Should a Voter Suppression Attorney be on the FEC

[Yellowdogtexan]

I am glad to see that Senators Feingold and Obama are blocking the confirmation of an bushie asshole named von Spakovsky to a seat on the Federal Elections Commission. This man is a specialist in denying the right to vote to minorities and should not be put on the Federal Election Commission. Here is the statement from these Senators on blocking this nominee. http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004389.phpA statement just out from Sens. Barack Obama (D-IL) and Russ Feingold (D-WI) after their opposition to Hans von Spakovsky's nomination scuttled a deal to move von Spakovsky quickly through the Senate:“While at the Department of Justice, Hans von Spakovsky was directly involved in efforts to politicize the Department and use the Voting Rights Section to disenfranchise voters, rather than enforce our nation’s civil rights laws. As a recess appointee to the FEC he has been a committed, ideological opponent of the campaign finance laws he is supposed to enforce. Putting him at the head of the FEC is just another example of this administration putting the fox in charge of the hen house. We oppose his nomination, and any effort to tie his nomination to the other pending nominations to the FEC.”
Only bush would nominate someone who wants to keep people from voting to the FEC.

[Ringo]

I am glad to see that Senators Feingold and Obama are blocking the confirmation of an bushie asshole named von Spakovsky to a seat on the Federal Elections Commission. This man is a specialist in denying the right to vote to minorities and should not be put on the Federal Election Commission. Here is the statement from these Senators on blocking this nominee. http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004389.phpOnly bush would nominate someone who wants to keep people from voting to the FEC.

Are you talking about the DNC's LARGESTS block of Voters?

Paroled Murderors, Rapists, Drugheads etc...

DEAD people ala the Daley Machine

Minorities who cannot speak, understand English or have a clue about Yellow livered, Traitorous, slimeball, Criminal, Pedophile Liberals, so they make an X, with Al Gores help?

You people need watched closely as your mostly thieves, perverts, Traitors, and Freedom leechers, who hide behind CROOKED lawyers and Judges!:godzilla

[Yellowdogtexan]

The right to vote is fundamental. Von Spakovsky did his best to keep minorities and the poor from voting and so does not belong on the Federal Election Commission. The repugs are holding hostage several other nominees to this commission and that is sad. bush should have never put this person up and von Spakovsky should not be confirmed

[Saguaro]

Are you talking about the DNC's LARGESTS block of Voters?

Paroled Murderors, Rapists, Drugheads etc...

DEAD people ala the Daley Machine

Minorities who cannot speak, understand English or have a clue about Yellow livered, Traitorous, slimeball, Criminal, Pedophile Liberals, so they make an X, with Al Gores help?

You people need watched closely as your mostly thieves, perverts, Traitors, and Freedom leechers, who hide behind CROOKED lawyers and Judges!:godzilla


Only in Texas

[Trueblue]

Only in Texas

:rofl ^5, Sag.

[Yellowdogtexan]

As I mentioned, senate repugs are holding the nomination of three other nominees to the FEC hostage to try to force the confirmation of this voter suppression expert. http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004396.phpIn holding the other three nominees hostage, the Republicans have a clear strategy. The commission typically has six members, three of them Republicans and three Democrats. If the Senate did not vote on any of the four nominees up for confirmation, then the commission would be down to only two members by the end of the year, which would effectively incapacitate it. The commission requires four members to operate. To prevent that from happening, President Bush could stock the commission with recess appointees while Congress was out of session.

Either one of those scenarios is "fraught with potential danger," Fred Wertheimer, the executive director of the nonpartisan watchdog Democracy 21, told me.

If the FEC were crippled, that would be bad, he said, creating a situation where outside groups funded by millionaires (like the Swift Boat Vets) could run amok in a campaign year. "That would be a license to steal and to completely ignore campaign finance laws."

But if the commission were stocked with the president's appointees, that would be much worse. "You could have an agency that leaves one party free to do whatever it wants, while raising concerns that the other party is breaking the law.

"The whole fight at the Justice Department over the firing of the U.S. attorneys has arisen over misusing the criminal justice system in order to influence political results.... Now, if you don’t get some legitimate form of a commission ready to go for the 2008 election, you face the same danger, except with far greater stakes involved, mainly the presidency, the Senate and House -- who wins and who loses."

Update: With regard to recess appointments, it's worth noting that during last recess, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) had plotted to keep the Senate in "pro forma" session in order to prevent Bush from making any recess appointments -- a strategy that eventually led to a deal with the White House not to make any appointments that recess.
The repugs (and they are repugs) want to either destroy the FEC or to put a person who will work to deny the vote to others. That is not an acceptable choice

[patriotsblade]

Ringo, in order to vote in the United States one must be a US citizen and meet the following criteria:

1. Be 18 years of age or older.
2. Not have a felony conviction.
3. Register

If a person meets that criteria, why would you complain?

[issac the dragon]

There are few things in this country more un-American than voter supression. And it is one of the priorities of the Republican party. Yet they claim to be the party of 'true patriots.'

[Yellowdogtexan]

This is amusing. The FEC lacks a quorem because bush is insisting that this bozo (von Spakovsky) be confirmed by the Senate and the Senate is refusing to confirm him. McCain formerly applied for matching funds in the primaries and now want to withdraw from the federal matching fund program but can not do so unless the FEC approves such withdrawal. As a result, McCain may be guilty of violating the law and be subject to fines and convictions of a felony unless he cuts off spending.

The head of the FEC (a bush appointee) told McCain that he needs consent of the FEC to withdraw from the federal program. It will be amusing to see what happens.

I am hopeful that bush will see reason and withdraw Spakovsky's nomination and let the FEC get a real quorem so that McCain can try to withdraw. There is still an issue as to a questionable loan that McCain took out that will be litigated later when and if the FEC gets back into operation.

Only bush would think that it is a good idea to shut down the federal agency in charge of enforcing federal election laws during an election year.

[nixon]

Are you talking about the DNC's LARGESTS block of Voters?

Paroled Murderors, Rapists, Drugheads etc...

DEAD people ala the Daley Machine

Minorities who cannot speak, understand English or have a clue about Yellow livered, Traitorous, slimeball, Criminal, Pedophile Liberals, so they make an X, with Al Gores help?

You people need watched closely as your mostly thieves, perverts, Traitors, and Freedom leechers, who hide behind CROOKED lawyers and Judges!:godzillaThe Daley Machine... There is a city that works. My kinda town...Nixon. And they SURE AS HELL DON'T LIKE REPUBLICANS!!!!

[Yellowdogtexan]

This is amusing. Here is a description of the silliness that bush's insistence of having a voter suppression attorney confirmed as a member of the federal agency in charge of enforcing federal election laws. http://forums.thepoliticalasylum.com/showpost.php?p=189542&postcount=5The bushies are going to have to back down or risk having mccain violate the same federal election laws that he sponsored.

[Matt]

Are you talking about the DNC's LARGESTS block of Voters?

Paroled Murderors, Rapists, Drugheads etc...

DEAD people ala the Daley Machine

Minorities who cannot speak, understand English or have a clue about Yellow livered, Traitorous, slimeball, Criminal, Pedophile Liberals, so they make an X, with Al Gores help?

You people need watched closely as your mostly thieves, perverts, Traitors, and Freedom leechers, who hide behind CROOKED lawyers and Judges!:godzilla

Even if this preposterous post had legs, would this be any reason to put a person known to work toward disenfranchising voters in this position?

[Ringo]

Ringo, in order to vote in the United States one must be a US citizen and meet the following criteria:

1. Be 18 years of age or older.
2. Not have a felony conviction.
3. Register

If a person meets that criteria, why would you complain?

I have a nice piece of land about 85 miles south of the Florida Keyes, ya interested?

IF the Vote was EXACTLY that, I have no problem!

However I have seen that VIOLATED many times by DEMS, especially in Chicago, and in 2000 it was done in Missouri and Florida, by the same thieves!!!

How do you think JFK was elected? The Chicago Vote, controlled by DALEY and the Mob!!!

Doggie would like us all to believe that LAWYER means honesty and respect, when in truth it means DECEPTOR-LIAR-SCUMBAG!!!

