Voter Suppression: Feds Challenge Texas Voter ID Law

That is going to be interesting if that is the standard. The MN legislature is in the process of getting an amendment to the MN Constitution to require ID for voting (a bill was passed last year but vetoed by the governor).

 

Why would that matter? SSI and welfare aren't rights but voting is. It's in the government interests to limit access to welfare but as conservatives like to note one of the purposes of government is to protect and make it possible for people to exercise their rights.

Let me ask a question back in a related vein. Voter ID laws call for government issue IDs. For those who support this idea of adding not just one layer of government registration, since you already need to register to vote, but another layer, getting the ID, to exercise a basic right do you or would you support gun registration by the government?

 

Without going into detail about each point of your excellent post, rimrocker, as all one has to do is read it to see how obvious the merits of the DOJ case are, if one adds the blatant attempt by the Republican majority in the Texas Legislature to suppress minority representation with gerrymandered redistricting, what they are attempting to do is perfectly obvious to anyone who cares to open their freakin' eyes and examine the facts.

 

Back when Deck was a youth, a man's identification was a look in the eye and a firm handshake!

/humor

 

Is that what you call it?

 

Really? Goods such as food, clothing, housing, and medical care are not rights?

 

Well I dont know the demographics of MN so I cant tell if a VRA case could even be made.

The Indiana case wasn't over the VRA. In fact no reference to minorites were ever made. Furthermore Indiana allowed those who could not afford a photo ID to sign an affadavit stating that before allowing them to vote. Indiana was simply over "the right to vote."

Texas on the other hand is subject to Section 5 review of the VRA and has a gigantic minority population that is relatively spread out (including minorities in rural areas) In the Indiana case, the whole thing was silly because while the defense couldn't actually cite an example of voter fraud, the prosecution couldn't cite an example of someone who would be disenfranchised. The whole thing was a hypothetical mess which in turn made it much easier for John Paul Stevens to join the majority since the state does have a compelling interest in preventing fraud and the prosecution couldn't provide actual examples of disenfranchisement.

It is quite easy to find examples in Texas and the state did a terrible job of defending itself during the preclearance process. They couldn't even submit their documents on time and when they finally did, they didn't really do much to defend themselves. They basically accepted that the Justice Department would reject them and that this would go to the DC circuit court for review.

 

They are not and I will head you off before you run with this. That doesn't mean that government shouldn't be involved with those. I said this during the health care debate that health insurance isn't a right but that doesn't mean government shouldn't see that everyone has access to it.

 

Food, clothing, housing, and medical care are not rights, they are responsibilities. Medical care is a special case because unlike the others you mentioned, it is impossible to "opt out" of the medical care system except in very special cases like the members of the Christian Scientist church.

This is the reason that it is appropriate for the government to mandate health insurance. If you are found bleeding on the side of the road or convulsing with chest pain, you will use the healthcare system and you should be responsible for paying your bills. It is very analogous to government mandating car insurance for people who choose to drive a car, the obvious difference is that you don't have a choice whether to use the healthcare system or not. You will use it, it is just a matter of time and it is not right that you should be able to foist your healthcare costs on others if you end up in the ER and can't pay your bills.

 

FYI in Texas's appeal, they are specifically challenging Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act.

Looks like we're going to have a decision regarding the constitutionality of Section 5.

 

racist Mandela

 

That was actually kind of funny and harmless

 

So Africans have to get an ID to vote, but Americans don't have to?

enough, democrats, enough.

 

Commodore with the unique ability to post pictures with captions that are completely out of context to make an idiotic political point. Nicely done. Can't wait for the next one.