made it I will add a bit
to it.
It is absolutely true that the extreme position people don't like the fact that
a black man is in the White House period....... If they can reduce the latino
and black vote they think that there will always be a white man elected. This
is so much a race issue for them that it isn't even funny.

Since the latino and black vote are growing entities, the more problems that
can be created to keep them from the polls the better.

Paul's example of a person from MPLS trying to vote in Winona is not fraud. It
is simply misplaced judgment and I suspect when they were asked to write down
their address it was easily identified and prevented. The point is, how many
of those people do you see every year? Do we really need to make it tough for
a lot of vulnerable people who don't have the funds or the ability to get a
proper ID to vote to prevent a small number of dumb people? The answer is NO
unless you are one of those people trying to minimize the ability of people of
color to vote at all.

>From what I have read, this expensive technology they are talking about it a
lot of blow and bluster and 1) doesn't always work correctly and 2) doesn't
correct the problem as it has been identified. Do the politicians think we are
all stupid out here and so amazed by technology that we are blind to what is
being done?

Joliene Olson

Rest of post

Joliene, can you cite some evidence about the "extreme position people"
along with some data as to the approximate of those people? Would it be
about the same as the "extreme position people" that hated George Bush?

Terry Angst

On 3/1/2012 4:33 PM, Joliene Olson wrote:
> Well, John Slade made a very good point and since he made it I will add a bit
to it.
> It is absolutely true that the extreme position people don't like the fact
that a black man is in the White House period....... If they can reduce the
latino and black vote they think that there will always be a white man elected.
This is so much a race issue for them that it isn't even funny.
>
> Since the latino and black vote are growing entities, the more problems that
can be created to keep them from the polls the better.
>
> Paul's example of a person from MPLS trying to vote in Winona is not fraud.
It is simply misplaced judgment and I suspect when they were asked to write
down their address it was easily identified and prevented. The point is, how
many of those people do you see every year? Do we really need to make it tough
for a lot of vulnerable people who don't have the funds or the ability to get a
proper ID to vote to prevent a small number of dumb people? The answer is NO
unless you are one of those people trying to minimize the ability of people of
color to vote at all.
>
> > From what I have read, this expensive technology they are talking about it
a lot of blow and bluster and 1) doesn't always work correctly and 2) doesn't
correct the problem as it has been identified. Do the politicians think we are
all stupid out here and so amazed by technology that we are blind to what is
being done?
>
> Joliene Olson
>
>
>
> Joliene Olson
>
> About Joliene Olson: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/7gGuqd5qt3yGTZRFH9QK43
>
> View full topic, share on Facebook and more:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/1c9RTulm3xZAkD1qrtdwPw
>
> Special News: Deep Dish Community Engagement:
http://blog.e-democracy.org/posts/1372
> Tell your St. Paul and Minneapolis friends to visit: http://beneighbors.org
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> To post: winona@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment
publicly.
> To leave: Put "unsubscribe" - or for digest write "digest on" - in
subject.
>
> Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/winona
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting thanks:
http://OnlineGroups.Net

Rest of post

Should read as follows:

Joliene, can you cite some evidence about the "extreme position people"
along with some data as to the approximate*number* of those people? Would it
be
about the same as the "extreme position people" that hated George Bush?

Terry Angst

On 3/1/2012 5:33 PM, Terry Angst wrote:
> Joliene, can you cite some evidence about the "extreme position people"
> along with some data as to the approximate of those people? Would it be
> about the same as the "extreme position people" that hated George Bush?
>
> Terry Angst
>
> On 3/1/2012 4:33 PM, Joliene Olson wrote:
>> Well, John Slade made a very good point and since he made it I will add a
bit to it.
>> It is absolutely true that the extreme position people don't like the fact
that a black man is in the White House period....... If they can reduce the
latino and black vote they think that there will always be a white man elected.
This is so much a race issue for them that it isn't even funny.
>>
>> Since the latino and black vote are growing entities, the more problems that
can be created to keep them from the polls the better.
>>
>> Paul's example of a person from MPLS trying to vote in Winona is not fraud.
It is simply misplaced judgment and I suspect when they were asked to write
down their address it was easily identified and prevented. The point is, how
many of those people do you see every year? Do we really need to make it tough
for a lot of vulnerable people who don't have the funds or the ability to get a
proper ID to vote to prevent a small number of dumb people? The answer is NO
unless you are one of those people trying to minimize the ability of people of
color to vote at all.
>>
>>> From what I have read, this expensive technology they are talking about it
a lot of blow and bluster and 1) doesn't always work correctly and 2) doesn't
correct the problem as it has been identified. Do the politicians think we are
all stupid out here and so amazed by technology that we are blind to what is
being done?
>> Joliene Olson
>>
>>
>>
>> Joliene Olson
>>
>> About Joliene Olson: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/7gGuqd5qt3yGTZRFH9QK43
>>
>> View full topic, share on Facebook and more:
>> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/1c9RTulm3xZAkD1qrtdwPw
>>
>> Special News: Deep Dish Community Engagement:
http://blog.e-democracy.org/posts/1372
>> Tell your St. Paul and Minneapolis friends to visit: http://beneighbors.org
>>
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> To post: winona@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment
publicly.
>> To leave: Put "unsubscribe" - or for digest write "digest on" - in
subject.
>>
>> Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/winona
>> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
>> Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting thanks:
http://OnlineGroups.Net
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2114/4844 - Release Date: 03/01/12
> Terry Angst
>
> About Terry Angst: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/6NyTBjf1R7CwSDqvGV7IP3
>
> View full topic, share on Facebook and more:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/g9KIORfqf3H3iPbwecasO
>
> Special News: Deep Dish Community Engagement:
http://blog.e-democracy.org/posts/1372
> Tell your St. Paul and Minneapolis friends to visit: http://beneighbors.org
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> To post: winona@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment
publicly.
> To leave: Put "unsubscribe" - or for digest write "digest on" - in
subject.
>
> Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/winona
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting thanks:
http://OnlineGroups.Net

