Our biggest threat in the general election isn't a repuke candidate

[cali]

It's the case being heard today by the Supreme Court. 20 states have mandated that voters produce voter ID. Today the SCOTUS takes it up. It's a crock of shit of course, and simply a repuke trick to reduce minority voters access to the polls, but it's a huge threat and a real problem if this case is decided for the defendants. The questions of the Justices will be quite interesting today.

[cali]

1. kick

because this is of vital importance. WE shouldn't skip nuts and bolts reality

[paparush]

2. Kick & Rec nt

[1corona4u]

3. I don't understand?

why shouldn't someone have to produce an ID? Why is that a 'repuke' trick?

[AB_Positive]

4. It's not "voters producing ID"...

It's "Voter ID" - a separate ID system trying to be put into place. Only those with "Voter ID" cards would be allowed to vote, and of course minority groups would have a hard time getting the Voter ID, just like Repugs use other methods to keep minorities away from the ballots. Grarg.

-AB+

[cali]

5. The plaintiff's in the case

have provided subtantial- to say the least- evidence that this is a method to disenfranchise minority voters, and that there is NO evidence of fraud that would require voters to produce ID. It's a deliberate attempt to place an obstacle in the way of poor and minority voters; particularly those who live in the inner cities.

Here is some information about it, and about who's behind this push.

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/01/08/558650.aspx
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/525385/new_study_finds_voter_id_laws_reduce.html

A release from the League of Women Voters:

Federal Judge Upholds Discriminatory Voter ID Requirement

League of Women VotersVows: No One Turned Away at Polls



Washington DC- The League of Women Voters of the United States and the League of Women Voters of Georgia today expressed extreme disappointment following a federal judge’s ruling that upholds a discriminatory voter ID requirement in the state of Georgia.

“This ruling is a troubling wake-up call that democracy is being compromised in Georgia and elsewhere,” said national League president Mary G. Wilson.

“The ruling is extremely disappointing to the League and to voters throughout Georgia,” Wilson continued. “Discriminatory and unnecessary photo ID restrictions are known to prevent eligible citizens from exercising their most precious right: the right to vote. We thought poll taxes were part of a by-gone era: Clearly we were wrong.”

“Now its time to focus on education efforts,” said Jennifer Owens, Executive Director of the League of Women Voters of Georgia. “The Georgia League will continue to do everything it can to ensure voters of all backgrounds have the information and the access they need to exercise their rights.”

“Together with our national network of League members, we will continue to work against these unnecessary restrictions that disproportionately undermine our democracy by hindering the rights' of the elderly, people of color, and the poor,” Owens concluded.

Not only does the Georgia law reduce the acceptable forms of identification that voters can use from 17 to 6 but it also makes state-issued photo identification an absolute must in order to vote. Georgia’s photo ID law was first passed by the legislature in 2005 with a revised version passed in 2006. A series of legal challenges at the state and federal level have resulted in numerous injunctions delaying its implementation. However, on September 6, 2007 a federal court judge upheld the constitutionality of the law and Georgia voters will be expected to produce photo ID to vote in-person beginning with special elections on September 18, 2007.

http://www.lwv.org/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Home&CONTENTID=9443&TEMPLATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm