[The federal district judge Lynn] Adelman found some 300,000 people in Wisconsin do not have IDs and wrote the voter ID law would "prevent more legitimate votes from being cast than fraudulent votes." He ruled there was no rational basis for the law because voter impersonation — the only kind of fraud the voter ID law would curb — is nonexistent or virtually nonexistent....Later today, we should be able to get to audio of the argument here by hitting the "Today" button. The argument is the first of the morning, and the judges are Easterbrook, Sykes, and Tinder.
Friday's oral arguments come less than two months after the Wisconsin Supreme Court upheld the voter ID law in a pair of cases. One was decided 5-2; the other 4-3.
September 12, 2014
Wisconsin voter ID law is up for oral argument in the 7th Circuit today.
The Cap Times reports:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
85 comments:
"Adelman found some 300,000 people in Wisconsin do not have IDs and wrote the voter ID law would "prevent more legitimate votes from being cast than fraudulent votes."
Even if that is true (big "if") why does it matter?
there's a big difference between virtually nonexistent and nonexistent and voter fraud has been proven to exist. Every fraudulent vote cancels a legal vote. Sometimes the rights of the one overrule the rights of the many. The person's vote that has been cancelled by a fraudulent vote suffers clear damage. In India, all voters have a free, government issued picture ID. We should be able to do and require the same. A requirement to register in advance and receive that ID should be considered a minimal and necessary condition to vote. We should expend the funds necessary to achieve this.
Adelman found some 300,000 people in Wisconsin do not have IDs and wrote the voter ID law would "prevent more legitimate votes from being cast than fraudulent votes."
He presumes all 300,000 are citizens?
I have a lot in-laws that are illegal.
"found some 300,000" Wow! That's impressive. I once found me some pine nuts.
There is no need for a hearing with extreme leftwing Democrat 20 year Wisconsin state senator, Judge Lynn Adelman on the case. Adelman is a leftist ideologue.
Charlie Sykes ex-wife. Wheeeee!
Adelman found some 300,000 people in Wisconsin do not have IDs and wrote the voter ID law would "prevent more legitimate votes from being cast than fraudulent votes.
Anyone who is legally entitled to vote can follow some simple steps to ensure that they are allowed to vote.
Anyone whose vote is being canceled by a fraudulent vote has absolutely no legal recourse.
The proponents of no-voter ID are almost tempting fate -- voter impersonation doesn't happen so let's bring it on -- see if it does happen. Of course, then it will be too late for a nation of laws.
God help them for they know not what they do.
Democrats know voter fraud helps them. So they are against limiting voting to legitimate voters.
lit said...
God help them for they know not what they do.
Oh, they know exactly what they're doing, with malice and forethought.
Does "do not have IDs" = "cannot get IDs"?
If the statement was " drivers do not have car insurance", would that be an argument that car insurance should not be mandatory, or that people need to get themselves car insurance?
https://www.projectveritas.com/voter-fraud-eric-holder-in-washington-dc/
300,000 people don't have ID. So what's stopping them from getting it? Should legitimate voters have their voting rights diluted to accommodate those who are too feckless to take the trouble to get ID?
The judge claims the ID requirement would prevent more legitimate votes than fraudulent ones. Even if that were true, it's not the courts' place to fine-tune the legislature's efficiency.
Requiring ID does not place an undue burden on the exercise of a citizen's right to vote.
Oh, I get it!
This time the federal courts will find they must intercede in a state court's business and all that "Doctrine" Althouse was mentioning w/rt the John Doe investigations can be safely ignored.
Awesome!
I'm guessing the "garage mahal" and "madisonfella" types will unsurprisingly switch their views 180 degrees now.
Meanwhile, I get to remain consistent. The Democrats who would deprive fellow citizens of their civil rights (freedom of speech, freedom of religion) in the John Doe case are the same Democrats who support subversion of civil rights (voting by eligible voters) in the Voter ID case are wrong for the same reasons in both cases.
When the tumult erupted here in Texas over the onerousness of getting a picture ID, I looked up the requirements for applying for food stamps. The website advised prospective applicants to bring a picture ID. I have never heard it argued that is unreasonable. The whole controversy is manufactured, because it disproportionately disadvantages Democrats--at least in most states. I don't argue Republicans as a class are necessarily more ethical, but we do seem less adept at certain outright frauds.
