Well, at least he’s honest about how he feels about my work helping poor people to register to vote.
Why are left-wing activist groups so keen on registering the poor to vote?
Because they know the poor can be counted on to vote themselves more benefits by electing redistributionist politicians. Welfare recipients are particularly open to demagoguery and bribery.
Registering them to vote is like handing out burglary tools to criminals. It is profoundly antisocial and un-American to empower the nonproductive segments of the population to destroy the country — which is precisely why Barack Obama zealously supports registering welfare recipients to vote.
There are desperately poor white people living all throughout Appalachia who voted overwhelmingly for John McCain and Sarah Palin. They all benefit from the Motor Voter Law, which makes it possible for them to register to vote at the welfare office as well as the Division of Motor Vehicles. You NEVER hear Democrats complaining about how easy it is for these folks to vote. It’s true that the Democratic Party benefits when overall turnout is high and suffers when it is low. Democrats have a self-interested motivation for doing voter registration, including among the poor. But we’re not hypocrites about it. We try to make it easy to vote for everyone.
If we’re talking about people voting more than once, or voting when they’re not eligible to vote, or people impersonating someone in order to cast a vote, there is almost no voter fraud occurring in this country. Probably the most common cases of voter fraud are when people move and fail to reregister in their proper precinct. If they go ahead and vote at their old precinct, that’s voter fraud. It’s minor, but it does take place. Much less common are cases like Ann Coulter’s where people deliberately lie about what precinct they live in for whatever reason.
These types of relatively minor cases of voter fraud do not involve an increase or decrease of the overall electorate, and unless someone moves out of state, they only impact local races. When people don’t follow the rules, they should be punished, but there is no epidemic of voter fraud, and certainly not from the underclass.
Yet, the Republicans have moved in state after state to make it more difficult to vote.
The most common new requirement, that citizens obtain and display unexpired government-issued photo identification before entering the voting booth, was advanced in 35 states and passed by Republican legislatures in Alabama, Minnesota, Missouri and nine other states — despite the fact that as many as 25 percent of African-Americans lack acceptable identification.
Having fought for voting rights as a student, I am especially troubled that these laws disproportionately affect young voters. Students at state universities in Wisconsin cannot vote using their current IDs (because the new law requires the cards to have signatures, which those do not). South Carolina prohibits the use of student IDs altogether. Texas also rejects student IDs, but allows voting by those who have a license to carry a concealed handgun. These schemes are clearly crafted to affect not just how we vote, but who votes…
…In Georgia, Florida, Ohio and other states, legislatures have significantly reduced opportunities to cast ballots before Election Day — an option that was disproportionately used by African-American voters in 2008. In this case the justification is often fiscal: Republicans in North Carolina attempted to eliminate early voting, claiming it would save money. Fortunately, the effort failed after the State Election Board demonstrated that cuts to early voting would actually be more expensive because new election precincts and additional voting machines would be required to handle the surge of voters on Election Day.
Voters in other states weren’t so lucky. Florida has cut its early voting period by half, from 96 mandated hours over 14 days to a minimum of 48 hours over just eight days, and has severely restricted voter registration drives, prompting the venerable League of Women Voters to cease registering voters in the state altogether. Again, this affects very specific types of voters: according to the nonpartisan Brennan Center for Justice, African-Americans and Latinos were more than twice as likely as white voters to register through a voter registration drive.
So, the evidence is quite plain. Democrats want more people to vote, and Republicans want less. The Democrats try to expand the electorate, and they don’t try to suppress Republican votes. The Republicans actively try to suppress the Democratic vote.
The idea that all citizens are equal and we’re all entitled to one vote is perfectly fine with the Democrats, but it it’s a socialist plot to conservatives.
My bad, too. I registered 200+ college students in an area where Obama won by 1,200. It’s unlikely those students voted for McCain — the lines in my district were out the ass in 2008 (the lines were non-existent in 2010, btw).
Speaking of this, Yglesias just had a thread about voting rights. I think we’ve discussed this before, but I’m of the opinion that felons and people in prison should be allowed to vote as well. We’re either going to make it a right or we’re not. The more access to voting we give to the American people, the better.
Also, 16 year-olds should be allowed to vote, too.
I certainly agree with regard to felons who have served their time being allowed to vote. Any argument against just seems facially unconstitutional to me. After all, paying your debt to society has to mean something right? You can’t just have this basic civil right permanently restricted for the rest of your life.
Regarding felons currently serving time… well… I guess I can see a more plausible argument against allowing them to vote. Should murderers and rapists and others who have egregiously breached the social contract be allowed to have a say in its future shape? Or should they be denied that right until they’ve served out their punishment? Not quite sure where I fall on that issue.
