|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Sept 25, 2012 9:00:09 GMT -5
Message deleted by The Half Feeb aka Mich1.
|
|
Taxman10
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 29, 2010 15:12:43 GMT -5
Posts: 3,455
|
Post by Taxman10 on Sept 25, 2012 9:19:23 GMT -5
healthcare isn't a problem for republicans...we can afford it. it's the lowly leaches called democrats who pander to the lowest common denominator (called "poor people") who think "healthcare" is a problem. shockingly it's these same "poor people" who want the govt to give them more and more and more... Um, Ok I have to address this. My parents are not "lowly leaches". My dad owns multiple business, employs nearly 100 people, lives in a million dollar home that's paid for, has a half million dollar vacation home that he paid cash for and millions sitting in his investment accounts. Oh yeah- plus he is a republican. Guess who can't get insurance? That's right- my mom can't. She was diagnosed with breast cancer many years ago and has been in remission for over a decade. Pre-existing conditions they tell her. So she has to pay for special medical insurance that costs the two of them over $3000 a month because they aren't eligible for traditional insurance. Fortunately they can afford it but it's nice to know that you think they are leaches and poor. Your parent's aren't leaches...they CAN afford it. Can't you read?? I specifically said, Republicans can afford it. So basically you didn't address anything, except to prove my point. Good job Shelia...go unlock the bathroom now....
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Sept 25, 2012 9:26:53 GMT -5
I can afford health insurance, and I'm a Democrat.
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Sept 25, 2012 9:33:30 GMT -5
Just bc someone doesn't have the time, or money to get one or he is black or Asian or Latino - it's still not discriminatory to ask for one.
How are all those Latinos getting alcohol and cigarets?? Are you telling me none of them drink or smoke?? Is it discriminatory to ask them for ID since they haven't "had the time" to get one??
Are none of them driving? Cashing checks? Have bank accounts??
I wish we would save screaming discrimination for truly people being discriminated against, not every time someone doesn't like something
Lena
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Sept 25, 2012 9:38:24 GMT -5
"Asking for ID is discriminatory" is not the argument, nor is it "because someone doesn't like something."
When a law or rule is passed and found to disproportionately affect a specific segment of the population, that law or rule is discriminatory. By definition.
|
|
Rocky Mtn Saver
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by Rocky Mtn Saver on Sept 25, 2012 9:42:45 GMT -5
Just bc someone doesn't have the time, or money to get one or he is black or Asian or Latino - it's still not discriminatory to ask for one. How are all those Latinos getting alcohol and cigarets?? Are you telling me none of them drink or smoke?? Is it discriminatory to ask them for ID since they haven't "had the time" to get one?? Are none of them driving? Cashing checks? Have bank accounts?? Lena Maybe not. You assume a lot about people's circumstances. A person could easily take the bus or carpool, get paid in cash from a small employer (I worked for a legitimate one that did), and not use a bank. The article indicates that the problem isn't their lack of trying, but that their birth certificates have been invalidated, and they won't be able to complete the process in time for the upcoming elections. I'm sure the process isn't quick or easy for that kind of thing.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,719
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Sept 25, 2012 9:42:56 GMT -5
"Neither of those things is a right in the constitution and voting is." Actually we had a thread on this a while back (on P&M I think). The right to vote technically isn't in the constitution. "the other part of this that I disagree with is comparing it to buying booze or getting a license to drive a car." It's not just for that, you need it to board an airplane, access your bank account, or even just buy children's cough syrup. Phoenix, we've had this discussion before on P&M and again you are thinking about middle class and above issues not living on the edge issues. Badly off people don't buy airline tickets, have bank accounts, and probably go without cough syrup in favor of buying groceries. Getting an ID for a certain part of the population is a hardship. Since I don't think it will reduce voter fraud in any measurable way I think it is merely a Republican belief that implementing it will give them more election wins than they feel they would get otherwise. I don't know if that will turn out to be true, but more laws to tromp on the disadvantaged is not something I am for.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,719
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Sept 25, 2012 9:46:12 GMT -5
"Asking for ID is discriminatory" is not the argument, nor is it "because someone doesn't like something." When a law or rule is passed and found to disproportionately affect a specific segment of the population, that law or rule is discriminatory. By definition. I wonder if facts will play any better here than they did in P&M. This is a deeply emotional issue for some people and they seem to be unwilling to look at it rationally. True and nice try. Won't matter for the true believers in IDs though.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Sept 25, 2012 9:48:51 GMT -5
I think people are getting hung up on semantics. As soon as someone says the word "discrimination," people start talking about racism. Discrimination has a legal definition; racism is a social construct. Apples and oranges.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 4, 2024 2:23:21 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2012 9:51:19 GMT -5
"Asking for ID is discriminatory" is not the argument, nor is it "because someone doesn't like something." When a law or rule is passed and found to disproportionately affect a specific segment of the population, that law or rule is discriminatory. By definition.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,719
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Sept 25, 2012 9:54:27 GMT -5
Aren't you comparing apples and oranges there? Shouldn't you be comparing the 75% of potential minority voters who have government ID to the percentage of ALL minority voters who voted in the 2008 elections? Using black voters kind of skews the data, since you just posted that they turned out at nearly the same rate as white voters. It's fine to focus on only black voters, but for consistency's sake you should at least use the number of potential black voters with government ID. Otherwise it looks like you're cherrypicking data to support your theory. It is cherry picking in any event. There are probably no stats on those voters who used ID to vote and those that did not. He's making an assumption that because the percentage of voters with IDs is less than the percentage of that group that cast votes that IDs are not an issue. Without knowing how many of those 65% who cast votes voted without ID and do not have an ID we can not reasonably know the true impact. It has always been true that a significant percentage of people do not vote in this country.
