Release List Reviews Shop Join News DVD Giveaways Video Games Advertise
DVD Reviews | Theatrical Reviews | Price Search Buy Stuff Here
DVD Talk
DVD Reviews DVD Talk Headlines HD Reviews


Add to My Yahoo! - RSS 2.0 - RSS 2.0 - DVD Talk Podcast RSS -


Go Back   DVD Talk Forum > General Discussions > Other Talk > Religion, Politics and World Events

Religion, Politics and World Events They make great dinner conversation, don't you think? plus Political Film

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-09-07, 09:22 AM   #101
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Shackled
Posts: 35,372
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Dog
I'm negatively impacted by many laws. It doesn't mean that they shouldn't exist.

You're essentially making an equal protection argument. The thing is that reducing voter fraud is a legitimate state interest.
No, I think you are misunderstanding my point. Or I'm getting thrown into the mix of one side versus another. The law has a solid basis to exist. It is going to go forward, and it can't be stopped. I've said at least twice that my position is that Dems need to move on.

My point in the thread has been
1) There are more reasons that just loving fraud to oppose such laws
and
2) This is an underlying political motivation more than some altruistic make the world better motivation
__________________
This Space Reserved for When My Ennui Lifts

NearysEpiphany was right.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-07, 10:21 AM   #102
X
Administrator
 
X's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 1987
Location: AA-
Posts: 10,566
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushdog
Regardless, you seem on a zealous pursuit to prove me wrong can't imagine how much of your "limited" free time you've been spending. I'll accept that there is evidence of an increase in leisure time among the poor. That's one of the constellation of understood issues that creates barriers to voting. So, cross that one off the list and keep:
1) sub-cultural norms (think inner city and minority)
2) being "off the grid" and working largely off the books
3) being less likely to drive or to have a passport
4) being of lower education and perceive less value in voting, and preceding that getting an ID card

Hmm, which legitimately eligible group is more likely to be negatively impacted by voter ID laws?

Poor
Minority
Lower Educated

or

Wealthy
White
More Educated

That's a thinker. But hey, I know it is all just principle here.
I simply responded to your comment of
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushdog
Cost is also in free time. If you are a poorer person, you have less of it.
and that is all I am discussing so all those other "facts" have nothing to do with me. It just seemed hard to believe the one statement you made about free time even though it may pass as common knowledge. But from anything I could find out about it, it appears it isn't true when just that one stated factor is considered and you might realize that now too.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bushdog
I'll accept that there is evidence of an increase in leisure time among the poor.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-07, 10:27 AM   #103
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Rick
It will prevent *some* from voting. Even proponents of the proposal agree with that.
I agree with that. But rain will prevent some from voting. I simply think that making voting more secure is worth it given the small (imo) inconvenience that would be placed on people.

Admittedly, I am more jaded on the issue given our vote tally in the last govenor's race, and that certainly affects my opinion, but it doesn't seem any less valid because I have seen more voter fraud than you.
__________________
“The illegality of cannabis is outrageous, an impediment to full utilization of a drug which helps produce the serenity and insight, sensitivity and fellowship so desperately needed in this increasingly mad and dangerous world.”

― Carl Sagan
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-07, 12:05 PM   #104
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 5,191
I just think there is far more potential for voting fraud with electronic voting machines than at the individual level. If conservatives REALLY cared about fraud, they'd focus on the machines.

But that isn't going to happen since the Diebold guy is a huge fundraiser for the Reps.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-07, 12:28 PM   #105
Moderator
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,087
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Rick
I just think there is far more potential for voting fraud with electronic voting machines than at the individual level. If conservatives REALLY cared about fraud, they'd focus on the machines.
Because after all we can only do one thing at a time right? There's no way of doing both now is there...
__________________
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." -- Norman Thomas