The Bancroft Library at U.C., Berkeley, requires photo ID. I am surprised the student body there isn't out demonstrating against this outrageous discrimination.
Requiring ID does not place an undue burden on the exercise of a citizen's right to vote.
In your opinion. What is the average distance between some non-IDed person's house and the closest DMV? If you don't drive, how do you get there?
The one in Ashland, for example -- the only one in Ashland Co -- is only open T/Th.
"Adelman found some 300,000 people in Wisconsin do not have IDs and wrote the voter ID law would "prevent more legitimate votes from being cast than fraudulent votes."
It's not the judge's job to determine necessity or even efficacy — only legality.
Forget voter ID.
I think you should be required to show proof that you paid taxes as a condition of being allowed to vote. Kind of like a stockholder at a corporate annual meeting.
I tired of people with no "skin in the game" making decisions of what to do with my "skin in the game".
300,000 people.
Not just illegals as those above have pointed out.
How many are under 18? I'd wager the entire population of Wisconsin under age 11 has no ID's.
Anyone want to challenge the 300k number? There are 4.4 million people of voter age and 7% don't have any form of picture ID? I like to see the statistical analysis that supports 300k.
How many of the 300k actually vote? If it is very low, then the number of people "suppressed" may be lower that the number of fraudulent votes prevented by such a law.
T J Sawyer: "The Bancroft Library at U.C., Berkeley, requires photo ID."
Venezuelans, under the enlightened leadership of their hard left government, requires ID to PURCHASE FOOD.
And the lefties looooove that government.
Is this the right time to mention that obama/Holder don't make all the illegals show ID to board flights?
CWJ:
Don't forget all the old folks in rest homes who don't have valid IDs. Those people -- even the incompetent ones -- need to be allowed to vote!
MadisonMan said...
Requiring ID does not place an undue burden on the exercise of a citizen's right to vote.
In your opinion. What is the average distance between some non-IDed person's house and the closest DMV? If you don't drive, how do you get there?
The one in Ashland, for example -- the only one in Ashland Co -- is only open T/Th.
Maybe you get there the same way you get to the voting booth, which is only open on Tuesday. The same people who work the "get out vote" campaign and do a "get a voter ID" campaign.
"Is this the right time to mention that obama/Holder don't make all the illegals show ID to board flights?"
What does this mean?
I would argue one out of every ten Americans is not a citizen and that warrants a Voter ID law and also should warrant proof of citizenship when one registers to vote.
"The same people who work the "get out vote" campaign [could] do a "get a voter ID" campaign."
That's an excellent point. Why don't they? {/rhetorical}
Original Mike said...
"Is this the right time to mention that obama/Holder don't make all the illegals show ID to board flights?"
What does this mean?
This is what the National Border Patrol Council (Border Patrol Union) has stated publicly:
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Texas/2014/07/11/Exclusive-TSA-Allowing-Illegals-to-Fly-Without-Verifiable-ID-Says-Border-Patrol-Union
Orig Mike- DHS has allowed the poor wittle undocumented illegals to board planes with no ID.
You can try to google it if you'd lie and you will see the mimeographed paper they give them so they can get through airport security.
@Drago: Are these flights chartered by the Feds or are they general aviation?
Thanks, AJ.
Why are judges permitted to base their opinions on their own predictions?
We know from history that data presented in amicus briefs can be an absolute fabrication by design, but this data could provide the supporting evidence for the judge's opinion.
"Is this the right time to mention that obama/Holder don't make all the illegals show ID to board flights?"
What does this mean?
You cannot transport undocumented travelers around the United States on airplanes without a valid photo ID through our commercial aviation system. The DOJ has created an exception process to people that can claim they have no documentation to be in the United States.
This is general aviation.
http://dailysignal.com/2014/08/25/illegal-immigrant-air-tsa-allows-illegal-immigrants-board-planes-without-ids/
Ramzi Yousef traveled around the United States prior to the construction of the 1993 World Trade Center bomb with similar "documents to appear".
NBC2 news in Ft Myers Florida found over 100 registered voters that where not citizens.
MadisonMan said...
In your opinion. What is the average distance between some non-IDed person's house and the closest DMV? If you don't drive, how do you get there?