|
|
Rocky Mtn Saver
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by Rocky Mtn Saver on Sept 25, 2012 9:59:12 GMT -5
It has always been true that a significant percentage of people do not vote in this country. And, honestly, rather than worrrying about the possibility of a dozen people voting fraudulently among millions, and disenfranchising hundres of thousands in the process, shouldn't this be what people focus their efforts on? If, that is, they are really interested in fair and accurate elections that represent the citizenry's desires, of course.
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Sept 25, 2012 10:05:38 GMT -5
Just bc someone doesn't have the time, or money to get one or he is black or Asian or Latino - it's still not discriminatory to ask for one. How are all those Latinos getting alcohol and cigarets?? Are you telling me none of them drink or smoke?? Is it discriminatory to ask them for ID since they haven't "had the time" to get one?? Are none of them driving? Cashing checks? Have bank accounts?? Lena Maybe not. You assume a lot about people's circumstances. A person could easily take the bus or carpool, get paid in cash from a small employer (I worked for a legitimate one that did), and not use a bank. The article indicates that the problem isn't their lack of trying, but that their birth certificates have been invalidated, and they won't be able to complete the process in time for the upcoming elections. I'm sure the process isn't quick or easy for that kind of thing. Just because their birth cert is invalidated doesn't mean that the DL they got with it is invalid. So they can just keep driving and using it as ID. It doesn't mean that DL is a valid ID for the purposes of the voter regulations though. When I had to renew my DL the last time for the new homeland security crap. The first thing they said was that my state issued DL that they gave me wasn't a valid form of ID for getting the new one.
|
|
Rocky Mtn Saver
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by Rocky Mtn Saver on Sept 25, 2012 10:09:37 GMT -5
That assumes that they already have a driver license, which according to PA, more than 750,000 people (~9% of the voting population) do not have.
|
|
sheilaincali
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 17:55:24 GMT -5
Posts: 4,131
|
Post by sheilaincali on Sept 25, 2012 10:09:38 GMT -5
taxman- my point is that as Republicans, who can afford their nearly $40,000 a year medical expense they still THINK THAT HEALTH CARE IS A PROBLEM. More people think that there is a problem with the health care system than just the lowly leaches, democrats and poor people.
I am assuming you are sitting in your mother's basement in a bathrobe waiting for your next dungeons and dragons meeting to start so I'm going to stop trying to reason with or argue with you now.
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Sept 25, 2012 10:20:13 GMT -5
We can use that logic in many different laws and rules.
If you are not a certain height - you can't ride a rollocoster - is it discrimination against short people and children?
If you can't see, you can't drive - is it discrimination against blind or legally blind people?
You can't get a beer if you are not a certain age - is it discrimination against people of certain age?
Rocky, I am not assuming anything. Article didn't say they can't get ID, it said they can't get it IN TIME. So, again just bc they didn't - all of a sudden it's discrimination??
I don't know.... may be I am taking this a bit too personally, but when words like "discrimination" and "hardship" are used, I think of things much much different than getting on a bus or filling out some paperwork to get an ID.....
Lena
|
|
Rocky Mtn Saver
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by Rocky Mtn Saver on Sept 25, 2012 10:31:10 GMT -5
Rocky, I am not assuming anything. Article didn't say they can't get ID, it said they can't get it IN TIME. So, again just bc they didn't - all of a sudden it's discrimination?? They can't get an ID because their legal documents have been INVALIDATED. So, yes, if someone comes along today, Sept 25, and tells you that you can't get a driver license and therefore can't vote in November because your home state has declared your birth certificate as suddenly no good - through no fault of your own- and you have no way to prove that you are legally here in the US, wouldn't you be feeling that it was unfair to you as the legal voter?
