Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.
Republicans Move To Disenfranchise College Students
compassionate_warrior
Veteran
From today's NY Times OP-Ed page: KEEPING STUDENTS FROM THE POLLS [note: this applies only to those studying away from their home state]
"Next fall, thousands of students on college campuses will attempt to register or vote and will be turned away. Sorry, they will hear, you have an out-of-state driver's license. Sorry, your college ID is not valid here. Sorry, we found out that you paid out-of-state tuition, so even though you do have a state driver's license, you still can't vote.
7 States have already passed strict laws requiring a government-issued ID (like a driver's license or passport) to vote, which many students don't have, and 27 others are considering such measures. ... It's all part of a widespread Republican effort to restrict the voting rights of demographic groups that tend to vote Democratic. Blacks, Hispanics, the poor and the young, who are more likely to support President Obama, are disproportionately represented in the 21 million people without government IDs. On Friday, the Justice Department blocked the new voter ID law in South Carolina.
Republicans usually don't want to acknowledge that their purpose is to turn away voters, especially when race is involved, so they invented an explanation, claiming that stricter ID laws are necessary to prevent voter fraud. In fact, there is almost no voter fraud in America to prevent.
William O'Brian, speaker of the New Hampshire State House, told a Tea Party group earlier this year that students are "foolish" and tend to "vote their feelings" because they lack life experience. Voting as a liberal, he said, that's what kids do. And that's why, he said, he supported measures to prohibit students from voting from their college addresses and to end same-day registration."
Students, it looks like you'll have to request absentee ballots from your home state in order to be able to vote in the 2012 election. Be herewith forewarned.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/27/opinion/keeping-college-students-from-the-polls.html
"Next fall, thousands of students on college campuses will attempt to register or vote and will be turned away. Sorry, they will hear, you have an out-of-state driver's license. Sorry, your college ID is not valid here. Sorry, we found out that you paid out-of-state tuition, so even though you do have a state driver's license, you still can't vote.
7 States have already passed strict laws requiring a government-issued ID (like a driver's license or passport) to vote, which many students don't have, and 27 others are considering such measures. ... It's all part of a widespread Republican effort to restrict the voting rights of demographic groups that tend to vote Democratic. Blacks, Hispanics, the poor and the young, who are more likely to support President Obama, are disproportionately represented in the 21 million people without government IDs. On Friday, the Justice Department blocked the new voter ID law in South Carolina.
Republicans usually don't want to acknowledge that their purpose is to turn away voters, especially when race is involved, so they invented an explanation, claiming that stricter ID laws are necessary to prevent voter fraud. In fact, there is almost no voter fraud in America to prevent.
William O'Brian, speaker of the New Hampshire State House, told a Tea Party group earlier this year that students are "foolish" and tend to "vote their feelings" because they lack life experience. Voting as a liberal, he said, that's what kids do. And that's why, he said, he supported measures to prohibit students from voting from their college addresses and to end same-day registration."
Students, it looks like you'll have to request absentee ballots from your home state in order to be able to vote in the 2012 election. Be herewith forewarned.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/27/opinion/keeping-college-students-from-the-polls.html
0
Comments
I'm actually surprised that out of state students were not already voting absentee... From my military days, it was the norm to vote absentee because of having to move around.
AFAIK, there hasn't been much voter fraud. What there has been is all manner of obstructionism like this, on the part of the Republicans the last 3 presidential elections (remember Florida, in the first GW Bush election?) Polling stations that didn't have enough booths, so people had to wait in line for hours, turning away Blacks on various pretexts, voting machines that failed, many different scandals. A good book to read on this is "The Best Democracy Money Can Buy", by journalist Greg Palast.
Was there proof that machines did not really fail, or is that a political spin?
Lets not forget the 10 years of ACORN fraud. ACORN's unofficial motto "vote early, vote often"
http://rottenacorn.com/activityMap.html
And the Obama Democratic Primaries fraud recently discovered, forcing the Indiana Democratic Leader to resign.
http://www.westernfreepress.com/2011/12/13/democratic-party-head-resigns-during-vote-fraud-investigation/
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25349
There was a lawsuit in NM because the machines in rural Hispanic communities and Native American communities didn't register the votes for president. Now the state is required to provide paper ballots for every election.
