Mercury Rising 鳯女

Politics, life, and other things that matter

How Much Will The MN GOP’s “Voter ID” Amendment Cost Minnesotans? Between $49 and $139 Million.

Posted by Phoenix Woman on September 5, 2012

In case, after witnessing the walking bounced checks that are Tony Sutton and the Republican Party of Minnesota, you needed any further proof that Republicans in general, and Minnesota Republicans in particular, should never be trusted with Other People’s Money — here you go:

Yesterday, Citizens for Election Integrity Minnesota (CEIMN) and Hamline University professor David Schultz released Cost of Minnesota’s Election Amendment.

[…]

According to group’s press release, the amendment is going to be costly to state and local government:

The report estimates that if the amendment is adopted state and local governments will need to spend between $33 million and $67 million to comply with its likely requirements and that individuals who currently lack a government identification will need to spend between $16 million and $72 million to get the documents necessary for the free ID if they wish to vote.

The proposed amendment would mandate the showing of a government-issued ID when voting. According to Kathy Bonnifield, Executive Director of CEIMN, “The amendment could make significant changes to Minnesota’s elections, affecting mail-in voting,
absentee voting, and Election Day Registration, and introduce provisional balloting.” 

The estimated cost to local governments is between $23 million and $53 million. Counties with mail-in precincts will be impacted at a greater rate than counties that do not have mail-in precincts. For example, the estimated cost to Renville County, with 9,000 registered voters and no mail-in precincts, is between $46,000 and $150,000 while the cost estimate for Roseau
County, with 8,700 registered voters and eight mail-in precincts, is between $200,000 and $300,000.

So, state and local governments will have to spend between $33 million and $67 million, and individuals who don’t currently have what Mary Kiffmeyer would consider proper ID would have to shell out between $16 million and $72 million to get all the documents needed to successfully apply for the “free” ID.

All for something that doesn’t stop the sort of fraud Republicans claim it would stop, but will make it a lot harder for college kids, seniors, and veterans to vote.

You can read the full report here.

55 Responses to “How Much Will The MN GOP’s “Voter ID” Amendment Cost Minnesotans? Between $49 and $139 Million.”

  1. Mike Mainello said

    Your article is wrong just in the state of Minnesota it appears that Senator Franken was fraudulently voted into office. http://washingtonexaminer.com/york-when-1099-felons-vote-in-race-won-by-312-ballots/article/2504163#.UEw63pHdW9I

    • Charles II said

      Mike, there’s a danger in getting your information from Party organs like the Washington Examiner, a paper run by a right-wing billionaire for the purpose of indoctrinating gullible people like yourself.

      To be a Party sheep, you have to believe that a few courageous conservatives are right and the many good and honest people who oversaw the recount are blind. For those of us who haven’t been indoctrinated, we look at the other side of the story.

      Here are some facts that are inconvenient for the sheep:
      * Of the names that Minnesota Majority submitted, 56% (270/480) were obvious mis-identifications
      * Therefore York’s basic numbers are completely wrong. Only 210 votes are even in question
      * in the one case of felon voting that is known, the man in question said he voted for Coleman.

      One may add that there is no particular reason to believe that felons who vote actually vote Democratic. Getting caught is a big deal, so only someone who is very committed and also thinks he can get off if caught is likely to break the law. That means that felons who vote are likely to be wealthier and politically rabid. That is more consistent with Republicans than Democrats.

      In other words, everything you believe is based on falsehoods and dubious reasoning. It was a close election. After an enormous effort to be fair and count the votes accurately, Coleman lost.

      Get over it.

      • Mike Mainello said

        Oh, liberal logic. ” 177 people have been convicted — not just accused, but convicted — of voting fraudulently in the Senate race. Another 66 are awaiting trial.” That does not trouble you, especially with the high bar to prove fraudulent voting?

        I quote the facts. I can’t find many facts at liberal sites because they hide or ignore them.

        I have accepted the fact that Senator Franken was elected (fraudulently in my opinion), but liberals are constantly harping on Voter ID and lack of proof of any problem. Here are facts and it illustrates why Voter ID is needed.

        Please cite where Republicans have been found guilty of Voter Intimidation and Fraud. I have many examples of Democrat fraud and voter intimidation. I realize you will not have any examples, but cite how devious Rethuglicans or Teabaggers are and with the help of the Koch Brothers have covered up their crimes.

      • Charles, it’s obvious that he’s just here to troll. He hasn’t read the post at all because that would require him to have intellectual honesty — I suspect he’s just some minion from Kiffmeyer’s cult come to spew non sequiturs and irrelevancies. Be interesting to see what the IP log says about him.

      • Mike Mainello said

        I am reading your posts and Firedog Lake is such an unbiased source of news. No IDs to vote, but you IDs to listen to a speech from AG Holder. Hypocrisy!

      • Still waiting for you to actually disprove a single thing I’ve said with a pertinent fact in context.

      • Oh, and Mike —

        Still waiting for you to honestly answer these five questions:

        1) Do you favor a national ID? If not, why not?

