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.
Link to an accusatory article dated on the website the Huffington Post. This article was updated
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
Voter Identification Cards
If India, Mexico, and the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania can do it, every state in the United States can do it.
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.
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.
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.
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
I have started writing a seventh page on the topic of voting by people who aren't eligible to vote because they're not American citizens. When I finish writing that page, I will include the link here.
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
on your Twitter account @jstines3 on
Link to an accusatory article dated on the website the Huffington Post. This article was updated
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.
Voter ID laws discriminate against the most vulnerable Americans. Congress needs to ensure equality in the voting process now#RestoretheVote— Sheila Jackson Lee (@JacksonLeeTX18) June 14, 2016
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.Link to the official biography of U.S. District Court Judge Richard J. Leon on the website of the U.S. Court system.
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 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.
BREAKING: Federal Judge Turns On Obama With Bombshell Ruling – White House In Panic Mode - World News Politics https://t.co/02KCR1lHFb— EX-GOP; #WRITEINCRUZ (@grannyinfla16) July 16, 2016
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.RALEIGH, North Carolina (WTVD) --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.
North Carolina won this time
These are the first three paragraphs of a December 19, 2018 Associated Press story that was published in the Charlotte Observer.RALEIGH, N.C.
The North Carolina law detailing a new voter photo identification requirement got challenged in court Wednesday mere moments after the Republican-led General Assembly completed the override of Democratic Gov. Roy Cooper's veto of the measure.
Six voters filed the lawsuit in Wake County court less than 15 minutes after the state House finished the override in a mostly party-line 72-40 vote. The Senate already voted to override Tuesday.
The photo ID law implements a constitutional amendment approved in a referendum last month that mandates photo identification to vote in person, with exceptions allowed. Still, the plaintiffs contend the law violates the state constitution and should be blocked, saying it retains requirements within a 2013 photo ID law that federal judges struck down.
For more information on the topic of Voter I.D.
I have written six blog pages, on a different blog, about voter fraud. These are the links.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
I have started writing a seventh page on the topic of voting by people who aren't eligible to vote because they're not American citizens. When I finish writing that page, I will include the link here.
December 8, 2017 Update
Note: Chuck has 324,000 followers.I bet voter ID would really help against other countries, Like Russia, interfering in our elections. Maybe Democrats would consider this easy measure.— Chuck Woolery (@chuckwoolery) December 8, 2017
February 12, 2019 update
Note: Brit was commenting on an opinion piece that was published this day in the New York Times.Very informative piece on voter-id laws. It seems they neither suppress turnout nor suppress fraud. So would everyone please calm down. https://t.co/sevM6nMDdF— Brit Hume (@brithume) February 12, 2019
These are the first paragraphs of a March 11, 2024 article on the website of The Federalist..
These are the first paragraphs of a September 27 Rasmussen Reports article. This article was linked in an article by independent Journalist Sharyl Atkisson.
These are the first three paragraphs of an October 1, 2024 KCRA story. The link in the second paragraph was in their story.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a new law prohibiting local governments from enacting or enforcing a requirement that a person must show identification when voting.
Senate Bill 1174, authored by Dave Min (D-Irvine), targets a voter ID requirement that was adopted by Huntington Beach in Orange County.
These are the first paragraphs of an October 24, 2024 article on the website of the Gallup polling organization.
End
No comments:
Post a Comment