Gov. Rick Scott: voter purge lawful, feds are wrong and breaking the law

[wmw999 2,147]

No, the second doesn't say that, and the framers didn't imagine a world like that.

The problem is that there are Martians out there -- law-abiding people who read laws and rules the way only Martians might. If they take action, then we have to clarify via the judicial and then legislative process. Thereby changing laws, and we all know how much stronger something repaired is than something that's never needed repair.

The more people out there, the more Martians there are. Well-meaning people who just don't get the same thing from what they read. And then they act on it. It happens in all walks of life, not just the second amendment.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

No, the second doesn't say that, and the framers didn't imagine a world like that.

The problem is that there are Martians out there -- law-abiding people who read laws and rules the way only Martians might. If they take action, then we have to clarify via the judicial and then legislative process. Thereby changing laws, and we all know how much stronger something repaired is than something that's never needed repair.

The more people out there, the more Martians there are. Well-meaning people who just don't get the same thing from what they read. And then they act on it. It happens in all walks of life, not just the second amendment.

The issue is the double standard people have on civil rights. My right to own a gun can be questioned each and every time I buy a gun. My right to carry a gun can be questioned whenever a cop asks. I have to show ID to buy a gun, I have to BUY and ID to carry a gun and show it to any cop that asks. Yet being asked to show an ID to vote is somehow a great sin against civil rights?

Screams of hypocrisy.

And Bill of Rights is not a difficult document to read, the only issue is when others try to interpret it to mean what they want. People go ape shit when anything is done to limit the individuals rights with regard to the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 7th, and 8th Amendments. And you can bet if the 3rd was in use that they would be against that just as strongly.... But the 2nd, they crap on and feel good about it.

Hypocrisy.

[wmw999 2,147]

Quote

***And Bill of Rights is not a difficult document to read, the only issue is when others try to interpret it to mean what they want.

That's that Martian reading I was talking about.

As far as disagreement over what the bill of rights means, I seem to recall some discussion about the meaning of "freedom of religion." And as far as the right to own a gun being abrogated by the need to show ID when you buy one, I'm guessing that you're all in favor of everyone following the law.

What is your realistic plan when people don't? Catch them? The more people, the harder that is.

I'm not sure the framers would have worded everything the same as they did had they lived now. For sure that whole land-owning-to-vote thing, the slaves thing, the women-as-chattel thing. And even those mostly took major upheavals to happen.

Something that attacks our right to have fun? No chance.

Wendy P.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

As far as disagreement over what the bill of rights means, I seem to recall some discussion about the meaning of "freedom of religion."

What is so difficult about: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"?

Congress will not pick one religion over another and will not prevent a person from worshiping. It gets sticky when we talk about pagans sacrificing virgins... But the general concept is very easy to grasp... Just like only allowing legal voters to cast a ballot.

The 2nd is even easier. "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". It does not allow murder, but it clearly allows the ownership and carry of weapons.

Quote

What is your realistic plan when people don't? Catch them? The more people, the harder that is.

Well in the case of voting, require a person to show who they are before they cast a ballot.... Not terribly difficult since Canada already does it.

Quote

I'm not sure the framers would have worded everything the same as they did had they lived now. For sure that whole land-owning-to-vote thing, the slaves thing, the women-as-chattel thing. And even those mostly took major upheavals to happen.

The founders knew that taxation without representation was bad, but they also knew that representation without taxation is also bad. Trying to make only those who had 'skin in the game' be allowed to vote was an attempt to avoid having an electorate that could vote entitlements to themselves without having to pay for the cost of them.

Slavery was not a major issue in the 1700's; There was no mention of slavery in the Articles of Confederation at all. Which is not to say it was not an issue at all. John Jay wrote that the idea of them discussing 'liberty' while slavery was allowed involved "an inconsistency not to be excused". Patrick Henry refused to go to the convention over the issue. But slavery was codified in the Constitution in the process of "Compromise" that so many people claim we should do now on major issues. Without the compromise there would of been no Constitution. The slaves counting as three-fifths of a whole person was against the North's wishes that they not count at all.

And 1808 was a date put into place in Article 1, Section 9 putting a 20 year "protection" for the slave trade.... And on January 1, 1808 Congress passed a law banning it.

