PDA

View Full Version : Howard Dean: Our Voters Are Too Stupid to Know How to Vote Legally


PittsburghAfterDark
04-19-2006, 11:02 AM
Dean Response to Indiana Court Ruling on Voter ID

April 18, 2006

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean today issued the following statement on Indiana's voter identification law, one of the most stringent in the country:

"Today, I join Democrats in Indiana and throughout America in expressing my profound disappointment over the federal court ruling on Indiana's voter identification law. While Democrats are working to protect the fundamental right of all Americans to vote and have their votes counted, Indiana Republicans have joined national Republicans in pursuing unfair voter ID laws that disproportionately prevent countless poor, minority, elderly, rural, disabled and student voters from casting their ballots.

"Indiana's voter ID law, widely regarded as one of the most restrictive in America, creates unfair obstacles that will prevent citizens who are lawfully eligible to vote from casting their ballots. I applaud the Indiana Democratic Party's decision to appeal this ruling. As part of our Party's commitment to doing whatever we can to ensure that all Americans have the opportunity to participate in our democracy, the DNC will assist the Indiana Democratic Party's legal challenge to this unfair law and continue our fight to make it easier for all Americans to exercise their right to vote."
DNC Press Release (http://www.democrats.org/a/2006/04/dean_response_t_1.php)

Voter ID law looming for Hoosiers
Indiana Senate OKs strictest rules in U.S.; Daniels has said he'll sign

About the bill

A voter would be required to show a photo ID issued by the U.S. government or the state of Indiana that, at the least, contains their name and an expiration date. Those who cannot afford an ID can obtain one for free, if proper documents are presented.

Exceptions

People who vote by absentee ballot or who are patients at a nursing home or other health facility that is also a polling place are exempt.

If you don't have ID

People who show up at the polls without the ID could cast a provisional ballot that would be counted only if that person takes the required ID to the county clerk's office by the Monday following the election.

By Mary Beth Schneider

mary.beth.schneider@indystar.com
April 13, 2005

A bill that would give Indiana the strictest voter ID requirements in the nation is on its way to Gov. Mitch Daniels' desk -- and, apparently, to a courthouse as well.
The Senate voted along party lines, 33-17, to concur with changes made in the House to Senate Bill 483. The session contained none of the drama and emotionally charged speeches of previous hearings, where Democrats accused Republicans of trying to suppress voting during elections.

Under the bill, most voters would have to show a photo ID issued by the federal or state government, such as a military ID or driver's license. People who do not have a driver's license and cannot afford to pay for a state-issued photo ID will be issued one for free.

The bill now goes to Daniels, who already has said he will sign it into law, and would take effect July 1. The next major election in Indiana is the primary election on May 2, 2006.

Daniels said Tuesday that while he wants to take a look at the bill first, "I said before, I likely would sign it. It reflects the sentiment of the state."

A recent poll taken for The Indianapolis Star and WTHR (Channel 13), The Star's news-gathering partner, showed that 75 percent of the 1,003 Hoosiers surveyed support requiring voters to show a government-issued photo ID. The poll, conducted March 25 through March 30 by Selzer & Co. of Des Moines, Iowa, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points.

The Indiana Civil Liberties Union will file a lawsuit, said Legal Director Ken Falk, because of concerns that the bill is unconstitutional and unfair to those who don't have a government-issued photo ID, such as a driver's license, and may not be able to get one.

Such a requirement would prevent some people from voting, said Falk and other opponents of the bill. He did not say when the lawsuit would be filed but said he did not have to wait until after the election is held.

The bill's sponsor, Sen. Victor Heinold, R-Valparaiso, said the bill is needed to guard against voter fraud.

"I want everyone in this state to have the right to vote -- one time," Heinold said.
Sen. Larry E. Lutz, D-Evansville, said the only cases of voter fraud in Indiana that have been documented involve absentee ballots -- a problem the bill does not address.

"We should do all we can to make it easier to vote," Lutz said, "not make it more restrictive and intimidating."

