Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
SpiceGIrl

Supreme Court, in 5–4 Decision, Allows States to Purge Voters for Their Failure to Vote

151 posts in this topic

38 minutes ago, bmore_ken said:

Damn, somebody just  got schooled hard. :lol::D

an informed citizen is the best citizen when it comes to keeping an eye on the government......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Dystopia said:

Look I’m not saying this can’t impact elections. Just saying, people that haven’t voted in the past 6 years probably aren’t that engaged in the political process. Doubt anyone who voted in that House of Delegates race hadn’t voted in the past 6 years prior. 

Please do not inject common sense, rational thinking and facts into this discussion. This thread is to be controlled by emotion, political bias and links based on opinion, "pols" and "studies".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, can you hear me now! said:

an informed citizen is the best citizen when it comes to keeping an eye on the government......

I agree. It's a shame we've been lacking informed citizens for around 50 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Lombardi6 said:

I agree. It's a shame we've been lacking informed citizens for around 50 years.

yep...trumpkiins are the manifestation of this.....your hero bragged how much he loved the uneducated......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, can you hear me now! said:

yep...trumpkiins are the manifestation of this.....your hero bragged how much he loved the uneducated......

Careful. I think Lombardi6 is tryin' to pull a fast one.

The Voting Rights Act was "around" 50 years ago...

Quote

It's a shame we've been lacking informed citizens for around 50 years

 

Edited by EL-FLIPPO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, EL-FLIPPO said:

Careful. I think Lombardi6 is tryin' to pull a fast one.

The Voting Rights Act was "about" 50 years ago...

missed that.....good point.....he isn't very subtle about his dislike of the "others".......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, can you hear me now! said:

missed that.....good point.....he isn't very subtle about his dislike of the "others".......

It's only a fact in your mind, which I have enjoyed watching you lose the past 2 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I haven't lost anything.....you on the other hand...well let's just say it doesn't take long to figure out who and what you are.....

I gave you the benefit of the doubt and someone pointed out why that may have been generous.....wasn't me who referenced 50 years....you did....1968...a bad year for certain types of Americans who believed in certain types of purity....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, Lombardi6 said:

Please do not inject common sense, rational thinking and facts into this discussion. This thread is to be controlled by emotion, political bias and links based on opinion, "pols" and "studies".

"Not only common sense but statistical surveys show that most people who receive such governmental postcards don’t return them—either because they don’t understand the legalese they bear, or because they mean to and forget, or because they just lose the card. In his dissent, Breyer cited figures showing that, in 2012, Ohio sent roughly 1.5 million postcards—and got back only about 235,000 replies. Justice Breyer’s dissent notes that Ohio’s system in 2012 used the combined failure to vote and the failure to return a postcard to begin the “purge” process for more than 1 million voters. If not returning a postcard meant the voter has moved, this suggests that nearly 13 percent of Ohio’s population had moved in the previous two years. But, he noted, “the streets of Ohio’s cities are not filled with moving vans.” In fact, it seems likely that at most a third of that number had actually moved, he said."

Link

Edited by hst2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People who show up and are not on the rolls should be able to cast a provisional ballot and have it count if it turns out they were purged for not voting in the past.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Maryland:

Quote

 

A voter is placed on inactive status after two sample ballots are mailed and returned to the state with no forwarding address. Voters are removed from the rolls after not voting in two consecutive federal elections.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/md-politics/conservative-group-threatens-to-sue-maryland-alleging-poor-voter-registration-process/2017/04/18/7b592ac6-2446-11e7-a1b3-faff0034e2de_story.html?utm_term=.c0f62a7dd79c

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Jimmy Jazz said:

People who show up and are not on the rolls should be able to cast a provisional ballot and have it count if it turns out they were purged for not voting in the past.

Then what would be the point of purging them for not voting in the past?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Cameron said:

Then what would be the point of purging them for not voting in the past?

Presumably some of the people who are purged have in fact died or moved and this would reduce the number of those names on the rolls which the right is all in a tizzy about since fear that all manner of shadiness goes on in urban voting precincts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Jimmy Jazz said:

Presumably some of the people who are purged have in fact died or moved and this would reduce the number of those names on the rolls which the right is all in a tizzy about since fear that all manner of shadiness goes on in urban voting precincts.

The very purpose here is to remove voters who have not voted in past elections.

Removing voters who have died is a separate issue.

I looked this up to see if it's still the law in MD because I remember quite some time ago, a voter in my family (My Dad, I think) was turned away from the polls for this reason - -   not voting in past elections. 

 

Edited by Cameron

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, bmore_ken said:

You're not losing your right. You can just re register when you decide you feel like actually voting.

 

5 hours ago, can you hear me now! said:

I already registered and someone took my right away. Is exercising my right to vote required by law? No. It is my vote and as such, I can do what I feel is right for me with it. This is a wonderful example of voter suppression. Like I said, are we going to put time limits on all personal rights? If not, why this one?

