Welcome to the new Sinister Design forums!
Started by SmartyPants, June 27, 2013, 10:15:48 PM
Quote from: SmartyPants on August 29, 2013, 05:53:24 PMThe series of speeches celebrating the 50th Anniversary shows how outdated the voting rights act has become.
Quote from: CraigStern on September 04, 2013, 09:28:00 AMThere's been quite a bit more than that as well, which I didn't even get into before. Some prominent examples that journalists happened to catch: Voter suppression@2008 presidential election
Quote from: SmartyPants on September 05, 2013, 07:29:53 PMAreas without any history of voter suppression should not be put through such a burden.
Quote from: SmartyPants on September 05, 2013, 07:29:53 PMVoter suppression clearly isn't much of a problem, because no one in Congress feels this is enough of a priority to even talk about.
Quote from: CraigStern on September 05, 2013, 11:31:57 PMQuote from: SmartyPants on September 05, 2013, 07:29:53 PMAreas without any history of voter suppression should not be put through such a burden.What areas would those be? (Hint: probably not Texas.)
Quote from: CraigStern on September 05, 2013, 11:31:57 PMQuote from: SmartyPants on September 05, 2013, 07:29:53 PMVoter suppression clearly isn't much of a problem, because no one in Congress feels this is enough of a priority to even talk about.Your faith in the competency of members of Congress to focus on things based on their actual importance to the nation is both touching and naive. :)
Quote from: Justice John Paul Stevens"The relevant burdens here are those imposed on eligible voters who lack photo identification cards that comply with SEA 483. Because Indiana's cards are free, the inconvenience of going to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, gathering required documents, and posing for a photograph does not qualify as a substantial burden on most voters' right to vote, or represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting. The severity of the somewhat heavier burden that may be placed on a limited number of personse.g., elderly persons born out-of-state, who may have difficulty obtaining a birth certificateis mitigated by the fact that eligible voters without photo identification may cast provisional ballots that will be counted if they execute the required affidavit at the circuit court clerks office. Even assuming that the burden may not be justified as to a few voters, that conclusion is by no means sufficient to establish petitioners right to the relief they seek."
QuoteJeffrey Milyo, professor of economics and public affairs at the University of Missouri and the Hanna Family Scholar in the Center for Applied Economics at the University of Kansas, notes that overall voter turnout in Indiana actually increased after the implementation of photo ID. His study evaluated the effects of photo identification requirements by comparing county-level turnout in Indiana in the 2002 and 2006 mid-term elections, since the current ID law was not in place in 02. Previous studies have examined the effects of voter ID laws more generally, but none of these separately analyzes the effects of so called mandatory photo ID on turnout in Indiana, Milyo said. I examined a variety of models on voter turnout. After controlling for several factors that influence county-wide turnout, there is no consistent or statistically significant evidence that the photo ID law depressed turnout in counties with greater percentages of minority, poor or elderly voters. Contrary to conventional wisdom, turnout in Democratic-leaning counties actually increased in the wake of the new photo ID requirements, all else constant.