Out-of-state driver’s licenses, for example, are not valid photo IDs under the law.Who would think that they were?!
IN THE COMMENTS: Ignorance is Bliss said...
"Out-of-state driver’s licenses, for example, are not valid photo IDs under the law."And Original Mike, quoting the article, says:
Actually, they are valid photo IDs, that establish conclusively that you are not eligible to vote in Wisconsin because it is not your place of residence. If you wish to make Wisconsin your place of residence then you need to act like you live in Wisconsin which include changing your driver's license.
"It certainly alleviates a huge burden for students who would have to travel [to the Division of Motor Vehicles]. In the case of UW-Madison, they’d have to research a bus line they’re not used to and travel further down University Avenue than they’ve traveled before.”I think the issue is that out-of-state students tend to want to keep their home-state driver's license. So the question I have is whether a person with a current, non-Wisconsin driver's license is entitled to vote in Wisconsin? If not, the university should not be processing in-state IDs for persons who are not qualified to vote. The reason students should have to go to the DMV to get their IDs is so that they can replace out-of-state IDs with in-state IDs.
When did college students become children?
Posts
147 comments:
"Who would think that they were?!"
98.7% of Democrats.
Democrats!
"It certainly alleviates a huge burden for students who would have to travel [to the Division of Motor Vehicles]. In the case of UW-Madison, they’d have to research a bus line they’re not used to and travel further down University Avenue than they’ve traveled before.”
When did college students become children?
"But thousands of UW System out-of-state students wanting to vote in Wisconsin may not have a Wisconsin ID or other types of valid photo IDs. Out-of-state driver’s licenses, for example, are not valid photo IDs under the law."
What a bunch of crap this is.
"It certainly alleviates a huge burden for students who would have to travel [to the Division of Motor Vehicles]. In the case of UW-Madison, they’d have to research a bus line they’re not used to and travel further down University Avenue than they’ve traveled before.”
You'd think they were black, or elderly, or poor or something.
Out-of-state driver’s licenses, for example, are not valid photo IDs under the law.
Actually, they are valid photo IDs, that establish conclusively that you are not eligible to vote in Wisconsin because it is not your place of residence. If you wish to make Wisconsin your place of residence then you need to act like you live in Wisconsin which include changing your driver's license.
To quote the article " in the case of UW Madison they'd have to research a bus line they're not used to and travel further down University Avenue than they've traveled before."
I mean, we can't ask the little darlings to go outside their comfort zone can we? What a mean, mean, mean government we have!
To all you UW students out there and especially the United Council Executive Director, STOP YOUR EFFING WHINING! You are supposed to be the best of the best since you got into our illustrious university and yet you act like stupid imbeciles when it comes to stuff Iike this.
Are you going to tell your boss someday you can not do something because you'd have to learn to go somewhere new to accomplish it? My goodness, I am so sick the of the whining!
That out of state ID can be used at the bank, to board a plane, buy liquor, or any of the other MANY REASONS FOR ID that Curious George and others have argued over and over suggest that ID are a part of normal life.
But that legally valid ID that all other photo ID demanding people find perfectly acceptable for identifying th bearer .... no, that photo ID does not identify you well enough to vote in WI, just EVERY SINGLE OTHER USE in the state.
What a joke.
Does our state patrol accept them for driving in our state?
And yet out-of-state Driver's Licenses are valid IDs for flying. What does Wisconsin Voter Law know that TSA doesn't.
I can understand the source of confusion.
Are Passports valid? I'm guessing they wouldn't work either.
This certainly puts a crimp in the ol' method of double double voting: voting absentee in your home state and then again as a student in Madison.
Expect a a caterwaul.
But, Ignorance, if they do that, they will have to give up their second vote, in their home state.
It is all so unfair!
Students who think they can vote with an out-of-state driver's license, are probably misreporting their taxes.
But I'm actually curious from a sociological angle -- at what point does an out-of-state student decide to vote locally instead of voting by absentee ballot in the state he or she is from?
I suppose that some students identify with their place of study fairly easily. Maybe they'll stay in the college town forever. Maybe they'll move on. Either way, that lack of interest in returning to their home state means they might as well transfer their vote.
But that legally valid ID that all other photo ID demanding people find perfectly acceptable for identifying th bearer .... no, that photo ID does not identify you well enough to vote in WI, just EVERY SINGLE OTHER USE in the state.
What a joke.
Oh, it identifies you. It identifies you as someone who should be casting an out-of-state ballot for you legal state of residence. One citizen, one vote. Not one citizen, one vote per form of ID.
Do better.
This certainly puts a crimp in the ol' method of double double voting: voting absentee in your home state and then again as a student in Madison.
Because this was such a horrible commonplace problem.
So many solutions in search of a problem! No wonder there are so many laws on the books!
Euthanizing non-productive "useless eaters"? Progress!
Requiring proof that voters are eligible under the law? Fascist!
I guess I'm confused by the flip side as well.
Wouldn't WI law require residents of the state (as evidenced by the fact that they live and vote there) to you know, have a valid WI drivers license?