[Yellowdogtexan]

However I have seen that VIOLATED many times by DEMS, especially in Chicago, and in 2000 it was Where and when. The morons pushing the voter ID laws before the SCOTUS could not identify even one case where a voter ID law would have made a difference. If you have a real claim, then identify it and tell the GOP. They really need some real examples of so-called voter fraud. Like most of your posts, this claim is also crap and has no basis in reality.

Claims of voter fraud are simply bogus and are being used by idiots to try to deny the vote to minorities.

[Matt]

Ringo brings up voter fraud, Florida and Dems in the same sentence! :roll

[nixon]

Ringo brings up voter fraud, Florida and Dems in the same sentence! :roll
And the year 2000!!! He's crazy. He needs help. I'm kind of new around here, so who would I talk to about getting an intervention on his behalf?

[Saguaro]

I have a nice piece of land about 85 miles south of the Florida Keyes, ya interested?

IF the Vote was EXACTLY that, I have no problem!

However I have seen that VIOLATED many times by DEMS, especially in Chicago, and in 2000 it was done in Missouri and Florida, by the same thieves!!!

How do you think JFK was elected? The Chicago Vote, controlled by DALEY and the Mob!!!
Doggie would like us all to believe that LAWYER means honesty and respect, when in truth it means DECEPTOR-LIAR-SCUMBAG!!!

Ringo, were you even alive in 1960 ?

[Ringo]

Even if this preposterous post had legs, would this be any reason to put a person known to work toward disenfranchising voters in this position?

A PERSON no, BUT Dog is talking about another BOTTOM FEEDING hand picked LIBERAL Lawyer, who are all known LIARS & THIEVES!!:ninja:mw:Q:nerd


There, fixed that Post!!

[Ringo]

Where and when. The morons pushing the voter ID laws before the SCOTUS could not identify even one case where a voter ID law would have made a difference. If you have a real claim, then identify it and tell the GOP. They really need some real examples of so-called voter fraud. Like most of your posts, this claim is also crap and has no basis in reality.

Claims of voter fraud are simply bogus and are being used by idiots to try to deny the vote to minorities.

Describe MINORITIES Whitey???

[Ringo]

Ringo, were you even alive in 1960 ?

No but unlike Liberals my History began in 1776, with the birth of this Great Nation!

In light of the GREATNESS-Conservative Christians, and the DECADENCE-Liberals, we are still a great Nation!!

Democrat Voter Fraud has been here since TRUMAN!

TWO DEMOCRATS in a ROW(TRUMAN-JFK) were elected by the thinnest of measures, thanks to Pendergast KC, and Daley & the MOB Chicago!

[Yellowdogtexan]

Just like Doc/baronx, ringo is full of hot air and crap and can not back up his stupid charges. Ringo claims to have proof of voter fraud. The attorneys arguing the voter id case before the SCOTUS were unable to document any cases of voter fraud. If ringo really believes his crap and actually has any proof, he needs to come forward and present his proof. I can show him how to file with the SCOTUS as an amicus brief or letter in order that this important evidence of voter fraud can be considered.

However, if as I suspect ringo is full of crap again and has no proof, then he is best to hide like a coward. The SCOTUS do not tolerate bogus claims and will want real proof as ringo's charges if they are to consider such charges. Most of ringo's amusing charges are so stupid that they would be laughed at if he tried to get the real world to consider such charges. If ringo presented something like his stupidity on vince foster to the SCOTUS he would be laughed at and his amicus brief or letter would be published in every bar journal in the humor section.

Again, if ringo has any proof, then provide it. Otherwise, ringo is just like bartonx/doc, i.e. full of crap and too much of a coward to submit their theories or proof to the real world.

[Matt]

A PERSON no, BUT Dog is talking about another BOTTOM FEEDING hand picked LIBERAL Lawyer, who are all known LIARS & THIEVES!!:ninja:mw:Q:nerd

There, fixed that Post!!

Of course you did.
It isn't hard to fix a post if you have no facts ~ just anger against a group and accusations with no foundation ~ your trademark it seems!

[Matt]

No but unlike Liberals my History began in 1776, with the birth of this Great Nation!

In light of the GREATNESS-Conservative Christians, and the DECADENCE-Liberals, we are still a great Nation!!

Democrat Voter Fraud has been here since TRUMAN!

TWO DEMOCRATS in a ROW(TRUMAN-JFK) were elected by the thinnest of measures, thanks to Pendergast KC, and Daley & the MOB Chicago!

Voter fraud has been here a lot longer than that and it is not party specific. Read your history or just watch the history channel and you can glean some facts.
Some may be painful but you are tough ~ you can handle it!

[Yellowdogtexan]

Just like Doc/baronx, ringo is full of hot air and crap and can not back up his stupid charges. Ringo claims to have proof of voter fraud. The attorneys arguing the voter id case before the SCOTUS were unable to document any cases of voter fraud. If ringo really believes his crap and actually has any proof, he needs to come forward and present his proof. I can show him how to file with the SCOTUS as an amicus brief or letter in order that this important evidence of voter fraud can be considered.

However, if as I suspect ringo is full of crap again and has no proof, then he is best to hide like a coward. The SCOTUS do not tolerate bogus claims and will want real proof as ringo's charges if they are to consider such charges. Most of ringo's amusing charges are so stupid that they would be laughed at if he tried to get the real world to consider such charges. If ringo presented something like his stupidity on vince foster to the SCOTUS he would be laughed at and his amicus brief or letter would be published in every bar journal in the humor section.

Again, if ringo has any proof, then provide it. Otherwise, ringo is just like bartonx/doc, i.e. full of crap and too much of a coward to submit their theories or proof to the real world.I note with amusement that ringo has refused to back his stupid and silly claim that he has evidence of voter fraud. Ringo like bartonx/doc is all hat and no cattle

[Capitalist]

I am glad to see that Senators Feingold and Obama are blocking the confirmation of an bushie asshole named von Spakovsky to a seat on the Federal Elections Commission. This man is a specialist in denying the right to vote to minorities and should not be put on the Federal Election Commission. Here is the statement from these Senators on blocking this nominee. http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004389.phpOnly bush would nominate someone who wants to keep people from voting to the FEC.

Is there anything that details anything he did to 'supress' anything.

What a bunch of bullshit.

[Capitalist]

The right to vote is fundamental. Von Spakovsky did his best to keep minorities and the poor from voting and so does not belong on the Federal Election Commission. The repugs are holding hostage several other nominees to this commission and that is sad. bush should have never put this person up and von Spakovsky should not be confirmed

I want you to show me where in the constitution that says voting is a right?

[Capitalist]

Ringo, in order to vote in the United States one must be a US citizen and meet the following criteria:

1. Be 18 years of age or older.
2. Not have a felony conviction.
3. Register

If a person meets that criteria, why would you complain?

Because at least half of them are too stupid to understand the issues to be allowed to vote.

[Capitalist]

There are few things in this country more un-American than voter supression. And it is one of the priorities of the Republican party. Yet they claim to be the party of 'true patriots.'

Proof moron, proof.

Just saying something enough does not make it fact.

The democrats do more to screw with elections that republicans can even think of.

[Capitalist]

This is amusing. Here is a description of the silliness that bush's insistence of having a voter suppression attorney confirmed as a member of the federal agency in charge of enforcing federal election laws. http://forums.thepoliticalasylum.com/showpost.php?p=189542&postcount=5The bushies are going to have to back down or risk having mccain violate the same federal election laws that he sponsored.

You keep using that term, voter suppression attorney, where has that been established?

[Capitalist]

Where and when. The morons pushing the voter ID laws before the SCOTUS could not identify even one case where a voter ID law would have made a difference. If you have a real claim, then identify it and tell the GOP. They really need some real examples of so-called voter fraud. Like most of your posts, this claim is also crap and has no basis in reality.

Claims of voter fraud are simply bogus and are being used by idiots to try to deny the vote to minorities.


Why are democrats so afraid of making sure voters are who they say they are?

I guess it has nothing to do with dead people voting in democrat districts or illegals voting, naw nothing like that.

Can't cheat if you have to show a GD ID.

I have to show ID to cash a damn check, why not to vote?

PS - Anyone who is such a loser that they have no ID does not need to be voting anyway.

[Capitalist]

Just like Doc/baronx, ringo is full of hot air and crap and can not back up his stupid charges. Ringo claims to have proof of voter fraud. The attorneys arguing the voter id case before the SCOTUS were unable to document any cases of voter fraud. If ringo really believes his crap and actually has any proof, he needs to come forward and present his proof. I can show him how to file with the SCOTUS as an amicus brief or letter in order that this important evidence of voter fraud can be considered.

However, if as I suspect ringo is full of crap again and has no proof, then he is best to hide like a coward. The SCOTUS do not tolerate bogus claims and will want real proof as ringo's charges if they are to consider such charges. Most of ringo's amusing charges are so stupid that they would be laughed at if he tried to get the real world to consider such charges. If ringo presented something like his stupidity on vince foster to the SCOTUS he would be laughed at and his amicus brief or letter would be published in every bar journal in the humor section.

Again, if ringo has any proof, then provide it. Otherwise, ringo is just like bartonx/doc, i.e. full of crap and too much of a coward to submit their theories or proof to the real world.


So where is your backup that this guy is a voter supression lawyer?

[Capitalist]

Voter fraud has been here a lot longer than that and it is not party specific. Read your history or just watch the history channel and you can glean some facts.
Some may be painful but you are tough ~ you can handle it!

In recent times it is far more likely for democrats to cheat.

[Capitalist]

I note with amusement that ringo has refused to back his stupid and silly claim that he has evidence of voter fraud. Ringo like bartonx/doc is all hat and no cattle

Try reading this:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_200609/ai_n16779712

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1433365/posts

[Yellowdogtexan]

So where is your backup that this guy is a voter supression lawyer?http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/nation/17256012.htm?source=rss&channel=krwashington_nationNow, amid a scandal over politicization of the Justice Department, Congress is beginning to examine allegations that von Spakovsky was a key player in a Republican campaign to hang onto power in Washington by suppressing the votes of minority voters.

"Mr. von Spakovsky was central to the administration's pursuit of strategies that had the effect of suppressing the minority vote," charged Joseph Rich, a former Justice Department voting rights chief who worked under him.

He and other former career department lawyers say that von Spakovsky steered the agency toward voting rights policies not seen before, pushing to curb minor instances of election fraud by imposing sweeping restrictions that would make it harder, not easier, for Democratic-leaning poor and minority voters to cast ballots.

In interviews, current and former federal officials and civil rights leaders told McClatchy Newspapers that von Spakovsky:

-Sped approval of tougher voter ID laws in Georgia and Arizona in 2005, joining decisions to override career lawyers who believed that Georgia's law would restrict voting by poor blacks and who felt that more analysis was needed on the Arizona law's impact on Native Americans and Latinos.

-Tried to influence the federal Election Assistance Commission's research into the dimensions of voter fraud nationally and the impact of restrictive voter ID laws - research that could undermine a vote-suppression agenda. There is a great deal more

[Yellowdogtexan]

In recent times it is far more likely for democrats to cheat.The reason that the GOP is pushing bogus voter id laws is that demographics are moving against them. Texas for example is becoming more blue with for example a large number of Democratic state judges being elected in Dallas County in 2006. Here is a good piece on why voter fraud is a myth and why the GOP is pushing voter suppression measures like voter id laws. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/15/AR2007051501874.html?nav=rss_opinion/columnsFor the simple reason that when it comes to voter fraud in America, there's no there there. Voter fraud is a myth -- not an urban or rural myth, as such, but a Republican one.

As a report authored this spring by Lorraine Minnite, a political science professor at Barnard College of Columbia University, for the voter-rights program Project Vote makes unmistakably clear, the government's failure to prosecute or convict more than a handful of people for voter fraud isn't for lack of trying. Since 2002, the Justice Department's Ballot Access and Voting Integrity Initiative has, as Gonzales put it, "made enforcement of election fraud and corruption offenses a top priority." And yet between October 2002 and September 2005, just 38 cases were brought nationally, and of those, 14 ended in dismissals or acquittals, 11 in guilty pleas, and 13 in convictions. Though a Justice Department manual on election crime states that these cases "may present an easier means of obtaining convictions than do other forms of public corruption," federal attorneys have failed to rack up those convictions, for the simple reason that incidents of fraud have been few and far between.

As the Republican Myth has it, nothing is more fraught with fraud than voter-registration campaigns waged in working-class and poor neighborhoods that are largely black or Hispanic. According to the 2004 Census, 15 percent of blacks and Hispanics were registered during such campaigns; the figure for whites is just 9 percent. But of those 38 prosecutions that the Justice Department brought between 2002 and 2005, a grand total of two were for fabricating or falsifying voter registration applications. This qualifies as one of our smaller crime waves.

From Rove's perspective, however, a crackdown on voter registration campaigns in minority communities made cold electoral sense. Shortly after George W. Bush became president, Rove began to impress upon leading Republicans the importance of the nation's changing demographics -- that with the nation becoming steadily less white, Republican survival depended on winning a greater share of black and Hispanic voters. That, of course, was just one way to address the party's electoral problem. The other, in close races, was to suppress black and Hispanic turnout -- a task that would become far easier if the airwaves were buzzing with news of voter-fraud indictments. It was a task that required federal prosecutors who would indict first and ask questions later.Demographics are moving against the GOP and so the only way to compete is by suprressing the votes of the poor and minorities. The whole voter fraud myth is simply a smoke screen to cover the efforts of Rove and the GOP to suppress the votes of minorities and the poor. Again one of the favorite tools are bogus voter id laws.

[Capitalist]

http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/nation/17256012.htm?source=rss&channel=krwashington_nationThere is a great deal more

All you have here are allegations and innuendo, that is not proof.

As a mater of fact they are really pissed that he wants people to identify themselves before voting.

Well if I were a democrat that would piss me off too.

[Capitalist]

The reason that the GOP is pushing bogus voter id laws is that demographics are moving against them. Texas for example is becoming more blue with for example a large number of Democratic state judges being elected in Dallas County in 2006. Here is a good piece on why voter fraud is a myth and why the GOP is pushing voter suppression measures like voter id laws. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/15/AR2007051501874.html?nav=rss_opinion/columnsDemographics are moving against the GOP and so the only way to compete is by suprressing the votes of the poor and minorities. The whole voter fraud myth is simply a smoke screen to cover the efforts of Rove and the GOP to suppress the votes of minorities and the poor. Again one of the favorite tools are bogus voter id laws.

That still does not explain the shrill response to wanting people to identify themselves when voting.

This is VERY lame.

[Yellowdogtexan]

Try reading this:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1433365/postsAre you a freeper? You know that freepers are really disgusting creatures. Anyone who relies on the freerepublic is simply poorly informed and WRONG.

[Capitalist]

Are you a freeper? You know that freepers are really disgusting creatures. Anyone who relies on the freerepublic is simply poorly informed and WRONG.

No worse that huffington post or moveon.org or dailykos or commondreams or any of the other looney left sites.

Are you an idiot, anyone who relies on idiots is simply poorly informed and wrong. Plus they are stupid to boot.

[Yellowdogtexan]

No worse that huffington post or moveon.org or dailykos or commondreams or any of the other looney left sites.freepers are really disgusting creatures. The number of death threats and the like would never be tolerated on a real blog or place where intelligent people post. I am not surprised that you are a freeper. You are clueless about the issues just like all freepers.

[Yellowdogtexan]

Plus they are stupid to boot.You should not call anyone stupid See http://forums.thepoliticalasylum.com/showpost.php?p=190201&postcount=20

[Capitalist]

freepers are really disgusting creatures. The number of death threats and the like would never be tolerated on a real blog or place where intelligent people post. I am not surprised that you are a freeper. You are clueless about the issues just like all freepers.

I am not a 'freeper' ahole.

You don't like the source so Fing what.

You still have offered nothing but accusations without any proof.

Attacking me will not provide proof. But hey you know that , don't you.

[Capitalist]

You should not call anyone stupid See http://forums.thepoliticalasylum.com/showpost.php?p=190201&postcount=20

Yawn.. Is that the best you got?

Yawn...

Ok then,

Heel dog heel...

Of course you can always suck my ....

[Yellowdogtexan]

That still does not explain the shrill response to wanting people to identify themselves when voting.

This is VERY lame.The only thing that is lame is your silliness and stupidity. Let me explain this to you. There is a good study that shows that voter ID laws suppress voting by the elderly, the poor and elderly.http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/2/15/12833/9922In closely contested elections, turnout is everything. New research shows that voter ID requirements negatively effect turnout, and, for minority voters, by large percentages. This data is especially troubling to progressive voters since minorities are a critical part of any progressive coalition. Given the fact that voter fraud, the rationale for voter ID requirements, is isolated and infrequent, the adoption of voter ID requirements by states should be recognized for what it is: a deliberate strategy to deny minority voters access to the ballot box and suppress voter turnout.

According to an as-yet-unreleased analysis of the 2004 election conducted by the Eagleton Institute of Politics at Rutgers University, voters in general are 2.9 less likely to vote as a result of ID requirements. The effect increases significantly for minorities. African-Americans are 6% less likely to vote as a result of ID requirements and Hispanics are 10% less likely to vote. Twelve states had some form of documentary ID required in order to cast a regular ballot in 2004.

Since then, 12 states have enacted voter ID requirements (two--Georgia and Missouri--were struck down by the courts) bringing the total number of states with these requirements to 24. Most of these laws were passed on the pretext of preventing "voter fraud". However, a close examination of voter fraud allegations reveals they are made more on the basis of a partisan agenda than on facts. In fact, according to the US Department of Justice, since October 2002, 86 individuals have been convicted of federal crimes relating to election fraud (including several offenses not remedied by ID requirements), while 196,139,871 ballots have been cast in federal general elections. The ratio of confirmed cases of voter fraud to votes cast is so small our calculator renders the answer in scientific notation!

Given the nonexistence of systemic voter fraud in America and the clear and disproportionate impact of voter ID requirements on minority voters, it seems clear that voter ID requirements are nothing more than voter suppression techniques given the force of law. This is especially troubling for progressives since the voters most likely to be affected are from already marginalized constituencies: blacks, Hispanics, low- and moderate-income families. The issue is not that these people have any ID but that they do not have the special picture ids that these laws require. These laws are designed to make it difficult for the poor to vote.

Again, I can bury you with studies on this issue. Your opinion is ill-informed and wrong.

[Yellowdogtexan]

I am not a 'freeper' ahole. Your posts are dumb enought to qualify you as a freeper and you cite the freerepublic and therefore you are a freeper.

[Yellowdogtexan]

Here is yet another study (this time from the DOJ) that shows that voter fraud is a myth. http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud.html?ei=5088&en=277feccfa099c7d0&ex=1334030400&adxnnl=1&pagewanted=all&adxnnlx=1179443085-c9em7MBCAEp9No0kJxWLQQWASHINGTON, April 11 — Five years after the Bush administration began a crackdown on voter fraud, the Justice Department has turned up virtually no evidence of any organized effort to skew federal elections, according to court records and interviews.

Although Republican activists have repeatedly said fraud is so widespread that it has corrupted the political process and, possibly, cost the party election victories, about 120 people have been charged and 86 convicted as of last year.

Most of those charged have been Democrats, voting records show. Many of those charged by the Justice Department appear to have mistakenly filled out registration forms or misunderstood eligibility rules, a review of court records and interviews with prosecutors and defense lawyers show.

In Miami, an assistant United States attorney said many cases there involved what were apparently mistakes by immigrants, not fraud.

In Wisconsin, where prosecutors have lost almost twice as many cases as they won, charges were brought against voters who filled out more than one registration form and felons seemingly unaware that they were barred from voting.

One ex-convict was so unfamiliar with the rules that he provided his prison-issued identification card, stamped “Offender,” when he registered just before voting.

A handful of convictions involved people who voted twice. More than 30 were linked to small vote-buying schemes in which candidates generally in sheriff’s or judge’s races paid voters for their support.

A federal panel, the Election Assistance Commission, reported last year that the pervasiveness of fraud was debatable. That conclusion played down findings of the consultants who said there was little evidence of it across the country, according to a review of the original report by The New York Times that was reported on Wednesday.

Mistakes and lapses in enforcing voting and registration rules routinely occur in elections, allowing thousands of ineligible voters to go to the polls. But the federal cases provide little evidence of widespread, organized fraud, prosecutors and election law experts said.

“There was nothing that we uncovered that suggested some sort of concerted effort to tilt the election,” Richard G. Frohling, an assistant United States attorney in Milwaukee, said.

Richard L. Hasen, an expert in election law at the Loyola Law School, agreed, saying: “If they found a single case of a conspiracy to affect the outcome of a Congressional election or a statewide election, that would be significant. But what we see is isolated, small-scale activities that often have not shown any kind of criminal intent.”Again, the claims of voter fraud are at best overstated and are being used as an excuse to try to adopt voter Id laws to keep the old, the poor and minorities from voting.

[Yellowdogtexan]

Lets look at the GOP history of voter suppression. http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oId=16368Here are a few examples of recent incidents in which groups of voters have been singled out on the basis of race.

Most recently, controversy has erupted over the use in the Orlando area of armed, plainclothes officers from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) to question elderly black voters in their homes. The incidents were part of a state investigation of voting irregularities in the city's March 2003 mayoral election. Critics have charged that the tactics used by the FDLE have intimidated black voters, which could suppress their turnout in this year’s elections. Six members of Congress recently called on Attorney General John Ashcroft to investigate potential civil rights violations in the matter.

This year in Florida, the state ordered the implementation of a “potential felon” purge list to remove voters from the rolls, in a disturbing echo of the infamous 2000 purge, which removed thousands of eligible voters, primarily African-Americans, from the rolls. The state abandoned the plan after news media investigations revealed that the 2004 list also included thousands of people who were eligible to vote, and heavily targeted African-Americans while virtually ignoring Hispanic voters.

This summer, Michigan state Rep. John Pappageorge (R-Troy) was quoted in the Detroit Free Press as saying, “If we do not suppress the Detroit vote, we're going to have a tough time in this election.” African Americans comprise 83% of Detroit’s population.


In South Dakota’s June 2004 primary, Native American voters were prevented from voting after they were challenged to provide photo IDs, which they were not required to present under state or federal law.


In Kentucky in July 2004, Black Republican officials joined to ask their State GOP party chairman to renounce plans to place “vote challengers” in African-American precincts during the coming elections.


Earlier this year in Texas, a local district attorney claimed that students at a majority black college were not eligible to vote in the county where the school is located. It happened in Waller County – the same county where 26 years earlier, a federal court order was required to prevent discrimination against the students.


In 2003 in Philadelphia, voters in African American areas were systematically challenged by men carrying clipboards, driving a fleet of some 300 sedans with magnetic signs designed to look like law enforcement insignia.


In 2002 in Louisiana, flyers were distributed in African American communities telling voters they could go to the polls on Tuesday, December 10th – three days after a Senate runoff election was actually held.


In 1998 in South Carolina, a state representative mailed 3,000 brochures to African American neighborhoods, claiming that law enforcement agents would be “working” the election, and warning voters that “this election is not worth going to jail.”

Recent Strategies

As this report details, voter intimidation and suppression is not a problem limited to the southern United States. It takes place from California to New York, Texas to Illinois. It is not the province of a single political party, although patterns of intimidation have changed as the party allegiances of minority communities have changed over the years.

In recent years, many minority communities have tended to align with the Democratic Party. Over the past two decades, the Republican Party has launched a series of “ballot security” and “voter integrity” initiatives which have targeted minority communities. At least three times, these initiatives were successfully challenged in federal courts as illegal attempts to suppress voter participation based on race.

The first was a 1981 case in New Jersey which protested the use of armed guards to challenge Hispanic and African-American voters, and exposed a scheme to disqualify voters using mass mailings of outdated voter lists. The case resulted in a consent decree prohibiting efforts to target voters by race.

Six years later, similar “ballot security” efforts were launched against minority voters in Louisiana, Georgia, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Indiana. Republican National Committee documents said the Louisiana program alone would “eliminate at least 60- 80,000 folks from the rolls,” again drawing a court settlement.

And just three years later in North Carolina, the state Republican Party, the Helms for Senate Committee and others sent postcards to 125,000 voters, 97 percent of whom were African American, giving them false information about voter eligibility and warning of criminal penalties for voter fraud – again resulting in a decree against the use of race to target voters.

[Capitalist]

Lets look at the GOP history of voter suppression. http://www.pfaw.org/pfaw/general/default.aspx?oId=16368

Here are a few examples of recent incidents in which groups of voters have been singled out on the basis of race.

Most recently, controversy has erupted over the use in the Orlando area of armed, plainclothes officers from the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE) to question elderly black voters in their homes. The incidents were part of a state investigation of voting irregularities in the city's March 2003 mayoral election. Critics have charged that the tactics used by the FDLE have intimidated black voters, which could suppress their turnout in this year’s elections. Six members of Congress recently called on Attorney General John Ashcroft to investigate potential civil rights violations in the matter.

This year in Florida, the state ordered the implementation of a “potential felon” purge list to remove voters from the rolls, in a disturbing echo of the infamous 2000 purge, which removed thousands of eligible voters, primarily African-Americans, from the rolls. The state abandoned the plan after news media investigations revealed that the 2004 list also included thousands of people who were eligible to vote, and heavily targeted African-Americans while virtually ignoring Hispanic voters. Just curious, is excluding fellons not legal? If purged can they not vote with a provisional ballot? I don't see the problem here?

This summer, Michigan state Rep. John Pappageorge (R-Troy) was quoted in the Detroit Free Press as saying, “If we do not suppress the Detroit vote, we're going to have a tough time in this election.” African Americans comprise 83% of Detroit’s population. I would like a link to that. Then if so I want to see where anything this blowhard said was acted on


In South Dakota’s June 2004 primary, Native American voters were prevented from voting after they were challenged to provide photo IDs, which they were not required to present under state or federal law. This I will admit is wrong, but in a primary this gives no help to the republicans, does it?


In Kentucky in July 2004, Black Republican officials joined to ask their State GOP party chairman to renounce plans to place “vote challengers” in African-American precincts during the coming elections. Any word on if it was done and if that is legal?


Earlier this year in Texas, a local district attorney claimed that students at a majority black college were not eligible to vote in the county where the school is located. It happened in Waller County – the same county where 26 years earlier, a federal court order was required to prevent discrimination against the students. So what was the final result here, was anyone stopped from voting. I will say that I don't like the idea of students in a college , many of whom, are still claimed as dependents by their parents and who have little or no involvement in the town, voting in local elections no mater their party.

In 2003 in Philadelphia, voters in African American areas were systematically challenged by men carrying clipboards, driving a fleet of some 300 sedans with magnetic signs designed to look like law enforcement insignia.Now tell me how you know for sure this is a republican thing and also why they were so stupid to let them bother them. Unless of course many of them had outstanding warrants? Why is it that you can suppress the blsck vote by simply having people who look like cops near a voting place. I don't give tham a second look.


In 2002 in Louisiana, flyers were distributed in African American communities telling voters they could go to the polls on Tuesday, December 10th – three days after a Senate runoff election was actually held.Again , proof that this was a republican effort is? Now I will admit that it is highly likely that it was some republicans doing it, but proof? Also note, if someone passes a flyer in my hood saying that election day is on the wrong day, it does not matter, I would vote on the actual election day. Are you saying these poeple are too sptupid to figure it out?


In 1998 in South Carolina, a state representative mailed 3,000 brochures to African American neighborhoods, claiming that law enforcement agents would be “working” the election, and warning voters that “this election is not worth going to jail.”I think that is pretty low, but again why is having law enforcement around so scary to them?

Recent Strategies

As this report details, voter intimidation and suppression is not a problem limited to the southern United States. It takes place from California to New York, Texas to Illinois. It is not the province of a single political party, although patterns of intimidation have changed as the party allegiances of minority communities have changed over the years. Now we get to the meat of the situation. it is all about who they are likely to vote for. See if minorities did not put all their eggs in one basket this stuff would not even be tried.

In recent years, many minority communities have tended to align with the Democratic Party. Over the past two decades, the Republican Party has launched a series of “ballot security” and “voter integrity” initiatives which have targeted minority communities. At least three times, these initiatives were successfully challenged in federal courts as illegal attempts to suppress voter participation based on race. I am always amazed how democrats think making sure voters are legal and that the ballots are safe is somehow suppression?

The first was a 1981 case in New Jersey which protested the use of armed guards to challenge Hispanic and African-American voters, and exposed a scheme to disqualify voters using mass mailings of outdated voter lists. The case resulted in a consent decree prohibiting efforts to target voters by race.This kind of crap is wrong and if blacks ever start voting republican the dems will do it.



Six years later, similar “ballot security” efforts were launched against minority voters in Louisiana, Georgia, Missouri, Pennsylvania, Michigan and Indiana. Republican National Committee documents said the Louisiana program alone would “eliminate at least 60- 80,000 folks from the rolls,” again drawing a court settlement.funny how they don't mention specifically what 'ballot security' measures they are talking about.

And just three years later in North Carolina, the state Republican Party, the Helms for Senate Committee and others sent postcards to 125,000 voters, 97 percent of whom were African American, giving them false information about voter eligibility and warning of criminal penalties for voter fraud – again resulting in a decree against the use of race to target voters. So tell me, are their criminal penalties for voter fraud? What was the 'false' information? Plus, if someone sends me info that indicates i am not eligible to vote I will laugh at it and throw it away. Are they counting on the people who ge thtese postcards being stupid or something?

[Yellowdogtexan]

Voter suppression is a key tactic for the GOP. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A707-2004Oct26.htmlBy all accounts, Republicans are spending these last precious days devoting nearly as much energy to suppressing the Democratic vote as they are to mobilizing their own.

Time was when Republicans were at least embarrassed by their efforts to keep African Americans from the polls. Republican consultant Ed Rollins was all but drummed out of the profession after his efforts to pay black ministers to keep their congregants from voting in a 1993 New Jersey election came to light.

For George W. Bush, Karl Rove and their legion of genteel thugs, however, universal suffrage is just one more musty liberal ideal that threatens conservative rule. Today's Republicans have elevated vote suppression from a dirty secret to a public norm.

In Ohio, Republicans have recruited 3,600 poll monitors and assigned them disproportionately to such heavily black areas as inner-city Cleveland, where Democratic "527" groups have registered many tens of thousands of new voters. "The organized left's efforts to, quote unquote, register voters -- I call them ringers -- have created these problems" of potential massive vote fraud, Cuyahoga County Republican Chairman James P. Trakas recently told the New York Times. It is established gop practice to try to keep the poor and minorities from voting.

[Yellowdogtexan]

Here is a good piece that links the GOP voter suppression efforts with the story about the fired US Attorneys. http://www.tompaine.com/articles/2007/05/15/keep_out_the_vote.phpIt is, as Garrett Epps recently wrote in Salon.com, an “urban legend that American elections are rife with voter fraud, particularly in the kinds of poor and minority neighborhoods inhabited by Democrats. In 2002, Attorney General John Ashcroft announced that fraudulent voting would be a major target of the Department of Justice. As the New York Times reported last month, the main result of this massive effort was such coups as the deportation of a legal immigrant who mistakenly filled out a voter-registration card while waiting in line at the department of motor vehicles.”

This paucity of felons was confirmed by studies conducted for the Election Assistance Commission, a government group established in the wake of the 2000 Florida debacle. But according to the Times and other media, at the insistence of Republican commission members, language was toned down to say, merely, “There is a great deal of debate on the pervasiveness of fraud.”

Several of the dismissed U.S. attorneys failed to pursue voter fraud allegations with the ferocity Rove and the White House desired. (For one thing, it is a clearly stated Justice Department guideline that “Federal prosecutors and investigators should be extremely careful to not conduct overt investigations during the pre-election period or while the election is underway”—so as to not influence results. In at least two instances, this policy was trod upon by overzealous administration officials.)

Monday’s Washington Post reported, “Nearly half the U.S. attorneys slated for removal by the administration last year were targets of Republican complaints that they were lax on voter fraud, including efforts by presidential adviser Karl Rove to encourage more prosecutions of election-law violations.”

Federal prosecutors in four jurisdictions deemed voter fraud trouble spots by the administration (New Mexico, Missouri, Washington State and Nevada) were let go. A fifth, Steven Biskupic in Milwaukee, was kept on for fear of offending Wisconsin Republican Congressman James Sensenbrenner, who at the time was chair of the House Judiciary Committee. (A similar concern may have protected Philadelphia federal prosecutor Pat Meehan, a protege of Pennsylvania Senator Arlen Specter, now ranking minority member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.)

At least two of the terminated Feds—John McKay, former U.S. attorney for western Washington State, and David Iglesias, former U.S. attorney for New Mexico—are on record as believing that Karl Rove and other White House aides were directly behind the dismissals. “That would explain why the wagons are so tightly circled,” Iglesias told a Seattle Times editorial meeting that he and McKay attended last week. (McKay noted, “I think there will be a criminal case that will come out of this. This is going to get worse, not better.”)

But the real motive for all this chasing of phantoms in the polling booths may be far more than a diversion. Note, for example, that the aforementioned Tim Griffin, Rove’s choice to take over as U.S. attorney in eastern Arkansas, has been the focus of accusations that in 2004, while research director of the Republican National Committee, he was involved in “caging” minority voters—unfairly, and possibly illegally, making challenge lists of African- and Hispanic-Americans registered in Democratic districts.

All signs point to a continuing, concentrated GOP campaign to curtail voting rights, to intimidate impoverished and elderly citizens, to suppress voter turnout in minority neighborhoods that would lean Democratic, to take control of who gets to vote. Hence the upswing in punitive state voter ID laws, attempts to restrict registration, purge voter rolls and other legislation allegedly aimed at quashing illegal voting. And the U.S. attorney firings.

“We have, as you know, an enormous and growing problem with elections in certain parts of America today,” Rove told the Republican National Lawyers Association last spring. “We are, in some parts of the country, I’m afraid to say, beginning to look like we have elections like those run in countries where the guys in charge are, you know, colonels in mirrored sunglasses.”

[Yellowdogtexan]

Here is yet another example of a gop voter suppression technique that was tried recently. http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/003212.phpConcerning The Philadelphia Inquirer's story about a "voter alert!" going out to New Jersey voters in a local election, the following statement was just released by Michael Drewniak, Public Affairs Officer of the U.S. Attorney's office in New Jersey:A story published in Sunday's Philadelphia Inquirer which said the U.S. Attorney's Office flooded Camden with taped phone messages warning against buying votes in that city's recent election was false. Neither the U.S. Attorney's Office or the Voting Rights Section of the Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice had any role in the phone-message blitz.

As U.S. Attorney Christopher J. Christie noted, the U.S. Attorney's Office would never engage in such a practice, which clearly could have been used as a voter-suppression tactic. The U.S. Attorney's Office was not contacted to authenticate the matter or comment for the story, which implied the office sanctioned or was the source of the recorded phone-message blitz.The Inquirer's story contained a transcript of the call, which cleverly gave the impression of coming from the U.S. attorney's office, while not actually saying that it was:"Voters alert!" said the taped message. "Please note that it is a federal crime to be paid for a vote. I repeat, it is a crime. If you or your neighbor have been offered payment, please report it immediately to the U.S. Attorney's Office at 856-757-5026."So now the question is: who paid for the robo calling? And where else have such robo calls been used?

[Yellowdogtexan]

The GOP also likes to use bogus voter fraud cases to suppress minority vote. Rove was pushing a program to suppress the Democratic vote in key states during the 2006 election. http://harpers.org/archive/2007/05/hbc-90000061....in the final weeks before the midterm Congressional elections of November 2006, presidential political advisor Karl Rove orchestrated a large-scale effort to suppress voter turnout among potentially Democratic constituencies, leveraging Department of Justice resources in the process. Key to the project were P. Kyle Sampson, Alberto Gonzales’s chief of staff, and Matthew Friedrich, then chief of staff in the Department’s Criminal Division.

Friedrich’s testimony and statements to Congressional investigators made clear that the decision to proceed with “voter fraud” charges in a series of dubious cases resulted from direction from partisan political operatives in the White House, including Rove.

McClatchy writes:Only weeks before last year’s pivotal midterm elections, the White House urged the Justice Department to pursue voter-fraud allegations against Democrats in three battleground states, a high-ranking Justice official has told congressional investigators.

In two instances in October 2006, President Bush’s political adviser, Karl Rove, or his deputies passed the allegations on to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales’ then-chief of staff, Kyle Sampson.
These and similar allegations make increasingly plain why Rove and the White House are going to such tremendous lengths to block his testimony under oath.
It also seems that the firings of the US Attorneys is also due in large part to the fact that the attorneys being targeted refused to push bogus voter fraud lawsuits that were intended to suppress voter turnout. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/13/AR2007051301106_2.html?nav=hcmoduleWhite House officials also criticized John McKay, then the U.S. attorney in Seattle, for not pursuing an investigation after the disputed 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington state. McKay, who was fired, has said that claim was baseless.

However, it was not clear until last week that Biskupic came close to being fired, that Graves had been asked to resign or that Justice officials had highlighted Nevada as a problem area for voter fraud. New information also emerged showing the extent to which the White House encouraged investigations of election fraud within weeks of November balloting.

Rove, in particular, was preoccupied with pressing Gonzales and his aides about alleged voting problems in a handful of battleground states, according to testimony and documents.

Last October, just weeks before the midterm elections, Rove's office sent a 26-page packet to Gonzales's office containing precinct-level voting data about Milwaukee. A Justice aide told congressional investigators that he quickly put the package aside, concerned that taking action would violate strict rules against investigations shortly before elections, according to statements disclosed this week.

That aide, senior counselor Matthew Friedrich, turned over notes to Congress that detailed a telephone conversation about voter fraud with another Justice official, Benton Campbell, chief of staff for the Criminal Division. Friedrich had asked Campbell for his assessment of Rove's complaints about problems in New Mexico, Milwaukee and Philadelphia, according to a congressional aide familiar with Friedrich's remarks.

The notes show that Campbell also identified Nevada as a problem district. Daniel G. Bogden of Las Vegas was among the nine U.S. attorneys known to have been removed from their jobs last year.

Rick Hasen, a professor at Loyola Law School who runs an election law blog, said that "there's no question that Karl Rove and other political operatives" urged Justice officials to apply pressure on U.S. attorneys to pursue voter-fraud allegations in parts of the country that were critical to the GOP.

Hasen said it remains unclear, however, "whether they believed there was a lot of fraud and U.S. attorneys would ferret it out, or whether they believed there wasn't a lot of fraud but the allegations would serve political purposes."The bushies have gone so far as to use the DOJ for partisan political purposes and that is wrong. The Department of Justice represents all of the people and not just Karl Rove and the bushies.

[Yellowdogtexan]

Some more on GOP voter suppression http://www.blackcommentator.com/168/168_guest_musgrove_voting.htmlWhat the Bush Administration is doing is not new. Since 1981, the Republican Party has adopted a strategy of suppressing the black vote in closely contested states in order to win elected office. The political calculus is simple: For the past forty years, blacks have voted overwhelmingly for Democrats in statewide and presidential elections, and Democrats have required high black turnout to win closely contested elections, particularly in the South. One way to ensure Republican victories in closely contested states, then, is to suppress the black vote. Thus, for the past twenty-five years, Republican Party functionaries and Republican Departments of Justice have administered "vote integrity" and "vote security" initiatives aimed at purging blacks from the rolls and intimidating those that come to the polls. More recently, the Bush 2000 and 2004 campaigns have worked with Republican Secretaries of State - Florida 2000 and Ohio 2004 are the most noteworthy examples - to create voting system crises where large numbers of newly registered blacks are anticipated at the polls. The results have been a lack of voting machines in high turnout precincts resulting in long lines that act as a disincentive to vote, understaffed election helplines that lead to busy signals for voters and election workers, arbitrary election administration rulings that disqualify prospective black voters, and a number of other preventable problems that disproportionately effect new black voters. Once in office, the Bush Administration simply enlisted the Justice Department, Civil Rights Division in this ongoing campaign. Do I need to keep on dumping on this subject??? I can find more examples if I need to.

[Yellowdogtexan]

Little boy willyj/cisco/cappy does not want to deal with facts it appears. Given how weak of a debater he is, I do not blame him from running away from this thread.

[Yellowdogtexan]

This bozo is still at it. He is never going to be confirmed to the FEC and it is amusing that the best that this idiot could find are some undicted claims that are 24 years old http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/03/hans_on_holiday.phpOK, so Hans von Spakovsky's nomination to the Federal Election Commission has left the Senate hopelessly gridlocked, and the FEC crippled. And he packed his bags and left the building months ago. But the man is still keeping busy.

