Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As expected, the Supreme Court rejected an appeal on Wisconsin's Voter ID law, making it the official law of the land. In fact, the Supreme Court has previously ruled on this subject. As a result, they decided without comment not to even hear this case.
The U.S. Supreme Court cleared the way for Wisconsin to implement a voter-identification law that opponents say is one of the strictest in the nation.
Rejecting an appeal by civil rights groups, the justices Monday gave a victory to Republicans, including Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, who have championed voter-ID laws around the country. Wisconsin is one of 30 states with ID laws and one of 17 that enacted measures since the Supreme Court upheld an Indiana statute in 2008.
It still won't be in effect for April elections. That gives quite a long time for people to get ready for the 2016 presidential. The reason it was put on hold was because it came about too soon before elections. Glad it was put on hold long enough & with more than enough time for people to get necessary documents.
The Leftists won't give up on this - the Texas voter ID law will probably still make it's way to the US Supreme Court (again). I wonder how many times the Leftists will have to lose in the Supreme Court before they accept that their "base" has enough competency to use a photo ID to vote the same way they use a photo ID to fly, bank, get credit, use a credit card, buy a cell phone, get Federal benefits .... all the things we do in our everyday lives? It's an insult to presume they can't use a photo ID to vote.
Lower courts have largely backed voter-ID laws. In a notable exception, a federal trial judge said Texas's statute was the product of intentional discrimination. That case is now before a federal appeals court and could make its way to the Supreme Court before the 2016 election.
Unlike with Wisconsin, the Supreme Court let the Texas law take effect for the 2014 election.
The Leftists won't give up on this - the Texas voter ID law will probably still make it's way to the US Supreme Court (again). I wonder how many times the Leftists will have to lose in the Supreme Court before they accept that their "base" has enough competency to use a photo ID to vote the same way they use a photo ID to fly, bank, get credit, use a credit card, buy a cell phone, get Federal benefits .... all the things we do in our everyday lives? It's an insult to presume they can't use a photo ID to vote.
Lower courts have largely backed voter-ID laws. In a notable exception, a federal trial judge said Texas's statute was the product of intentional discrimination. That case is now before a federal appeals court and could make its way to the Supreme Court before the 2016 election.
Unlike with Wisconsin, the Supreme Court let the Texas law take effect for the 2014 election.
By all means, let the Texas case advance to the Supreme Court, if somehow the Appeals Court does not finish it off first.
The Supreme Court has already ruled on this topic, and all that is left is a little bit of post-ruling clean up work, which the Wisconsin case was and the Texas case is. There may still be the occasional extremist lefty judge who declares Voter ID's unconstitutional in some region, but all that does is set up another quick and quiet smack-down, like the one we saw on the Wisconsin law today.
The Leftists won't give up on this - the Texas voter ID law will probably still make it's way to the US Supreme Court (again). I wonder how many times the Leftists will have to lose in the Supreme Court before they accept that their "base" has enough competency to use a photo ID to vote the same way they use a photo ID to fly, bank, get credit, use a credit card, buy a cell phone, get Federal benefits .... all the things we do in our everyday lives? It's an insult to presume they can't use a photo ID to vote.
Lower courts have largely backed voter-ID laws. In a notable exception, a federal trial judge said Texas's statute was the product of intentional discrimination. That case is now before a federal appeals court and could make its way to the Supreme Court before the 2016 election.
Unlike with Wisconsin, the Supreme Court let the Texas law take effect for the 2014 election.
As so many people have pointed out and the liberals conveniently never have an answer for, the requirements involved in the voter ID laws are nothing that any functioning member of society can't meet - if you can't produce an ID to vote then you must have to have no bank account, no education, no employment, no credit cards, or anything else of that sort. So the idea that these are upstanding citizens whose vote the racist Republicans are trying to strip away simply doesn't stand up to any rational scrutiny. It's beyond any remote credibility to think that there are millions of minorities who participate in no area of society whatsoever, but yet somehow they are enthusiastic participants in the democratic process.
That being the case, I think their true objection to it, which of course they will never admit, is that it disrupts their "community organizing" efforts. I've seen these efforts in action personally when I was younger in Los Angeles. They approach you on the street, have the paperwork to get you registered already in hand and filling it out. Basically all they want you to do is sign on the bottom line, then they go and register you as a Democrat. You do absolutely nothing. Come election day, they will pick you up and drive you to the polls and tell you on the way over which way they want you to vote. The rhetoric is of course that they are simply trying to encourage interest in the electoral process, but it's garbage. Do they try to get you to go to political meetings? No. Do they solicit your interest for the primaries? No. Do they offer to explain the issues to you? No. They are interested in one thing and one thing only, getting you to mark the D box instead of the R box.
I believe this is the root of the liberal opposition to ID laws. Those laws kill these efforts. They mean you can no longer approach some kid or homeless person on the street and 5 minutes later walk away with a genuine registered Democrat. I have no proof of this, but it is the only explanation I can see that is consistent with the facts.
Next, we need to have the straight ticket option removed.
That is a state by state issue, and it is not likely to happen. On the contrary, expect to see more states adopt straight ticket voting as a result of the Republican tsunami of 2010 and 2014.
Next, we need to have the straight ticket option removed.
Why do we "need" this? I already know how I'm going to vote, so the straight ticket option makes the process easier for me. It doesn't change my vote, just makes it convenient.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