I always thought that your legal address, your voting address, and your drivers license address ought to be the same...
"In the case of UW-Madison, they’d have to research a bus line they’re not used to and travel further down University Avenue than they’ve traveled before.”
Because students never ever leave campus for any reason during the school year so figuring this out will be hard.
I guess no students have never gone to the Target that is walking distance from the Hill Farms DMV office either.
Privileged white kids who might have to take a bus farther than they are used to: being on the right side of oppression seems to wither the ability to do the very things poor blacks have to do every day. They might even have to sit by a black man on the bus -- guard your wallet, white boy!
It is turtles all the way down...
Are Passports valid? I'm guessing they wouldn't work either.
Again, if the passport says you live in Wisconsin, by all means vote in Wisconsin (in your district of residence too, please.)
Is this really so hard for our educated elite to understand?
How quaint that Wisconsin authorities seem to think that Wisconsin voters ought to be Wisconsins.
If students with out-of-state licenses can vote in Wisconsin, can I? Why should my living in South Texas interfere? I'll send for an absentee ballot.
Believing that a college ID would be valid ID for voting purposes isn't necessarily stupid (provided you're eligible to vote if your residency during the school year is adequate to establish residency for voting purposes). But if you think an out of state drivers license--which of course features an address IN ANOTHER STATE--would be sufficient to allow you to vote in this state, then you should be deemed forever too stupid to vote.
I can understand the source of confusion
Confuse & Conquer. That's a sign of a confident, capable leader who encourages all to participate in the great Wisconsin Comeback. Or, the great Kansas Comeback. Or 13 other GOP State Comebacks.
Downstream Mark is a different Mark than upstream Mark that downstream Mark quoted and responded to. That was confusing.
The Drill SGT said...
I guess I'm confused by the flip side as well.
Wouldn't WI law require residents of the state (as evidenced by the fact that they live and vote there) to you know, have a valid WI drivers license?
I always thought that your legal address, your voting address, and your drivers license address ought to be the same...
9/23/14, 8:46 AM
That is so "yesterday" thinking! Dems / libs should be free to vote whenever, wherever and as many times as they wish. Anything else is oppression.
There's two Mark's? I just thought he was schizophrenic.
The argument that voter ID laws shouldn't exist because ineligible voters voting in elections is "too rare to be a real problem" is a poor argument. If policymakers identify something that could become a problem--and logically, having people vote on other people's behalf or lie about who they are could certainly become a problem--they would be foolish not to take reasonable measures to prevent it.
I get of course that some voters (who tend to vote Democratic, which is why Democrats tend to oppose these laws) will be negatively impacted as they may not have drivers' licenses or the cost of getting a photo ID is a burden on them as they'd have to take off from work to get one and pay a fee that could be another day's wage. But then, the argument should be that the government imposing such a voting ID requirement should find ways to alleviate this burden--opening a mobile ID issuing station, waiving fees, or expanding hours for such offices. Arguing that voter fraud is not a problem and requiring ID is discriminatory only makes it look like you're trying to pull a fast one.
Because this was such a horrible commonplace problem.
It's apparently enough of a problem to get the usual Leftists in a spittle-flecked rage.
Listen, I kept my out-of-state drivers license all through college, and voted absentee every election. All the UW students can either learn how to use the Postal Service to cast ballots in their home states or, if they want to Put Scott Walker In His Place get off their asses and get to the DMV.
I'm pretty sure passports are valid.
Im the Good Mark.
Good Mark, give yourself an picture.
Wisconsin's DMV is certainly not confused:
You should notify WisDOT of your change of address within 10 days of your move.
That's how I became Original Mike. The Johnny Come Lately Mike was a Scientologist! I had to clear up that confusion pronto.
Mark said...
That out of state ID can be used at the bank, to board a plane, buy liquor, or any of the other MANY REASONS FOR ID that Curious George and others have argued over and over suggest that ID are a part of normal life.
But that legally valid ID that all other photo ID demanding people find perfectly acceptable for identifying th bearer .... no, that photo ID does not identify you well enough to vote in WI, just EVERY SINGLE OTHER USE in the state.
What a joke."
None of your examples are dependent on state residency like voting. For example you don't need to be a resident of WI to buy booze in WI.
Now who's the joke?
Mark @ 8:39 AM answers Althouse's question.
There is a dedicated bike lane from the Memorial Library on campus to the Hill Farms DMV -- a distance of 4.2 miles.
But then, the argument should be that the government imposing such a voting ID requirement should find ways to alleviate this burden--opening a mobile ID issuing station, waiving fees, or expanding hours for such offices. Arguing that voter fraud is not a problem and requiring ID is discriminatory only makes it look like you're trying to pull a fast one.
Both these things are true.
Actually, same-day voter registration and non-drivers ID issuance at polling places makes sense to me. Make the requirements for proof-of-residency the same as for getting a driver's license, Require a photo and fingerprint. (If you get snippy about that, do some variation on the "purple finger" regimen.) And make it free.
Oh, and you'd have to make if a felony to get the residents ID without giving up your out-of-state drivers license.
One person, one vote.
must...cheat...to...win.
