HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » DOJ offers guidelines for...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Tue Aug 21, 2012, 11:44 AM

DOJ offers guidelines for acceptable racist Voter ID laws

Justice Department Approves Va. Voter ID Law

The above article is about the Department of Justice signing off on Virginia's new voter ID law, which is less restrictive than challenged laws in South Carolina and Texas that DOJ has not approved.

So we have an example of a legally acceptable voter ID law in a state with a long history of black voter suppression.

Without criticizing the DOJ, I want to note that what is being upheld here is a law instituted for the sole purpose of disenfranchising poor, working class and minority voters and creating delays at urban and minority district polling places.

It expands acceptable ID beyond photo IDs, but it addresses no actual problem, and it eliminates the option of signing an affidavit if you don't have the required ID.

Its only legislative purpose is to reduce the number of votes cast by the "wrong" people.

The ability to attest to your voting status at the polling place is conceptually quite important to me because eliminating it introduces "shit out of luck" voting... situations where voting is not merely made burdensome, but is disallowed.

If you show up at a polling place without ID you go home without voting. There is no paperwork you can sign, nothing you can attest to... just go home.

7 replies, 1193 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 7 replies Author Time Post
Reply DOJ offers guidelines for acceptable racist Voter ID laws (Original post)
cthulu2016 Aug 2012 OP
qb Aug 2012 #1
hifiguy Aug 2012 #2
MotherPetrie Aug 2012 #3
msongs Aug 2012 #4
hifiguy Aug 2012 #6
librechik Aug 2012 #5
electedface Aug 2012 #7

Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Tue Aug 21, 2012, 12:15 PM

1. The most insidious component is requiring a system of provisional ballots.

This creates a huge financial burden on local governments, who essentially need to double the staff at polling places, and provide office space and additional staff for the following days so provisional voters can come in and show their IDs. The requirement to show up twice to have your ballot counted is also a burden on voters.

ALEC really did its homework when it devised every conceivable way of disenfranchising voters.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Tue Aug 21, 2012, 12:18 PM

2. Eric Holder is the most useless piece of shit

this side of the Repuke party. The man is an embarrassment, a disgrace, and is no Democrat.

Voter suppression, well maybe just a little. Prosecute fraudsters or war criminals? Perish the thought. MMJ dispensaries? Call out every SWAT team within 50 miles.

Disgusting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #2)

Tue Aug 21, 2012, 12:24 PM

3. times a million

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #2)

Tue Aug 21, 2012, 01:14 PM

4. eric holder did not appoint himself attorney general and he is not the boss nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to msongs (Reply #4)

Tue Aug 21, 2012, 02:11 PM

6. He's the boss of the DOJ.

He could stop this shit in a second.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Tue Aug 21, 2012, 01:25 PM

5. it's obvious to me that the DOJ is still dominated by Bush appointees

who use the same tricks to rule the department that they do to rule the Senate as a minority. There was a coup back in 2001, and DOJ is one place where they are still firmly in charge.

Though the DOJ is the most secretive of many institutions of government, Ron Suskind managed to get some evidence of this in his book, "Confidence Men," which I recommend.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cthulu2016 (Original post)

Wed Aug 22, 2012, 03:05 PM

7. This is Voter Suppression

I don't think it's necessarily the act of showing an ID that is an issue, because everyone can eventually get an ID. HOWEVER...

This being enforced several months before a presidential election. If voter fraud was really an issue, and this law was to ensure a vote is legitimate, than it would have been proposed and implemented a couple of years ago in order to ensure everybody who would be effected is taken care of.

I think the outrage stems from the time in which this law was enacted.

Oh, and this isn't shady:

Watch the video and sign the petition to end Voter Suppression.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread