Skip to comments.Arizona voting law disenfranchises citizens (LA Times Barf Alert)
Posted on 03/23/2013 12:54:43 PM PDT by Dallas59
It's a familiar story: Out of an exaggerated concern about potential election fraud, a state adopts procedures that have the effect of disenfranchising perfectly qualified voters. In this case, the state of Arizona is demanding that would-be voters provide proof of citizenship beyond what Congress has required. The Supreme Court, which heard arguments about Arizona's policy on Monday, should strike the requirement down.
In 1993, Congress enacted the National Voter Registration Act, popularly known as the "motor voter" law because, among other provisions, it allows citizens to register to vote when they apply for a driver's license. Congress was clear about its objective: "to establish procedures that will increase the number of eligible citizens who register to vote in elections for federal office."
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
what citizens are they talking about?
I thought the law was about NOT giving licenses to illegal’s.
All I’ve heard all my life is about how important my vote was. That’s BS. You can’t buy smokes or beer without showing some I.D. Try cashing a check or getting a loan without showing some I.D. The LA Times is just a bunch of commie libs advocating for voter fraud, IMHO.
>>The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the power to override state decisions about the "times, places and manner" of congressional elections, and that is what it did when it directed the states to "accept and use" the registration form approved by the federal government.
Tough. Also in the Constitution are Article I Section 2 and the 17th Amendment. They specify the qualifications of electors to the House and Senate have the same qualifications as electors to the most numerous branch of the State legislatures.
If a State requires proof of birth or citizenship to elect state assemblymen, I do not understand how that can be a contested standard for Congressional elections.
The LA Times may want some sort of ID from those seeking employment with their company.
Oh good heavens, the nerve of some people demanding that people have an ID..that might disenfranchise the CRIMINALS that came here ILLEGALLY..the horror, criminals not being allowed to have ID’s..but never fear Dems, your voting booth will still remain at the border so when the criminals cross they will vote Democrat just like you know they will
>>This law should never have been passed in the first place because, as the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals concluded, "Arizona has not provided persuasive evidence that voter fraud in registration procedures is a significant problem in Arizona."
Uh, just when did the feral courts get the power to determine what is "significant?" In a republic, that is a matter left for the reps of the people.
Disenfranchisment? Isn’t that when my vote is canceled out by someone voting twice? Or an illegal voting? Or people bussed in from other states voting in my state? Or how about when voting machines change people’s votes?
That is all the push for amnesty and the resistance to voter ID has ever been about. They see the way to a permanent majority, just dangling out there.
(1)Previously, they had former East German Stasi agents working as guards.
But they weren't tough enough and once let some factual reporting escape.