While five other states require photo IDs, all allow for more variety -- such as a school ID -- or an alternative, such as a signed affidavit from the voter as to his or her identity. Indiana's bill would allow people who show up at the polls without a photo ID to cast a provisional ballot that would be counted only if the person takes the ID to their county clerk's office by the Monday following the election.
Lutz said many people won't bother to do that, and that surveys have shown that in Indiana's last election, most provisional ballots went uncounted anyway -- many because of errors by poll workers.

Other critics say the bill treats voters differently by exempting some people from the requirements, and hinders the exercise of a constitutional right.
"Everyone is saying all you have to do is go get a free ID," Falk said.

They forget, he said, that the Bureau of Motor Vehicles has made it harder to get that ID by requiring the person to show several pieces of identification that some people don't have, such as a utility bill and a birth certificate. And, he said, it costs money to obtain a birth certificate, while voting should be free.
Indianapolis Star (http://www2.indystar.com/articles/6/236465-2566-009.html)

You'll notice what has Democrats in a tizzy.??A state requires picture ID to vote.??It's a major scandal!??Despite the state of Indiana offering free ID services to anyone for voting purposes, this is a problem???Exceptions being made for nursing home residents and absentee balloting?

Are Democrats really so unsure that their constituancy doesn't have the wherewithal to obtain a free government ID???Is this what they're telling us???Well, indirectly, yes.??They are saying their voters are too damn stupid to know how to vote if they can't just show up.

Hell, you need a picture ID to make a return at most retailers.

This is so typical of liberals, 75% of the state is in favor of it yet they are against it.??Again showing that if they can't win in the legislature try the courts.??The courts will surely be more receptive to their agenda that goes against the will of the people and their elected representatives.

Bottom line: the dead can't go get picture ID's and that is a major Democratic voting block.

KrAzY3
04-19-2006, 03:54 PM
I think they're telling us that they don't like the idea of every living American citizen getting one vote each. Clearly that isn't how they prefer things to be...

This reminds me of the whole Florida thing. Some of the stuff was insane. It was like the Democratic party was announcing that everyone who wanted to vote for them was a idiot. They couldn't understand it, they punched the wrong hole, etc... yet we were to believe all the Republicans had it figured out perfectly.

penmyst
04-19-2006, 04:27 PM
Bottom line: the dead can't go get picture ID's and that is a major Democratic voting block.

Bingo!

AlonzoMourning23
04-19-2006, 07:54 PM
The point is many people don't vote, and you're going to further reduce that by adding a certain level of effort. Minorities are disproportionately poor, and the poor would be the most likely not to have a photo ID and be required to purchase one, or show that they need a free one due to lack of money. That effort is a roadblock since much of the population already is apathetic. Since minorities are disproportionately poor, and a large percentage of minorities do vote democrat, you are going to loose more democrat votes than republican votes due to these increased regulations.

Though I'd love to see the evidence that democrats use fraud more than republicans, especially enough to constitute a "major voting bloc".

KrAzY3
04-19-2006, 09:41 PM
Voting should take effort. These people are shaping our country, if they are too apathetic, good. I want the motivated people voting, not the wastes of flesh.

AlonzoMourning23
04-19-2006, 10:06 PM
Voting should take effort. These people are shaping our country, if they are too apathetic, good. I want the motivated people voting, not the wastes of flesh.


That's fine, but this is not equal on both sides. This is more likely to stop apathetic democrats. The apathetic republicans are likely to be unaffected. Democrats are strongest among the poor and the rich. Republicans are strongest in the middle. Only one of those 3 groups is going to have a significant amount of people without ID's.

PittsburghAfterDark
04-19-2006, 10:24 PM
I'll have to remember that Democrats are mostly rich the next time you you say the Republicans cater to the wealthy.

Rephrase that a bit, Democrats appeal to liberal rich.??Typically liberal rich haven't worked to earn their wealth; entertainers, writers, musicians etc.??They've never created a job in their collective lives by tribute of their business accumen.

"Minorities are disproportionately poor, and the poor would be the most likely not to have a photo ID and be required to purchase one, or show that they need a free one due to lack of money."

Um.... 'zo? How do you think these people get Medicaid, welfare, SSI, Section 8 housing, food stamps, WIC or any other countless government programs?

The poor are the most likely to have photo ID.

Recognize this for what it is; a voting program for the living impaired.