        2) Did you know that the person behind the ALEC Voter ID vote suppression amendment is Mary Kiffmeyer, Secretary of State during the Pawlenty administration — and a known practitioner of voter suppression tactics?

        3) Did you know that in 2009, Democrats in the legislature promoted a Mark Ritchie plan to safeguard voting in Minnesota, and do it far better and cheaper than the Kiffmeyer Amendment would — only for Pawlenty to veto it while Kiffmeyer claimed it would cost too much?

        4) Did you know that a growing number of Minnesota local governments are realizing with horror that the Kiffmeyer Amendment, if ratified, would blow huge holes in their budgets? (Kittson County alone would have to shell out $160 for each person in the county — not each voter, but each man, woman and child — in order to comply with that.) Where do you think the money will come from, especially with the Republican-controlled legislature slashing Local Government Aid?

        5) Have you watched the video I put in this post?

      • Charles II said

        Mike Mainello says, ” 177 people have been convicted — not just accused, but convicted — of voting fraudulently in the Senate race. Another 66 are awaiting trial.”

        So you’re not disputing the point that York’s numbers are completely wrong, that four years after the election, we’re talking about slightly over 200 votes out of 2.9 MILLION illegally cast. None of these votes were cast fraudulently–a term that implies that the felons knew they were voting illegally. The guys just didn’t know the rules.

        You’re not disputing that there’s no evidence that these felons voting might not all be Republicans for all that we know.

        Nor are you disputing the point that Voter ID as it currently stands will dienfranchise tens of thousands of Minnesotans. Could you at least pretend to care that the cure for the problem you want to address is about 100 times worse than the problem?

        And you are completely wrong that these allegations have not been discussed fully and fairly by liberal sites. For example.

        Mike Mainello says, “Please cite where Republicans have been found guilty of Voter Intimidation and Fraud.”

        Voter Intimidation. The Republican Party is under a consent decree dating from 1981 when it committed massive voter intiimidation, misdeeds which it has repeated again and again in a completely lawless manner. I dare you to read this article.

        As for voter fraud, the highest profile case is of the Republican Indiana Secretary of State. There’s a Republican county-level candidate in Arizona. And there’s a big question as to whether Mitt Romney committed voter fraud by claiming to have been living in his son’s basement in Massachusetts when he voted there. These are people who claim to be leaders, so their bad example is a lot more damaging than some felon who didn’t know he had to apply to get his voting rights restored.

        If Republicans cared about the poor, the elderly, the disabled, the young whose votes they are blocking, it would be a lot easier for Democrats to care about the miniscule number of cases of felons voting because they don’t know the rules.

      • Mike Mainello said

        I read your article and while I don’t condone the actions allegedly conducted by the individuals, what we are discussing is completely different. All voters, regardless of race, color, gender, etc, should have to provide proof of who they are.

      • Charles II said

        Mike, I don’t object to making voters provide proof of who they are.

        I do object to a corrupt political party trying to retain its fading hold on political power by imposing heavy financial burdens on the poor, the old, and the disabled to prevent them from voting. According to the Strib, 250,000 Minnesotans will be affected!

        I do appreciate that you read the article showing that there is voter fraud by senior Republicans.

      • Mike Mainello said

        Then you don’t have a problem since the states have said they will pay for the IDs. Yes, there might be a time burden on the individual, but it is in the person’s best interest to have proper ID should they want to vote or obtain any other product or service that requires an ID. President Obama has been in power for 3+ years and I have not seen him request ID waivers for traveling, alcohol, or medication. It appears we agree on this issue.

      • Charles II said

        Mike Mainello says, “Then you don’t have a problem since the states have said they will pay for the IDs….”

        Mike, please take the time to read and think about what the Star Tribune and the Brennan Center are saying. The state may be offering to pay for the IDs. They are not paying for the birth certificates or for transportation–in states like Georgia people are being forced to travel to other counties for their IDs. Low income people are forced to change addresses frequently. Every time they do, they have to get new ID. There are even elderly people from rural areas who never got a birth certificate.

        As you grudgingly and vaguely acknowledge, the time burden can be heavy for someone carrying two or three jobs, as so many of the working poor must. And, for someone in their 80s or 90s, or someone with a serious disability, just getting out of the house is a big deal. \

      • Mike Mainello said

        I have considered the writings, but think about what you are saying and lets follow it to the next step. The person dies. If this person is not properly documented, under today’s society, then their belongings could be confiscated by the state and the heirs not receive anything. Maybe the family is not even notified of a family members death. Does this person not bear any responsibility for their actions?

        If a person is not that responsible for their life, then maybe they should not vote. But, by the same token, someone else should not be able to vote for them – illegally. As a US citizen you have the right to vote, but I want to make sure your vote counts.

      • Charles II said

        Mike Mainello says, “I have considered the writings, but think about what you are saying and lets follow it to the next step. The person dies. If this person is not properly documented, under today’s society, then their belongings could be confiscated by the state and the heirs not receive anything. Maybe the family is not even notified of a family members death. Does this person not bear any responsibility for their actions? ”

        Huh?

        There are tons of homeless people who don’t have any ID, they die every day, and no one seems to care about them. I think it would be great if they got an ID. It would make being homeless a lot less difficult.

