Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 

Tennant: ‘Voter suppression laws’ introduced

March 19, 2013

PARKERSBURG — Two bills in the guise of voter ID laws are being opposed by the West Virginia Secretary of State and a non-partisan voting rights protection coalition she formed....

« Back to Article

 
 
sort: oldest | newest

Comments

(27)

north26103

Mar-19-13 12:17 AM

only the worst Secretary of State in the country would oppose ID to vote.....the one from the state that has one of the worst reputations across the country for voter fraud....Ms. Tennant you are wrong on this and wrong for West Virginia!

8 Agrees | 13 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mythravere

Mar-19-13 6:42 AM

We all know why these laws are being produced. Its to reduce the minority vote!

Its plain and simple whats going on.

No one would take issue with these laws if there was a need for them. But given the rights extremely virulent opposition to Obama and their positions on minorities. The "coloring" of these laws stinks of voter suppression.

12 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Artifactman

Mar-19-13 6:46 AM

Great job Secretary of State Natalie Tennant standing up for the poor and minorities. This is just another way to detour our rights for voting and costing the state of West Virginia more money to even vote on this... Any vote can be questioned by the signature, anytime...

9 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

teedoff

Mar-19-13 7:54 AM

These same people have to show ID for Social Security, a bank account, AFDIC, to see their doctor, etc. How is requiring ID to prove you are even elligible to vote anything but just that?

10 Agrees | 9 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

gunsrock

Mar-19-13 9:22 AM

Nothing like throwing out a race card to try and get what you want. I have voted dem my whole life but every time I hear the race card thrown out just drives me crazy. If a person is to incompetent to get the correct ID then maybe they are to incompetent to vote. Just my opinion.

8 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

mythravere

Mar-19-13 9:41 AM

Who gets all the blame for all the problems going on in this country?

Obama!

Who gets the blame for putting Obama in office?

Minorities!

The GOP is so power hungry they'll do just about anything to get that power back.

Remember a lot of them (vociferously so I might add) holler about taking "THEIR" country back.

Laws like this are just part of the process to do just that. At least in their warped view.

Only problem is that people are starting to see them as a massive hindrance to the governance of this nation.

8 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Milt59

Mar-19-13 10:03 AM

The Dems depend on incompetent people to get elected. They do not want anyone to be required to show an ID. This way these people can vote two or three times. How hard is it to get an ID? They should have one anyway.

7 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

JoeBlow

Mar-19-13 10:18 AM

What a load of Crap. How does anyone get buy and not have an ID?

7 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Mar-19-13 11:13 AM

"These laws would place unfair barriers on certain portions of the population that would make it much more difficult, if not impossible, for an otherwise legally registered voter to cast their ballot.”

That is an opinion of a liberal individual who happens to be our Secretary of State. That is not and cannot be the position of that office as the SOS does not create policy but instead is charged with enforcing the laws on the books.

For those who cry about this being suppressive laws, that’s simply not true. The law will require EVERY citizen to provide an ID, not just minorities. Under the Constitution and Bill of Rights, that is perfectly legal as there is NO guaranteed right to vote. Anyone who cites Amendments to state otherwise is ignoring the facts.

“We all know why these laws are being produced. Its to reduce the minority vote!”

Is that the case in Chicago where President Barrack Obama had to show identification to vote?

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

StephenWV

Mar-19-13 1:19 PM

To register to vote you only need to check a box that says "I am a U.S. citizen" and sign that it is true. NO ONE checks and no proof is required. DHHS will no longer accept a sworn statement of program eligibility but you would want us to accept that to vote?!?!. I do not want my President to be chosen by those that would vote more than once, dead people and foreigners AGAIN. Allow requirements for the elderly to be lessened. But if all others do not have a social security card or drivers license they are likely NOT a citizen, so prove it. Natalie Tennant likes this? Go figure.

7 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

BakerKat

Mar-19-13 5:56 PM

Yes it would keep all those dead people from voting wouldn't it? We already have our drivers license and those who don't usually have the DMV ID card. They never ask me for ID when I vote - wouldn't mind if they did. I always bring it in case they do.

6 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Mar-19-13 6:10 PM

Voting rights are under attack in this country as state legislatures nationwide pass voter suppression laws under the pretext of preventing voter fraud and safeguarding election integrity. These voter suppression laws take many forms, and collectively lead to significant burdens for eligible voters trying to exercise their most {fundamental "constitutional" right.}

5 Agrees | 7 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Mar-19-13 6:11 PM

Despite this frenzy of state legislation to counteract so-called voter fraud and to protect the integrity of our elections, proponents of such voter suppression legislation {have failed to show that "voter fraud is a problem" anywhere in the country}. Aside from the "occasional unproven anecdote or baseless allegation," supporters of these laws simply cannot show that there is any need for them.