Nobody's losing their right.  There is something known as a provisional ballot that is used for occasions where a voter's name may not be on the rolls.  Once the eligibility to vote is determined, the provisional ballot is counted.  With early voting and absentee ballots, anyone who can't find the time to vote in at least 1 of 3 consecutive elections and can't return a card which simply requests a verification of information deserves to go through a little more trouble when they decide that this time they want to vote.  Something else to whine about.  Like it is so hard to go out and vote at the max of once every two years.  

Edited by cprenegade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, can you hear me now! said:

I believe you are wrong.

Not wrong,  Back to school for you, sweetie!

7 hours ago, ms maggie said:

Nonsense.

Is there a constitutionally guaranteed federal right of free speech? Strictly speaking, no. Certainly not an affirmative right. The first amendment prohibits the govt from abridging the right to free speech. The right itself is assumed, nowhere is it articulated.

Same with the right to vote and the 15th amendment, even the same term, "abridge".

Try again, this time try to (key word here.....) comprehend what you read!

7 hours ago, bmore_ken said:

Damn, somebody just  got schooled hard. :lol::D

Yo get an F, it stands for "Fail! lol! :P

I'll take my chances that the *American Constitutional Society for Law and Politics is correct and that "can you hear me now", "msmaggie", and "bmore_ken" from The Baltimore Sun Talk Forum are not.

Pay close attention this time and remember that key word.....comprehend.

Quote

But do we have a fundamental affirmative individual right to vote in our Constitution? The answer may surprise you - "No."

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/does-the-us-constitution-guarantee-americans-an-affirmative-individual-right-to-vote

*The American Constitution Society brings together many of the country’s best legal minds to articulate a progressive vision of our Constitution and laws.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And why would these two fine Democrats introduce a bill entitled "The Pocan-Ellison Right to Vote Amendment" if we already had it?

Quote

While most Americans believe an explicit right to vote is enshrined in our Constitution, the Constitution contains no expressed guarantee of an individual’s right to vote. A constitutional amendment can ensure this right is guaranteed while also providing a pathway to challenge attempts to restrict voting rights.

https://pocan.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/reps-pocan-and-ellison-introduce-right-to-vote-constitutional-amendment

Civics, if only you'd pay attention and.....(remember the word of the day......) comprehend!

:P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not voting constitutes a vote in itself.  As for deceased voters I suspect that news gets filtered through the regular channels. This is just more republican cheating at the vote.  Can't win honestly anymore. tsk. First Bush and now Trump. Time to dissolve the GOP for insurgency, anti-democratic platforms and unAmerican activities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, bmore_ken said:

Well if you haven't voted in two or three elections, it's apparently not a priority to you anyway.

I agree with that. Why whine now?

Also, how difficult is it to register? How much of one's precious time does it take to register through one of the several ways there are to register, regardless of which state you live in?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Jimmy Jazz said:

People who show up and are not on the rolls should be able to cast a provisional ballot and have it count if it turns out they were purged for not voting in the past.

I also agree with that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SpiceGIrl said:

Not wrong,  Back to school for you, sweetie!

Try again, this time try to (key word here.....) comprehend what you read!

Yo get an F, it stands for "Fail! lol! :P

I'll take my chances that the *American Constitutional Society for Law and Politics is correct and that "can you hear me now", "msmaggie", and "bmore_ken" from The Baltimore Sun Talk Forum are not.

Pay close attention this time and remember that key word.....comprehend.

https://www.acslaw.org/acsblog/does-the-us-constitution-guarantee-americans-an-affirmative-individual-right-to-vote

*The American Constitution Society brings together many of the country’s best legal minds to articulate a progressive vision of our Constitution and laws.

reconcile this --> the Application of the Legislatures of two thirds of the several States, shall call a Convention for proposing Amendments, which, in either Case, shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, cprenegade said:

 

Nobody's losing their right.  There is something known as a provisional ballot that is used for occasions where a voter's name may not be on the rolls.  Once the eligibility to vote is determined, the provisional ballot is counted.  With early voting and absentee ballots, anyone who can't find the time to vote in at least 1 of 3 consecutive elections and can't return a card which simply requests a verification of information deserves to go through a little more trouble when they decide that this time they want to vote.  Something else to whine about.  Like it is so hard to go out and vote at the max of once every two years.  

if voting is so easy, why are so many states trying to make it harder to vote?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some of the discussion here reveals just how transparent Ohio's actions are. It is against the law, still, to purge voters for not voting. Some of you seem to feel that it doesn't matter, mostly because, well, because they don't vote anyway?  I don't understand why that should matter. Someone who registers to vote should be able to vote or not vote whenever they want. No good is served by disenfranchising them even if they don't vote.

And just in case anyone didn't notice, the point of the law is to remove voters from the rolls who have moved. There are more effective ways to do that than to contrive to disenfranchised thousands of people.

It seems attention should be paid to Ohio Republican's motivstion to use this roundabout way to purge voters who have moved.  They would tell you, if they were honest about it, that they would prefer that these mostly Democratic voters never vote at all. And that is what this is all about.

Edited by hst2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0