"When you look really deep, we are all kind of shallow" -- unknown

My Countdown Counting down to: End of the countdown clock
1199 days 9 hours 27 minutes
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-07, 02:10 PM   #106
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 5,191
Quote:
Originally Posted by nemein
Because after all we can only do one thing at a time right? There's no way of doing both now is there...
I keep trying to post honestly about this issue and you keep being snide. Fine. I'll leave you to it.
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-07, 02:15 PM   #107
Moderator
 
nemein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: 1bit away from total disaster
Posts: 34,087
I'm trying to be honest too. I don't see why we can't focus on both things though as both issues are important IMHO. We should make sure that only those who are elligible to vote can vote (hence the ID thing) and that when they vote it is accurately tabulated (the machine thing). What's wrong w/ that?
__________________
"The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, until one day America will be a Socialist nation, without knowing how it happened." -- Norman Thomas

"When you look really deep, we are all kind of shallow" -- unknown

My Countdown Counting down to: End of the countdown clock
1199 days 9 hours 27 minutes
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-07, 03:11 PM   #108
DVD Talk God
 
kvrdave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 86,188
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Rick
I just think there is far more potential for voting fraud with electronic voting machines than at the individual level. If conservatives REALLY cared about fraud, they'd focus on the machines.

But that isn't going to happen since the Diebold guy is a huge fundraiser for the Reps.
I just think there is more actual voting fraud the old fashioned way. It is much easier.
__________________
“The illegality of cannabis is outrageous, an impediment to full utilization of a drug which helps produce the serenity and insight, sensitivity and fellowship so desperately needed in this increasingly mad and dangerous world.”

― Carl Sagan
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-07, 06:35 PM   #109
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Germany
Posts: 95
On a side note, voter fraud may be a serious issue, but photo id's are not going to fix it. There must be more oversight on the election process. Photo ID's simply treat a symptom, they do not cure the disease. In the face of voter fraud today, photo id's are the equivalent of pissing on a forrest fire.

Goldblum stated:

Yours is the argument that is ridiculous. Voter fraud is a rampant problem. A simple photo ID requirement would work to severly hamper such fraud. And it does work to hamper fraud in college testing exams.

Is it a foolproof method? Of course not. But the alternative is...well, at present there is no alternative means of restricting fraud in place. I'll side with stopping some fraud as opposed to stopping no fraud.

Sure, photographing, videotaping and fingerprinting as well as the "death penalty" would also serve to hamper voter fraud, but hopefully the differences between a photo ID and these outlandish examples do not need to be stated.


Please provide examples of this rampant problem or cases where persons are being prosecuted. (Ann Coulter does not count).

It does not REDUCE fraud in college testing that is simply BS. Just making this statement does not make it so. If you bothered to do any research you would know why it does not. Hint: No prosecution of offenders. They are allowed to retake the test. No to mention the fact there are many more ways to defraud the College testing program. (Look it up)

As far as stopping some fraud, how can you provethis type of fraud exists other than the fact that Hannity and Rush say that there is.

Yes, the death penalty is an outlandish satire of what our current government is capable of but photographing (see voter id), videotaping, and fingerprinting are not that far out of the norm.

We may agree to disagree on this issue, but rather than simply attacking me or my argument, I would love for someone to explain to me exactly how this will reduce the percieved fraud that is so rampant. (ex: How do we keep people from forging these so called $2 ID's?)

As an added question, voter fraud had always been a problem. Why are republicans suddenly concerned with this issue? It did not seem to matter in 2000 or 2004 when voters rights were severely infringed upon. (This staetment is accurate, look it up)
  Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-07, 09:14 PM   #110
DVD Talk Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Working for Gizmonic Institute
Posts: 10,430
Quote:
Originally Posted by mseang
As an added question, voter fraud had always been a problem. Why are republicans suddenly concerned with this issue? It did not seem to matter in 2000 or 2004 when voters rights were severely infringed upon. (This staetment is accurate, look it up)
Thanks, but if you want to make that statement, you provide the proof.
__________________
JasonF said it "crazyronin understands scripture better than all those Popes"
the mods around here are morons-wendersfan
PSN and Origin: boomanchu2
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-07, 01:12 PM   #111
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 120,058
Update: SCt grants cert....

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews

Quote:
Voter IDs on Supreme Court Agenda

By MARK SHERMAN
The Associated Press
Tuesday, September 25, 2007; 2:01 PM

WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to decide whether voter identification laws unfairly deter the poor and minorities from voting, stepping into a contentious partisan issue in advance of the 2008 elections.