        But that’s not what this law is about. This law is about raising a barrier to voting. If it were really about proper ID, it would have taken into account the criticisms of the law that have been raised from the beginning. It hasn’t. The voter ID hysteria is all hypocrisy and BS.

      • Mike Mainello said

        “But that’s not what this law is about. This law is about raising a barrier to voting. If it were really about proper ID, it would have taken into account the criticisms of the law that have been raised from the beginning. It hasn’t. The voter ID hysteria is all hypocrisy and BS.”

        Now your true colors are beginning to show. It appears that Minnesota came up with a system that you don’t agree with and in your opinion it should be scrapped. Fine, that is your opinion, but you said you thought voter ID was a good idea, but now it appears you were either lying to me or to yourself.

      • Charles II said

        Ok, Mike. Now you are trolling. This is a warning, because this site does not tolerate trolls (see our Policy on Posting)

        You have been told that I support people getting voter ID if the way it is done does not lead to suppression of the vote.

        You argue that people should get ID because then if they die, their heirs might be cheated or the family might even not be notified.

        I point out that that position is pure hypocrisy, because Minnesota is not enacting a law to get everyone ID–just voters. If they wanted to get ID to ensure that family members get notified, the very first people they’d do this for would be the homeless. So, this effort is aimed at blocking some people from voting– and based on the 250,000 who will be affected vs. the 200-some who actually illegally voted, it’s pretty clear it’s not aimed at stopping felons from voting.

        You call that lying.

        As the primary person who has been dealing with the ignorant, tendentious nonsense you have been ladling out, my patience is getting very thin.

      • Mike Mainello said

        You can call me a “troll” and block me, that is your right as a member of this web site. However, I have provided logical responses to your comments and even though you don’t agree with them it does not make me a troll. It just means we disagree.

      • Charles II said

        Mike Mainello says, “However, I have provided logical responses to your comments and even though you don’t agree with them it does not make me a troll.”

        From the policy on posting:

        Harassment includes constant off-topic posting, chronic use of well-known logical fallacies to frustrate honest debate, and the use of fake facts.

        Examples of off-topic posting include:
        * dragging in Al Gore and the recount of 2000
        * dragging in the issue of ID in identifying people who die

        Examples of fake facts include:
        * Using propaganda mills like The Examiner as sources
        * Calling a report by the Brennan Center “smoke”

        Logical fallacies include
        * Assuming in the absence of any evidence that the people who illegally voted in Franken v. Coleman were Democrats aka dicto simpliciter
        * Using the circular argument that people must have ID because they of course have library cards
        * Throwing out red herrings like the issue of people who die without ID in a discussion of voter ID

        But more generally, simply disregarding well-documented evidence that there is a conspiracy to corrupt the vote…and it’s run by Republicans.

        As the Policy on Posting says, ” very simply, any behavior that is repeated after a site administrator says stop is harassment.”

        Take some time off from posting. Read some of the links you have generously been provided. Reflect on the possibility that the people you are dealing with might be just as interested in honest elections as you are, but that they might know something you don’t.

      • Mike Mainello said

        I have read most of your examples and they are just not germane to the topic and I have answered every question posed to me from people posting on your web site.

        1. Franken Vote – Are these facts wrong, regardless of the site reporting them? washingtonexaminer.com/york-when-1099-felons-vote-in-race-won-by-312-ballots/article/2504163. 177 convictions for fraudulent voting.

        2. I keep reading that you support Voter ID, it is just that no system can be created that will satisfy your requirement enabling people to obtain the ID. Am I wrong? My point is this, government requires IDs to conduct many basic day to day actions in life. The number of people not possessing IDs are very small and would probably not vote at all. So in agreement with former DEMOCRATIC PRESIDENT JIMMY CARTER, let us implement an ID system for voting.

        3. Lets increase the penalties for voter fraud and intimidation so it is not worth it to conduct these practices.

        How is any of this controversial or causing voter suppression?

      • Charles II said

        Mike Mainello says, “In only 3.5 years President Obama has created a higher deficit than President Bush created in 8 years.”

        Amazingly false.

        The cause of most of the deficit now is Bush policies.

      • Mike Mainello said

        Ah yes, Bush’s fault, that never gets old does it. President Bush, the same president that inherited a recession from President Clinton after the dot com bubble burst. I guess he kept blaming President Clinton as he kept unemployment at 5% for most of his term and was trending the deficit down until 2006 when the Democrats took over congress and the budget started going the other direction.

        So lets review – 1992 – Economy is terrible when President Clinton takes over with a democrat congress. 1994 – Republicans take over congress and work with President Clinton to help fix the budget. Bubble bursts in 1999 – 2000 and President Bush wins election (I know you disagree) and goes on to fix the budget after the second round of tax cuts. 2006 and Democrats take over and the budget deficit starts to explode. Remember it is Congress the spends money.

        So that dummy President Bush, out of office for 3+ years, did not have control of either house of congress for the last 2 years, has run up this big deficit. Wow how did he do it? I guess maybe President Obama should win a second term and the Democrats loose control of the Senate. That may be what is needed to fix the problem. There is only one flaw in this scenario – President Obama is no President Clinton.