How proud the GOP!
So what are the valid IDs for identification purposes?
We're talking about 2 forms of proof here: one that you fulfill the residency requirements (usually a bank statement, lease, utility bill, etc.) and one that shows you are over 18 and are who you say you are.
It's common sense that an out-of-state driver's license can't be used to prove residency, but there is no rational reason I can think of to prevent it being proof of age and identity.
I researched the UW campus to the Madison DMV bus option in about 4 mouse clicks....but of course I am a Marquette grad. But I can understand why UW students would have a tough time.
tim, if you want to use the out-of-state license as a second form of ID (for the picture) you also have to require that the person surrender the license, otherwise that person could still cast a vote in the home state.
That's why when you apply for a new license in a new state you have to surrender the old license. I have no idea if the states share information about when licenses have been surrendered, but at least it would reduce intentional voter fraud.
As Tim McGuire noted, nothing about being from another state invalidates the ID for use as identification for all state and federal purposes .... except this single purpose.
Residency is established in ways other than ID.
It's just common sense that the voting rules be changed two months from an election, and after tens of thousands of people have already voted.
It does seem that if a student wants to claim Wisconsin residency for the purpose of voting, they should be required to get a Wisconsin driver's license.
machine, how is the GOP saying voters should have to prove they're legal residents of the state and district "cheating"?
I get that getting a photo ID is burdensome. What makes your argument hard to square is that NOT having a photo ID is more burdensome still, unless you're a homeless person living under a bridge.
I'm not saying that homeless person shouldn't be able to vote: if they have the wherewithal to get to a polling place, they should be able to get a voters ID then and there, with the location of the underpass as their address.
But really, if cheating is going to be done by anyone, it's going to be done much more easily in an environment where nobody asks any questions.
"It's just common sense that the voting rules be changed two months from an election, and after tens of thousands of people have already voted."
Refresh my memory. When was the Voter ID law passed?
Wisconsin students admitting that they voted more than once doesn't mean that it actually happened, you know.
http://www.iowastatedaily.com/news/article_bd9207e2-17f8-5c1f-a88a-ef78c0e20a08.html?mode=jqm
It's just common sense that the voting rules be changed two months from an election, and after tens of thousands of people have already voted.
Citation(s) please. Also explain how any "rules change" will affect any absentee ballots already cast.
"It does seem that if a student wants to claim Wisconsin residency for the purpose of voting, they should be required to get a Wisconsin driver's license." - Original Mike
Fucking Fascist!
The article and the Democrat commenters arguments here are yet more proof that a lot of Democrats are morons.
Getting a photo ID is "burdensome"?
Put the bong down.
Why would you want to inconvenience and perhaps disenfranchise them like this, when they likely hold an out-of-state drivers license and student i.d. as their primary two photos?
What part of "holding an out-of-state driver license means you should be casting a ballot in that state" don't you smarter-than-republicans understand?
If you're smart enough to go to college, you're smart enough to get an absentee ballot from your home district.
Do better.
Tim - I understand that there's an Original Mike vs. Hitler comparison thread started over at Isthmus.
I get of course that some voters (who tend to vote Democratic, which is why Democrats tend to oppose these laws) will be negatively impacted as they may not have drivers' licenses or the cost of getting a photo ID is a burden on them as they'd have to take off from work to get one and pay a fee that could be another day's wage.
Except to hold a job, those disenfranchised would have needed to produce two forms of ID to even get the job in the first place.
Perhaps it was because I went to college in the Redest of Red States, but it never even occurred to me to NOT vote absentee in my less Red State. And if I was going to go to the trouble of declaring myself eligible to vote in the State I was going to school in, well I'd be doubly sure to get a valid Driver's license for said State for tuition residency purposes.
Citation(s) please. Also explain how any "rules change" will affect any absentee ballots already cast.
Because all those absentee ballots that were sent in were without photo ID requirements.
"It's an added requirement, when there is no evidence of voter cheating."
How blind are you!?!
Evidence of cheating by Wisconsin college students
Not just evidence, admissions. Or was every singe one of them a liar, but honest at the polls?
The complaints about how hard it is to get an ID are partisan horseshit meant to hide routine vote fraud by Democrats.
Why else would they oppose it so vehemently, or not come up with an alternative plan to protect vote integrity?
Voter fraud by the Democrats is so well known that certain places are known solely because of it.
The flack tells us that we are on target.
"I thought that was 18, and gone from home... ?" Fine! Get a Wis ID and give up your old one.
"Why should a person aged 18 and up still be declaring mom and pop's home address for voting purposes?"
They should be if that is where they are filing their state tax return.
So you're pretty much admitting: Wisconsin college students are being discouraged to vote in the states where they now reside and go to school?
You really just aren't getting that "legal residence" thing are you?
By the way, one shouldn't claim to understand "the scientific studies" and use the construction "barely NO voter fraud" in the same sentence. Particularly when one is casting aspersions on the education of others.
Given that the university IS issuing voter-ready IDs to all and sundry, there's not much reason for the outrage theater.