The justices will hear arguments early next year in a challenge to an Indiana law that requires voters to present photo ID before casting their ballots. The state has defended the law as a way to combat voter fraud.

The state Democratic party and civil rights groups complained that the law unfairly targets poor and minority voters, without any evidence that in-person voter fraud exists in Indiana. The party argued that those voters tend to be Democrats.

Courts have upheld voter ID laws in Arizona and Michigan, but struck down Missouri's. Earlier this month, a federal judge dismissed a challenge to Georgia's voter identification law, saying the statute does not impose a significant burden on the right to vote.

Election law experts had urged the court to take the Indiana case to instruct courts on how to weigh claims of voter fraud versus those of disenfranchisement. "The court better resolve this question before ballots start getting counted next fall," said Stanford University law professor Pamela Karlan.

The court is expected to issue a decision by late June, in time for the November general election.

The Indiana law enacted in 2005 was upheld by a federal judge and by the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago. Before the law's passage, an Indiana voter had only to sign a poll book at the polling place, where a photo copy of the voter's signature was kept on file for comparison.

"The purpose of the Indiana law is to reduce voting fraud, and voting fraud impairs the right of legitimate voters to vote by diluting their votes," Judge Richard Posner said in his majority opinion.

But in a dissent, Judge Terence Evans said, "Let's not beat around the bush. The Indiana voter photo ID law is a not-too-thinly veiled attempt to discourage election-day turnout by folks believed to skew Democratic."

Bill Groth, an attorney who has represented the Indiana Democratic Party in the lawsuit, said he was thrilled that the nation's highest court will take up the case. He said the appeals court made light of the right to vote in its decision, but the Supreme Court has guarded that right more seriously.

"The court has over and over stressed that the right to vote should be protected, and any state law that burdens that right should be carefully and meticulously reviewed," Groth said.

The voter ID challenge was among 17 new cases accepted by the court in advance of the start of its new term on Monday.

The cases are Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, 07-21, and Indiana Democratic Party v. Rokita, 07-25.

I strongly suspect that Judge Posner's opinion from the Circuit below will be extremely persuasive to Kennedy and the Justices to the right of him.
__________________
"A question for you. Would you rather Bucknell make the NCAA's once every 20 years or so and get ass raped by teams like Kansas in the first round or have them drop down a rung to a confernce where they can compete for a title?"
- Josh Hinkle
1st Round Final Scores: Bucknell 64 Kansas 63 | Bucknell 59 Arkansas 55

Last edited by Red Dog; 09-25-07 at 01:14 PM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 09-25-07, 01:27 PM   #112
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Posts: 36,980
it looks like GA is ramping up their voter education drive about voter id cards. I saw an ad for it. i thought it had been nixed
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-08, 09:44 AM   #113
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 120,058
The SCt has upheld the Indiana voter ID requirements in a 6-3 decision.

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/court-r...-id-challenge/

Quote:
Court rejects voter ID challenge; no new grants
Monday, April 28th, 2008 10:01 am

The Supreme Court, voting 6-3, on Monday rejected a constitutional challenge to Indiana’s law requiring voters to show a photo ID before they may cast a ballot. Three Justices [Stevens, Roberts, Kennedy] said the evidence offered against the requirement in Indiana did not support a challenge to the law as written — that is, a “facial” challenge, and three others [Scalia, Thomas, Alito] said the law only imposed a minimal and justified burden on voters. Three Justices [Breyer, Ginsburg, Souter] dissented. The decision, in the case of Crawford v. Marion County Election Board (07-21) and a companion case, was the only ruling of the day. The Court also issued new orders, but granted review of no new cases. The Court took no action on a major new case testing whether U.S. and foreign business firms may be sued for an alleged role in the apartheid policies of South Africa (American Isuzu Motors, et al., v. Ntsebeza, et al. (07-919).

The voter ID ruling may turn out to be a significant victory for Republicans at election time, since the requirement for proof of identification is likely to fall most heavily on voters long assumed to be identified with the Democrats — particularly, minority and poor voters. The GOP for years has been actively pursuing a campaign against what it calls “voter fraud,” and the Court’s ruling Monday appears to validate that effort, at least in part. The main opinion said states have a valid interest in preventing voting by those not entitled to do so, even if there is no specific proof of that kind of fraud in the state.