As for women having the right to vote..... Well, men were sexist and were in control.

You do notice that most of the Amendments to the Constitution GRANT more freedoms or solidify freedoms rather than take them away right?

But that is not important to the issue being discussed here. What is so damn bad about making each vote count by only allowing legal voters to vote? Why is it that this is not an issue in Canada?

How do we do it?

We require the person to provide some sort of proof of who they are, Canada has some great examples that no one seems to be upset about, why reinvent the wheel?

1. Govt issued ID.
2. Show two original pieces of authorized identification. Both pieces must have your name and one must also have your address.

Such as:

Identity Cards

Driver's Licence
Health Card
Canadian Passport
Certificate of Canadian Citizenship (Citizenship Card)
Birth Certificate
Certificate of Indian Status (Status Card)
Social Insurance Number Card
Old Age Security Card
Student ID Card
Provincial/Territorial Identification Card
Liquor Identification Card
Hospital/Medical Clinic Card
Credit/Debit Card
Employee Card
Public Transportation Card
Library Card
Canadian Forces Identity Card
Veterans Affairs Canada Health Card
Canadian Blood Services/Héma-Québec Card
CNIB ID Card
Firearm Possession and Acquisition Licence or Possession Only Licence
Fishing, Trapping or Hunting Licence
Outdoors or Wildlife Card/Licence
Hospital bracelet worn by residents of long-term care facilities
Parolee Identification Card

Original documents
(with name and address)

Utility Bill (telephone, TV, public utilities commission, hydro, gas or water)
Bank/Credit Card Statement
Vehicle Ownership/Insurance
Correspondence issued by a school, college or university
Statement of Government Benefits (employment insurance, old age security, social assistance, disability support or child tax benefit)
Attestation of Residence issued by the responsible authority of a First Nations band or reserve
Government Cheque or Cheque Stub
Pension Plan Statement of Benefits, Contributions or Participation
Residential Lease/Mortgage Statement
Income/Property Tax Assessment Notice
Insurance Policy
Letter from a public curator, public guardian or public trustee
One of the following, issued by the responsible authority of a shelter, soup kitchen, student/senior residence, or long-term care facility: Attestation of Residence, Letter of Stay, Admission Form or Statement of Benefits

Bold are the thing I have on me or in my car... I'd bet you are close to the same

3. Have a person who has that information who lives in the same area as you vouch for you.

How is any of that difficult?

In addition you could make the law take place in two years... That would give PLENTY of time to anyone to gather those documents.

[tkhayes 140]

all that ranting would be fine if that is all that it is/was. But it is not.

What is ACTUALLY is, is Governors like Rick Scott, who then take an interpretation of a Voter ID law to purge 180000+ people off the roles and dump the responsibility back on them to fix it in 30 days or they may not get to vote, and they may not find out until election day that they were purged.

And people think Bradley Manning is guilty of treason?

I'll vote for your interpretation of the voter ID process if ANY OTHER ATTEMPT to stop voters from voting is met with federal criminal charges, which would at least be defending the Constitution, instead of openly allowing government to limit it.

We already have a judicial branch of the government. If there are people breaking the law by voting illegally, then go investigate/prosecute it. But using the executive power of the administrative branch to dump citizens, should be considered illegal as well.

Instead, the feds simply sue. How about arresting him?

[matthewcline 0]

There would be an equal amount of Liberal and Conservative individuals in Jail then. I am cool with that.

(I think Manning is Guilty, but I do not have all the evidence either)

The purge is supposed to happen periodically any way, yes?
Wasn't the Governor blocked from doing this for a period of time and only succeeded in the law being enforced now?

The TN law passed, the grand destruction of voter rights, didn't happen, I got my new card in the mail, the list of Photo ID's acceptable was with it, including the waiver system (for those who can show they can't legally get an ID) and a way to get your free Photo ID.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[tkhayes 140]

I do not think I ever touted or claimed that their would be widespread destruction fo voters rights. What I said is we are creating a problem bigger than the one than we are fixing.

Glad the system worked for you - what about the people that moved and never got the notice or the card in the mail?

