Tuesday, May 12, 2015

Voter identification prevents voter fraud


India is a nation that whose population is four times the United States population.  Link to statistics on the web page IndiaOnlinePages.

India's people speak more languages and dialects than we do, so it is much harder for their government to organize any nation-wide policy than it would be for our own government.  Link to the Lanaugages of India page on the website New World Encyclopedia.

If India can organize a national system of identification for their voters, then the United States can do it.

Thank you, Judy Stines, for posting this graphic
on your Twitter account @jstines3 on May 8, 2015.


Link to an accusatory article dated December 26, 2012 on the website the Huffington Post.  This article was updated February 25, 2013.

This is a tweet that was posted by U.S. Representative Sheila Jackson Lee, who claims to represent the people of the 18th Congressional District in Texas, which includes the city of Houston.  If you click on the date, you can see the tweet on her Twitter account.



The only people who should be voting in an American election are Americans.
Voters should be able to prove who they are, whether they vote in person or not.

This proof of identification would also prevent anyone from
  • voting twice,
  • voting when they're actually a citizen of another country, or
  • voting after they've died. (Yes, it has happened.)



Voter Identification Cards

An Indian voter's identification card.

This is a real identification card for a real person.
A sample voter identification card for someone who lives in Pennsylvania.
A Mexican voter's identification card.

This is a real person, too.

If India, Mexico, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania can do it, every state in the United States can do it.





July 18, 2016 Update

Kansas, Oklahoma, and Georgia won

A Federal judge rejected a challenge to the principle of Voter ID.

These are the first five paragraphs of a June 29, 2016 Washington Times story.  Both of the links in these paragraphs were in their story.
Kansas, Alabama and Georgia can demand their residents submit proof of citizenship before signing up to vote even if they’re using the federal government’s registration forms, a judge said Wednesday, delivering a win to states concerned about voter fraud.

The League of Women Voters and the Obama administration had tried to halt the practice, arguing that federal law doesn’t require an extensive citizenship check when people register to vote, and saying the three states were imposing an extra burden on voters.

But Judge Richard J. Leon said that while it may be an inconvenience to require proof of citizenship, and voter registration drives may have to do more work to get folks signed up, it’s not an insurmountable burden — and certainly less so than trying to explain Obamacare.

“The organizational plaintiffs and their members will undoubtedly have to expend some additional time and effort to help individuals,” Judge Leon wrote. “But let’s be candid: doing so pales in comparison to explaining to the average citizen how the [Affordable Care Act] or tax code works!”

Since the voter groups didn’t show a real and irreparable harm, he rejected their request for a preliminary injunction.
Link to the official biography of U.S. District Court Judge Richard J. Leon on the website of the U.S. Court system.

Link to his two-page PDF order.

Link to his 25-page PDF Memorandum Opinion, which states the reasons why he made this decision.

I want to thank the person who uses this Twitter account @grannyinfla16 for posting a Tweet that mentioned this story on another website.  They linked to a story on another website, which linked to the Washington Times story that I quoted here.  If you click on the date at the end of this tweet, you will be able to see her tweet on her timeline.



North Carolina lost

This is a link to a July 29, 2016 New York Times story, written in an unprofessional manner.  Their choice of adjectives and adverbs makes it clear that this newspaper has taken sides in an issue that is likely to be an important factor in the presidential election in November.

Quotes from the article that show biased reporting.  I highlighted their bias with boldfaced text.

"A federal appeals court decisively struck down North Carolina’s voter identification law on Friday ..."

"That ruling and a second wide-ranging decision on Friday, in Wisconsin, continued a string of recent court opinions against restrictive voting laws that critics say were created solely to keep minority and other traditionally Democratic voters away from the polls."

The "critics" aren't named in this article.  The NY Times is substituting this false organization for their own opinions, which belong in an editorial, not a news story.  States have the legal right to prevent non-citizens and non-residents from voting.  The State Government of North Carolina exercised their right to do so.

North Carolina lost again

These are the first two paragraphs of a February 21, 2017 story on the website of the A.B.C. News affiliate in Raleigh, North Carolina.
North Carolina's new Democratic governor and attorney general say they are ending state efforts to persuade the U.S. Supreme Court to revive a GOP-backed voter ID law that was struck down by a lower court, but Republican lawmakers say they will continue pushing for the high court's review.

Former Republican Gov. Pat McCrory last year asked the Supreme Court to review an appeals court ruling that the elections law was unconstitutional because it targeted minority voters with "almost surgical precision" to discourage Democratic support and protect Republican dominance.

For more information on the topic of Voter I.D.

I have written six blog pages about voter fraud.  Another possible topic for this series is voting by citizens of foreign countries, who don't have a legal right to vote in American elections, even if they are visiting America on our the day of any of our elections.

Link to Part 1 - about ACORN

Link to Part 2 - changing the election date

Link to Part 3 - The voting ballot of  then-Attorney-General Eric Holder could have been stolen

Link to Part 4 - tampering with the electronic voting machines

Link to Part 5 - lawsuits to change the result of an election

Link to Part 6 - about voting in the name of dead people