I still find the sociology interesting. Your residence is where you vote, pay taxes, register your car, get your freshwater fishing license, etc. This evidence of locality is important in a myriad bureaucratic ways.
It is the university that defines a standard for residency that is different than the state. Quote:
If you do not qualify as a Wisconsin resident, you will be assessed nonresident tuition. In determining residence status for tuition purposes, different standards are used than those which may be used for voting, paying taxes, etc. Individuals who come to Wisconsin primarily for educational purposes do not automatically qualify as Wisconsin residents for tuition purposes, even after living in Wisconsin a year or more.
It is this decree that assigns students to out-of-state limbo.
Requiring you prove you are who you say you are is a reasonable thing for Government to be involved in.
Your binary assumption as to what I am, or should be for, government wise, is pure bush league.
"In the case of UW-Madison, they’d have to research a bus line they’re not used to and travel further down University Avenue than they’ve traveled before."
The horror.
"Why does Wisconsin want me to spend my precious on-campus study and (clean) social time tromping around off-campus to the DMV just to wait in their gov.t bureacracy for me to obtain an otherwise unneeded identification card..."
Maybe because of the recent history of Wisconsin college students voting multiple times?
Naaah!
"Let them vote! Let them Vote!" and Let them Vote again!
The question is whether the ID is to establish identity or residency.
For example, to get a resident permit to park your car in the city of Cambridge, Massachusetts, a driver's license won't do. You need to produce either:
(1) Current utility bill (gas, electric, telephone or cable) dated for service at your residency within the last 30 days. This must be in the same name as the vehicle registration. Cell phone bills do not apply.
(2) 2 pieces of mail received at your Cambridge address within the last 30 days. This must be in the same name as the vehicle registration.
"Why does Wisconsin want me to spend my precious on-campus study and (clean) social time tromping around off-campus to the DMV just to wait in their gov.t bureacracy for me to obtain an otherwise unneeded identification card..."
Cry me a river, build a bridge and get over it to the DMV office and get a valid WI ID.
"Except to hold a job, those disenfranchised would have needed to produce two forms of ID to even get the job in the first place."
That depends on whether the forms of ID required to get the job are also accepted for voting--not all voting ID proposals have the same standards. Also, the ID you may have used to get the job years ago may be expired by the time you're planning to vote, and you'd need new ID. In my case, when I moved to Maryland from DC, I held the same job (and had used my ID from DC when onboarding) but wouldn't become eligible to vote in Maryland until I got my Maryland drivers license (not a problem for me, as I could take time off work to hit the DMV).
Then of course there are the elderly people with expired drivers licenses or who for whatever reason don't have the IDs required for voting.
My point isn't that voting ID laws should be prohibited because they place any burden on any individuals, it is simply that for some individuals these burdens exist and policymakers need to be vigilant about alleviating these burdens as much as possible. Our country has an ugly history from the Jim Crow era of making it extra difficult for some people to vote, and while the recent voter ID laws aren't motivated by racial animus as those Jim Crow laws were, we shouldn't be cavalier about voting rights any more than we should be cavalier about the potential for voter fraud.
"Why do you assume that they are allowing Mom and Dad to claim them as dependents still?"
Why do you assume mom and dad are claiming them? A student in WI from South Dakota, Washington or Florida doesn't pay state income taxes if they maintain their residence at the parent's house. But if you vote in WI, you better become a resident of WI and not have it both ways.
The University of Wisconsin, like many colleges across the US has many foreign students. A university ID has nothing to do with citizenship. What state would allow someone to vote because they have a college ID?
"garage mahal said...
It's just common sense that the voting rules be changed two months from an election, and after tens of thousands of people have already voted."
They were changed well over a year ago.
Wow, some of you!
What part of only one vote per person do you not understand? Of course a student ID identifies a student for any number of purposes. If one wishes to vote in a particular state, however, one should have to prove residency in that state. Simple.
We are not talking about fake ID's to get an underage person into a bar. This is a serious issue. It disenfranchises no one to require they prove their eligibility to vote. No one has the right to vote in more than one place per election.
States can create programs to make ID acquisition easier for the elderly and infirm, but the simply lazy just need to buck up and do what needs to be done to be able to vote. It seems to me that if one is receiving any kind of payment or program help from the government they should have a valid ID, but that is probably being naive on my part.
So sorry if it is a burden to walk, bike or bus somewhere to do this. When I think of the people for whom voting is literally taking their life in their own hands because of death threats, I have zero sympathy for the whiners.
This is not a poll tax, this is a simple matter of trying to keep things honest. Now who could object to that?....I think we know....
If you don't qualify for in-state tuition you should not be able to vote. Maybe state universities should be required to charge in-state tuition to anyone registered to vote in the state.
The assumption that non-driving urban students cannot get valid ID at the DMV without having to learn to drive isn't racist, it's just ignorant.
"So giving them two weeks to study up to be able to obtain a drivers license seems like a pretty steep learning curve to me."
You do know that the DMV issues free state ID cards -- no studying needed.
They were changed well over a year ago.