        You guys are great and I am actually learning a lot.

    • Charles II said

      Mike Mainello says, “1. Franken Vote – Are these facts wrong, regardless of the site reporting them? washingtonexaminer.com/york-when-1099-felons-vote-in-race-won-by-312-ballots/article/2504163. 177 convictions for fraudulent voting.

      Yes, Mike. It is a g-dd–ned lie to say that 1099 felons voted when the district attorney looking at the allegations has clearly said that most of the allegations are mis-identifications. It is further a g-dd–ned lie to call it fraud when the DA has concluded that there was no deliberate attempt to commit fraud.

      Mike Mainello says “2. I keep reading that you support Voter ID, it is just that no system can be created that will satisfy your requirement enabling people to obtain the ID. Am I wrong?”

      Yes, Mike, you are wrong. My objection is to who pays, both in money and in convenience. If Minnesota wants to have state employees drive vans to the homes of people who are disabled and elderly and who work two or three jobs, if they want to pay all the costs of getting ID, which in one case mentioned by the Strib including getting a man’s legal name changed and in lots of cases of elderly people born in rural areas could involve getting birth certificates to be issued, I have no problem with it.

      Mike Mainello says, “My point is this, government requires IDs to conduct many basic day to day actions in life. The number of people not possessing IDs are very small …”

      And in this you have been stubbornly ignoring the evidence from the Brennan Center that about 10% of the American population does not have ID and many of those would have serious difficulty getting it.

      If you are sincere in wanting to prevent voter fraud, then be just as sincere in caring about depriving people of the right to vote.

      Mike Mainello says, “3. Lets increase the penalties for voter fraud and intimidation so it is not worth it to conduct these practices.”

      Voter fraud–actual voter fraud and not innocent mistakes–is punished very heavily in most places. In Minnesota, it can cost you a year in jail and $10,000. What are you proposing? Cutting off a hand or an ear?

      Now, voter intimidation is almost never punished. According to Wikipedia, the NBPP was exceptional: “Since the voting rights act was enacted in 1965, only a handful of cases under the act have been pursued by the Justice Department. According to AAG Perez, the Department has records of only three prior cases.” If voter intimidation were properly enforced, I wouldn’t worry about the penalties, since they are essentially the same as for voter fraud. But perhaps because voter intimidation tends to be done through conspiracy, while voter fraud is an individual offense, Project Vote recommends that “The penalties for convictions of voter intimidation should be increased to a maximum of five years in prison and a $100,000 fine.” I would not be opposed to increasing the penalty, but the main issue is enforcement.

      • Phoenix Woman said

        Exactly. Mike Mainello is yet another product of the nearly fifty years Republicans have spent promoting the big business and big bigotry alliance called “The Southern Strategy”. Use racist motivations to appeal to frightened white working-class voters and get them to vote against their own long-term best interests by cutting taxes on the rich and big businesses — and cloak the racism behind a shield of pretended “fiscal responsibility”. Or, as Reagan strategist Lee Atwater explained it back in 1981:

        ”You start out in 1954 by saying, ‘Nigger, nigger, nigger.’ By 1968 you can’t say ‘nigger’ — that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states’ rights and all that stuff. You’re getting so abstract now [that] you’re talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you’re talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.

        ”And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I’m not saying that. But I’m saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me — because obviously sitting around saying, ‘We want to cut this,’ is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than ‘Nigger, nigger.”’

        Why has it come to be that what once was the Party of Lincoln is now the Party of David Duke and Strom Thurmond? It was a simple business calculation — Corporate America and rich people in general wanted to get out of paying the taxes needed to sustain our societal infrastructure, and they figured the best way to do that was to manipulate race hatreds among whites in order to convince them that societal infrastructure helped black people more than white people. It succeeded very well in cutting the taxes on the rich and on corporations, but that success came at the price of poisoning the minds of the Republicans, from the lowliest grunt worker to elite-level opinion controllers like Peggy Noonan and Tucker Carlson, with the deep-set sickness of bigotry.
        Sow the racist wind, reap the insanely racist whirlwind.

      • Mike Mainello said

        The only hatred I hear comes from you. The majority of conservatives want everyone to have a the same opportunities. We listen to both sides and then make a decision. Just ask Juan Williams how he he was treated by conservatives and liberals when he was out promoting his book on education or after he was fired by PBS for his comments.

        Reference your articles – David Duke was not welcome in the Republican party and lost the races he ran. Taxes are paid by all people that earn income over a set level. The upper 1% regardless of color pay approximately 80% of the income tax. As usual you are trying to split people into different groups. I think it is great they make a lot of money and pay a lot of taxes. If they earned it illegally, then they should go to jail – DEMOCRAT GOVERNOR CORZINE come to mind. I think that is wrong the GE and its CEO did not pay any taxes on their profits. President Obama can ask him about that next time President Obama attends one of the jobs meetings being ran by Mr. Imelt. I really don’t care to comment on Bob Hebert. He is a democrat hack and will turn a phrase to support his case.

