Phillip Martin of BurntOrangeReport.com states that the voter fraud that exists in Texas cannot be solved by the proposed legislation.
Texas Republicans Claim Voter ID Needed
To even try and argue this point is laughable at best. Cleary the staff of BurntOrangeReport has never been to a polling location on Election Day or during Early Voting.
I have had the honor of volunteering on several political campaigns through out my college years and helping run a State Representative race for Texas HD 125 in 2006. The oldest voter for our district during that time was old enough to have fought in the Civil War--- he was a life-long democrat. On Election Day we had a bus pull in to our polling location on the Southside of San Antonio with a bus full of elderly people from the Rio Grande Valley (located about 4 ½ hours south of San Antonio). They were there to vote for Ciro Rodriguez.
Now, anyone who has ever worked a poll on Election Day or voted on Election Day for that matter can tell you that you are only allowed to vote in your designated precinct. The volunteer wearing a Ciro Rodriguez shirt pleaded with the Poll Worker to let them vote there, lest they drive all the way back home and miss their opportunity to vote all together. The woman in charge of the precinct (a member of the Bexar Co. Democrats) decided the right thing to do would be to allow them to vote. Surprise, surprise. The real question was what were these people driving all the way from Harlingen to vote in San Antonio for? Answer: The RGV was considered to be a strong hold for Ciro, San Antonio was more of a battleground area and the votes in this specific precinct and county overall were critical to his campaign.
The real reason why liberals, not only in Texas but across the country, are so eager to keep legislation requiring voter identification is because they will be losing out on several thousand perhaps even millions of votes across Texas and the country. Heaven forbid we have a fair election---democrats would rarely win. If the democrats can’t manage to pick up seats or reclaim the White House with the set of advantages they have, they should just pack up and go home. Seriously. But to sit there and claim that the Republicans have no reason to push this legislation is ridiculous.
Sorry Mr. Martin you are horribly misinformed. My advise, open your eyes, go to a polling location and witness, firsthand, the gross misuse of authority and bastardization of the voting process conducted by your party.
The Voter ID push will make it more difficult for individuals to get away with this type of behavior and actions. If we can deter this from happening even a fraction of the time, why wouldn't we? To say that these measures won't thwart voting fraud in its entirety is sad excuse for an argument. Granted there will always be individuals who will try to circumvent the system, that's not why we fight. The argument being presented by Martin is the equivalency of saying our current laws will not keep drugs of the streets or prevent terrorist attacks so we should just nix the whole thing.
For more information on voter fraud in Texas feel free to visit Attorney General for the State of Texas Gregg Abbott's website.
Posts
24 minutes ago
8 comments:
Hey Katy, thanks for reading! You might want to read a little closer next time, though.
I stated that, "There has not been a single case of voter fraud in Texas over the past dozen years that could be mitigated with the voter ID laws proposed by Republicans the Texas Legislature."
That's considerably different than what you've claimed I said. If you want to make up something I said, then call me a liar, feel free to. But it's a disservice to your readers.
Phillip, I did edit the original post to allow for the main point to be made...that Voter ID can significalty reduce the amount of Voter Fraud. I apologize for any miscommunication but the main arguement still stands and should be addressed. It is impossible to know if any case of voter fraud could have been mitigated by the Voter ID laws simply because 1) there is so much undetected / unreported fraud and 2) Voter ID laws are not in effect. Thus to say that the laws are ineffective without ever having tried the Legislation is a disservice to your readers.
He was old enough to fight in the Civil War? Was he really 150 years old or do you not know when the Civil War was?
I used to go to Burnt Orange all the time to get my political news. But I like Right Up Front better. Now, I only come here! EVERY DAY!
Keep up the good work! Five stars!
I am well aware of when the civil war was---that is what made this mans age and apparent voting history all the more shocking...if you have anything substantial to contribute feel free to let us know.
And to the radder second anonymous person...thank you! We appreciate your support.
I'll try this one again, since it apparently didn't go through the first time:
1) Requiring a photo ID would not address the problem you are raising. Voter fraud is when someone is misrepresenting who they are to the election judge at a polling place. The problem you are raising in your post can only be solved by having competent election judges that won't cheat the system -- something that would require the state to invest more money into in order for counties to hire non-partisan, trained election officials that don't allow stuff like that.
2) Again, to your example, even if he voted, he'd be disqualified in any sort of recount, and recounts automatically happen for any close outcomes. You'll remember Leininger Republican Nathan Macias demanded a recount after his close loss to Doug Miller in the recent HD-73 primary; not a single voter was disqualified for participating in voter fraud (why? b/c voter fraud isn't a problem).
3) Finally, I don't trust the Texas AG to accurately enforce any proposed voter ID laws, especially considering he's failed to prosecute ACTUAL voter fraud:
"In 2005, two election judges, both Republicans, and a 10-year-old boy handed out over 100 ballots, Hebert testified, without checking any voter registration cards or IDs. The ballots were filled out and turned in, he said, quoting from several Dallas District Attorney memos that suggested there was a strong basis for prosecuting the judges for not following procedures and counting "over 100 more ballots" that there were "signatures on the roster."...
(Source: http://www.alternet.org/democracy/80589/?page=2)
---Phillip
The last civil war vet died in 1959.
First of to anonymous: the whole point of that wasn't to argue that this individual was the oldest living person voting, it was to argue that this registered democrat was a dead person who magically voted in every election...hence voter fraud.
1. Requiring a photo ID of an individual prior to voting would stop voter fraud. No photo ID sorry no vote. That would be like aruging that requiring a photo ID to get into a bar and consume alcohol wouldn't stop under age drinking.
2. Having that persons vote dismissed in the off chance of a recount doesn't change the fact that voting fraud occured...we can throw as many "what if" scenarios in there, it doesn't change the point: IT IS STILL HAPENNING. Nice intro with good ol' Jim Leininger though...crazy old rich guy who generously gives his money to help poor minorities get an education..pft what is he thinking?
3. By your own standard of what "voter fraud is: someone missrepresenting themselves at a polling place to an election judge or official" the three individuals in your arguement about the AG wouldn't qualify as actual voter fraud as their was no "misrepresentation" on the part of the individuals who turned in the ballots.
You can't have it both ways.
Post a Comment