Then how did thousands of people vote under the old rules? Answer: you don't give a fuck and you're totally on board with fucking Wisconsinites over if it helps Dear Leader.
The idea that requiring an ID to vote is a call to "toughen up" college students is a laugher too.
I think that based on the above quoted official pronouncement from the University of Wisconsin spokesperson that travel of 4 miles is an intolerable burden, there should be no university activity of any kind requiring a student to travel more than 4 miles from his place of residence and that no student can voluntarily do so as it would diminish the students who choose not to.
Pretending it's "too hard" to get an ID card is a laugher.
Also travel to a polling place if that travel is greater than 4 miles.
Pick a single place to declare your residency and then comply with the laws of that residency. It is not hard, even, if one has to take a hour within the next 40 days to do so.
I've voted absentee from other states multiple times in my life due to attending school or with the military. I have also established residency several times as I have moved around in life on a more permanent basis. Never been disenfranchised by my state of residence because I understood that I had to take certain actions within a certain time frame in order to vote.
Again, for the "barely NO voter fraud" crowd:
Task Force Finds More Ballots Cast Than Registered Voters
The law was intentionally written so that most of the student IDs in the state are not valid for voting purposes. The attempt to suppress the vote is plain and obvious.
The law was intentionally written so that most of the student IDs in the state are not valid for voting purposes. The attempt to suppress the vote is plain and obvious.
They know this, but they will go and on and on like they are trying to preserve integrity in elections. Of course they can't come out and say their ideas are shit and unpopular and don't want the masses to vote them out. So they cheat.
madisonfella said...
The law was intentionally written so that most of the student IDs in the state are not valid for voting purposes. The attempt to suppress the vote is plain and obvious.
9/23/14, 10:39 AM
Sorry but GOOD! A Student ID is no replacement for proof of residency. You are a resident for the purposes of voting, by the address on your DMV issued ID (and some others). A student ID does not do that. One person, one vote. You want to vote where you go to school? Get a DMV issued ID with that as your legal address AND give up whatever other DMV ID you have so that you only vote once.
This is not rocket science. Why are you being so obtuse?
"Mark said...
Madison skews very left, and I wonder how much of that skew actually comes from UW students from Wisconsin casting ballots out-of-district?"
It would be very left otherwise. Very left.
There is a lot of confusion here with proof of identication as opposed to proof of residence. You have to supply proof of residence when registering to vote. When you present your driver's license in order to vote, you are not being asked to provide proof of residence; if you registered before election day, you've already done that. You're presenting your DL as proof of identification. An out-of-state DL would prove that, but Wisconsin law does not allow an out-of-state DL to be offered as proof of ID.
"Less than a handful of Marquette boys... no threat to democracy, not representative of all or even many Wisconsin students. "
Ha ha ha! No threat to Democrats is what you mean, isn't it?
In Dane County, 30,000 people voted same day with utility bills, etc, as proof of residency.
Gore carried Wisconsin by 6,000 votes.
But no need to check and see if these voters only voted once, even though many admitted to voting multiple times later.
Almost a third of a thousand Wisconsin students who were actually asked admitted to voting multiple times.
Jman said...
There is a lot of confusion here with proof of identication as opposed to proof of residence. You have to supply proof of residence when registering to vote. When you present your driver's license in order to vote, you are not being asked to provide proof of residence; if you registered before election day, you've already done that. You're presenting your DL as proof of identification. An out-of-state DL would prove that, but Wisconsin law does not allow an out-of-state DL to be offered as proof of ID.
9/23/14, 10:50 AM
What did you use when you registered to vote, to prove you are an actual resident? Use that when you actually go to vote. I believe whatever you used when you registered is acceptable as ID when you actually go to vote.
Actually, they are valid photo IDs, that establish conclusively that you are not eligible to vote in Wisconsin because it is not your place of residence.
Yes, when you change residency you are supposed to update your drivers license. I don't know what Wisconsin's rules are on that.
It seems like there is often a conflict between where students are from and where they live - but there are rules for obtaining residency and those should be followed. Otherwise, you basically vote from your parents location. That's what I did in college.
By the way, in Wisconsin, you can use a WI DL to vote even if the address of the DL is not current. In fact, the DL could also be expired since the last general election and still be valid for voting purposes. s. 5.02 (6m), WI stats.
o quote the article " in the case of UW Madison they'd have to research a bus line they're not used to and travel further down University Avenue than they've traveled before."
I showed up in a new city at 18 for orientation and managed to get around metro and bus lines with no trouble. It's not complicated. Sheesh.
Requiring you prove you are who you say you are is a reasonable thing for Government to be involved in.
Sorry, I can't agree. If you are under suspicion of a crime, maybe. But just in ordinary life? The Govt can please leave me alone.
An individual with a nonexpired, non-Wisconsin driver's license is entitled to vote if he or she is at least 18 years old and has established residency in the state (28 days at an in-state address). Oh, and not a felon.
If you respond to the commenter Mary, whose comments are ALWAYS deleted, I am forced to delete your comment too.
Keep that in mind.
Do not discuss deletions in the thread. Email me if you have questions.