The restriction of voting rights to just normal folks by the GOP is just totally shocking to me. The Supreme Court should be ashamed for upholding those laws. Certainly, I think Americans 50 years from now will look upon those laws – hopefully after overturning them – with universal shame. It’s zombie Jim Crowism. Simply appalling. One of the worst acts of the modern GOP, period.
Well I don’t think we should have a criminal justice system focused on punishment; it should be about making people better, more model citizens for when they get out. For those that have no chance of getting out, well, I don’t know how they should be handled when it comes to voting…but I’m not terribly concerned that there’s going to be so many of them that they can vote directly on policy that will allow them out of prison. It’s just more peeing your pants about nothing.
I can see the argument against it. I just don’t agree, and I don’t think we should be punishing people to condition their behavior. Give them a stake in society, and they’ll naturally want to better their communities without any forced coercion. People aren’t born criminals (other than perhaps sociopaths or others with certain types of disorders).
if felons have served their time, when they end parole, a voter registration application should be right there, in the folder with their last legal appointment.
So much for government of the people, by the people, for the people, eh?
I still say we should hit back with our own voter ID law. Only people with a valid college student ID get to vote. See how they like that.
It is challenging to be a member of the party that actually believes in democracy and wants government to work for everyone, in competition with a party that doesn’t believe in democracy and only wants government to serve their interests. Puts us at a disadvantage every damn time.
Based on the headline, I thought you were referring to our tax dollars going to bail out
corporationsjob creatorsNot to mention that anyone who has ever voted for Rick Perry, Michele Bachman, Sarah Palin, et. al., is guilty of giving them the best burglary tools that money can buy.
ps. Hola Manny!
hola back.
Con Frijoles? good stuff. reminds me of a distant era when I had motivation to actually write.
Yeah, I thought you’d like that one 🙂
I hear you about the writing. Looks like a lot of other people are having the same motivational problems, looking over at the sidebar. Maybe I’ll get back into it at some point, now that I have a desk job again.
Heh.
No.
I didn’t do that.
Isn’t that called ‘Faginy’?
referring to “Fagin” from “Oliver Twist”…..teaching/equipping criminals?
hmmmmm….I think I’ll sign up
Whether it be Joe Wilson’s “You Lie” or this dude’s unabashedly spoken opinion of which Americans should have representation it is patently obvious that there is a newly hatched comfort zone in America. In hindsight I wish Obama had stopped his speech when Wilson disrupted it and asked the Seargent of Arms to remove him, because now he’s going to have to bring a BIG Glock to this knife fight.
It is a big leap of arrogance for someone to so misunderstand the very framework of America.
Should america be about everyone or should it only be about a group of respectable people who have easy access to RMVs, not like the horror-show urban rmvs are.
But you see, Republicans just want to return us to the original intent of the founders. In their view, the only people who can vote – or hold office – are propertied white men. (That’s also why Obama makes their heads explode.)
Ah, you are catching on. By their voter suppression efforts, GOPers reduce the African-American community’s input to 3/5, sound familiar?
The older I get the more inclined I become towards applying some strict limitations on who gets to vote. Yep, you read that right.
To earn the privilege to vote a person should first take an IQ test at age 18. The national average score is 100 points so I’d be generous and let anyone who does better than, say, 90 pass the first test. Part II of this test would be scoring better than 70 out of 100 on a test of Constitutional and historical knowledge, something similar to what immigrants are required to know to get citizenship. (Reciting all the presidents would not be required.) I’d call these folks the “citizen voter pool”. Only members of this potential voting pool would be allowed to run for elected offices.
Then, every two years before a national vote, the “citizen voter pool” would have to pass another test of their knowledge of current events and policy issues. This would be like renewing your driver’s license past the age of 70 by driving thru an obstacle course to make sure you can still drive. Those who pass are now officially “citizen voters”.
Passing this biannual test gets you a ballot. Failure to fill out the ballot and mail it in would be a felony. It would also be a felony to reveal your “current voting status” thereby eliminating direct lobbying, the corruption of bribery and the possibility of physical coercion.
With the internet and such, “citizen voters” could pretty much eliminate the need for state legislatures, hire and fire the governing executives of their state and maybe even directly vote on legislation in Congress. Heck, given the requirements, there might barely be enough actual “current voters” to fill the seats for each state in the House of Representatives. It could, in practice, be a direct democracy based on merit.
An old gal can fantasize, right?
Tom Tancredo supports your plan.