Qtec
12-29-2011, 01:41 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Voting Law Changes in 2012
Ahead of the 2012 elections, a wave of legislation tightening restrictions on voting has suddenly swept across the country. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>More than five million Americans could be affected</span> by the new rules already put in place this year -- <span style='font-size: 14pt'>a number larger than the margin of victory in two of the last three presidential elections.</span>
This report is the first full accounting and analysis of this year's voting cutbacks. It details both the bills that have been proposed and the legislation that has been passed since the beginning of 2011.
Executive Summary
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Over the past century, our nation expanded the franchise and knocked down myriad barriers to full electoral participation. <u>In 2011, however, that momentum abruptly shifted.</u></span>
State governments across the country enacted an array of new laws making it harder to register or to vote. Some states require voters to show government-issued photo identification, often of a type that as many as one in ten voters do not have. Other states have cut back on early voting, a hugely popular innovation used by millions of Americans. Two states reversed earlier reforms and once again disenfranchised millions who have past criminal convictions but who are now taxpaying members of the community. Still others made it much more difficult for citizens to register to vote, a prerequisite for voting.
These new restrictions fall most heavily on young, minority, and low-income voters, as well as on voters with disabilities. This wave of changes may sharply tilt the political terrain for the 2012 election. Based on the Brennan Center’s analysis of the 19 laws and two executive actions that passed in 14 states, it is clear that:
These new laws could make it significantly harder for more than five million eligible voters to cast ballots in 2012.
The states that have already cut back on voting rights will provide 171 electoral votes in 2012 – 63 percent of the 270 needed to win the presidency.
Of the 12 likely battleground states, as assessed by an August Los Angeles Times analysis of Gallup polling, five have already cut back on voting rights (and may pass additional restrictive legislation), and two more are currently considering new restrictions.
</div></div>
link (http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/voting_law_changes_in_2012)
When more people vote, the Republicans always lose, they know this.
link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Now many of our Christians have what I call the goo-goo syndrome — good government. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote.</span> Elections are not won by a majority of people, they never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."</span> </div></div>
This is what Rove has been planning for 20 years or more. Along with the attack on the unions this voter fraud myth/fabrication/lie is an assault on the US people and the democratic system of electing representatives. They want less people to vote and they are targeting those who traditionally vote for the opposition.
IMO, it goes against the spirit and meaning of the USCON.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of <u>failure to pay poll tax or other tax.</u> </div></div>
It could be argued that when it costs you to money to obtain the required ID card, that has never been required before, then its a tax on voting.
Even if its not, its an outrage.
Q
What's Mitt's take on this? if..if..if..if.... (http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/david/romney-very-serious-error-bock-voter-photo-i)
Ahead of the 2012 elections, a wave of legislation tightening restrictions on voting has suddenly swept across the country. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>More than five million Americans could be affected</span> by the new rules already put in place this year -- <span style='font-size: 14pt'>a number larger than the margin of victory in two of the last three presidential elections.</span>
This report is the first full accounting and analysis of this year's voting cutbacks. It details both the bills that have been proposed and the legislation that has been passed since the beginning of 2011.
Executive Summary
<span style='font-size: 14pt'>Over the past century, our nation expanded the franchise and knocked down myriad barriers to full electoral participation. <u>In 2011, however, that momentum abruptly shifted.</u></span>
State governments across the country enacted an array of new laws making it harder to register or to vote. Some states require voters to show government-issued photo identification, often of a type that as many as one in ten voters do not have. Other states have cut back on early voting, a hugely popular innovation used by millions of Americans. Two states reversed earlier reforms and once again disenfranchised millions who have past criminal convictions but who are now taxpaying members of the community. Still others made it much more difficult for citizens to register to vote, a prerequisite for voting.
These new restrictions fall most heavily on young, minority, and low-income voters, as well as on voters with disabilities. This wave of changes may sharply tilt the political terrain for the 2012 election. Based on the Brennan Center’s analysis of the 19 laws and two executive actions that passed in 14 states, it is clear that:
These new laws could make it significantly harder for more than five million eligible voters to cast ballots in 2012.
The states that have already cut back on voting rights will provide 171 electoral votes in 2012 – 63 percent of the 270 needed to win the presidency.
Of the 12 likely battleground states, as assessed by an August Los Angeles Times analysis of Gallup polling, five have already cut back on voting rights (and may pass additional restrictive legislation), and two more are currently considering new restrictions.
</div></div>
link (http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/voting_law_changes_in_2012)
When more people vote, the Republicans always lose, they know this.
link (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8GBAsFwPglw)
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">"Now many of our Christians have what I call the goo-goo syndrome — good government. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>They want everybody to vote. I don't want everybody to vote.</span> Elections are not won by a majority of people, they never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. <span style='font-size: 14pt'>As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."</span> </div></div>
This is what Rove has been planning for 20 years or more. Along with the attack on the unions this voter fraud myth/fabrication/lie is an assault on the US people and the democratic system of electing representatives. They want less people to vote and they are targeting those who traditionally vote for the opposition.
IMO, it goes against the spirit and meaning of the USCON.
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of <u>failure to pay poll tax or other tax.</u> </div></div>
It could be argued that when it costs you to money to obtain the required ID card, that has never been required before, then its a tax on voting.
Even if its not, its an outrage.
Q
What's Mitt's take on this? if..if..if..if.... (http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/david/romney-very-serious-error-bock-voter-photo-i)