How big is the voter fraud problem in TN? Has it even been defined? How many people who are valid to vote will end up not being able to vote in Nov due to the new system?


That's data and that will determine whether or not it was worthwhile. I'll look forward to your updates on TN since we do not see nay news of it here in FL

[matthewcline 0]

Quote

I do not think I ever touted or claimed that their would be widespread destruction fo voters rights. What I said is we are creating a problem bigger than the one than we are fixing.

Glad the system worked for you - what about the people that moved and never got the notice or the card in the mail?Their Voter Card has info on how to register at their new address, failure to do so is on them.

How big is the voter fraud problem in TN? Has it even been defined? How many people who are valid to vote will end up not being able to vote in Nov due to the new system?Big enough BOTH parties addressed it when they happened to be the minority party, R's passed it this time, with an almost identical plan to the D's (compromise was the free ID and the waivers to those who had a hardship that wouldn't allow them to get the free ID-or no change to business as usual). The new system covers 100% of legally able to vote, voters.


That's data and that will determine whether or not it was worthwhile. I'll look forward to your updates on TN since we do not see nay news of it here in FL

It must not be a big deal now, the news stopped talking about it even before the law was voted on and the opposition here stopped once the two parties plans happened to be compared, ans ow and behold, they looked pretty much identical.

In the end, it addressed voter fraud, maybe statistically or in your opinion, it was not that big of a deal, some feel the same about seat belt laws, yet we all agree those laws are for the betterment of society.

it is cyclic, the parties argue both sides, depending on which will benefit them at the time.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

We already have a judicial branch of the government. If there are people breaking the law by voting illegally, then go investigate/prosecute it.

And if people are not required to prove who there are.... then how in the hell are you going to know if they are voting illegally?

What is there to stop me from voting for you in your district?

[tkhayes 140]

Quote

What is there to stop me from voting for you in your district?

Not much - but the point is that you already DO NOT vote in my district. There is not a problem with voting in my district by guys named DaVinci. So to pass a law to further cause you to NOT vote in my district seems moot.

Once again, there is NO DEMONSTRATED PROBLEM with illegal voting that is worth pursuing. fuck, we can barely get the legal population to vote, why is everyone so concerned about the statistically insignificant portion that MIGHT be illegal?

But if you DO vote in my district and you do it illegally, then Gov. Scott can do his investigation into illegal voters, just like he is doing now. But instead of canceling the right to vote for many, he could investigate (with the arm of law behind him), and then prosecute you for the crime that you committed.

That is how it works. But right now, no one has found a bunch of illegal voters - they have only found a few. prosecute them - and maybe it will be a deterrent to others who think about it.

[rushmc 18]

And a district judge agree with him

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/06/27/2869977/florida-and-feds-head-to-court.html

Quote

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. -- A judge on Wednesday rejected a request by federal authorities to block Florida's contentious move to remove potentially ineligible voters from its rolls

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

And a district judge agree with him

http://www.miamiherald.com/2012/06/27/2869977/florida-and-feds-head-to-court.html

Quote

TALLAHASSEE, Fla. -- A judge on Wednesday rejected a request by federal authorities to block Florida's contentious move to remove potentially ineligible voters from its rolls

with a ridiculous logic that won't stand up to non partisan review:

Quote

Hinkle in ruling from the bench said federal laws are designed to block states from removing eligible voters close to an election. He said they are not designed to block voters who should have never been allowed to cast ballots in the first place.

We already know that the Florida lists had eligible voters on it. He is signing off on a process that presumes guilt (non eligible) until proven innocent, and just weeks away from an August 14th election. Doesn't seem to fit within our American concepts of justice.

Oddly, he blasted all for partisan politics in the matter, but his ruling seems to be more of the same.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Not much - but the point is that you already DO NOT vote in my district.

You know that do you?

Quote

Once again, there is NO DEMONSTRATED PROBLEM with illegal voting that is worth pursuing.

Canada felt that there was so they put 'common sense' rules in place. Clearly people in FL thought there was, otherwise they would not have done anything.

Quote

fuck, we can barely get the legal population to vote, why is everyone so concerned about the statistically insignificant portion that MIGHT be illegal?