        Oh well, nice talking with you. Ban me, delete my comments, whatever you think you should do. I hope one day the democrat party moves back to the center so 2 parties can represent the people. It will take a total reform of the news media for this to happen, but I pray that it will.

      • Mike Mainello said

        Oh yeah, the Willie Horton ad, did you know that the Massachusetts furlough program was initially brought up by Senator Al Gore Jr in his 1988 run. “The first person to mention the Massachusetts furlough program in the 1988 presidential campaign was Al Gore. During a debate at the Felt Forum sponsored by the New York Daily News, Gore took issue with the furlough program. However, he did not specifically mention the Horton incident or even his name, instead asking a general question about the Massachusetts furlough program.[7]” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willie_Horton

      • Charles II said

        Well, I wish that the Mike Mainellos of the world were able to hear what we are saying.

        It’s true that Dems/libs tend to overreact to the voter ID issue, but they’re reacting to a long history of first Dixiecrats and then (when Dixiecrats joined the GOP) Republicans trying to prevent Americans from voting. Holding power against the will of people qualified to vote amounts to tyranny, and the GOP has become the party of tyranny.

        But we all want clean elections. Today a Maryland Dem, Wendy Rosenberg dropped out of her race because she’s been voting in two states. I hope both of them prosecute her. It would be nice if Ann Coulter had been prosecuted for exactly the same crime.

        The point should not be Democratic or Republican voter fraud, since they both obviously engage in it. It is that a lot of wealthy people have a sense of impunity, that they can get away with anything. It’s highly unlikely that they–or felons who don’t understand that they need to get their voting rights restored before they vote– are swinging elections. But it’s wrong, and Dems should join Reps in taking steps to stop it. Voter ID? I don’t mind, especially if it allows homeless people to pick up their prescriptions, too.

      • Mike Mainello said

        With the exception of the “Tyranny” comment and the fact that it was the Republican party in 1964 that was key in breaking the filibuster of the Dixiecrat Democrats (Al Gore Sr, William Fulbright, and Robert Byrd), it was a very good response.

      • Charles II said

        Mike Mainello says, “With the exception of the “Tyranny” comment and the fact that it was the Republican party in 1964 that was key in breaking the filibuster of the Dixiecrat Democrats (Al Gore Sr, William Fulbright, and Robert Byrd), it was a very good response.”

        Oh, glad you’re still in, Mike. We may talk some sense into you, yet. :-)

        In 1964, Lyndon Johnson made a very deliberate choice to end support for segregation by the Democratic Party. He knew it would cost the Democrats their advantage in American politics for a generation, but he did it anyway.

        As you say, Republican votes helped to overcome the filibuster.

        But then the Dixiecrats left the Democratic Party and joined the Republicans. Richard Nixon’s campaign strategist Kevin Phillips called the strategy of bringing the Dixiecrats into the Party “The Southern Strategy.” Republicans could not win on economic issues. So they ran on racism. From Eugene Robinson at RealClearPolitics:

        The history of the Republican Party’s estrangement from African-Americans is well known. In 1960, Richard Nixon won 32 percent of the black vote. In 1964, Barry Goldwater — who had opposed the landmark Civil Rights Act — received just 6 percent of the black vote. This dramatic shift made possible Nixon’s “Southern strategy,” which political strategist Kevin Phillips explained to The New York Times in 1970, using some archaic terminology:

        “From now on, the Republicans are never going to get more than 10 to 20 percent of the Negro vote and they don’t need any more than that,” Phillips said, “but Republicans would be shortsighted if they weakened enforcement of the Voting Rights Act. The more Negroes who register as Democrats in the South, the sooner the Negrophobe whites will quit the Democrats and become Republicans. That’s where the votes are. Without that prodding from the blacks, the whites will backslide into their old comfortable arrangement with the local Democrats.”

        In other words, the idea was to capitalize on the racial fears and grievances of Southern whites — by letting black voters drift away from the GOP, and even encouraging them to stay away.

        So, my statement was perfectly accurate. It was always conservatives, whether they called themselves Dixiecrats or, later, Republicans, who wanted to prevent people from voting.

        As for tyranny, I think it’s accurate. Ever since the founding of this country, one party has always represented the interests of the wealthy, while the other has represented–however feebly– the interests of the poor and middle class. The wealthy have misused their power and influence to divide and distract Americans, to corrupt members of the other party, and otherwise to rule against the will of the people. The resultant conflict and disillusionment weakens the whole country, which was ok as long as we were protected by our oceans and could let the other powers fight it out. But now economic power is what determines power. The great economic engine that drives our military supremacy is dying, thanks to all the corruption.

        The Democrats are, heaven knows, no saints. But none of their presidential candidates were awarded medals by Der Fuhrer. They have never tried to overthrow a president. They have never ordered the murder of a journalist or the firebombing of a think tank.

        One can go on. It’s a long and astonishing history that very few Americans know because… well, who owns the press and the electronic media?