Putting together the three votes of Justices who found the particular challenge to Indiana’s law wanting on the evidence, with the votes of the three dissenters, means, however, that a majority of the Court has not barred all future challenges to voter ID laws, provided future cases seek to test such laws as they were actually applied in a specific election. Still, the plurality opinion that announced the Court’s judgment – written by Justice John Paul Stevens — probably means that any such “as-applied” challenges would not be easy to make.

Full opinion here:
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-cont...8/04/07-21.pdf
__________________
"A question for you. Would you rather Bucknell make the NCAA's once every 20 years or so and get ass raped by teams like Kansas in the first round or have them drop down a rung to a confernce where they can compete for a title?"
- Josh Hinkle
1st Round Final Scores: Bucknell 64 Kansas 63 | Bucknell 59 Arkansas 55

Last edited by Red Dog; 04-28-08 at 09:52 AM.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-08, 09:56 AM   #114
DVD Talk Legend
 
wishbone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 19,294
Thanks for the update Red Dog.
__________________
"Wishbone is spelled with an E not a 3..... *Be gone*" - Minor Threat
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-08, 09:57 AM   #115
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 120,058
Scalia's final paragraph sums it beautifully as far as I'm concerned:

Quote:
The universally applicable requirements of Indiana’s voter-identification law are eminently reasonable. The burden of acquiring, possessing, and showing a free photo identification is simply not severe, because it does not “even represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting.” Ante, at 15. And the State’s interests, ante, at 7–13, are sufficient to sustain that minimal burden. That should end the matter. That the State accommodates some voters by permitting (not requiring) the casting of absentee or provisional ballots, is an indulgence—not a constitutional imperative that falls short of what is required.
__________________
"A question for you. Would you rather Bucknell make the NCAA's once every 20 years or so and get ass raped by teams like Kansas in the first round or have them drop down a rung to a confernce where they can compete for a title?"
- Josh Hinkle
1st Round Final Scores: Bucknell 64 Kansas 63 | Bucknell 59 Arkansas 55
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-08, 12:31 PM   #116
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East County
Posts: 32,314
what does "ante" mean in legalese?
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-08, 12:57 PM   #117
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Pleasantville - in black & white ;P
Posts: 5,970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Dog
Scalia's final paragraph sums it beautifully as far as I'm concerned:
That brings up a question for me. How does the ID requirement effect provisional or absentee voting? (I know I should know this; I live in Indiana! )
__________________
"Americans are so enamored of equality, they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom." Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859) French historian.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-08, 12:57 PM   #118
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 120,058
"ante" here refers to the Stevens opinion in this case (it precedes the Scalia opinion). So that quote comes from p.15 of the Stevens opinion and the discussions of the state's interests are found from pp.7-13 of the Stevens opinion.
__________________
"A question for you. Would you rather Bucknell make the NCAA's once every 20 years or so and get ass raped by teams like Kansas in the first round or have them drop down a rung to a confernce where they can compete for a title?"
- Josh Hinkle
1st Round Final Scores: Bucknell 64 Kansas 63 | Bucknell 59 Arkansas 55
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-08, 01:05 PM   #119
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 120,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by mosquitobite
That brings up a question for me. How does the ID requirement effect provisional or absentee voting? (I know I should know this; I live in Indiana! )

It doesn't effect absentee voting at all.

For provisional voting, an appropriate affidavit must be filed with the county court clerk within 10 days of the election:
Quote:
The affidavit must state that (1) the person executing the affidavit is the same individual who cast the provisional ballot on election day; and (2) the affiant is indigent and unable to obtain proof of identification without paying a fee or has a religious objection to being photographed.
Or you can bring a photo ID to the county clerk within 10 days of the election to confirm identity, if, for example, you didn't have your ID with you at the polling place.
__________________
"A question for you. Would you rather Bucknell make the NCAA's once every 20 years or so and get ass raped by teams like Kansas in the first round or have them drop down a rung to a confernce where they can compete for a title?"
- Josh Hinkle
1st Round Final Scores: Bucknell 64 Kansas 63 | Bucknell 59 Arkansas 55
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-08, 01:07 PM   #120
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Pleasantville - in black & white ;P
Posts: 5,970
Also the dissenters argument is kinda funny if you scratch below the surface. They say "there's no proof any voter fraud took place that would make such a law necessary."