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Sept 25, 2012 10:37:53 GMT -5
Again, it didn't say they can't GET IT, it said they can't get it IN TIME!!!
Would I feel it was unfair??? Well, I am the wrong person to ask bc 1) if I was told that my documentation all of a sudden is not proving that I am here legally, voting, would be the least of my worries, making sure that I can prove that I am here legally would be my #1 concern. And 2 - believe it or not, my family was in a soft of similar situation while we were immigrating to US and my parents moved heaven and earth to make sure that we had all the right paperwork and could enter here legally and not have any future problems. So, yeah, I am the wrong person to ask.
Lena
|
|
Rocky Mtn Saver
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by Rocky Mtn Saver on Sept 25, 2012 10:40:57 GMT -5
Here's another interesting comment on the matter. There are an estimated 1 million voters in PA who may not have valid voter ID and are probably not aware of it. If a legitimate voter is not aware of having invalid ID for voting purposes, how will they exercise that fundamental right of citizenship? www.mcall.com/news/nationworld/blog_pennsylvania_ave/mc-swarm-of-numbers-complicates-voter-id-debate-20120726,0,4981185.post Number of registered voters without a Pennsylvania drivers license or non-driver photo ID that matches their voter registration: 759,000. (An unknown fraction may simply have used a different name or variation of their name when they registered to vote.)
Number of registered voters with an expired drivers license or non-driver photo ID that is not valid for voting: 900,000.
Total number of registered voters without valid PennDOT-issued photo ID that matches their voter registration information: 1.6 million.
Total number of active voters without valid PennDOT-issued photo ID that matches their voter registration information: 1.2 million. (Inactive voters are registered, but have not voted in four years.)
Some percentage of those 1.6 to 1.2 million voters will have one of the other forms of valid picture ID, including student IDs, nursing home IDs, passports, military IDs and employee IDs issued by the state or federal governments.
Matt Barreto, an expert hired by opponents of the law performed his own analysis after conducting an extensive survey.
Bareto's conclusion: About 1 million registered Pennsylvanians lack valid ID but alot of them don't realize it. Oh, and here's one other number: Obama's margin of victory in Pennsylvania in 2008: 605,820 votes.
|
|
Rocky Mtn Saver
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by Rocky Mtn Saver on Sept 25, 2012 10:42:04 GMT -5
Again, it didn't say they can't GET IT, it said they can't get it IN TIME!!! Lena Then why rush such a law into effect, if you know that a segment of the population will not be able to comply with it through no fault of their own? Where's the fire, if this is not a political move?
|
|
Rocky Mtn Saver
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by Rocky Mtn Saver on Sept 25, 2012 10:45:31 GMT -5
Again, it didn't say they can't GET IT, it said they can't get it IN TIME!!! Would I feel it was unfair??? Well, I am the wrong person to ask bc 1) if I was told that my documentation all of a sudden is not proving that I am here legally, voting, would be the least of my worries, making sure that I can prove that I am here legally would be my #1 concern. And 2 - believe it or not, my family was in a soft of similar situation while we were immigrating to US and my parents moved heaven and earth to make sure that we had all the right paperwork and could enter here legally and not have any future problems. So, yeah, I am the wrong person to ask. Lena But you're expecting people to move heaven and earth (and apparently Puerto Rico) by the end of October. Government bureaucracies being what they are, can you guarantee that everyone will be able to complete that process in a little over a month?
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Sept 25, 2012 10:45:50 GMT -5
Again, it didn't say they can't GET IT, it said they can't get it IN TIME!!! Would I feel it was unfair??? Well, I am the wrong person to ask bc 1) if I was told that my documentation all of a sudden is not proving that I am here legally, voting, would be the least of my worries, making sure that I can prove that I am here legally would be my #1 concern. And 2 - believe it or not, my family was in a soft of similar situation while we were immigrating to US and my parents moved heaven and earth to make sure that we had all the right paperwork and could enter here legally and not have any future problems. So, yeah, I am the wrong person to ask. Lena But no one in the gov is concerned that they aren't here legally. PR is part of the US so it isn't like they have to immigrate. ;D The only people who are suddenly concerned about their documents are the people who made up the new law for voting. I have no problem with making them get a new birth cert. I have a problem with informing people that they need a new one to vote 2 weeks before they would need it to prove they can vote knwoing full well that most of the people couldn't get the new one in two months with no other issues. So why does it have to be for this election? It isn't a problem if it is for next years election. Unless someone doesn't want these particular people voting in this election it isn't a problem to wait till the next.
|
|
whoisjohngalt
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:12:07 GMT -5
Posts: 9,140
|
Post by whoisjohngalt on Sept 25, 2012 10:58:16 GMT -5
This whole thing can be viewed and described as many things, but discrimination it is not. That's the only point I've been trying to make.