Most people call them dead.

Labrocca
04-20-2006, 01:15 AM
By most state laws you are required to carry identification. I am not sure about Indiana though. Seems all incredibly silly of course to protest the need for ID when voting. I thought that was already a requirement and if it's not ...it should be.

Bill O'Reilly was put this in his "rediculous items of the day" I think.

KrAzY3
04-20-2006, 12:46 PM
Am23, it shouldn't matter who this stops. If you can't identify yourself properly, you shouldn't be able to vote. Right is right, this isn't some unreasonable demand. This is perfectly logical and by the way PAD makes a good point. I doubt you can get on a lot of social programs without a ID, then again I wouldn't know, perhaps you can...

penmyst
04-20-2006, 05:40 PM
If someone can't put themselves out enough to get a FREE ID, then do we really want their political opinions to affect our elections? These people are probably just as lazy in their intellectual properties which means they aren't going to make quality decisions.

PAD already nailed the REAL reason why Democrats are up in arms about it.

rodeojones903
04-20-2006, 07:21 PM
If someone can't put themselves out enough to get a FREE ID, then do we really want their political opinions to affect our elections? These people are probably just as lazy in their intellectual properties which means they aren't going to make quality decisions.





That hits the nail right on the head imo.

AlonzoMourning23
04-20-2006, 08:29 PM
I'll have to remember that Democrats are mostly rich the next time you you say the Republicans cater to the wealthy.

I'm not sure I've ever made such a statement. I know I've made comments between big business and republicans though. Either way, catering to is not the same as having the actual votes.

I remember reading an article one the past election showing 100k+ (what I mean rich) were majority democrat voters, and again below a certain amount were democrat. Republicans held the middle.

Um.... 'zo???How do you think these people get Medicaid, welfare, SSI, Section 8 housing, food stamps, WIC or any other countless government programs?

The poor are the most likely to have photo ID.

Not everyone who is eligible actually applies for those programs, and I've known a few people who refused to due to pride. But, correct me if I'm wrong, but I wasn't aware that those programs required a picture ID to be enrolled. I have ID's, such as my social security card, that have no picture on them.

Recognize this for what it is; a voting program for the living impaired.

Most people call them dead.


Want to back that up?

Am23, it shouldn't matter who this stops. If you can't identify yourself properly, you shouldn't be able to vote. Right is right, this isn't some unreasonable demand. This is perfectly logical and by the way PAD makes a good point. I doubt you can get on a lot of social programs without a ID, then again I wouldn't know, perhaps you can...

Yes it does matter. For example, you have two sides split 50/50. For example (all hypothetical numbers), each side has 5% apathetic, uninformed voters and you introduce a program that will effect 2% of one side and only .5% of the other. The program shifted the vote total without actually changing the popular choice.

At the end of the day these laws usually come down to politics, and that's on both sides of the issue. I think it's only wishfull thinking to say this isn't a major reason as to why republicans support this ruling.

Though I would think you can get onto social programs by using your SS number or whatever. I doubt a government issued photo ID is required.

rodeojones903
04-21-2006, 12:50 AM
Though I would think you can get onto social programs by using your SS number or whatever. I doubt a government issued photo ID is required.


Well it should be. Its the least you can do if you are going to leech off taxpayers.

KrAzY3
04-21-2006, 11:53 AM
Though I would think you can get onto social programs by using your SS number or whatever. I doubt a government issued photo ID is required.


Well it should be. Its the least you can do if you are going to leech off taxpayers.


No, no, no...

Both voting and getting public assistance should require no effort at all. That way, the people who are too lazy to be productive can then vote to take money from the people that are. It is a perfect system, if we require effort though... well come on, they'd have to like work for it and we've already established their distain for that.

Old Corps Gunny
04-24-2006, 03:22 PM
Had to help a friend's daughter get into section 8 housing a few years back; she had to provide photo ID, birth certificate, SSID, bank statements AND fill out a five page (front and rear) form. After that they did a police check on her to make sure she had not been convicted of any felonies or or had a history of police responding to "breaches of the peace". Seems to me requiring a photo ID to vote is pretty minor in comparison. I know plenty of places that require TWO photo IDs before they will allow accept a personel check.