Rest of post

Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens was cognizant of voter fraud. In
writing a 6-3 majority opinion upholding an Indiana voter ID law, Mr. Justice
Stevens said that "flagrant examples of (voter) fraud . . . have been
documented throughout this Nation's history by respected historians and
journalists" and "that not only is the risk of voter fraud real but that it
could affect the outcome of a close election."

Tim Slade
Rural Winona

On Mar 1, 2012, at 1:51 PM, John Slade wrote:

> I really like the 'solution in search of a problem' statement that was made
earlier, because to get at what's really behind this one has to be aware what
the 'problem' actually is.
>
> For some, the most extremist few, the problem that really worried them was
the increase in youth and people of color turnout in the 2008 election.
(Remember, where the party of bank deregulation and wars of choice in the
middle east was run out of town on a rail?) So anything that can be done to
reduce voter turnout in those categories solves their 'problem' - which is that
their extremist candidates are having problems getting elected.
>
> The recent rash of laws on Voter ID comes from the same source - the
extremely partisan American Legislative Exchange Council, or ALEC. For the rest
of this point, I will turn to the noted political writer John Nichols. (No
relation, as far as I know, to Jim and Ann)
>
> "Republicans have argued for years that voter fraud (rather than unpopular
policies) costs the party election victories. A key member of the Corporate
Executive Committee for ALECs Public Safety and Elections Task Force is Sean
Parnell, president of the Center for Competitive Politics, which began
highlighting voter ID efforts in 2006, shortly after Karl Rove encouraged
conservatives to take up voter fraud as an issue. Kansas Republican Kris
Kobach, who along with ALEC itself helped draft Arizonas anti-immigration law,
has warned of illegally registered aliens. ALECs magazine, Inside ALEC,
featured a cover story titled Preventing Election Fraud following Obamas
election. Shortly afterward, in the summer of 2009, the Public Safety and
Elections Task Force adopted voter ID model legislation. And when midterm
elections put Republicans in charge of both chambers of the legislature in
twenty-six states (up from fifteen), GOP legislators began moving b
> ills resembling ALECs model.
>
> At least thirty-three states have introduced voter ID laws this year. In
addition to Wisconsin, Alabama, Kansas, South Carolina and Tennessee have
passed similar bills. Only a veto by Democratic Governor John Lynch prevented
New Hampshire from enacting a law the Republican House speaker admitted was
advanced to make it harder for liberal students to cast ballots, and that one
state representative described as directly attributable to ALEC.
>
> ALECs goal is to influence not just state politics but also the 2012
presidential race, to give the electoral edge to their preferred candidates, as
Cristina Francisco McGuire of the Progressive States Network pointed out in
March. Its no coincidence that they are waging the fiercest of these battles in
states that are also the likeliest battleground states in 2012, where
suppressing the youth vote could have a dramatic impact, she wrote. The one
class of voters that ALEC seeks to protect with resolutions and model
legislationoverseas military votershappens to be likely to vote Republican."
> John Slade
> Dayton's Bluff, Saint Paul
> About John Slade: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/5DTbsEHYNSYIexttiRGBMI
>
> View full topic, share on Facebook and more:
> http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/48eBJwlu4qdEpFwEzqDJic
>
> Special News: Deep Dish Community Engagement:
http://blog.e-democracy.org/posts/1372
> Tell your St. Paul and Minneapolis friends to visit: http://beneighbors.org
>
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> To post: winona@forums.e-democracy.org or "Reply-to-All" to comment
publicly.
> To leave: Put "unsubscribe" - or for digest write "digest on" - in subject.
>
> Forum Home: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/winona
> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
> Need help? http://e-democracy.org/support Hosting thanks:
http://OnlineGroups.Net

John Paul Stevens also stated in his opinion that voters without IDs may cast
provisional ballots. The whole idea of provisional ballots is absurd. Not only
is it going to add additional costs to run elections, but who would want their
ballot being counted days after the election especially when the election has
already been called? The entire concept sends the message that "your individual
vote really does not count nor matter."