Back in the 1930's the Burke Co. (NC) Democrat Party paid my Democrat voting Grandpaw to take his A Model Pickup around the county and ferry voters into town to the polling place come election day.
The Wisconsin Democrat Party can't rent some vans and do the same for voters who don't have ID?
The one in Ashland, for example -- the only one in Ashland Co -- is only open T/Th.
Cool! Ashland County is a deep blue county. They are the wrong kind of voters.
I can't believe this country is so far gone that this kind of idiotic left-wing BS is even considered worthy of a judicial docket. Even Humpty Dumpty would be embarrassed to make such a stupid argument.
So Garage, is Diane Sykes being the ex-wife of a radio talk show host more or less significant than John Chisholm's wife being a rabidly anti-Walker teacher's union steward?
Because neither you nor the press thought to mention one of these facts.
Don't forget all the old folks in rest homes who don't have valid IDs. Those people -- even the incompetent ones -- need to be allowed to vote!
With the "assistance" of their caregivers, I assume?
from reporter at court:
Judge Easterbrook searched for new DMV rules on IDs on his computer during arguments and said he `only found a press release' - @news3jessica
To quote Rick Perry `oops!'
so the people without ids can't get ids?
So Garage, is Diane Sykes being the ex-wife of a radio talk show host more or less significant than John Chisholm's wife being a rabidly anti-Walker teacher's union steward
I would say less because Chisholm's wife isn't a judge. Rabidly anti-Walker teacher's union steward? How the hell do you know that?
Is there another kind of teacher's union steward in Wisconsin?
I went to the Sarah Palin tea party event in Madison looking for a sweet demure union member, but I couldn't see or hear any because the moderates around me kept screaming fuck you at a fourteen year old girl.
He ruled there was no rational basis for the law
What does that have to do with anything?
Peter:
Those people helping those old, incompetent senior citizens are public servants. They should be praised for their efforts. And I'm sure they would never deign to debase themselves by stooping to partisan political maneuvering.
We are lucky to have such people in our midst.
Also, I refuse to use the [sarc] tag on this one. Do the freakin' math.
garage: "ow the hell do you know that?"
Asks the guy who claims to know how people voted in the sanctity of a voting booth.
"What is the average distance between some non-IDed person's house and the closest DMV? If you don't drive, how do you get there?"
Fine, no ID, your finger is dipped in indelible ink. So you can only illegally vote once.
Or you are photographed on site, and you image entered into a database.
The rest of us are in govt databases, with our images.
What Igv said. 300,000 is an improbable number.
Adelson "found" 300,000 without ID? 7% of the electorate?
We need that guy doing border patrol in Arizona and Texas!
Doesn't pass the laugh test. Maybe Adelson extrapolated the 300k number somehow. That's likely going to be the explanation. I'd like to see the method. 300,000. 7%. Big numbers.
Igv, given average voter turnout of about 50%, and assuming that those with no ID vote as frequently (once each election, natch), it's already 150,000.
Names, Adelson. Pictures. Maybe a group picture somewhere. "WE KNEAD VOTER WRITES!"
People are ignoring a more pressing issue: Shouldn't people with multiple personality disorders be given multiple votes? And what about imaginary friends? Do you want to live in a State that suppresses the votes of imaginary people? Not only that, but voter ID laws would clearly be discriminatory towards non-corporeal entities (Wights, wraiths, spectres ect.) as well as sprites, pixies, and leprechauns.
A gallant goofus nominated by Klintoon sez 300,000 people in Wisconsin do not have IDs.
I should hope there are at least that many, since WI has around 90,000 illegal aliens and 1.2 million people under 18.
This is interesting. 299,000 fraudulent votes are OK, because that sounds more fairer to the 300,000 people too lazy to arrange to vote anyway. Got it!
we should be able to get to audio of the argument here by hitting....
is that the right link?
"Adelman found some 300,000 people in Wisconsin do not have IDs and wrote the voter ID law would "prevent more legitimate votes from being cast than fraudulent votes."
How exactly did he make this finding? Did he acquire 300,000 sworn under the pain of perjury affidavits? And assuming for the sake of argument these 300,000 are real where is the evidence that they are so encumbered that they could not get a valid ID? Are we supposed to believe that people who need photo ID to open bank accounts, get driver's licenses, apply for benefits can somehow be able to do all these things without having the ID needed for voting? Or is it the Democrats need the old-age home dementia vote, the votes that require someone else casting the vote on the presumed intention of the demented if they weren't demented.