Very few crimes are committed with firearms compared to the number of firearms available. Why register them?

Quote

But if you DO vote in my district and you do it illegally, then Gov. Scott can do his investigation into illegal voters, just like he is doing now.

And how are you going to know that it was done illegally if you don't have to provide ID or track it in any way?

[tkhayes 140]

One again - I am not totally against an ID program but the plan is to ban voters first- by unregistering them and putting that onto the voter to fix. You want to ask for an ID ? Then fine - do it at the polls- but if even ONE citizen is not allowed to vote because they were removed wrongly from the registration, then the system has failed and the Constitution breached

So how do you propose to fix this without first removing the voters?

[kallend 1,647]

Quote

One again - I am not totally against an ID program but the plan is to ban voters first- by unregistering them and putting that onto the voter to fix. You want to ask for an ID ? Then fine - do it at the polls- but if even ONE citizen is not allowed to vote because they were removed wrongly from the registration, then the system has failed and the Constitution breached

So how do you propose to fix this without first removing the voters?

Gov. Scott does seem to have a very severe problem with truthtelling, doesn't he? He's around #1 on Politifact's list of liars.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Gov. Scott does seem to have a very severe problem with truthtelling

Isn't attacking the player not the ball one of the weaker methods of debate?

[normiss 622]

Note the forum as well as the poster.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

One again - I am not totally against an ID program but the plan is to ban voters first- by unregistering them and putting that onto the voter to fix. You want to ask for an ID ? Then fine - do it at the polls- but if even ONE citizen is not allowed to vote because they were removed wrongly from the registration, then the system has failed and the Constitution breached

So how do you propose to fix this without first removing the voters?

Quote

but if even ONE citizen is not allowed to vote because they were removed wrongly from the registration, then the system has failed and the Constitution breached

And if ONE person who is not eligible to vote, votes... Then the system has failed and the Constitution breached. Fact is that right now there is NO WAY to tell who is voting. And that is just stupid.

How do I propose to fix it? I have already given examples: Follow what Canada has done and require one of the three options to prove you are who you say you are.

BTW, you do know that you can cast a provisional ballot in FL right? If you are not on the rolls, you can cast a paper ballot and that ballot is put to the side and your claim to be eligible to vote is looked into. If you are allowed, the vote is counted, if not then it does not.

Quote

http://election.dos.state.fl.us/gen-faq.shtml

4. What happens if someone challenges my eligibility to vote at the polls?

If you are challenged on the basis that your legal residential address is not within the precinct, you will still have an opportunity to vote.
If you changed your address within the same county and your new address places you in the same precinct, you will be asked to complete an address update change at the polls and then you can vote a regular ballot (assuming you are otherwise eligible).
If your new legal residential address falls outside the precinct, you will be directed to the precinct that corresponds to your new address if time permits to go and vote there.
If you have moved from one county to the next, you will not be able to make the address change at the polls but you will be allowed to vote a provisional ballot. Provided you are eligible and registered and you voted in the precinct that corresponds to your new address, your provisional ballot will count.
If you do not execute the address change or you insist on voting in the precinct, you will allowed to vote a provisional ballot.
If you are challenged on any other grounds or your eligibility is questioned, you will be allowed to vote a provisional ballot.

So you let people who are unable at that time cast a provisional ballot and then their claim is looked into.

So in a nutshell:

1. Follow Canada's plan of identification requirements.
2. Implement it a year out from a national election so people have time to meet the new requirements.
3. Provide provisional ballots for those who still do not have ID.

This really should not be that big of a deal... you ALREADY have to register to vote. Having some ID when you actually do it should not be some Herculean effort.

[kallend 1,647]

Quote

Quote

Gov. Scott does seem to have a very severe problem with truthtelling

Isn't attacking the player not the ball one of the weaker methods of debate?

Not debating, just an observation: Scott is a proven habitual liar. Anyone who believes anything he says without checking independently is an idiot.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[matthewcline 0]

Quote

So you let people who are unable at that time cast a provisional ballot and then their claim is looked into.

So in a nutshell:

1. Follow Canada's plan of identification requirements.
2. Implement it a year out from a national election so people have time to meet the new requirements.
3. Provide provisional ballots for those who still do not have ID.