        Hint: count the number of TV channels and major newspapers devoted to issues of special interest to labor (11.4% of the population), teachers (7.2 million people) or students (76 million), women (half the population), African Americans (12%) and Hispanics (16%), the poor (25%) … and so on. Evidently whoever owns the media is not SEIU, NOW, the NAACP, or ACORN.

        On the other hand, it’s not too hard to get financial news. As newspapers go out of business, they still publish pages and pages of stock exchange prices.

      • Mike Mainello said

        While it is obvious you hate the Republican party it is a fact that more Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than Democrats and helped end the filibuster led by the Democrat party. Most of these senators remained in the Democrat Party for the rest of their career to include Al Gore Sr, William Fulbright (President Clinton’s Mentor) and Senator Robert Byrd.

        If the Republicans had been more about Party than principal, the act would not have passed. The truth is the act was bi-partisan, with Republicans leading the way.

        From Wikipedia: By party

        The original House version:[16]

        Democratic Party: 152–96 (61–39%)
        Republican Party: 138–34 (80–20%)

        Cloture in the Senate:[17]

        Democratic Party: 44–23 (66–34%)
        Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

        The Senate version:[16]

        Democratic Party: 46–21 (69–31%)
        Republican Party: 27–6 (82–18%)

        The Senate version, voted on by the House:[16]

        Democratic Party: 153–91 (63–37%)
        Republican Party: 136–35 (80–20%)

        As far as the media is concerned Fox News is the only TV station that leans conservative. The other 3 majors, MSNBC, CNN and PBS are decidedly more liberal / democrat. No major newsweekly is conservative, and very few newspapers. Talk radio is one of the few areas where conservatives dominate liberals in stations and ratings.

        While Nixon did adopt the Southern Strategy in 1968, I am sure it was President Johnson’s masterful use of the media and the sympathetic vote from the death of President Kennedy that helped him solidify the black vote. It is unfortunate that black Americans vote so solidly for the democrats because they are taken advantage of by their chosen party.

      • Charles II said

        Mike Mainello says, “While it is obvious you hate the Republican party it is a fact that more Republicans voted for the Civil Rights Act of 1964 than Democrats and helped end the filibuster led by the Democrat party.”

        Lord, Mike. I wish we could teach you to read. I said: “As you say, Republican votes helped to overcome the filibuster.” I’m agreeing with you.

        I’m just less impressed with the fact than you are. Both parties were in favor of the civil rights bills. The fact that more Republicans voted for cloture than against is due to the fact that there were almost no Republicans in the south. After the Dems embraced civil rights, the trogs moved to the Republican Party.

        The issue of whether newspeople who appear on TV are conservative or liberal has been debated to death. Serious academic studies, like David Croteau’s survey generally find that newspeople are socially liberal (issues like abortion or gay rights) but economically conservative (issues like cutting Social Security/Medicare or taxing the wealthy). On economic issues, they are often far to the right of the general public.

        But when it comes to ownership, there really is no question. Sometimes it’s obvious. For example, Bain Capital is a major owner of Clear Channel. NBC was owned by defense contractor General Electric; now it shares that with Comcast, which is no liberal bastion. Disney, owner of ABC, not only has a pact with Pat Robertson, but is a big sweatshop operator.

        The simple fact is that there are no poor people serving on the boards of major corporations. No union members. Etc. The big media companies are conservative by virtue of the fact that there is no one to represent the views of anyone except the very wealthy.

        And that’s why there are no channels to represent the interests of union members, teachers, students, etc.

      • Mike Mainello said

        GE, CEO Jeff Imelt, who is also the chairman of the presidents job council. In addition poor people are the recipient of taxes. Since President Obama and his policies keep reducing income at all levels, less taxes flow into the treasury and the deficit increases. In only 3.5 years President Obama has created a higher deficit than President Bush created in 8 years. As a side benefit you have less rich to hate.

      • Charles II said

        Mike Mainello says,

        “Oh yeah, the Willie Horton ad, did you know that the Massachusetts furlough program was initially brought up by Senator Al Gore Jr in his 1988 run. “The first person to mention the Massachusetts furlough program in the 1988 presidential campaign was Al Gore. During a debate at the Felt Forum sponsored by the New York Daily News, Gore took issue with the furlough program. However, he did not specifically mention the Horton incident or even his name, instead asking a general question about the Massachusetts furlough program”

        Oh, come on, Mike.

        The reason the Willie Horton ad campaign was so disgusting, the reason a dying Lee Atwater apologized for it on his deathbead, was because it showed a black man and was clearly intended to tell viewers blacks are scary and evil. Al Gore never mentioned WIllie Horton’s name or race. Asking whether a furlough program is a good idea is fine. Turning it into a racially divisive uglyfest is not.

      • Mike Mainello said

        Did you think the ad about dragging a black man to death was just as disgusting by the Democrats?

      • Charles II said

        Mike Mainello says, “id you think the ad about dragging a black man to death was just as disgusting by the Democrats?”

        Ok, let me see if I have this right, Mike. You are arguing that something bad done by Republicans is ok because of something bad done, well, actually not by Democrats, but by an outside group.

        Have I got that right?

        That’s what’s generally called moral relativism.

        I hear a lot of it from Republicans.