The vote suppression expert has just released his latest call-to-arms on the voter ID front at the Heritage Foundation. It's called "Stolen Identities, Stolen Votes: A Case Study in Voter Impersonation."

In it, Spakovsky takes on those liberal critics who claim that there's no voter fraud (like, say, The New York Times) by unearthing a 1984 grand jury investigation in Brooklyn, NY during which, he says, numerous episodes of voter fraud dating back to 1968 were uncovered.

Just because the case was 24 years ago and no indictments were issued shouldn't give us pause. The point is that it's evidence that fraud does occur. And therefore there's a strong case for requiring ID at the polls. And if the law disproportionately disenfranchises minority voters, I guess that's just collateral damage. The Supreme Court is expected to decide by late June whether Indiana's voter ID law is unconstitutional.

So you can see that Spakovsky is still on the case, though thankfully not still at the Justice Department, where he took a number of steps that had the effect of making it more difficult for minorities to vote. Bush put Spakovsky on the FEC by a recess appointment in December, 2005.

As voting law expert Rick Hasen points out, the piece is a brazen move for a guy who's been accused of being too partisan. Apparently Spakovsky is not holding out for winning Democrats over.

A recent report (pdf) by the Election Assistance Commission's inspector general served as a reminder for why Spakovsky is so controversial. In it, former Commissioner Paul DeGregorio, a Republican who frequently clashed with Spakovsky when he was at the Justice Department, is quoted as saying that "too many of [von Spakovsky's] decisions are clouded by his partisan thinking" and that Spakovsky thought that DeGregorio should use his position to advance the Republican Party's agenda.Again, this bozo will never be confirmed. At some point bush is going to have to back down or give the Democrats a great case to sue the heck out of Mccain for violating the FEC spending limits.

[Ringo]

Some more on GOP voter suppression http://www.blackcommentator.com/168/168_guest_musgrove_voting.htmlDo I need to keep on dumping on this subject??? I can find more examples if I need to.

Why what are you looking for?? You want me to tell TB about YOUR boring fucking thread, so she can tell you how fucking boring and redundant you are, which she won't, as she is trained to toss the pom poms for all the Liberal jibberish you spit out!!!:mw:minnie:mw:minnie

[Trueblue]

:cheers

[issac the dragon]

Ringo, as the foremost debater on this board ( that's a joke ) I wouldn't put any one down who actually make an argument on one side or the other. TB is a good poster and has nothing to be embarassed about. I don't read her posting, "Hey, its all in fun. No harm intended," because of the things she posts.

[Yellowdogtexan]

Why what are you looking for?? I just pointing out the stupidity of the bushies and this particular voter suppression attorney. This idiot will never be confirmed to the FEC for good reason. The best that this moron could come up with is some incredibly weak claims (if no indictments were issued 24 years ago), that do not support the idea of imposing a poll tax designed to keep minorities, the poor and the elderly from voting. Publication of a piece of crap like this piece by this moron was a clear admission that he will never be confirmed and that is not qualified to be on the Federal Election Commission.

Finally, bush is going to have to back down or watch McCain get sued for violation of the Federal spending limits. McCain's only hope is to have bush back down and let the FEC become operational again and then allow him to withdraw. Otherwise, Mccain is going to be committing a felony every time he spends any money between now and September. That is something that is called irony and I am greatly amused by this situation.

[Ringo]

Ringo, as the foremost debater on this board ( that's a joke ) I wouldn't put any one down who actually make an argument on one side or the other. TB is a good poster and has nothing to be embarassed about. I don't read her posting, "Hey, its all in fun. No harm intended," because of the things she posts.

Dragon Lady, I kid her a lot, but like MOST Liberals, she takes it all serious, like you and it causes twisted panties!! So you are a Masterdebator like Yellowdog eh, he likes to be known as a Masterdebator, while I'm just a poor down & dirty, heart pounding, sweaty, heavy breathing, all night long poor boy sex maniac!!:mnude

[Trueblue]

Dragon Lady, I kid her a lot, but like MOST Liberals, she takes it all serious, like you and it causes twisted panties!!

:rofl You take all kinds of stuff seriously, if it's directed at you, and your panties get so twisted I bet you walk like John Wayne. :lmao

[Ringo]

Just like Doc/baronx, ringo is full of hot air and crap and can not back up his stupid charges. Ringo claims to have proof of voter fraud. The attorneys arguing the voter id case before the SCOTUS were unable to document any cases of voter fraud. If ringo really believes his crap and actually has any proof, he needs to come forward and present his proof. I can show him how to file with the SCOTUS as an amicus brief or letter in order that this important evidence of voter fraud can be considered.

However, if as I suspect ringo is full of crap again and has no proof, then he is best to hide like a coward. The SCOTUS do not tolerate bogus claims and will want real proof as ringo's charges if they are to consider such charges. Most of ringo's amusing charges are so stupid that they would be laughed at if he tried to get the real world to consider such charges. If ringo presented something like his stupidity on vince foster to the SCOTUS he would be laughed at and his amicus brief or letter would be published in every bar journal in the humor section.

Again, if ringo has any proof, then provide it. Otherwise, ringo is just like bartonx/doc, i.e. full of crap and too much of a coward to submit their theories or proof to the real world.

THIS THREAD IS FULL OF *CONTROVERSARY* AND NAME CALLING ON A *PERSONAL* BASIS, AND SHOULD BE MOVED, RIGHT SAG?????:sheep:devil:sheep:charge

[Yellowdogtexan]

Ringo, I called you on your lies. Again, before the SCOTUS is a case on voter id laws. The lawyers representing the forces of darkness (i.e. the GOP) could not present even one case of voter fraud to the SCOTUS. You were silly and claimed that you had evidence of voter fraud. Given that I knew that you were making a claim that you could not back up, I called you on it. It appears that you still can not back up your claim. Grow up and learn to back your claims up.

[Ringo]

Ringo, I called you on your lies. Again, before the SCOTUS is a case on voter id laws. The lawyers representing the forces of darkness (i.e. the GOP) could not present even one case of voter fraud to the SCOTUS. You were silly and claimed that you had evidence of voter fraud. Given that I knew that you were making a claim that you could not back up, I called you on it. It appears that you still can not back up your claim. Grow up and learn to back your claims up.

Here Jr is just one group of charges, among MANY, NOW dispute the findings, instead of trying to degrade the Site, CNN waterboy!!:mw:mw:godzilla

http://av.rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A9ibyJw6ct5HSPoAhTNrCqMX;_ylu=X3oDMTBvdmM3bGl xBHBndANhdl93ZWJfcmVzdWx0BHNlYwNzcg--/SIG=12nrl9m02/EXP=1205846970/**http%3a//www.pardonmyenglish.com/archives/2005/08/democrat_voter.html

[Yellowdogtexan]

Here Jr is just one group of charges, among MANY, NOW dispute the findings, instead of trying to degrade the Site, CNN waterboy!!:Ringo, your souce is bogus and these morons have shut down because they were caught making up lies. The source of the most of the pretend facts and lies used to support the claims of voter fraud closed shop and was found to be a phony operation. http://www.slate.com/id/2166589Not so for the American Center for Voting Rights, a group that has literally just disappeared as an organization, and for which it seems no replacement group will rise up. With no notice and little comment, ACVR—the only prominent nongovernmental organization claiming that voter fraud is a major problem, a problem warranting strict rules such as voter-ID laws—simply stopped appearing at government panels and conferences. Its Web domain name has suddenly expired, its reports are all gone (except where they have been preserved by its opponents), and its general counsel, Mark "Thor" Hearne, has cleansed his résumé of affiliation with the group. Hearne won't speak to the press about ACVR's demise. No other group has taken up the "voter fraud" mantra.

The death of ACVR says a lot about the Republican strategy of raising voter fraud as a crisis in American elections. Presidential adviser Karl Rove and his allies, who have been ghostbusting illusory dead and fictional voters since the contested 2000 election, apparently mounted a two-pronged attack. One part of that attack, at the heart of the current Justice Department scandals, involved getting the DoJ and various U.S. attorneys in battleground states to vigorously prosecute cases of voter fraud. That prong has failed. After exhaustive effort, the Department of Justice discovered virtually no polling-place voter fraud, and its efforts to fire the U.S. attorneys in battleground states who did not push the voter-fraud line enough has backfired. Even if Attorney General Gonzales declines to resign his position, his reputation has been irreparably damaged.....