They don't turn people away for being Black, exactly. They have various mechanisms that they apply selectively. Like demanding ID or telling people their ID isn't acceptable, or checking their names on a list of prisoners or felons, and if the voter happens to have the same name as someone who has lost the right to vote, they're turned away. Opening the polling stations late, after people have gone to work, or closing them early, with dozens of people still waiting to vote. Things like this didn't happen in affluent neighborhoods, mainly in poor communities. I don't remember all the different tricks now. Changing the hours of operation of polling places at the last minute, that happened in Ohio, I think. Congress investigated voting procedures nationwide after the 2nd GW Bush election, and found rampant illegalities in key states. There was a website for a couple of years that posted the Congressional record as the investigations were taking place.
http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0511/S00067.htm
http://votetrustusa.org
Good question. Congress didn't pursue any lawsuits. It had its hands full with their regular business, in addition to these investigations. Plus there was voter pressure to impeach Bush, so Congress was debating whether to pursue impeachment, which would have been a tremendous distraction from their usual business. Considering that there were irregularities in every state, judging by the 2nd website, taking legal action would have been too gargantuan a task. The more important thing would be to pass legislation regulating elections more closely.
Moved to General Banter.
Jimmy Carter said in a radio interview that elections he's been an official observer to in 3rd World countries (he specified Guatemala) have been much more accurate and fair than what we've been experiencing in the US, which is a pretty sad statement. Congress allocated funds to the states for new machines, but that whole effort got delayed while people wrangled over which machines to get, and it was a bit of a boondoggle. I live in NM, which is no longer allowed to use voting machines. 2 years after the Bush/Kerry elections, there were congressional elections. Those, too, were a mess, because many polling stations ran out of paper ballots, and thousands of voters were turned away. The voter turnout was severely underestimated by state election officials.
About ordering absentee ballots, the military, etc., for the Bush-Kerry election I and many others in NM ordered absentee ballots to avoid using voting machines. Some people never received their ballots. I went to Kerry headquarters to ask why my ballot hadn't arrived yet, and it was a madhouse there. Voters were verging on hysteria, because they hadn't received their ballots, and they thought it was due to another attempt by Republicans to manipulate the election. One voter was shipping out to Iraq within days, and hadn't received his ballot. The staff person told him he could vote online, a special program had been set up so that military could vote online. I later heard that military online voting didn't work, some weren't able to access the site, it was another boondoggle. Furthermore, voters were informed after the election that absentee ballots ARE NOT COUNTED unless the election is especially close. They are thrown away without being counted! So--absentee ballots are not a good option!
There were similar problems as C_W presented in the Obama election. The report was that Obama lost 7 million votes due to various shenanigans, faulty voting machines, etc. Democracy in America has become a bit of a sham.
Carter did point out in the above-mentioned interview, that this isn't all that new. Back in the '60's the Democrats were the guilty party, especially in Chicago, he mentioned something about the Democratic Convention there, I forget the details, but the mayor of Chicago was notorious for running a powerful political machine that manipulated votes.
This news about targeting students is a real concern, bearing in mind that absentee ballots aren't routinely counted, and also that students may not know, unless there's a concerted effort by media to reach them with this message. Most students don't read the NY Times. They'll get to voting stations and will get a rude surprise if this news doesn't reach them. We used to have quite a few college students among our membership, I guess -- not so much anymore?
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/08/military_favors.html
Here's an interesting study accomplished in California... they show a significant decrease in voter participation by mailing in ballots (not good) however, it also showed a 5.99% favor to Democrats. If this is accurate, this could come back to bite the Republicans in the arse.
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?hl=en&gbv=2&gs_sm=c&gs_upl=2172l4344l0l8234l11l11l0l1l1l0l313l2454l0.2.7.1l10l0&q=cache:3gDk3hyi3_sJ:http://www.nonprofitvote.org/download-document/how-does-vote-by-mail-affect-voters-bergman-et-al.html+absentee+ballot+demographic&ct=clnk
What a fascinating study. And thanks to Pew Charitable Trust for funding it. Notice that over 62% of CA voters chose to vote by mail. I think that says a lot for voters' distrust of voting technology. Convenience is probably an issue, too, but that wouldn't explain why a significant majority of voters chose mail-in ballots. I'm going to enjoy reading this.
