Unfair voting restrictions in Indiana. Wait! What?

[HoughMade]

Name me an 95 year old person with breathing machine that could make that 5 mile walk.

So you believe that in order for there to be a "fair election" polling places have to be close enough to everyone​ for a 95 year old on oxygen to walk there?

 

[phylodog]

I still don't understand how showing identification results in a hardship.

 

[Kirk Freeman]

In order for the RKBA to mean anything, someone else has to buy me the Korth catalogue.

 

[Woobie]

The significant impact? I don't know, voter turnout?

Thats correct. You don't know. I want to see metrics on the registered voters who did not vote because of ID requirements. I have no doubt turnout is effected among people who would vote fraudulently, but I am undecided it is hurting those who vote legally.

 

[oldpink]

[video=youtube;axE83zcx6wY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axE83zcx6wY[/video]

 

[indiucky]

1. Baron Hill is one of the dumber members of Congress, and he has plenty of competition.

2. Baron, who is running for United States Senator, thinks that Congress passes laws for Indiana. He's just that stupid.

3. Indiana's voter ID statute is not subject to the VRA as it is not subject to §5 review.

4. Indiana's statute was upheld by the Supreme Court of the United States finding that is was necessary to combat voter fraud.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crawford_v._Marion_County_Election_Board

5. If people do not vote, then that is on them. I don't mind people not voting as it increases the power of my vote.

But to be fair dad said he had a decent jump shot back in the day....

But Kirk is spot on in his description...

"I know Lee Hamilton.....I have met Lee Hamilton...And you sir...Are no Lee Hamilton..." Indiucky to Baron Hill
(I actually got to say that to him when he was campaigning on the promise "that he was a worthy successor to Lee Hamilton"...He didn't like it)

 

[indiucky]

Fixed that for them...Oddly...I googled photos of ladies ironing panties and that didn't end well. [sigh] Let's just say this was the cleanest photo I could find for a family forum such as this.

Yep...Trying to find funny pics to post on INGO has made for some interesting searches...We were once discussing what clothing to wear when deer hunting and I, just to be a smart a$$, googled "Nude Deer Hunting" hoping to find a pic of some old geezer in his underwear deer hunting and post it as "this is how I roll" as a joke....

That's not what I found...Apparently there are some very naughty country girls out there in the woods....

 

[indiucky]

Quick, someone get CM some eye candy!

This should help...It's got his favorites covered...Spooky Chicks and a 1911....

 

[Timjoebillybob]

The significant impact? I don't know, voter turnout?

A person can get a free ID if they need one, heck if they show up without ID they can still vote a provisional ballot. How does it effect voter turnout?

I get that, but some would say it to disenfranchise particular groups. And I think both have merit. The firearm analogy is solid. Some would say the main point of common sense gun laws is to keep guns out of the hands of the ineligible, other would say it's to keep guns out of the hands of everybody. Voter fraud is FAR less common than firearm crime... FAR, FAR less. Firearm owners don't believe that they should have to prove anything to express a "right," so why should the right to choose how one is ruled be any different? And before you say because of those who abuse the system, ask yourself if the onus should be on the law abiding to prove their worthiness to express said right. The law is there, concerning voter fraud, as are the penalties. Enforce the law, make the attempt to defraud the electorate distasteful... but after 150 years of the system working, let's not create additional hoops for the law abiding to jump through, to observe a right.

Yes some would say that, in my experience those seem to be the type to scream racism at the drop of a hat and attempt to sway votes to their side by doing so.

Firearm crime may be more frequent. But IMO anyone that is a free man should be able to own firearms. And it doesn't effect anyone else if I buy 1 or 12. It does effect others if I were to vote 12 times.

So you believe that in order for there to be a "fair election" polling places have to be close enough to everyone​ for a 95 year old on oxygen to walk there?

Valid question.

 

[chipbennett]

I didn't read 4 pages of comments, so I apologize if this link has already been posted. Here’s one survey from Texas that shows a mere 1% failed to vote primarily due to lack of valid ID. Note that respondents did not give any indication that cost of obtaining valid ID was the reason for not having ID. It is safe to assume that cost is some subset of that one percent. So, I would conclude that, if this survey is representative, voter ID laws do not disenfranchise voters.

 

[oldpink]

Congressman Hill, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard.
At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought.
Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it.
I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.

 

[mom45]

I will have to try to remember to bring up the example I shared of the lady with two valid ID cards when we do pollworker training this year. Our polling place has no cell signal so I had no way to look this up online, but if that is true that it is a criminal offense, I would have gladly called the local sheriff's department to address the situation. I called the clerk's office to inform them but never thought of it as a crime at that time.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I didn't read 4 pages of comments, so I apologize if this link has already been posted. Here’s one survey from Texas that shows a mere 1% failed to vote primarily due to lack of valid ID. Note that respondents did not give any indication that cost of obtaining valid ID was the reason for not having ID. It is safe to assume that cost is some subset of that one percent. So, I would conclude that, if this survey is representative, voter ID laws do not disenfranchise voters.

You read the article Chip, there's more to that study that you're conveniently leaving out... and is a hallmark of disenfranchisement/voter suppression.

 

[Timjoebillybob]

You read the article Chip, there's more to that study that you're conveniently leaving out... and is a hallmark of disenfranchisement/voter suppression.

Agreed some, 2.7% didn't have one of the 7 forms of ID. I would like to know how many were unable to get one, vs how many didn't bother to. Same with the 1% Chip mentioned. Or are you referring to the part where it shows that those who vote Dem seem to be either too lazy or unintelligent to understand the law or get one of the 7 forms of ID by a 5 to 1 margin? Or vote by mail, since photo id isn't required for that.

 

[chipbennett]

You read the article Chip, there's more to that study that you're conveniently leaving out... and is a hallmark of disenfranchisement/voter suppression.

Please, enlighten us.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

 

[Kutnupe14]

Please, enlighten us.

Didn't your older article say that upwards of 10% of those that didn't vote claimed to not have the required documents. And 5% saying that that discouraged them from voting? One can only assume that they didn't have traditional identification documents, but held obscure forms which they werent aware qualified. So would say that this, especially given that this occurred in Texas (who got the crackdown for voter suppression before) was by design.

 

[Kutnupe14]

What type of ID does one need to submit an absentee ballot?

 

[chipbennett]

Didn't your older article say that upwards of 10% of those that didn't vote claimed to not have the required documents. And 5% saying that that discouraged them from voting? One can only assume that they didn't have traditional identification documents, but held obscure forms which they werent aware qualified. So would say that this, especially given that this occurred in Texas (who got the crackdown for voter suppression before) was by design.

The Texas DPS issues driver's licenses, non-driving IDs, and election certificates, and charges no fee for the latter.

Being required to have a (free) ID discouraged some people from voting? I couldn't care less. Voting is as much a responsibility as it is a right. I hold no sympathy for those who choose to remain low-information.

 

[phylodog]

Something which costs nothing and is required by all does not create a hardship for any particular group.