Lena
|
|
Rocky Mtn Saver
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by Rocky Mtn Saver on Sept 25, 2012 11:01:07 GMT -5
Discrimination it is. We will have to agree to disagree on that one.
|
|
973beachbum
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 17, 2010 16:12:13 GMT -5
Posts: 10,501
|
Post by 973beachbum on Sept 25, 2012 11:07:29 GMT -5
This whole thing can be viewed and described as many things, but discrimination it is not. That's the only point I've been trying to make. Lena Lena is English your first language? They made a law to target one specific part of the population. That is literally the textbook definition of discrimination.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Sept 25, 2012 11:07:50 GMT -5
Yes, each of those laws are TECHNICALLY discriminatory. The difference is, there are valid public interests at stake in each of these cases. These public interests are heavily weighted enough to tip the balance in favor of these rules. In the first case, these rules are in effect to protect the riders and public. Same logic in the second example. The third example is a little fuzzier, but 21 is the arbitrary deadline the government has chosen, and the public generally agrees.
But yes, technically those rules "discriminate" against the populations affected. That is the meaning of that word.
Again, we're (or at least I'm) talking about a word with a legally-specific meaning, not whether these laws are racist. If a rule/law is discriminatory but protects a valid public interest, it may be able to stand, as in the examples you've given.
If a rule/law is discriminatory and serves no public interest, it should be struck down.
I personally am not commenting on the validity of the rule or whether it fits into the first or second category, but regardless, saying "it's not discrimination" simply isn't true.
|
|
Rocky Mtn Saver
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by Rocky Mtn Saver on Sept 25, 2012 11:13:28 GMT -5
Interesting points, Mid.
And in the case of, for example, blind people being barred from driving for public and personal safety reasons, when there is a means to protect public and personal safety without discriminating against them, we would expect those laws to choose the non-discriminatory options. So, when we have driverless cars, for example, I expect we will see blind drivers no longer barred because that discrimination is not necessary. So, if there are non-discriminatory ways to address any actual public safety issue of voting fraud (focusing on absentee ballots, registration issues, voting machines, etc), we would expect those to be how it would be addressed rather than discriminatory methods overused.
|
|
tloonya
Junior Associate
What status?
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 16:22:13 GMT -5
Posts: 8,452
|
Post by tloonya on Sept 25, 2012 11:31:12 GMT -5
Be offended all you want, but A 2006 nationwide study of voting-age citizens by the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law found that African-Americans are more than three times as likely as Caucasians to lack a government-issued photo ID, with one in four African-Americans owning no such ID. There are several other studies with similar results at the link below. www.lawyerscommittee.org/admin/voting_rights/documents/files/Voter-ID-Talking-Points-for-web.pdf I just want to make sure I understand - black people lack ID's so asking them for one when they want to vote is racist?
Lena I didn't think this is fun thread! So wouldn't IDing people actually lower minority votes because they do not have an IDs? Is that what is going on here? Minorities vote elimination??? Smart move. Will it fly though???
|
|
tloonya
Junior Associate
What status?
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 16:22:13 GMT -5
Posts: 8,452
|
Post by tloonya on Sept 25, 2012 11:33:30 GMT -5
Interesting points, Mid. And in the case of, for example, blind people being barred from driving for public and personal safety reasons . Does anyone supposed there are ONE blind person who WANTS to drive???
|
|
Rocky Mtn Saver
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 23, 2010 9:40:57 GMT -5
Posts: 7,461
|
Post by Rocky Mtn Saver on Sept 25, 2012 11:34:48 GMT -5
Be offended all you want, but A 2006 nationwide study of voting-age citizens by the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law found that African-Americans are more than three times as likely as Caucasians to lack a government-issued photo ID, with one in four African-Americans owning no such ID. There are several other studies with similar results at the link below. www.lawyerscommittee.org/admin/voting_rights/documents/files/Voter-ID-Talking-Points-for-web.pdf I just want to make sure I understand - black people lack ID's so asking them for one when they want to vote is racist?
Lena I didn't think this is fun thread! So wouldn't IDing people actually lower minority votes because they do not have an IDs? Is that what is going on here? Minorities vote elimination??? Winner winner, chicken dinner! ;D Considering that it is nearly all Republican officials that are pushing through these Voter ID laws before the November elections, yes, that's clearly what they're targeting. Minorities tend to vote Democrat. The actual problem of voter fraud is statistically small, and true cases of voter fraud tend to be through absentee balloting and other problems that Voter ID Laws won't address.
|
|