"An individual with a nonexpired, non-Wisconsin driver's license is entitled to vote if he or she is at least 18 years old and has established residency in the state (28 days at an in-state address). Oh, and not a felon."
Yeah, but estoppel says that students get to vote as many times as they like.
"..o quote the article " in the case of UW Madison they'd have to research a bus line they're not used to and travel further down University Avenue than they've traveled before.""
Gosh! Ten year old Guatemalans navigate 1500 miles of hostile terrain and cross the Rio Grande to get in the US but UW students are confused by bus schedules.
Yes, when you change residency you are supposed to update your drivers license
In the past -- maybe it's different now -- that didn't mean you got a new license in WI. But the official record on a computer somewhere changed.
The irony here is that people wisely keep their out-state licenses for as long as possible because of the absolute horror of having to deal with the DMV. Yet these people want to now use those out-of-state licenses to vote for candidates who will do all they can to DMV-ize more and more of our lives.
"t UW students are confused by bus schedules."
It is like the old Florida bumper sticker "Honk if you voted for Gore! (It's the big button in the middle of the steering wheel)
In lieu of a driver's license, an individual can present an unexpired university or college ID, but will also have to present proof of enrollment in order to vote.
Madisondude: The law was intentionally written so that most of the student IDs in the state are not valid for voting purposes. The attempt to suppress the vote is plain and obvious.
Garage: They know this, but they will go and on and on like they are trying to preserve integrity in elections. Of course they can't come out and say their ideas are shit and unpopular and don't want the masses to vote them out. So they cheat.
Meanwhile in the REAL world student IDs have not been valid for a lot of things off-campus, such as alcohol purchases. And whomever mentioned TSA upstream must have been thinking about minor children, who can travel on a student ID.
Stop spinning Garage. The reason the law is in force now is because your side fought it until they lost once too often and so NOW the injunction is lifted. I know you swerve between thinking us conservatives are caveman-level stupid, pawing at our secret routers; and yet we are also evil geniuses who throw a last-minute monkey-wrench into the latest Democratic fraud scheme. But maybe we are just ordinary Joes who don't see a huge burden on asking voters to vote where they live and be who they claim to be. Occam's razor and all that.
"Sorry, I can't agree. If you are under suspicion of a crime, maybe. But just in ordinary life? The Govt can please leave me alone."
The irony in your statement is that the topic of discussion is choosing who the government is?
Left Bank of the Charles said...
The question is whether the ID is to establish identity or residency.
For example, to get a resident permit to park your car in the city of Cambridge, Massachusetts, a driver's license won't do. You need to produce either:
(1) Current utility bill (gas, electric, telephone or cable) dated for service at your residency within the last 30 days. This must be in the same name as the vehicle registration. Cell phone bills do not apply.
(2) 2 pieces of mail received at your Cambridge address within the last 30 days. This must be in the same name as the vehicle registration.
My youngest son has been in the Navy for 21 years, most of the time stationed in California. All of that time, he was listed as a Colorado resident. He had a Colorado driver's license, paid state income taxes, and voted by absentee ballot. A few weeks ago, he was in Colorado and tried to renew his driver's license. They wouldn't do it because he didn't have proof of a local address despite paying taxes to the state for 21 years. He's now getting a California license. Whether he officially changes his state of residency remains to be determined. California tax rates are a lot higher than Colorado's.
"In Dane County, 30,000 people voted same day with utility bills, etc, as proof of residency."
Can you provide a link to that? I'd like to have it.
"MadisonMan said...
In the past -- maybe it's different now -- that didn't mean you got a new license in WI. But the official record on a computer somewhere changed."
Now you get a new physical license...at least I just did a few months back. In the past, you got a sticker that affixed to the back of your license showing new residence.
"...that’s a perfectly good ID for all other UW purposes, but it’s not in the acceptable list for voting purposes.”
So, voting in government and polysub elections is among the "UW purposes?"
For the in-state tuition thing, is not the easiest just to tell them you are in the country illegally?
Why should a non-citizen of the state have a vote in how the state is run?
Can anybody provide a logical reason?
And they are only concerned if the student will vote Democratic. If the student was a conservative from the South, rest assured, UW-Madison wouldn't give a shit about their problems voting.
But that legally valid ID that all other photo ID demanding people find perfectly acceptable for identifying th bearer .... no, that photo ID does not identify you well enough to vote in WI, just EVERY SINGLE OTHER USE in the state.
Why should a resident of Alaska have a vote in Wisconsin's government?
I'm from SC. I think I'll demand an absentee ballot and promise a lawsuit if declined.
Why should my never having stepped foot in the step restrict my RIGHTS?
I'm pretty sure passports are valid.
If you live in Wisconsin, probably. The joke is that they're trying to get non-Wisconites to vote for Governor.
Because they will have to deal with the repurcussions of their decision.
Don't worry --- we had the same issue at my school. My state told them to go fuck themselves and vote absentee in their home state.
But we don't have the intellectual firepower of Madison.
must...cheat...to...win.
Cheating, of course, is having the voters for a state's election be residents of said state. Not just visitors who are there temporarily.
