Should Texas have to get DOJ or court approval before making voting changes? AG Eric Holder says yes

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Devilion Taylorsville, UT
    July 29, 2013 2:57 a.m.

    I found some of the comments above to quite interesting.

    "It is more important to prevent 7 erroneous votes than to allow 1 million people to vote correctly?"

    I think it's odd as that same line of thought can be used when viewing the current administrations attempts at restricting firearms. The percentage of illegal use of firearms is a fraction compared to the total number of firearms used in the United States.

    I betting that this same argument that was used to show that requiring ID to vote is wrong, will not be seen by the left as applying to firearm restrictions.

  • JayTee Sandy, UT
    July 28, 2013 11:08 p.m.

    Casca - - I hope you get 1,000 "Likes" Our country is falling victim to massive illegal invasion and massive voter fraud and election manipulation. We need to wake up while we still have some chance of getting a grip on this thing before it explodes completely in our faces. There are many now who are obviously committed to the destruction of everything that holds our country and our society together, and if they have their way, we're going to be on that proverbial ash heap of history before another generation passes.

    July 28, 2013 1:16 p.m.

    Democrats don't want voter ID because only the least imaginative, dumbest people among us, whose lives are an endless stream of ridiculous excuses and whining about their victimhood, are affected by such laws - or those who don't want their voter fraud activities curtailed. It's a relatively insignificant minority of the population, and probably would never make a dent in the margin of victory in any election. But, they vote nearly 100% Democrat, as do those who think so little of them that they claim to believe these people are really incapable of getting ID's without herculean, of not impossible effort. Although I clearly think little of them, I have enough confidence in them to believe they can get an ID without losing their jobs. Good grief people, can we never find the bottom of the acceptable incompetence barrel?

  • Casca Orleans, IN
    July 27, 2013 3:11 p.m.

    ONLY YOU have the power to stop it! AT numbersusa, write your own point of view or copy the one exhibited to send. Advise your representatives by phoning any of the100 Senators and 435 Representatives for State or Federal at toll-free number -- 1-888-978-3094--. Or you can phone the United States Capitol circuit at (202) 224-3121. A terminal operator will connect you straight with the Senate office or just about anybody in Washington. It is your right to speak up about the lies relating to the Benghazi, Libya massacre, The IRS running amok just before the Presidential election intimidating Conservative groups, the gun running scandal to Mexico with the murder of a Border Patrol agent and the IRS ignoring the 7 billion dollars being illegally siphoned from the child tax credit controversy. If you are really worried about your countries future under the present administration, go to Judicial Watch this is in depth coverage in Washington and every state, which has ominous activity to hide.
    NOTE: I just wonder when Eric Holders people will be spying on me, because my adverse drafts against this dangerous administration.

  • RDJntx Austin, TX
    July 27, 2013 12:22 p.m.

    This conversation is dumb. Part of the Texas voter ID law is that every one eligible to vote will be provided a FREE voter ID card if they don't have anothe form of valid ID. FREE people. how does that infringe on anybodys right to vote? they get to the grocery store, get to the post office, and get out to vote so they should be able to get out to get a voter ID card with little issue.

  • What in Tucket? Provo, UT
    July 27, 2013 9:25 a.m.

    Has there ever been a party like this Democratic Party pander to voters in such a way. No voter ID, ridiculous.

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    July 26, 2013 8:58 a.m.

    What do you expect from an AG who is in contempt of Congress?

  • David Centerville, UT
    July 26, 2013 7:20 a.m.

    Libs felt Cheney was a madman grabbing and abusing power. Holder is Cheney on steroids.

  • WHAT NOW? Saint George, UT
    July 25, 2013 9:52 p.m.

    Who can prove that there isn't a lot of undiscovered Republican fraud going on?

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    July 25, 2013 9:50 p.m.

    Re: "It is the department's first action to protect voting rights following the Supreme Court's decision . . . ."

    Protect voting rights? Yeah, right. Like coyotes' first action to protect the henhouse.

    Rather, it signals an intent to unfairly and illegally affect the 2014 elections by action that will inevitably be declared unconstitutional, but not -- the Obama regime and its politicized Injustice Department hopes -- until after the 2014 elections.

    It's interesting they picked on Texas. Its presidential voting history show a fairly consistent 60-40% Republican/Democrat vote split. Its Congressional delegation is not far from that [24/12 -- 66-33%].