        You are spending too little time thinking and a lot too much time popping off.

      • Mike Mainello said

        I did not justify either ad, but your interesting response – “Outside Group”.- was very typical

        I found what Al Gore and President Bush to be more honest – the program was a Dukasis program – versus a lie in that George Bush did not support what the “Outside Group” ad implicated.

        So just like the President Obama’s re-election team was on a conference call with the steel worker that claimed it was Mitt Romney and Bain Capital’s fault his wife died, but it was the “outside” group that published the ad. Please, moral relativism. It is called politics and your “outside group” ads are misleading at best where as Al Gore Jr and President Bush’s ad at least accurately portrayed a policy supported by Governor Dukakis.

  2. Mike Mainello said

    Here is another documented case –
    http://www.arkansasbusiness.com/article.aspx?aid=132827.54928.144956

    Even Democrat and Former President Jimmy Carter recommend voter ID.
    http://www.carolinajournal.com/exclusives/display_exclusive.html?id=8713#.Tyfo2WHzQj0.facebook

    The requirement for ID’s is critical to a fair election

    • Charles II said

      You say that “The requirement for ID’s is critical to a fair election”

      I say that unless the state pays for ID and all of the associated costs in time and money that ID imposes on voters, voter ID laws will keep millions of people–the old, the poor, the disabled, the young– from voting. Excluding people from voting by what amounts to a poll tax does not produce a fair election.

      You are pointing to a small injustice for which the actual evidence is very thin. I am pointing to a very large injustice for which the evidence is very strong.

      Read and reflect on the Brennan Center’s remarks, which I have linked just above, and I’ll consider that you might not be a completely brainwashed tool.

      • Mike Mainello said

        You do not think very highly of your voters. How do they receive medical care, qualify for any benefits, get a library card. You should welcome the opportunity for these people to join society and not fall through the cracks.

      • Mike Mainello said

        I read a lot of smoke, but very few hard verifiable facts. You tell me people are working and receiving paychecks without verification of who they are. Talk about an injustice to the worker. They are being exploited by the employer and should report them.

        Bottom line: I guess according to you I am brainwashed tool, but I see disenfranchised voters that can’t even attend most Democratic events to voice their opinion or see their selected candidate because these events require ID to attend. I see a bunch of liberals / progressives etc ripping down our country and its institutions just to retain power. I believe in equality for all US citizens and legal visitors. The rule of law is paramount for all people to have the ability to pursue their dreams and live a safe life. Your faux compassion hurts all people and exploits the most vulnerable.

      • Charles II said

        Mike Mainello says “I read a lot of smoke, but very few hard verifiable facts. You tell me people are working and receiving paychecks without verification of who they are. Talk about an injustice to the worker. They are being exploited by the employer and should report them.”

        I have no idea what you are talking about. If you had read the Brennan Center report, you would have seen that it says that the people most impacted include the elderly and the disabled, people who are highly unlikely to be working. You might also have noticed that the Brennan Center is part of the NYU School of Law, and is one of the most respected institutions on the issue of voting rights. You might also have noticed that they conduct studies–real studies, not crap from right-wing propaganda mills, but actual research– on the impact of voter ID laws.

        Mike Mainello says, “You do not think very highly of your voters. How do they receive medical care, qualify for any benefits, get a library card.”

        Once you get on Medicare, you do not need proof of identity unless you need to get a replacement card.

        Medicaid is a state-by-state matter. This study by Kansas says that

        If required to do so, 64.2% of Medicaid beneficiaries would need to purchase one of the three state-approved forms of identification….Slightly more than three-quarters (75.7%) “strongly agree,” “mostly agree,” or “somewhat
        agree” that they would need financial assistance to purchase an ID.

        Just because you cannot imagine that people don’t have photo ID does not mean that they have it or can get it.

      • Mike Mainello said

        Just think of the fraud that might be rooted out if a person has to provide proof. Based upon the size of Medicare, it could be massive. From a compassionate standpoint think about the recipients that are receiving sub-standard care because of non-eligible people receiving the service. You should be cheering this on.

      • Charles II said

        Medicare fraud is committed by insurance companies, physicians and other providers! Including, one should most acidly note, by the Republican governor of Florida, whose company was found to have stolen hundreds of millions.

      • Mike Mainello said

        You want to turn this into a Party thing, I am telling you that if Governor Scott of Florida and his company has committed insurance fraud and is convicted then he should pay a fine and / or go to Jail. I don’t care what his political affiliation. I think former Governor Corzine should go to trial over losing $1+ billion in investors money. Not because he is a democrat, but because he appears to have done something illegal.

        If Republicans are intimidating voters from the polls, then they should go to jail. That is the same for Democrats. I want a fair election with the proper people voting. I am tired of hearing Democrats blame losses on “phantom” intimidation and cheating. Prove it and put the criminals in jail. Hears were held in Florida after the 2000 election and while a lot of voters said they heard about intimidation, no actual people came forward with credible information supporting their case. Unlike the New Black Panthers in Philadelphia which should have gone to trial if not for AG Holder.

        I am a conservative Republican. Most of us believe in the rule of law and regardless of party will support the findings of the court in a criminal matter.