My state told them to go fuck themselves and vote absentee in their home state.
Mostly places don't want college students voting where the college is, unless they go through the whole switchover to residence. This is even an issue in my state, because the college town doesn't want college students voting in that town, as opposed to the one they are from. (there are a couple big colleges in a dry town 30 miles away)
Which makes sense, if you think about it. If you have more college students than adults with real jobs, houses, tax burdens etc voting in your town, lord knows what kind of decisions would be made. Most students are fine with this, a few aren't and go through the process to get switched over.
I'd think that people with out of state licenses not being able to vote would be a sign that the Voter ID system was working.
Todd wrote:
This is not rocket science. Why are you being so obtuse?
If he's having trouble with this, imagine if he had to deal with rocket science.
The irony in your statement is that the topic of discussion is choosing who the government is?
Is that ironic? I don't know. Contradictory maybe.
I am consistent in wanting fewer laws and to be left alone. Voter ID laws go against that in two ways.
"Voter ID laws go against that in two ways."
Looking the other way regarding rampant voter fraud has worked out great for libertarians in Chicago, hasn't it?
"Which makes sense, if you think about it. If you have more college students than adults with real jobs, houses, tax burdens etc voting in your town, lord knows what kind of decisions would be made. Most students are fine with this, a few aren't and go through the process to get switched over."
I think it has more to do with the permanency of the resident--someone staying at college but keeping a permanent residence for tax purposes, etc. in their home state isn't going to have much attachment or stake in the state where the college is. There's an implication that the student will leave once they graduate or transfer. Granted, that could also happen with any other new resident, but at least if they're required to go through establishing a permanent residency (and get drivers' license, etc.) there's a better chance that they plan to stay for the long haul, and then have more of an interest in the outcome of the elections.
I understand why some would want to change that--if your candidate is likely to win over the college kids, you want every voter you can get.
madfella,
" The attempt to suppress the vote is plain and obvious. "
The attempt to suppress the vote of those who ineligible to do so is admirable, and much appreciated.
Larry J.,
No way should your son be changing his residency unless he's decided he wants to. It's a matter of federal law that active-duty military are allowed to keep their legal residency at somewhere else than their current duty station; he should seek help from someone in his chain of command and/or the US Representative for the district that he's registered in.
"I am consistent in wanting fewer laws and to be left alone."
I don't see how requiring you to identify yourself at the polling place is "not leaving you alone". You want to be left alone? Don't walk in the door.
I share your leanings. Unfortunately, the left does not. Elections matter, and voting integrity is imperative.
Turns out, there's nothing illegal about voting in two states
It is very much illegal. Class IV felony.
Ignorance of the law is not a defense.
"I didn't INTEND to vote in two places" is no more of a defense than "I didn't INTEND to kill somebody".
You are confusing registration with voting, which is a conscious act that you cannot conceivably state was done unintentionally.
When you're wrong on such BASIC things, it's hard to take anything you write seriously.
""I am consistent in wanting fewer laws and to be left alone."
We all have the right to a secret ballot, but we don't have a right to hide who we are when we vote because voting (picking who gets to represent us in government) is a public act.
The bank teller read the note he had been given by the man at the window; "Give me the money and leave me alone."
Have to get the out of state indoctrinated plebes in to the booth no matter what the legal, moral or ethical consequences.
This is outright fraud on the part of the University of Wisconsin.
Another example of their proclaimed special citizenship. What a slap in the face to those that work the jobs and the land. An even bigger slap to the in-state families wrought with student loan debt, while UW fills its savings accounts.
I can't wait till the debt bubble bursts. Tax payers will get stuck with the bill, but places like UW will have to trim fat. Good luck in the real world.
Kirk Parker said...
Larry J.,
No way should your son be changing his residency unless he's decided he wants to. It's a matter of federal law that active-duty military are allowed to keep their legal residency at somewhere else than their current duty station; he should seek help from someone in his chain of command and/or the US Representative for the district that he's registered in.
Yes, he can keep his Colorado residency and keep paying the state income taxes, he just can't renew his driver's license. So, other than the lower tax rate, how does he benefit in any way by maintaining Colorado residency. He pays thousands of dollars a year in state income taxes in exchange for squat.
No, Original Mike, they accepted whatever drivers license that matched the person and proved their identity.
They did not only allow customers to use their service if their Photo identification was from In-state.
The bank teller....
is not the Government.
And in fact, I can shop around until I find the bank (or Credit Union) that I prefer.
Gusty
How much are they paying you per comment?
It is very much illegal. Class IV felony. When you're wrong on such BASIC things, it's hard to take anything you write seriously.
Tell it to the group that was defending the actions of this particular Republican who was voting in two different states. I was simply passing along their explanation of why what she did isn't considered illegal.
Larry J.,
" he just can't renew his driver's license"
Is is sure this is legit? Who can he talk to in his chain of command (whoever sees to the 'welfare and morale' aspects, I would guess) abut this issue?
If UW is scrambling to arm their out of state students with Wisconsin ID's, isn't that an admission that they know pre voter ID practices were not above board? I guess they're not stupid. Just amoral and unethical.