    So, why pick on Texas, rather than, say California. Its presidential voting history also shows about a 60-40% split. Its Congressional delegation, however, is nearly 72% Democrat.

    So the Injustice Department is going after a state whose votes come out about right, while ignoring California's clear gerrymandering.

    Coincidence, surely. Probably just the mistake of some local Cincinnati bureaucrats.

  • Tators Hyrum, UT
    July 25, 2013 6:54 p.m.

    Just thinking out loud here.
    But is it possible that the current administrations reluctance to require people to prove who they are before voting has anything to do with the fact that almost all of the fraud discovered, that would've been prevented with a photo ID requirement, were voting for democrats?
    And please don't say that fraud is so rare. The DISCOVERED fraud might be relatively small, but who can prove than there isn't a lot of undiscovered fraud still going on??

    That certainly would explain why Holder and Obama don't want to keep those votes from being counted and would like the practice continued. Nah... I'm sure that's just coincidental.

    Based on the above comments, I'm quite certain that both Truthseeker and Maudine are dyed in the wool democrats who relate to the current administrations feelings toward this matter... and for the exactly the same reasons.

    FYI... the argument about photo ID's being such a big burden and almost impossible to get genuinely comes across as more of an excuse than a valid reason to a lot of people.

  • Maudine SLC, UT
    July 25, 2013 6:46 p.m.

    @ Tators: No, the conditions to vote are not the same as the conditions to get a voter ID. There are a great many more polling places than DMVs no matter where you live.

    As for the number of people affected, are you claiming that preventing rare voter fraud is more important than ensuring those who have a right to vote are able to do so? It is more important to prevent 7 erroneous votes than to allow 1 million people to vote correctly?

    And if illegal immigrants are able to steal birth certificates and vote anyway, than what purpose do voter ID laws serve?

  • Tators Hyrum, UT
    July 25, 2013 6:08 p.m.

    @ Maudine:

    I genuinely believe that the scenario circumstances you described can be applied to only a very minuscule number of people. I've traveled a lot during my lifetime and have yet to meet anyone who didn't have a way to get to someplace like a ID office if they so desired. Where there is a will, there is almost always a way.

    Also, the circumstances you describe to get a photo ID are nearly the identical requirements it takes to vote. If that person doesn't drive, they will need either public transportation or someone to take them to a voting station. Voting always takes place in the middle of the week... on Tuesdays (1 day per year... not per week), also potentially effecting work. In other words, it shouldn't be any harder to get a photo ID than it is to vote, the main reason for getting the photo ID.

    Also, as far as a birth certificate goes, even illegal immigrants working for less than minimum wage acquire them... even at a premium. So again, if there's any will at all, there's certainly a way. They also last a lifetime... and sometimes beyond!

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    July 25, 2013 5:54 p.m.

    3rd try
    FYI Laws and requirements vary from state to state.

    Where did you go to get your picture ID? What documents did you have to provide to get a picture ID?
    How did you get those documents? How much did it cost?

    For example, there are many instances of (mostly elderly) people not being able to get an ID because they aren't able to obtain a copy of their birth certificate. In other cases, people don't live near a DMV, have transportation to a DMV to obtain an ID, nor the means to obtain a certified copy of their birth certificate.

    Gil Paar served in the military for four years was not allowed to vote because his Veteran's card, which is issued by the United State Department of Veterans Affairs and contains both his photo and address is not one of the approved forms of government-issued photo ID under Wisconsin's new voter ID law. Despite having a driver's license that would have allowed him to vote.

    Last December, RNC Chairman Priebus declared that Wisconsin is “absolutely riddled with voter fraud.” In fact, Wisconsin's voter fraud rate in 2004 was 0.0002% (7 votes).

  • Maudine SLC, UT
    July 25, 2013 5:26 p.m.

    @ Tators: Individuals without a photo ID by definition do not drive. This means they must either find a ride or use public transportation to get to a office that issues IDs. The more rural the ares, the less likely there is to be public transportation.

    Many individuals without photo ID must therefore find someone to drive them to an issuing office.

    ID issuing offices are not open on Saturdays. This means that the driver - and the person needing the photo ID - may have to miss work.

    Additionally, in rural areas of Texas, some offices that issue photo IDs are only open one or two days per week.

    In one area of Texas, an individual has to travel more than an hour each direction to an office that is open one day per week. This means the individual and the person driving them may miss a full day of work.