Two comments:
(1) Adelman assumes all of his (made up) 300,000 people who are too lazy to get an ID are ambitious enough to vote.
(2) Regarding the overbearing burden of seeking a photo ID here is an explanation of why we vote on Tuesday from Ask History:
But why a Tuesday in November? The answer stems from the agrarian makeup of 19th-century America. In the 1800s, most citizens worked as farmers and lived far from their polling place. Since people often traveled at least a day to vote, lawmakers needed to allow a two-day window for Election Day. Weekends were impractical, since most people spent Sundays in church, and Wednesday was market day for farmers. With this in mind, Tuesday was selected as the first and most convenient day of the week to hold elections. Farm culture also explains why Election Day always falls in November. Spring and early summer elections were thought to interfere with the planting season, and late summer and early fall elections overlapped with the harvest. That left the late fall month of November—after the harvest was complete, but before the arrival of harsh winter weather—as the best choice.
I tired of people with no "skin in the game" making decisions of what to do with my "skin in the game".
Join the Mobile Infantry and save the Galaxy. Service guarantees citizenship. Would you like to know more?
if no one is required to present an ID, then how do they KNOW there's no voter impersonation, since the most obvious way to catch someone in the act is not being used?
Seems to me that those against voter ID support voter fraud or benefit from it. If you're capable of registering, you're capable of getting an ID. It's the least you can do.
s there another kind of teacher's union steward in Wisconsin?
How do you know she is a union steward?
chuck said...
"He ruled there was no rational basis for the law"
What does that have to do with anything?
"Rational basis" is what law-talking-guys say when they mean "I don't like it". So it doesn't have anything to do with their legal function, although they pretend it that it does.
Google ngram shows they invented the misleading phrase around 1970.
Maybe you get there the same way you get to the voting booth, which is only open on Tuesday.
I would be very surprised to learn that the only place to vote in Ashland Co is in Ashland.
Distance can be an impediment to getting IDs. Places to vote usually aren't at too great a distance.
I do like the idea of ink on your finger after you've voted.
http://media.ca7.uscourts.gov/oralArguments/oar.jsp?caseyear=&casenumber=&period=Today
alex, i enjoyed that. yesterday i bought a 1950 astounding that has a heinlein article in it.
re skin in the game, the 24th Amendment prohibits charging any tax as a condition of voting. the 24th was the brainchild of the GOP under Eisenhower.
the 4th A prohibits the government from going through my pockets, person papers and effects, without a warrant or at least probable cause.
the 24th and 4th amendment burden of voter ID is sufficient to trigger the severe burden test of Norman v Reed, so strict scrutiny should apply under the 1st or 14th A. Re which, voting in a federal election is one of the privileges and immunities of federal citizenship, even after slaughterhouse.
Under the balancing test of Anderson and Crawford, WI's voter ID does more harm than good. The stay should continue. I say this as someone who has run for office twice as a Republican.
"prevent more legitimate votes from being cast than fraudulent votes."
Except that we don't know that, do we? We don't know whether all of the alleged 300,000 are actually entitled to vote. We don't know what barriers they have that prevent them getting voter ID (as in, if the barriers are so low that it is trivial to acquire ID, what makes one think that the person would actually bestir themselves to vote on election day). Most importantly, we don't know the true extent of voter impersonation. Judge Adelman is merely hypothesizing that it is less than 300,000 votes.
Birkel said...
Peter:
Those people helping those old, incompetent senior citizens are public servants. They should be praised for their efforts. And I'm sure they would never deign to debase themselves by stooping to partisan political maneuvering.
We are lucky to have such people in our midst.
Also, I refuse to use the [sarc] tag on this one. Do the freakin' math.
9/12/14, 11:10 AM
-----------------
These 'public servants' also make stops at group homes and half-way houses.
gt, well done! That makes no sense, but it comes across well.
Birkel said...
CWJ:
Don't forget all the old folks in rest homes who don't have valid IDs. Those people -- even the incompetent ones -- need to be allowed to vote!
In Chicago they do.
Sometimes three or four times.