Consisting of little more than a post-office box and some staffers who wrote reports and gave helpful quotes about the pervasive problems of voter fraud to the press, the group identified Democratic cities as hot spots for voter fraud, then pushed the line that "election integrity" required making it harder for people to vote. The group issued reports (PDF) on areas in the country of special concern, areas that coincidentally tended to be presidential battleground states. In many of these places, it now appears the White House was pressuring U.S. attorneys to bring more voter-fraud prosecutions.....

The arguments against vote fraud were built on a house of cards, a house that is collapsing as quickly as the U.S. attorney investigation moves forward.

So Hearne let the organization collapse, and in a bit of irony, a Washington lawyer who bought the ACVR domain name has set it to redirect to the Brennan Center's Truth About Fraud Web site, which debunks ACVR's claims of polling-place voter fraudRingo, you need to work harder and you may want to use a source that is still in business and which was not found to be a joke.

[Yellowdogtexan]

This is going to be fun to watch. The republicans are going to have to defend the concept that it was okay to shut down the FEC during an election year. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/feedarticle/7459379 Democratic Party officials want a federal judge to order an investigation into whether Sen. John McCain violated election laws by withdrawing from public financing, saying federal regulators are too weak to act on their own.

A lawsuit against the Federal Election Commission, to be filed Monday in U.S. District Court, questions the agency's ability to enforce the law and review McCain's decision to opt out of the system. The Republican presidential candidate, who had been entitled to $5.8 million in federal funds for the primary campaign, decided earlier this year to give up that money so he could avoid strict spending limits between now and the GOP's national convention in September.

During a conference call with reporters Sunday, DNC officials said the FEC is unable to act because four of its six seats are vacant. They want a judge to either order the FEC to begin an immediate review, or allow the Democratic Party to file a lawsuit against McCain's campaign challenging his decision.

Tom McMahon, the party's executive director, said ``there is a compelling public interest in determining whether Senator McCain agreed to participate in the matching funds program so he could get a loan for his campaign, then violated the terms of that agreement so he could ignore the spending cap and raise unlimited money from lobbyists and special interests.''

The DNC is seeking civil fines or an order barring McCain from exceeding spending limits, said DNC general counsel Joe Sandler.

Democrats filed an initial complaint with the FEC in February, asking it to investigate. Under federal rules, the party typically must wait 120 days before filing a lawsuit. But party officials said they were taking action before the deadline given the FEC's weakened status. The FEC has 60 days to respond to the lawsuit.
This is a way to speed up the process and force the republicans to defend the silly and dumb concept of shutting down the federal agency in charge of enforcing election laws during an election year.

[patriotsblade]

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/05/17/politics/main4104678.shtml

(AP) President Bush's contentious nominee for the Federal Election Commission removed his name from consideration Friday, potentially ending a lengthy stalemate that had paralyzed the work of the agency.

Hans von Spakovsky, a former Justice Department official who never had Democratic support to win confirmation, withdrew his nomination, saying it was time for the protracted deadlock to end.

Mr. Bush "reluctantly accepted" von Spakovsky's request, the White House said.

Democrats have objected to von Spakovsky's tenure at Justice, where he oversaw voting rights matters. The standoff has held up other Senate confirmations to the six-member FEC, which is without a quorum and has been unable to conduct business.

In a letter to Mr. Bush, von Spakovsky said the long-stalled process has been extremely hard on his family. "And quite frankly, we do not have the financial resources to continue to wait until this matter is resolved," he wrote.

He added: "The agency that is tasked with policing our campaign finance system needs to be operational during a presidential election year. The opposition to my nomination (however unfair) is preventing that from happening."

Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., welcomed von Spakovsky's withdrawal. Democrats have charged that von Spakovsky tried to suppress voter participation through new restrictions such as voter identification laws and voter roll purges.

"Democrats stood united in their opposition to von Spakovsky because of his long and well-documented history of working to suppress the rights of minorities and the elderly to vote," Reid said. "He was not qualified to hold any position of trust in our government."

Senate Republicans, however, argued that a recent Supreme court ruling upholding a strict Indiana voter identification law vindicated von Spakovsky's stance on the issue.

Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky blamed Democrats for obstructing what he called "a highly-qualified nominee to the FEC."

"Once again, liberal interest groups did their best to manufacture controversy and, once again, Senate Democrats played along," McConnell said in a statement.

Mr. Bush sent the Senate a new slate of FEC nominees this month, retaining von Spakovsky but withdrawing the nomination of FEC Chairman David Mason.

Mason had clashed in the past with presumed Republican presidential nominee John McCain.

The Senate could vote on the remaining four nominees awaiting confirmation or wait until Mr. Bush nominates a replacement for von Spakovsky. The commission consists of six members - three from each party. It takes four votes on the commission to act, meaning that even with a 3-2 advantage, Democrats would need one Republican to avoid a deadlock.

The FEC has unfinished business before it, including final action on regulations governing candidate air travel as well as new rules on lobbyist fundraisers and joint advertising by national parties and federal candidates.

Also pending is action on McCain's decision to bypass public matching funds during the primary. Mason had informed McCain that he needed commission approval before withdrawing. Without a quorum, the FEC was unable to act. Mason also said McCain needed to explain the terms of a loan he obtained before he won the early primaries.

Richard L. Hasen, a law professor at the Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said the most important action by the FEC is a "non-controversial and ministerial act" - approving requests for public financing by presidential candidates. McCain is expected to ask for the $84 million available this year for the general election.

"It would be a terrible situation for a candidate wanting to get public financing to not be able to get it," Hasen said.

:rooster

[Trueblue]

:dance

:party

:woot

[nixon]

[QUOTE=Ringo;195211]Here Jr is just one group of charges, among MANY, NOW dispute the findings, instead of trying to degrade the Site, CNN waterboy!!:mw:mw:godzilla

[Yellowdogtexan]

This is a major victory and a show of how weak bush is right now. Here is the statement from Senate Majority Leader Reid. http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/05/breaking_spakovsky_withdraws_a.php"I welcome the President's decision to withdraw the controversial nomination of Mr. von Spakovsky. It is an action I have repeatedly urged the President to take for more than six months. Democrats stood united in their opposition to von Spakovsky because of his long and well-documented history of working to suppress the rights of minorities and the elderly to vote. He was not qualified to hold any position of trust in our government.

"His withdrawal today is a victory for our electoral process. With Mr. von Spakovsky now removed, I anticipate that we will be able to swiftly put a functioning FEC in place. That too is what the American people deserve."

[Yellowdogtexan]

The silly voter suppression attorney had a piece in the WSJ that was so silly and pathetic that I was amused. He is complaining about being picked on simply because he wants to deny people the right to vote.

[Yellowdogtexan]

bush backed down and this idiot will not be on the Federal Election Commission. Rep. Keith Ellison had fun with von Spakovsky on Wednesday http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2008/07/ellison_slams_von_spakovsky_ov.phpELLISON: Now here's something that happened on the May 7th Indiana election. A dozen nuns and another unknown number of students were turned away from the polls Tuesday in the first use of Indiana's stringent voter ID law since it was upheld last week by the United State Supreme Court. Mr. von Spakovsky, you wanna stop nuns from voting?
VON SPAKOVSKY: [silence]

ELLISON: Why don't you want nuns to vote, Mr. von Spakovsky?

VON SPAKOVSKY: Congressman Ellison, uh-

ELLISON: I'm just curious to know.

VON SPAKOVSKY: Those individuals, uh, were told, were- knew that they had to get an ID, they could have easily done so. They could have voted, uh, by absentee ballot- uh, nursing homes under the law are able to get-

ELLISON: . . . Mr. von Spakovsky, are you aware that a 98-year old nun was turned away from the polls by a-

VON SPAKOVSKY: They all had passports-

ELLISON: Excuse me.

VON SPAKOVSKY: They had expired passports which meant that they could have gotten-

ELLISON: Mr. von Spakovsky, do you know a 98-year old nun was turned away from the polls by a sister who's in her order and who knew her, but had to turn her away because she didn't have a government-issued ID? That's okay with you?

VON SPAKOVSKY: Yes. . . The GOP is simply a bunch of nun haters