Well Terry, I am not going to go out and do any indepth research to satisfy
your question. However, you only need to look at Fox News, Rush Limbaugh,
Hannity, Sara Palin and those others of that type and then add in the dozens of
emails I get from my brother and another "friend" or two who seem to like to
bombard people with the same old tired laments. Everything about Obama being
bad, wrong, or he is the cause of everything bad even to the point of not long
ago getting one that was still harping on the man's birth certificate. Then
you look at those people and they are 100% white and wealthy it isn't hard to
figure out that they simply don't want a black man in the white house and how
dare he be there. Add in Santorum and his religious zeal and Newt and his
harranging and you really can say it is the 1% that are rich and white.

The extremist that scare me the most are the religious and sanctimonous zealots
that feel that they have the right to tell me what I should believe and if I
have another opinion that it isn't worth considering. THink Republican this
past year. Not one of them would even consider someone elses ideas as worth
sitting down and talking about. It was their way or NO WAY. Simply repeating
NO NO NO NO isn't discussing or working on solutions for problems.

You might think that those who didn't like GWBush, including me, went on and on
about him but it certainly wasn't at the same level of hatred and intensity
that we are seeing now. This is bordering on racist if it isn't already.

Joliene Olson

I disagree with your appraisal of the level of hate for Bush, Joliene. I
don't know what you feel but I remember Bush being blamed for everything
including a bad hair day.

I think it is apparent that many Americans find much to dislike about
the President's policies. From ObamaCare to the financial bailouts, to
the unemployment rate, to the millions lost on the Solyndra loan that
put the American taxpayer last in line to get paid, to the GM
stockholders that found their shares worthless, to shutting down
drilling for oil, to failing to approve a pipeline, and more more
more. I don't care to debate those issues with you, I just want to
point out that there are reasons to dislike his policies.

Joliene, my point being that it isn't difficult for many Americans to
find a great deal of fault with Obama. Obviously you feel differently.
That's your right. AND, I'm entitled to my views without you implying
I'm racist. I don't take kindly to that veiled accusation Joliene.
There is much to dislike about his policies. I don't care if he is
green, brown or black.

I guess you're on your own with your brother and "friend." Is your
brother racist?

Terry Angst

On 3/3/2012 2:48 PM, Joliene Olson wrote:
Well Terry, I am not going to go out and do any indepth research to
satisfy your question. However, you only need to look at Fox News, Rush
Limbaugh, Hannity, Sara Palin and those others of that type and then add
in the dozens of emails I get from my brother and another "friend" or
two who seem to like to bombard people with the same old tired laments.
Everything about Obama being bad, wrong, or he is the cause of
everything bad even to the point of not long ago getting one that was
still harping on the man's birth certificate. Then you look at those
people and they are 100% white and wealthy it isn't hard to figure out
that they simply don't want a black man in the white house and how dare
he be there. Add in Santorum and his religious zeal and Newt and his
harranging and you really can say it is the 1% that are rich and white.

The extremist that scare me the most are the religious and sanctimonous
zealots that feel that they have the right to tell me what I should
believe and if I have another opinion that it isn't worth considering.
THink Republican this past year. Not one of them would even consider
someone elses ideas as worth sitting down and talking about. It was
their way or NO WAY. Simply repeating NO NO NO NO isn't discussing or
working on solutions for problems.

You might think that those who didn't like GWBush, including me, went on
and on about him but it certainly wasn't at the same level of hatred and
intensity that we are seeing now. This is bordering on racist if it
isn't already.

Joliene Olson
Joliene Olson

About Joliene Olson: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/7gGuqd5qt3yGTZRFH9QK43

View full topic, share on Facebook and more:
http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/6PlXGQVgX6faRI7I4CEu08

Special News: Deep Dish Community Engagement:
http://blog.e-democracy.org/posts/1372
Tell your St. Paul and Minneapolis friends to visit: http://beneighbors.org

Rest of post

I agree with Terry on this one. If I am racist because I disagree with
President Obama's policies, I guess hating his white half too might negate out
the black racism thing.

But, over and above that. I'd like to point out that I just had to supply my
state photo ID (drivers license) and offer up my SSN to purchase the 'right' to
harvest fish in MN. I complained about it, but was told 'that's just the way
it is'. Guess people will get use to it after the first time.