Well if you don't have to offer ID, how the hell do you PROVE fraud in this case? Let's say I was planning on voting under my dead grandma's name. If I go into the poll and notice someone I know working the booth, do you think I'm going to attempt the fraud? Only an idiot would attempt it. So without an ID requirement established, how the hell would you charge someone with that? You'd never know!
__________________
"Americans are so enamored of equality, they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom." Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859) French historian.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-08, 01:09 PM   #121
DVD Talk Limited Edition
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Pleasantville - in black & white ;P
Posts: 5,970
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Dog
It doesn't effect absentee voting at all.
Watch - the numbers of absentee votes will sky rocket! Dems will say its because those people can't get somewhere to get an ID so of course this is only natural. Repubs will say they're taking advantage of a loop hole. My guess is it will be somewhere in the middle.
__________________
"Americans are so enamored of equality, they would rather be equal in slavery than unequal in freedom." Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859) French historian.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-08, 01:10 PM   #122
DVD Talk God
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Directionally Challenged (for DirecTV)
Posts: 120,058
Quote:
Originally Posted by mosquitobite
Also the dissenters argument is kinda funny if you scratch below the surface. They say "there's no proof any voter fraud took place that would make such a law necessary."

Well if you don't have to offer ID, how the hell do you PROVE fraud in this case? Let's say I was planning on voting under my dead grandma's name. If I go into the poll and notice someone I know working the booth, do you think I'm going to attempt the fraud? Only an idiot would attempt it. So without an ID requirement established, how the hell would you charge someone with that? You'd never know!

That Souter argument is the same lame argument made by the dissenting 7th Cir. judge posted earlier in this thread.
__________________
"A question for you. Would you rather Bucknell make the NCAA's once every 20 years or so and get ass raped by teams like Kansas in the first round or have them drop down a rung to a confernce where they can compete for a title?"
- Josh Hinkle
1st Round Final Scores: Bucknell 64 Kansas 63 | Bucknell 59 Arkansas 55
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-08, 01:13 PM   #123
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: East County
Posts: 32,314
Quote:
Originally Posted by Red Dog
"ante" here refers to the Stevens opinion in this case (it precedes the Scalia opinion). So that quote comes from p.15 of the Stevens opinion and the discussions of the state's interests are found from pp.7-13 of the Stevens opinion.
danke.
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-08, 01:29 PM   #124
DVD Talk Hero
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: in da cloud
Posts: 26,196
Quote:
Originally Posted by mosquitobite
Also the dissenters argument is kinda funny if you scratch below the surface. They say "there's no proof any voter fraud took place that would make such a law necessary."

Well if you don't have to offer ID, how the hell do you PROVE fraud in this case? Let's say I was planning on voting under my dead grandma's name. If I go into the poll and notice someone I know working the booth, do you think I'm going to attempt the fraud? Only an idiot would attempt it. So without an ID requirement established, how the hell would you charge someone with that? You'd never know!
same as the death penalty opponents trying to make every method of killing a prisoner unconstitutional. when you can't make up a rational argument, you make something else up to try to win

interesting how the court answers these in their opinions. they basically say you are full of 5h1t if you think we are going to buy it
  Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-08, 01:42 PM   #125
DVD Talk Legend
 
wishbone's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 19,294
Quote:
Originally Posted by mosquitobite
Watch - the numbers of absentee votes will sky rocket! Dems will say its because those people can't get somewhere to get an ID so of course this is only natural. Repubs will say they're taking advantage of a loop hole. My guess is it will be somewhere in the middle.
Add'l info on absentee voting.

I think there may be more absentee voting in the wake of this decision but I do not see it skyrocketing especially since Voter ID has been in place for three years now. I am sure we have not heard the end of this as far as the Democratic Party is concerned.

__________________
"Wishbone is spelled with an E not a 3..... *Be gone*" - Minor Threat
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:31 PM.


Copyright 2011 DVDTalk.com All Rights Reserved. Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0