Skip to comments.Wisconsin voter ID ruling creates confusion
Posted on 08/02/2014 7:38:37 AM PDT by TurboZamboni
MADISON, Wis. -- A court-ordered change to Wisconsin's photo identification law that's designed to cut down on voter fraud is creating confusion and may even open the door to the very type of behavior Republican lawmakers were trying to prevent.
Policy makers, attorneys and voter ID experts were struggling Friday with how to interpret a Wisconsin Supreme Court ruling from a day earlier, which mandated a change to the law in order to make it constitutional.
The court said the state can't require applicants for state-issued IDs to present government documents that cost money to obtain, such as a copy of a birth certificate. The court left it to the Division of Motor Vehicles to come up with a solution.
"We don't know how that's going to work," Assembly Speaker Robin Vos said Thursday shortly after the ruling. When asked whether obtaining photo IDs without having to present government-issued documents verifying a person's identity could result in fraud, Vos said: "It's got a potential for it."
The requirement, passed in 2011, is not currently in effect. A state judge blocked it in March 2012 and in May a federal judge struck it down as violating the U.S. Constitution's guarantee of equal protection. While the state Supreme Court upheld the law as constitutional, a federal appeals court would have to reverse U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman's ruling for the requirement to take effect.
Thirty-four states have passed laws requiring some sort of identification from voters, but only 31 of them are in effect, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.
(Excerpt) Read more at twincities.com ...
The laughs never end. So you need an ID to vote, but no official ID is necessary to get an ID. Brilliant.
Similar situation in Kansas. The law is clear: have a legal ID. The press is the problem, as it’s trying to make this simple requirement out to be one of the most confusing things in the history of mankind.
Maybe the ‘reporters’ really are this stupid but it sure looks like a panic play to me.
What does county hall charge for a birth certificate? $15.00? Why not give everybody one free one a year? (or every two years?), Would it really bust the budget? Hell of a lot cheaper than voter fraud.
Not everyone domiciled in WI was born in WI. Stupid ruling.
How about allowing IDs to be purchased with EBT cards? I’m sure that the poor could trade a few bags of Doritos for the right to vote.
The right to bear arms is a basic constitutional right too. While I have no personal experience with it, I understand obtaining a pistol permit in some states is a difficult, time consuming and expensive process. I guess some rights are more important than other rights.
From what I have seen, I wouldn't bet about that.
Good point. There is a fee to get these documents, but the fee does not break the bank.
There is a fee to renew our driver’s licenses. I think it is about $30 to renew for a five year period in California. Other states have fees too, but these fees also do not break the bank.
Not sure why the issue of paying a nominal fee for a government service is at issue here. Unless liberals are looking to grasp anything to push against voter ID.
I researched and found a form on line that homeschoolers could use instead of a school id. The form basically asked for the "school administrator" (me) to sign saying my son was in homeschool. So even though I had legal documents to prove who he was, the DMV needed me to sign a piece of paper as the proof. Isn't that ridiculous?
I was thinking the same thing. 1 free should be sufficient.
When you pay a visit to the bureaucracy, you don’t have to characterize it as ridiculous. It is understood going in.
This small exchange is from another site I visited a few minutes ago:
Theyre going to tell Hispanics, Hey theyre going to send you back, and all that stuff. They will just use this as propaganda...”
Those who are to be sent back will not be voting anyway. Oh, wait- that’s why the RAT party so strongly opposes voter ID laws. Is it 1776 yet?
Off topic, but case in point, New Jersey. To obtain a carry permit you have to "prove a need"; unless you are "connected" the proof is never sufficient. Any permit/registration requirement is a clear violation of the Second Amendment anyway. What part of "shall not be infringed" do they fail to get?
They know that, outside of a few big cities and a couple of radical states, they'd never win another election. Of course they oppose it.
Well, inner city blacks use pistols without those stinkin’ permits, so why shouldn’t they vote without stinkin’ IDs? /s
Good point! Actually our DMV just “moved and improved” - a greeter directs you and you use a computer to determine what you need, then get a ticket with a number on it so you can sit instead of moving in a line like cattle. It has really helped the wait time because some things are quicker to obtain and you don’t get in line behind some moron who doesn’t understand what they are being told.
Minority voting was up in the first Texas election that required ID to vote, so the Supreme Court of MN is uninformed as to the effect of the ID laws in other states.
Of course, it will cut down on the sizable bloc of dead people voting, and that is what Democrats fear.
we have a lot of online services renewals etc.
You can also make appointments. In Oceanside, CA the illegals line up every morning, but an appointment can get you in and out quickly.
We are RE brokers and the Bureau of RE is the worst state agency to deal with and it’s all paid for by our fees.
Sorry, I get those cold states mixed up. I meant the Supreme Court of WE.
Our tax office was the worst before they moved! Smallish downtown area with court house and all government offices together so there was never any parking (although since it was an old downtown the parking was along the streets which are still shaded by huge old trees, so that part was nice!) - but once you did find somewhere to park and got inside, it was chaos - small area to wait, had to be in a line, which had to wind out the door - three folks working the counter. Then when you got up there you learned they don’t take credit or debit cards - just cash or checks. Seriously.... who doesn’t take debit? But now they do - hard to believe government improved!
I recently went to the DMV extension in my nearby little town. I was the only one there except for the lone employee. He was friendly and helpful and I walked out in less than 10 minutes.
The whole time I kept thinking that the whole situation was weird and creepy. After my previous experiences in big city DMVs, I couldn't help but to get the feeling that I was on some sort of camera show or some type of government setup.
So true! lol
Newspaper reporters are frequently confused.
As long as banks impose a fee upon the merchant, they are unable to use these cards.
In our case there is no legal method to charge the taxpayer a fee to cover the swipe fee, and there is no will to force banks to waive the swipe fee for government transactions.
I can pay some bills online using a credit card if we use a third party to be the intermediate, and we agree to pay the ~ $3.95 convenience fee.
Yes, I figured that was why they weren’t set up to take credit cards at the former location - I have no idea if they got some kind of agreement with a bank to waive the fee or not. Do banks also charge for debit transactions? I ask because we stayed at a charitable location when a family member was in the hospital and instead of putting the charges on a credit card (which would cost the location the fee), I used my debit and discussed with the worker on site - she thanked me for considering that fee (we were there for a month so it wasn’t just one fee). But if the bank charges for debit then I didn’t do them any favor
Debit cards using a PIN are charged the least fees.
When a website disables all “know your customer” form of identification, that website pays the highest fees. Very high fraud liability.
Which is why the forces of O’ disabled all identity checks for the last two elections.
Our “progressive” local governments still collect taxes like it was 1955.
And for any of you who are not familiar with these charities - there are lots of them across the U.S. Sort of like Ronald McDonald House - folks affiliated with a hospital or Hospice can stay there for a very reduced rate. The one we were at had laundry facilities and even soap, shampoo, etc. We save travel shampoos and soaps and donate to them whenever we are in town. they also need toilet paper, coffee, etc if anyone is looking for a place to donate things that are actually used instead of cash going to overhead!
too bad the prices aren’t still the same as 1955!
Reasonable decision. So the state should issue IDs to those who need them for free.