Todd: There is nothing in the Constitution giving you the right to fish. Also,
when you presented your state ID you didn't have to ensure that your current
address was the one on your photo ID to get your fishing license. Each hoop an
individual has to jump through increases the chance they won't vote or if they
fail once they likely won't try again. That is not democracy.

Tonya: But I did have to verify that my address was my current address, the
attendant specifically asked that of me. I do recall, when I go in and vote I
tell the person who I am, they look me up and ask me if I still live at the
specified address. I do, as I change my address if and when I move, so I'm not
sure what 'they' would do if I said 'why, no, it's not my current address.' (as
if anyone voting illegally would do that anyway).

Rest of post

---------
As far as 'rights' go, it's not a right that a person who is ineligible to vote
may do so. In fact, it's illegal. Just as the DNR is interested in proving
that I am a resident of the state of Minnesota to charge me an 'in state' rate
for fishing rather than charging the 'out of state' rate. It's simply a method
of proving that I am a citizen to determine which rate I pay, nothing more.
They also, obviously, check to verify that I have a legal right to obtain a
fishing license in this state (and who knows what other legal systems they are
tied into -- child support for example) as I would expect we do for voting
rights.
-------------------------------------
Those that would regulate/ban weapons and/or ammunition find no fault in saying
that 'regulating' a right explicitly granted in the US constitution is no big
deal. I'm saying, you can't have your cake and eat it too. Regulation of
'rights' granted (implicitly or explicitly) by either the US Constitution or
Minnesota State Constitution seem to be the issue here. Gun control is just an
example, I'm not relating it to voter ID any further than saying some 'right's
are regulated (and even over regulated) even when law abiding citizens are
involved.
----
Personally, I think this statistic (?) shows the need for improvement:
"Pew study: 1 in 8 voter records flawed"
(http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/story/2012-02-10/pew-study-inaccurate-voter-registration-rolls/53083406/1)

and I'm open to listening to valid solutions. As far as what I've heard about
being argued as a point 'against' voter ID (even though the Supreme Court *has*
found in favor of a state requiring photo ID already -- see above) is that it
'disenfranchises' legal voters to the point where they may not want to / be
able to exercise their rights. I'd like to point out that the reverse is also
true. Many persons, legally able to vote, feel disenfranchised by a system
that would allow ineligible voting to take place.

Yes, I understand that Minneapolis/St. Paul is a 'sanctuary city' and that we
celebrate 'diversity' of culture. What I, personally, would appreciate is that
We protect our election process as much as possible. If that means I have to
show a photo ID or some other sort of waiver, so be it.

Just my opinion, I may be wrong. But, then again, so may you be. We'll figure
it out somehow I'm sure.

In the lifetime of many of the people commenting here, in the American South,
certain people (who were black) were required to prove their worthiness to vote
by answering this question: How many bubbles are in a bar of soap?

The overt racism of those laws has led these states to be under a Federal watch
whenever they change their voting rules, they have to check with the Feds. The
reason they have to do this is deep, systemic disenfranchisement of black
people over many years.

For this reason, a Voter ID provision in one of these states (I think it was
North Carolina) was refused by the Justice Department for having a disparate
impact on different racial groups.

I see Voter ID as another poll tax; I see it's main intended effect to be
reducing the number of people voting, and that it's primarily poor, and
disproportionately colored people who get caught up in that. But we're a Yankee
state that didn't enact (many) Jim Crow laws, and so we don't have a federal
double-check, and also the expressed intent is voter fraud, not vote
suppression.

The real disturbing actions on the voter front haven't been individuals
fraudulently voting. People are fishing hard to find one - two - three examples
of out and out voter fraud. What there are, though, are tons of examples of bad
'felon lists' being used by states to determine eligibility. Greg Palast writes
very well about how both Florida 2000 and Ohio 2004 used lists that their
Republican Secretaries of State KNEW had false positives in them to suppress
the black vote. THAT is voter fraud.

And for those who are claiming that the Bush-bashing is the same as the
Obama-death-threats, you're fooling yourselves. Violent threats have gone up
significantly from Bush to Obama. The rhetoric is way more violent, there's way
more gun references and 'first amendment remedies', there's hate speech going
on that encourages the 'lone wolf' shooters.

All this despite the fact that many of us on the Left believe that George Bush
stole the 2000 election. When the newspapers did the final Florida-wide recount
and found that in almost all scenarios, Gore won the state, it was buried under
the fold on the B section. But when some loonie claims that Barack was born in
Kenya, Fox News has him (or her) on for weeks.

Now, my Dad and I definitely don't agree on this; we're both political, but I
changed my politics when I got to college. (Rick Santorum was right! College
does make people liberals!)

John Slade
(at the intersection of Highway 61 and I-94)

You cannot post because you are not logged in.

Lawmakers weigh technology-driven alternative to voter ID amendment

Already a member?

Not a member?

E-Democracy is 100% Donation Supported Contribute Today!