I suppose if it keeps garage from voting more than once it will be worth it.
Things Democrats don't care about:
Blacks, the elderly, and the poor not being able to get a library card, get food stamps, get on an airplane, open a checking account, get a credit card, or get a job.
Never ever hear the left bitch about this? Any lawsuits?
But vote? OMGF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
DISCRIMINATION!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SUPPRESSION!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
the 24th and 4th amendment burden of voter ID is sufficient to trigger the severe burden test of Norman v Reed, so strict scrutiny should apply under the 1st or 14th A. Re which, voting in a federal election is one of the privileges and immunities of federal citizenship"
GT if the courts were to actually apply strict scrutiny most gun control laws would tossed. There is no constitutionally enumerated right to vote but there is an enumerate right to bear arms. So why does anyone need to be burdened with apply for a permit of any kind if the are in possession of the same civil rights that would allow them to vote?
As for the 24th amendment, it figures that Republicans would get blamed somehow since it was designed to prevent poll taxes from keeping blacks from voting yet they get no credit for advancing civil rights.
I say lets get rid of it and only allow net federal taxpayers vote in federal elections with Alex's Heinlein exception for the military but exclude all others who work for government, get government contracts and collect government benefits. They can always get jobs in the private sector if voting is that important to them.
I suppose if it keeps garage from voting more than once it will be worth it.
The only instance of voter fraud Walker and the state could prove in court was by a ......die hard Walker supporter. Which photo ID wouldn't have prevented.
For the dope who said voters should prove they pay taxes, who the hell doesn't pay taxes? Try buying something and see if you have to pay tax on it.
CWJ: Don't forget all the old folks in rest homes who don't have valid IDs. Those people -- even the incompetent ones -- need to be allowed to vote!
They vote: they just don't know it.
When my wife was convalescing at the VA hospital in Los Angeles in 2010, she caught a man going around trying to take bedbound vets' ("We'll mail those for you") absentee ballots or get them to sign blank ones. She reported him but he was somehow able to "flee" by walking out the front door before "security" could react.
The implication is that positive identification for any purpose is an unwelcome burden, unnecessarily restricting, and probably prejudiced.
If the law requires photo ID, how can a vote be "legitimate" if the person violates the law in voting?
It may be that person fraud is negligible compared to other forms of voter fraud. It's my impression that Democrats consider the democratic process, including suffrage and representation, to be obstacles. A democratic Democrat is increasingly an oxymoron or perhaps it always was. I imagine that not a few Republicans have overlapping or convergent interests.
"... voter impersonation — the only kind of fraud the voter ID law would curb — is nonexistent or virtually nonexistent...."
How could anyone know this if the impersonator is successful?
Oh, I forgot, judges know everything, like God.
OK, I see I've been referenced in absentia which is fine.
lgv, whose comment follows mine, makes the same mistake that I apparently too subtlety tried to make. There's a huge difference between "people" the entire population, and registered voters. Easily big enough to absorb 300,000 Wisconsinites.
Now perhaps the judge meant something other than people, and perhaps this is just a case of bad reporting. If so, that needs correction!
But if not, this judge should not be allowed to be deciding anything regarding this case. He's not competent to identify simple facts, much less actual relevant evidence.
Does he say 300k "people" or "US Citizens"?
Tried to illustrate, not tried to make. Sorry.
tim in vermont, Even that distinction is useless. Come on, 5 year olds are US citizens.
The injunction just got lifted. Audio is in, too.
So how would a ID law 'prevent more legitimate votes than fraudulent ones?
Does the judge think those without IDs would refuse to go get one?
We in Texas have the ID law and one can get an ID from the state police AT NO CHARGE.
So judge, where is your logic?
Here is another thing voter I'd laws prevent. Voting in multiple states.
Its actually not that tough to be registered in more than one state. However, it is pretty darn tough to have more than one valid state ID at a time.
And while this doesn't matter so much in the west where states are far apart, the east and northeast are a different story.
garage mahal said...
I suppose if it keeps garage from voting more than once it will be worth it.
The only instance of voter fraud Walker and the state could prove in court was by a ......die hard Walker supporter. Which photo ID wouldn't have prevented.
9/12/14, 12:37 PM
Since your self admitted default position is to lie, I'm going to assume you're lying now. As usual.
Post a Comment