This really should not be that big of a deal... you ALREADY have to register to vote. Having some ID when you actually do it should not be some Herculean effort.

This is pretty much what TN has in place right now. With the exception of all the screaming and yelling as the law was going through the debates (from both sides, depending on the year, and who introduced it), it has been met with little fan fare.

The new cards came out in the mail, if you moved and didn't re-register, you didn't get a card (but you needed to re-register to vote any way). You get a pamphlet of what ID's are acceptable, and how to get a free one if you don't have one already. You also got info on who to get it waived, how to get transportation to the polling stations etc.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[kallend 1,647]

Quote

Note the forum as well as the poster.

So, based on Scott's record, do you believe everything he says?

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[tkhayes 140]

Quote

So you let people who are unable at that time cast a provisional ballot and then their claim is looked into.

So in a nutshell:

1. Follow Canada's plan of identification requirements.
2. Implement it a year out from a national election so people have time to meet the new requirements.
3. Provide provisional ballots for those who still do not have ID.

This really should not be that big of a deal... you ALREADY have to register to vote. Having some ID when you actually do it should not be some Herculean effort.

Fine, if that is all that it is. But sadly it is not.

They are PURGING THE VOTER ROLES. AND purging legal citizens from those roles.

So ask for the ID, but if you purged my right to vote, I will burn down your house - ;-)

I object STRONGLY to have legal citizens right to vote removed, even temporarily, for any reason. If it is SO FUCKING IMPORTANT, then send a government worker to my house with my registration card in hand, to verify my ID and hand me my New Voter ID card.

But if you put that workload back on me, as a voter, when I already have free and legitimate, legal right to vote, then you have violated the most basic of all of my rights. Not a chance in hell.

I accept the handful of legal votes to the tens of thousands that are purged.

Once again, for the nth time, the problem is NOT proven, and even if it was/is, it is NOT statistically significant, and certainly not worth the millions of taxpayer dollars that we have spent trying to fix it.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Not debating, just an observation

Your reply shows it is a debate.

Quote

Anyone who believes anything he says without checking independently is an idiot.

Anyone who believes anything anyone says without checking independently is an idiot.... Difference is I include people like Obama along with Scott.

[kallend 1,647]

Quote

Quote

Not debating, just an observation

Your reply shows it is a debate.

Your statement is incorrect. I am not debating any point in this thread. Just observing that Scott is currently #1 on the list of liars in Politifact's listing.

...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Fine, if that is all that it is. But sadly it is not.

They are PURGING THE VOTER ROLES. AND purging legal citizens from those roles.

And yet there are STILL people on the rolls that are not legally on there... Such as people that died years ago.

You may not like the process, but it is the only process that at least in theory is allowed by Federal Law. Federal Laws says that the States have to make sure that the voter rolls are correct. There are very few options to do that other than to question those that are questionable.... To not require them to prove they are legal and do nothing if they do not... then there is very little other avenues to take.

Quote

So ask for the ID, but if you purged my right to vote, I will burn down your house - ;-)

Might be better to just answer the letter they sent to your home of record, or just cast a provisional ballot.

Quote

I object STRONGLY to have legal citizens right to vote removed, even temporarily, for any reason.

And I STRONGLY object to a illegal voter casting a ballot for any reason.

Quote

If it is SO FUCKING IMPORTANT, then send a government worker to my house with my registration card in hand, to verify my ID and hand me my New Voter ID card.

Why not just ask for Id at the polling location?

Quote

But if you put that workload back on me, as a voter, when I already have free and legitimate, legal right to vote, then you have violated the most basic of all of my rights.

And if you allow an illegal vote to be cast, you have violated one of my most basic rights... to have my vote carry the weight it is supposed to have and not be watered down by an illegal vote.

Quote

I accept the handful of legal votes to the tens of thousands that are purged...... Once again, for the nth time, the problem is NOT proven, and even if it was/is, it is NOT statistically significant

You have no data to support your claim.

How many illegal votes were cast in the last Presidential election? If you do not have that number, then it is impossible to claim you know how big the problem is.

Quote