Exactly why the judges ruled the State is compelled to promote integrity. Every state has a concentrated body of College Administrators, fully prepared to cheat.
The left claims voter fraud is non-existent, while UW engages in mass fraud right out in the open.
Tell it to the group that was defending the actions of this particular Republican who was voting in two different states
A group you cite has no knowledge of law and that absolves you?
Hardly.
There is no way to ACCIDENTALLY vote in two states in one election.
Them being wrong and you citing them as evidence, again, makes it hard to take what you write seriously.
I was simply passing along their explanation of why what she did isn't considered illegal.
And you cited a source that is blatantly incorrect.
That, again, absolves you how?
I don't know the law in Wisconsin but I recently had the occasion to research the law in Oregon. There, you are required to obtain an Oregon driver's license within 30 days after you establish residency. If Wisconsin's law is the same (a big if), then these students claiming Wisconsin residency for voting purposes are all violating Wisconsin law. I think that is unlikely. The legal test for residency is the place where you intend to remain indefinitely. For almost all out-of-state students in Wisconsin, that place was their home before they left for school and it never changed. Ergo, their residency never changed and they are not required to obtain Wisconsin driver's licenses nor eligible to vote in Wisconsin.
Something I learned today...if you can't leave your house and vote absentee you are exempt from the ID requirement.
Good.
Why should a person aged 18 and up still be declaring mom and pop's home address for voting purposes?
For the same reason that illegal immigrants should still be declaring their "home address" for voting purposes, silly. Because we are still a nation of laws when it comes to voting.
Are you that daft?
I jumped through all kinds of hoops to get in-state residency when I moved to another state to attend school. But it gave me the right to vote in that state and negated my right to vote in the one I left. Tough shit if you don't play by the rules.
Quite standing up for cheaters.
And you cited a source that is blatantly incorrect.
And you've cited no sources that shows their statement to be incorrect, blatantly or otherwise. It is hard to take you seriously when you only chant "wrong! wrong!" without providing anything to back up your claim.
Exactly which law did Kathy Myalls break?
Wisconsin law clearly gives students the right to register and vote where they attend school.[13] Generally, your residency is considered to be where you currently live “without any present intention to move.”[14]
[14] Wis. Stat. Ann. § 6.10(1)
[15] Wis. Stat. Ann. § 6.10(12)
http://www.brennancenter.org/analysis/student-voting-guide-wisconsin
MadMan,
"Something I learned today...if you can't leave your house and vote absentee you are exempt from the ID requirement.
Good."
Wrong! This is bad; very bad. I've read enough accounts of vote manipulation at nursing homes and managed-care facilities to believe that they are all made up.
madfella,
Nothing Wisconsin does in its laws can get around the issue of voting in multiple jurisdictions. It's perfectly fine if WI wants to enable any transient student to vote in their elections -- though if I had some spare $$$ I'd love to fund a lawsuit claiming that anyone to whom the state grants that right must be considered a state resident for any and all other purposes, including in-state tuition. You've made your bed, you f*cking leftie legislators, now lie in it and see your financial catastrophe come even faster!
But... please pay attention ... nothing WI does in its laws can make it legal for a person to claim residence in 2 different states for the purposes of voting twice in the same election!
I don't give the faintest damn whether WI is strict or lenient about granting resident status to transient students, but would consider it well worth starting American Civil War II over an attempt to give such people 2 votes in the same election where I am given only 1.
besides, doesnt voter id laws require the states/govt to give FREE govt issued voter id cards to legal residents of said state?
But... please pay attention ... nothing WI does in its laws can make it legal for a person to claim residence in 2 different states for the purposes of voting twice in the same election!
Nobody is saying that voting twice in the same election should be allowed. What is being discussed is if students should be required to vote in the state they came from, rather than the one they currently live in.
I've read enough accounts of vote manipulation at nursing homes and managed-care facilities to believe that they are all made up.
I'm glad you think the accounts of manipulation are all made up. I do too.
If you want to take steps to prevent, say, a WWII Veteran (who does not drive and who is confined to his house by the infirmities of age) from voting, by all means go for it. I can't think the optics of that campaign will reflect well on you.
madfella,
"What is being discussed is if students should be required to vote in the state they came from, rather than the one they currently live in."
Who's discussing that? Nobody here that I can see, not even you! The point being discussed here arose because of the statement that University ID by itself is not valid ID for voting being enrolled in the University does not in itself establish resident status. D you see anything in that statement about whether student should be required (or, alternatively, prohibited) from establishing residency by the normal means of doing so?
Sorry, MadMan, I kind of garbled up what I was trying to say.
Rather, I've read too many such accounts to believe they are all fabricated. Does that clarify my meaning?
And spare me the bad-optics nonsense, ok? Yes, of course, those operating in bad faith can make great hay out of such a story, but all that means is Yet One More Bad Thing Done By Party Hacks. Ho hum.
Best article on double voting
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2004/10/people_who_vote_twice.html
Wisconsin makes no effort to find double voters. Some states have started to check this but GAB has not.
Post a Comment