Democrats Vote Against Election Reform

Discussion in 'Politics' started by carpro, Sep 21, 2006.

  1. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,941
    Likes Received:
    296
    http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20060921-123316-5086r.htm

    House bill to require voter ID

    By Charles Hurt
    THE WASHINGTON TIMES
    September 21, 2006

    The House yesterday passed legislation that would require voters to show a valid photo identification in federal elections over the overwhelming objections of Democrats who compared the bill to segregation-era measures aimed at disenfranchising Southern blacks.

    The Federal Election Integrity Act was approved on a nearly party-line 228-196 vote. Republicans backed the bill 224-3, with three nonvoters; Democrats opposed it 192-4, with five nonvoters. They were joined in opposition by the House's one independent member.

    The bill, which faces an uncertain future in the Senate, is part of a Republican effort to complete before the November elections a package of proposals aimed at curbing illegal immigration and its effects on ordinary Americans.

    The so-called "Voter ID" bill, aimed at stamping out voter fraud, would require voters in federal elections to provide picture identification by 2008 and provide proof of U.S. citizenship by 2010. It was among the recommendations made last year by the bipartisan Commission on Federal Election Reform, headed by former President Jimmy Carter, a Democrat, and former Secretary of State James A. Baker III, a Republican.

    "Effective voter registration and voter identification are bedrocks of a modern election system," they wrote in their final report.

    But Democrats, siding with groups that work on behalf of minorities and illegal aliens, called the bill a "modern-day poll tax" and said it would place an insurmountable burden on voters and infringe upon their voting rights.
     
  2. Martin

    Martin
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2005
    Messages:
    5,228
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have to show a picture ID when I vote here in North Carolina. What is wrong with proving you are who you say you are? For crying out loud you have to show ID to do many things in our society. I certainly see no reason why voting should be any different (mainly with the recent problems). However we should keep in mind that democrats have no interest in fixing the problems. As long as there are voting problems the democrats benefit. How? (1) If they lose they can always blame it on the voting system, or, claim that the evil republicans stole the election. (2) If people do not have to show ID when they vote then anyone can vote claiming to be anyone else. No security, no assurances, someone can vote two or three times under different names. So why would the democratic party want to change that? Both factors work in their favor.

    O, and make no mistake about it, the republican party is no different. They just use different issues.
     
  3. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,383
    Likes Received:
    790
    Only those who are dishonest and have dishonest intentions would have a problem with validating who the voter is. Of course without ID it is easier to claim voter fraud.
     
  4. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I believe the ballot should have to be written in plain english instead of legal mubo jumbo. We have an item on the ballot that no one knew if yes was for it or against it. i say reform all of it and get rid of the electoral college.
     
  5. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,383
    Likes Received:
    790

    Good Idea!:thumbs:
     
  6. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,941
    Likes Received:
    296
    It may be a good idea but it will never happen.

    Instead , the system will be corrupted by isolated states making changes in how their electoral votes are used in order to benefit the political agenda of those who make the rules.
     
    #6 carpro, Sep 22, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 22, 2006
  7. Baptist Believer

    Baptist Believer
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2002
    Messages:
    6,659
    Likes Received:
    190
    Let's not!

    The electoral college system helps our elections obtain a clear winner. Just think of all the problems we would have had during the 2000 election if the electoral college systems hadn't worked as well as it did. Allegations of voter fraud were mostly confined to Florida, but if there was a simple-majority popular vote, there would have been allegations and corruption everywhere.

    For your consideration:

    http://www.interocitor.com/archives/000159.html

    http://www.thenewamerican.com/tna/2001/01-01-2001/vo17no01_electoral.htm

    EDIT:

    Here's a very good article on Wikipedia that discusses the pro and con arguments, as well as provide historical context for the discussion:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Electoral_College
     
    #7 Baptist Believer, Sep 22, 2006
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2006
  8. billwald

    billwald
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 2000
    Messages:
    11,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    >get rid of the electoral college.

    Terrible idea. The president would then be elected by New York, New Jersey, Illinois, California, Michigan, and Texas. None of the other 42 states would matter. The USofA would be like the 13th century Italian city-states connected by wilderness.
     
  9. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'd be a lot more comfortable if they addressed the documented cases of fraud, such as states falsely accusing people of certain minority groups of being felons to purge them from voting rolls.

    It would be nice if they also required that electronic voting machines be hackproof.

    But that isn't going to happen.

    Guess why.
     
  10. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,383
    Likes Received:
    790
    Documentation with no foundation = no conviction
     
  11. Terry_Herrington

    Terry_Herrington
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2002
    Messages:
    4,455
    Likes Received:
    1
    Are you saying that you trust the electronic voting machines?
     
  12. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Not true at all, those states split their votes like every other state.

    The other problem is the electoral college can go against the poular vote so what good is it for you to vote if they can place the states votes contrary to popular.

    What if candicates had to win states? In other words, each states election would produce 1 winner. Add those up for the national vote. In the case of a tie, 25 to 25, I would get to cast the deciding vote? Or you could do a run off with only the top two candidates which would eliminate funding to take votes away from a candidate.
     
  13. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Barbarian observes:
    I'd be a lot more comfortable if they addressed the documented cases of fraud, such as states falsely accusing people of certain minority groups of being felons to purge them from voting rolls.

    It would be nice if they also required that electronic voting machines be hackproof.

    But that isn't going to happen.

    Guess why.


    In Florida, state officials admitted that a large, mostly black group of voters had been disinfranchised because they were falsely accused of being felons.

    Before a subsequent election, the state of Florida was found to have rigged the system for finding felons so that Hispanic felons (largely Cuban, and mostly republican voters) would not be identified.
     
  14. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Sounds like the penalty is not sever enough to deter the crime.
     
  15. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    Strange as it sounds, it wasn't a crime. Just a "big mistake."

    Or so they said. For some reason, the Justice Department overlooked it.

    Oh, wait....
     
  16. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,941
    Likes Received:
    296
    Florida democrats set up voter registration booths outside prisons and jails during 2000 and 2004.

    Wonder why?:smilewinkgrin:
     
  17. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,383
    Likes Received:
    790
    source please
     
  18. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,383
    Likes Received:
    790
    I do remember however that the dems tried to disenfranchise 100's of thousands of military voters.
     
  19. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,941
    Likes Received:
    296
    I remember that happening in Florida in 2000, as well.
     
  20. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    source please
     

Share This Page

Loading...