    In Dallas, it can be a 4 hour round trip to an issuing office.

    How "difficult" it is to obtain photo ID depends on your situation.

    Add in the cost of a birth certificate ($22 - about 3 hours of work at minimum wage), and it can indeed be difficult.

  • Tators Hyrum, UT
    July 25, 2013 1:20 p.m.

    Re: Truthseeker and Maudine:

    It's not difficult at all to obtain a picture ID. I've been around a long time and don't know of a single adult citizen who can't obtain one if they want to. On top of that, it obviously is the best way of proving you are who you say you are.

    Without picture ID, it would be relatively easy to be able to vote as a sibling or some other relative... even a dead one... as has been known to happen.

    Some people claim voter fraud is rare. Define rare and then back that up with some proof. In some areas it is. It's altogether possible that fraud is more prevalent than currently realized. Stats are based on KNOWN fraud... while unknown fraud is obviously yet unaccounted for, so truly could be fairly significant in some districts.

    Even if you want to stick with the somewhat rare argument, why not be proactive and take a preventive approach when it comes to dealing with voter fraud and potential fraud? Especially since it truly is not difficult or an unreasonable burden to obtain picture ID, which would also useful for numerous other things.

  • Maudine SLC, UT
    July 25, 2013 12:25 p.m.

    @ lost in DC: From the article, "Even as Congress considers updates to the Voting Rights Act in light of the court's ruling, we plan, in the meantime, to fully utilize the law's remaining sections to ensure that the voting rights of all American citizens are protected."

    Please explain how that is defying SCOTUS.

    @ Mountanman: You are assuming those individuals affected by voter ID laws participate in those other things - you are also comparing optional activities to a right.

    I've had a library card for over 40 years - I needed no photo ID to get it, I need no photo ID to use it. I've had a bank account for over 30 years - I had no photo ID when I opened it, I don't cash checks - I deposit them with an ATM card and withdraw funds the same way - no photo ID needed. I don't drink, smoke, or fly. None of that means I shouldn't have a right to vote.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    July 25, 2013 10:32 a.m.

    "...the attorney general said the Justice Department is asking a federal court in San Antonio to require the state of Texas to obtain approval in advance before putting FUTURE voting changes in place...".

    Voter ID?

    No problem.

    It's the slippery slope (a notorious Republican obstructionist epithet) of what Texas or any other state MIGHT do with FUTURE voting changes.

    It's interesting how the slippery slope gambit goes both ways...

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    July 25, 2013 10:27 a.m.

    People who don't go to the library, don't smoke or drink (or are clearly old enough to do so), don't fly, direct deposit their checks or go to the bank with a bank deposit slip don't need ID. It is very possible to conduct life without showing ID. It used to be one just had to show a utility bill to verify their address.

    The 2nd question is what should constitute an ID, and high should the bar be set?

    Does a Veteran picture ID need an address on it? What about a school-issued student ID?

    The bottom line is, voter fraud is rare. The bigger threats to a fraud-free voting system are the paperless voting machines.
    Maybe Republicans should concern thenselves with that.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    July 25, 2013 9:46 a.m.

    Please help me understand this issue. In order to check a book out of a public library, buy beer or cigarettes, buy an airline ticket or cash a check you must show an ID, but not to vote? Please explain to this poor Idaho farm boy why showing an ID in order to vote infringes on anyone's rights?

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    July 25, 2013 9:01 a.m.

    Good for Holder. PA should be next, as there are public statements by two different Republican leaders that voter suppression was the goal.

    Voter fraud is rare, yet Republican leaders in several states tried to impose new rules for voting.

    Now PA GOP party chairman Rob Gleason was asked in an interview broadcast whether he thought the attention drawn to Voter ID affected last year’s elections. He replied."Yeah, I think a little bit. We probably had a better election. Think about this, we cut Obama by 5%, which was big. A lot of people lost sight of that. He won, he beat McCain by 10%, he only beat Romney by 5%. I think that probably Voter ID had helped a bit in that."

  • mcdugall Murray, UT
    July 25, 2013 9:01 a.m.

    @lost in DC. Holder is not ignoring SCOTUS, you have ignored SCOTUS. SCOTUS only invalidated parts of the Voting Rights Act, not the entire Act.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    July 25, 2013 8:49 a.m.

    so holder is going to ignore the SCOTUS - typical of this misadministration, ignore stuff they don't like, even if it is part of their signature health insurance law.