5 Agrees | 6 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Mar-19-13 6:14 PM

You would think our Legislatures would have more important things to do! Like how are they going to come up with the funding for our highways and bridges.

7 Agrees | 5 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Mar-19-13 9:33 PM

"These voter suppression laws take many forms, and collectively lead to significant burdens for eligible voters trying to exercise their most {fundamental "constitutional" right.}"

As you claim voting is a most fundamental rigth, you will have no problem explaining the Article of the Costitution that grants that right.

1 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Mar-20-13 5:24 AM

15th Amendment. "Echoing the language of the 15th Amendment, the Act prohibits states from imposing any "voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure"

4 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Mar-20-13 5:26 AM

You don't base a policy on lies. In person voter fraud is a "lie." Early balloting which requires no ID is where you see voter fraud. Having an ID does nothing to curb "That" fraud.

4 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Mar-20-13 5:30 AM

I meant to say "Absentee balloting" which requires no ID is where you see voter fraud. Having an ID does nothing to curb "That" fraud.

4 Agrees | 2 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Mar-20-13 7:42 AM

Sorry dennie but you're wrong. The 15th Amendment prohibits the governmentdenying a citizen the vote based on that citizen's "race, color, or previous condition of servitude" meaning slavery. It doesn’t extend to anyone the “fundamental right” to vote.

Would you like to try again? You could try the 19th but all that does is prohibit the government from denying women the vote. The 24th deals with denying based on ability to pay a tax. The 26th gives the vote to those 18-20. Even the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965 doesn’t extend the fundamental right to all citizens to vote. It deals with discrimination based on race.

I’m sorry dennie but it seems to me you’re regurgitating the same tired tripe the left has been exposing for decades. Don’t you know that retelling a lie doesn’t make it true.

I’m curious though, you’ve ignored the fact that the President had to provide identification in IL to vote. Why is that?

2 Agrees | 4 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Mar-20-13 6:26 PM

I didn't know slavery existed 1964.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Mar-20-13 6:27 PM

Echoing the language of the 15th Amendment, the Act prohibits states from imposing any "voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure ... to deny or abridge the right of any citizen of the United States to vote on account of race or color. Specifically, Congress intended the Act to outlaw the practice of requiring otherwise "qualified voters to pass literacy tests in order to register to vote," a principal means by which Southern states had prevented African Americans from exercising the franchise. The Act was signed into law by "President Lyndon B. Johnson," who had earlier signed the landmark Civil Rights Act of 1964 into law.

2 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Mar-20-13 6:27 PM

The Act established extensive federal oversight of elections administration, providing that states with a history of discriminatory voting practices (so-called "covered jurisdictions") {could not implement any change affecting voting without first obtaining the approval of the Department of Justice,} a process known as preclearance. These enforcement provisions applied to states and political subdivisions (mostly in the South) that had used a "device" to limit voting and in which less than 50 percent of the population was registered to vote in 1964. The Act has been renewed and amended by Congress four times, the most recent being a 25-year extension signed into law by President "George W. Bush in 2006."

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Mar-20-13 6:28 PM

States are making it harder and harder for people to vote, virtually guaranteeing that many people won’t really have the right at all. Poll taxes and literacy tests have given way to more modern voter suppression tactics packaged as voter ID laws, restrictions to voter registration and cuts to early voting. With these new laws in effect, up to 5 million voters could be turned away at the polls.

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

denver

Mar-20-13 6:53 PM

And who said President Obama had to provide identification to vote

1 Agrees | 0 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

AaronS

Mar-20-13 7:16 PM

Thanks dennie for proving my point. States control guidelines regarding voting with the limitd restrictions. States cannot deny the vote based on race, origin, gender or certain age but otherwise, determine who can and cannot vote. Basically, so long as the restrictions placed by states are uniform to all citizens, there is little the federal government can or will do about those laws. After all, Voter ID laws that apply to EVERY citizen meet Constitutional muster so in reality, there is very little Big Brother can do.

And his from a Washington Post article. Feel free to google it if you choose.

“President Obama voted about 5:20 p.m. at a community center in his hometown of Chicago, punching his choices into a touch-screen machine after signing forms and showing his driver’s license.”

Once again, if it’s good enough for the President in ‘Chicago, why isn’t it good enough for citizens of West Virginia?

0 Agrees | 3 Disagrees | Report Abuse »

Showing 25 of 27 comments Show More Comments
 
 

 

I am looking for:
in:
News, Blogs & Events Web