ChangoLanzao

Right. That's not what I'm arguing. The point is that it is not needed and there is no constitutional justification FOR this voter I.D. law. It doesn't solve a problem that needs to be solved by potentially disenfranchising thousands of citizens.

It's so simple. Unless of course, you have no birth certificate with a raised seal and you are NOT a PA native. Or you don't have a car and have no convenient way to make it to a DMV at the time it's open. All this to solve a problem that the State of PA has admitted doesn't exist. This is cannot be justified on the basis that it only excludes "lazy" people. This nonsense constitutes a poll tax by another name. There's no constitutional justification for imposing a poll tax on "lazy" people.

Not all. There are many people who actually benefit from this situation. The Fourth Amendment is supposed to protect us from them.

I doubt that anyone would take issue with that statement.

Yup. Just about as much as we need voter I.D. laws.

Indeed! The dollar sign always precedes the numerals. Always! I will never understand why fluent, literate English speakers do that. Quite outrageous.

My point is - where is the limit? The Federal Government is going to far, e.g., http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=HcBaSP31Be8&vg=medium (full disclosure, I have not verified information used in the video). This whole thing for you boils down to "obama care is bad" right? I mean, is that what this concept is about? Mandatory health care is a good thing given the way the medical industry is set up right now. If you don't like the concept of mandatory health care (or pay a tax/fee/whatever you want to call it) then you should be advocating for change to the industry, not this law. Make it so that people without healthcare don't get service. Those people can just die in the street for all I care, if we don't have some kind of mandatory health care. That's pretty brutal I know and gosh, what if I was that person, the point I'm making is that you can't have it both ways. You're not wrapping your head around the fact that it costs you no matter what because the systems already helps everyone even if they can't pay. The fact that it's being forced by a bureaucratic movement now is irrelevant because Pandora's box is already open. Everyone gets served even if they can't pay. Here ya go! Print some of THESE out every one you distribute can potentially lower your health insurance premiums.

I stand corrected, DD. Thanks for the info. My search yielded lots of RW bullshit sites and no numbers. I'll have to be much more careful in my searches from now on. So, as it turns out, what I should have said is, "Complete and utter right-wing echo-chamber fact-based bullshit.".

I expect so, also. But, when you look at abortion statistics in NYC, something like 3 out of every 5 black children (IIRC) are aborted. Something is way wrong with that picture, IMO. Complete and utter right-wing echo-chamber bullshit without any basis in facts. Where did you get those numbers?

What has happened now, that was predicted to happen years later? Two easy examples 1) costs are rising faster than they were 2) companies are dropping employee coverage Doesn't get any easier than that!

Here's one more. Note that this $5B can also be considered as a waste of taxpayer money http://exmormon.org/d6/drupal/Mormon-Church-City-Creek-Project-Now-at-5-Billion-Dollars-April-2012

Another way to really waste 5 billion dollars. http://www.thedaily.com/page/2012/06/24/062412-news-camouflage-fiasco-1-5

Clearly, that will be a waste of your time.

It doesn't make much difference to a voter whether he is prevented from voting or has his vote negated by an ineligible voter's fraudulent vote. The effect is the same. The effect is not the same. When the state prevents a person from voting they are denied their right to cast a vote. When an inelligeble voter impersonates and votes in place of the elligible voter, the elligible voter will find out about it when they show up to vote and will be able to report it. Pennsylvania has admitted that there are no such reports to back up it's claim that their voter I.D. law is necessary to solve a problem.

http://www2.timesdispatch.com/news/2012/jul/21/3/the-voter-participation-centers-video-53212-vi-39606/

What are you seeing as a logical fallacy? Here ... THIS might help. I will buy you a bottle of fine imported beer for each fallacy you can identify in the article. Here's one: Proof by verbosity Proof by verbosity, sometimes colloquially referred to as argumentum verbosum - a rhetorical technique that tries to persuade by overwhelming those considering an argument with such a volume of material that the argument sounds plausible, superficially appears to be well-researched, and it is so laborious to untangle and check supporting facts that the argument might be allowed to slide by unchallenged.

Are you equating bureaucrats with logic? No. The article would be an excellent starting point for a one-semester course in logical fallacy and how it's used in contemporary politics.

The title is wrong. It should read: "Businessmen Versus Logic"

It's about the unconstitutional Pennsylvania voter I.D. law. It's about voter I.D. I guess the thread title threw me. Yes it did. That's what you get for judging a thread by it's title. I used the title from the article I linked. "Pennsylvania Admits There’s No In-Person Voter Fraud that would be mitigated by Pennsylvania's unconstitutional voter I.D. law" Would have been too long.

It's about the unconstitutional Pennsylvania voter I.D. law. It's about voter I.D.

Present the evidence for that. so far we got individual cases that don't even add up to statistical noise. Proponents want to spend more than a million dollars per illegal vote...and in the meanwhile will disenfranchise far more. Hardly seems like progress. Don't need to spend millions. Just check voters' IDs at the polls. I really don't understand why this is so difficult when it is being done without issue at thousands of polling places. Of course there will be the occasional glitch where clerical errors, changes in residence, etc. will appear. Just deal with those issues individually at the local level. Doesn't hurt the election officials to do a little extra work. There are no cases of in-person voter fraud where an I.D. would help. The State has conceded that point. So, the only effect of the voter I.D. law is really to introduce more paperwork and possible glitches that will make it more difficult for hundreds of thousands of citizens to vote. There's simply no reasonable justification for the voter I.D. law in Pennsylvania.

It also has no bearing on the current discussion. "Participants checked lists of voters to identify those who would take bribes and lined up people to drive them to the polls, where complicit precinct workers made sure they voted correctly and gave them a sticker or ticket to redeem for payment, according to the indictment and testimony." Voter ID wouldn't solve this problem. This has absolutely nothing to do with voter I.D.

Seriously. The Holocaust was a real wake-up call about the dangers governments pose to their populations. Avoiding victim disarmament should make committing such atrocities more difficult in the future. Nonsense. The Holocaust was about genocide. It wasn't about gun control. That was after the Nazis made it illegal for Jews to own firearms and confiscated many of their guns in 1938. They also leveraged local records of gun ownership to disarm victims outside Germany as they marched across Europe. The 1938 gun control act made it easier for Germans to own guns. Many Jews already owned guns. As you know, they did them no good at all. The miscreants came and took them anyway. They also took away their possessions, their clothes, their dignity, and their humanity. They did it legally. Gun control had little, if anything to do with the Holocaust. The Holocaust was NOT made possible by strict gun control laws.

The poll worker himself said he would let the lady vote. What prevents him from doing that? Do you think he's a liar? That poll worker, by his dereliction, potentially disenfranchised a lawful voter by possibly allowing his vote to be cancelled. He needs to be relieved of duty. We are concerned about each and every voter's rights, aren't we? OK. So we have a lying, derelict, poll worker. Agreed? So it appears. Did he do that or are you saying he could do that? Either way, he has demonstrated that he is willing to commit voter fraud. It doesn't fucking matter! (excuse my english ) The voter I.D. law in isn't preventing voter fraud. It's just giving him a justification to ask for "PAPERS PLEASE" at his discretion. Did the poll worker commit fraud or not? Again. That's irrelevant. The only thing the voter I.D. law accomplishes is making it more difficult for citizens to vote. It doesn't solve any other problem. There is no evidence of in-person voter fraud to justify potentially making it difficult for hundreds of thousands of citizens to vote.