*mumble* *mumble* :grumble:
I'm a college student and have voted absentee in the past. Or sometimes I drive the distance to vote. Depends on my schedule. So expecting someone to present identification is racist? Then get a license! It's not difficult. Why is it so hard or bad to expect people to be responsible enough to do such a basic task?
I think it's a kind of nasty, paternalist racism to believe that minorities are incapable of doing something so basic.
With the rise of authoritarian practices in America (detention without charge, warrantless wire tapping, etc, etc), this is no surprise. Just another indication of the decline and fall of the American empire. I used to be afraid of that, but now I just see it as inevitable, and will roll with whatever comes, and do my best to make sure that what comes after (wherever that may be) is better than what we started with. Those who are perpetuating the authoritarian state for the rich and powerful can do whatever they want to.
- Right to privacy
- Right to unlawful search and seizures
- Right to trial by jury
- Right to free speech
- Right to not have cruel and unusual punishments
I am able to give instances for each.
Today NSA has become the de-facto domestic surveillance arm of the "Justice" Department. If you want to go to bed believing that everybody involved will only use the vast (and they are vast) new powers of the government to spy on its citizens only for good and noble purposes, then you just lay your little head down and believe that. I know better. There is no accountability and no consequences.
Wiretapping is far from the benign scenario Telly03 outlines. The order under Bush was as Mountains says--to orient a division of the NSA toward domestic spying via phone wiretap and internet. The stated purpose was to enable security services to surveil domestic terrorist cells. But as the numerous imbroglios at airports involving innocent citizens finding their names on no-fly lists attests, narrowly targeted surveillance can easily get out of hand.
I was a college student on a language study program in the USSR, and I never EVER thought I'd see the day when my own country would begin to resemble in ominous ways that now-defunkt regime. Big Brother listening in (we used to talk into the electrical outlets in the dorm rooms, as a joke, as if they were bugs), the eviscerating of the media, as happened during Bush II (the joke in Russia was that of the two main newspapers, Pravda (Truth) and Izvestiia (News): Pravda has no Izvestiia, and Izvestiia has no Pravda). Unnervingly, under baby Bush, our media had no Izvestiia, or not much that would disturb His Highness. Is it any better now? I don't know. I've given up. You tell me.
The justification for domestic spying? Just like "back in the USSR", as McCartney sang. "We're surrounded by enemies! Enemies within, enemies without." You never know if your neighbor might be an enemy cell. Report on your neighbor to the police (or the NSA). The authorities are here to help you, and to defend the Motherland. Only true subversives get caught in the snare and shipped away on trains to unknown destinations. Cooperate with the authorities and all will be well. Telly03, we have a job opening for you, if you'd like to demonstrate your patriotism.
I really don't like hearing you assume that things have changed for the worse and spout it out as facts... There is enough unjustified govt paranoia going around without your help.
Sorry my friend, just not buying it. Am I personally worried about them reading my emails? Not at all. I have nothing to hide. But that's so far from the point that you can't see it from here. If you can't see the problem with what America has become from your desk inside NSA, perhaps it's time to get out so you can.
The way it used to work is that you showed some form of ID, even a student ID, in order to get a voter registration card. Your voter card was enough to get into the polling stations. Now it's all changing.
I remember in WA State, though, you were required to re-register for every election. People would show up to vote and would be told they couldn't vote, because they hadn't renewed their registration. That was unnerving. I don't know if that was common practice elsewhere, or just a local thing.
The argument that it is to reduce fraud is not reasonable because why not require all votes be by absentee ballot which would be the logical conclusion from believing it reduces fraud.
In the articles I've read, requiring a gov't ID of some sort is considered discriminatory because poor residents in rural areas aren't able to get to an office that offers the ID's. It harks back to the days of poll taxes, and fake literacy tests designed to prevent people of color from voting. I agree with Telly that it sounds perfectly reasonable, but from what little I've read about this issue, access to acceptable forms of ID's isn't easy for some, and those some tend to be the kind of voters (liberal) that Republicans don't want at the polls.