The question posed by this piece's title might have been answered, at least in part, by some reference to the very recent Fifth Circuit decision on Texas' ID statute. I find this omission rather strange given the apocalyptic tone of the series and the fact that the Fifth Circuit is nobody's idea of a liberal court. But, then, the Shelby County ruling from SCOTUS that seems to have induced much of this handwringing (and applied only to the VRAs "preclearance" aspect) is also more limited than one would gather from much of the reportage.
Hey, it's not like you have to recite the Gettysburg Address to vote. The rules apply to everyone, right? So, Democrats and others who want to ensure that every half-wit who can fog a mirror (especially those of the African American persuasion) gets to have a say, register your people and get them to the polls and STOP WHINING ABOUT IT! Near as I can tell, many of the restrictive practices touted by Republican state governments actually make a great deal of sense. That they disproportionately affect blacks is a problem for the blacks to address among themselves. Wow, a voter actually has to present photo identification to prove he or she lives where they say they do. Why not? This sort of identification proves more than one's address - it shows the bearer minimally belongs to our society -that they get it. As we say, "C'mon, man." If you can't manage such simple and fair registration requirements, maybe you shouldn't be voting. And this whole flap shouldn't be characterized as all about "preventing fraud" - it should be called what it really is - a program to weed out incompetents.
1
"Smaller guv'mint",... "Getting gov'mint out of your life"...LIES by "conservatives" who now SUPER-regulate our bed rooms, our womens' health clinics, our wedding chapels, our fewer voting booths and times, ....their regulations now allow filthier, toxic drinking water and air, budget-strangled schools, creation of poor people from the middle class to fill slots in the lowest paid service jobs they keep lousily paid - all to allow tax breaks for the rich people and companies that will repay them with fat jobs as soon as they get out of that government position. Immoral, unChristian, unAmerican!
4
If the Republican Party is committed to less government regulation, then how do they explain their ever increasing government regulation of individual voting rights that were formerly guaranteed?
6
Voting needs to be easier, not more difficult: longer period to vote,
automatic registration for citizens obtaining driver's licenses, even voting by mail as Oregon already does. It seems that efforts to make voting more onerous are only attempts at limiting one group or another from voting!
automatic registration for citizens obtaining driver's licenses, even voting by mail as Oregon already does. It seems that efforts to make voting more onerous are only attempts at limiting one group or another from voting!
7
I for one am bone tired of all the news from the east coast - and from Texas! I live about one hour from Ojinaga, Chihuahua Mexico and basically I find Texas government a major embarrassment - Perry, Cruz, Abbott, Patrick, the Border Patrol, blah, blah, blah. As far the east coast - from Florida to New Jersey and particularly Kentucky. We are having a spate of unwelcome news. Killings here and there and all over. Mitch McConnell and his love of coal over our future lineage. I clearly cannot abide another Bush and frankly I do not want another Clinton (tho that has nothing to do with the east coast). And that guy from New Jersey, to say nothing of that manic from Las Vegas. The Republican Party has become a shambles. Voting rights should NOT be complex. We sorely need some cool and calm and some new and some change. How about Rand Paul and that old hippie Democrat going at it - now that would be some welcome change !!
1
What is happening in NC has gained the attention of national and global readers, and for good reason.
Curtailing voter's rights is just one example of the bigotry and discrimination to be found in NC.
What happened to me, involving a little known archaic common law, the DOJ needs to take on, because it, too, has a discriminatory result.
My experience with this law, and the NC county court judge, who favored the corporations who harmed me, as he ruled in private, can be found at this safe site on change.org
http://chn.ge/1fhM4si
It's important to protect yourself by knowing this law.
Few individuals have the financial means to hire attorneys to take on corporate lawyers; but then, in NC, the NC Unjust system protects the wealthy, providing the "discriminatory result".
Until the DOJ investigates this law, stay away from NC.
Meg Conway, formerly of NC
Curtailing voter's rights is just one example of the bigotry and discrimination to be found in NC.
What happened to me, involving a little known archaic common law, the DOJ needs to take on, because it, too, has a discriminatory result.
My experience with this law, and the NC county court judge, who favored the corporations who harmed me, as he ruled in private, can be found at this safe site on change.org
http://chn.ge/1fhM4si
It's important to protect yourself by knowing this law.
Few individuals have the financial means to hire attorneys to take on corporate lawyers; but then, in NC, the NC Unjust system protects the wealthy, providing the "discriminatory result".
Until the DOJ investigates this law, stay away from NC.
Meg Conway, formerly of NC
The end of this article hits the nail on the head. So-called "civil rights" groups have used the fear of expensive lawsuits as a weapon to intimidate state governments and keep them from exercising their lawful powers. A Supreme Court ruling clarifying the boundaries of Section 2 would force these groups to be more selective in the threats they make.
3
Oh, come on. In Bush v Gore, the conservatives on the Supreme Court used the equal protection clause to justify stopping the recount.The claim was that different counties were using different standards in the recount. (The fact the stopping the recount perpetrated the much larger lack of equal protection due to the difference between punch card counties and optical reader counties is irrelevant here.)
If the equal protection clause applies in voting, then it is blindly obvious that the restrictive laws passed by Republican states are unconstitutional since they have the effect of making it more likely that one person will be able to vote and have his vote counted than another. There really shouldn't be any need for the Civil Rights Act here.
And lawsuits are historically the way unconstitutional laws are invalidated.
If the equal protection clause applies in voting, then it is blindly obvious that the restrictive laws passed by Republican states are unconstitutional since they have the effect of making it more likely that one person will be able to vote and have his vote counted than another. There really shouldn't be any need for the Civil Rights Act here.
And lawsuits are historically the way unconstitutional laws are invalidated.
4
What a sham! Republican state legislators making it harder for (mostly) Democrats to vote to prevent "fraud." But no one has any evidence of major fraud...or even minor fraud...certainly not enough fraud to have ever changed an election result. Add this to (mostly) Republican gerrymandering, and the result is paralysis in Washington. This analysis is brought to you by a former Republican. Sadly, "my" party no longer exists.
11
1,368 words written for the sole purpose of establishing a 'StrawDog Issue' for Democrats to attack in order to gin up outrage and get out the vote in 2016.
2
Spoken by someone truly ignorant of the issues involved.
7
Clearly Mr. Markarian has no use for the "one man, one vote" rule.
5