      • Charles II said

        Mike Mainello says, ” I am telling you that if Governor Scott of Florida and his company has committed insurance fraud and is convicted then he should pay a fine and / or go to Jail.”

        What do you mean if??

        Rick Scott was co-founder and CEO of Columbia/HCA in the 1990s, when the FBI launched a massive, multi-state investigation that led to the company pleading guilty to criminal charges of overbilling the government.

        But thanks to the massive corruption of our system of allowing corporations to spend huge sums on elections and on lobbying efforts–corruption which the Republican Party has consistently promoted–Columbia/HCA got off with a fine and Rick Scott got a chance to corrupt a whole state.

        I know all about the sins of the Democratic Party and I’ve helped to get a corrupt Democrat or two get unelected. But it’s very clear to me that you have no clue as to just how wildly corrupt the Republican Party has become.

        Mike Mainello says, “I am tired of hearing Democrats blame losses on “phantom” intimidation and cheating. Prove it and put the criminals in jail.”

        Then put the whole Republican leadership in jail, because they’ve been engaged in massive voter intimidation and election cheating for decades. As for the sorry case of the New Black Panther Party that FOX News keeps regurgitating for the Party sheep, this is what a reporter who investigated the Philadelphia case said:

        I spent a day interviewing voters in this ward and people told me they didn’t think that the men were “too exciting” and generally were not afraid.

        The NBPP is a few nuts ranting on street corners. It’s all hype.

      • Mike Mainello said

        I don’t just assume that a Republican is guilty because the party they affiliate with. Bravo to your actions, I think that is great.

        However, corporations donate to both Democrats and to Republicans. Duke Energy helped fund the 2012 DNC convention. I think it is naive to think that corporations should have to stop donating to campaigns, but if that is what you want, what do you think about Unions donating to campaigns?

        Did you know that during the 2000 Florida recount that President Bush listed all of his donors online and VP Gore did not? Did you now President Obama’s campaign disabled credit card firewalls enabling campaign donations outside the US during his 2008 campaign? What about candidate Obama NOT accepting public funding so he could receive excess funding for his campaign (after promising not to do this)?

        Neither party’s hands are clean and transparency is the key.

      • Charles II said

        Mike Mainello says, “I don’t just assume that a Republican is guilty because the party they affiliate with. ”

        But, as I demonstrated with a link, the Republican Party leadership has repeatedly engaged in voter suppression and intimidation, despite having gotten caught and forced to sign consent decrees:

        the national GOP and the New Jersey Republicans were forced to sign a consent decree promising to refrain from the sorts of suppression activities they employed in the 1981 race…In 1987, because of that evidence [in Louisiana], the RNC was once again forced to enter into an agreement with Democrats, this one requiring the federal courts to preapprove all of the Republicans’ ballot-security programs…..[In 1990] The Justice Department later brought a legal challenge against the [NC] state party over the mailings and Republicans agreed, once again, to curtail their efforts to suppress minority-voter turnout…

        On and on it goes:

        the phone-jamming scheme carried out by Republican operatives against a Democratic phone bank in New Hampshire in 2004…. In Texas, Congressman John Carter has suggested implementing literacy tests…n Florida in 2004, Governor Jeb Bush was forced to deactivate a list of purported felons who were to be blocked from voting when the news media discovered that the list included Black, but not Hispanic, voters and that many people on the list were actually eligible voters.

        A consistent effort to pervert democracy and steal elections by depriving the people least able to fight back of their vote. As Republican leader Paul Weyrich said:

        “I don’t want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of the people. They never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.”

        He is a tyrant, and the Republican party is the party of tyranny.

        The Democrats have their sinners and there’s organized pushback, especially against the practice of accepting corporate money effectively in exchange for legislation such as tax subsidies. There’s a constant attempt to retire the worst of the worst. Where is the pushback against corruption in the GOP?

        Mike Mainello says, “Did you know that during the 2000 Florida recount that President Bush listed all of his donors online and VP Gore did not?”

        Since you don’t seem to think it’s important to provide links to reasonable sources for your assertions, I have no idea whether this is even true.

        Mike Mainello asks, “what do you think about Unions donating to campaigns?”

        No person or interest should be able to distort the political process. If this is a country of one man-one vote, then elections should be financed through tax dollars, and all private influence over elections should cease. That includes unions, environmental groups, and women’s groups just as much as it includes corporations, the Chamber of Commerce, and billionaires.

      • Mike Mainello said

        I personally am open to complete federal funding of elections.

        I also believe you continue to combine events to come to your conclusion. Voter intimidation is wrong and people that do it should be held accountable. Having to provide a valid ID (no different than what is needed to make everyday life possible) to vote is not.

        It is a simple requirement. The Democrats are using it as a smokescreen to fire up their base because voters are disappointed with the results President Obama has experienced.

    • So Mike, a few questions for you:

      1) Do you favor a national ID? If not, why not?

      2) Did you know that the person behind the ALEC Voter ID vote suppression amendment is Mary Kiffmeyer, Secretary of State during the Pawlenty administration — and a known practitioner of voter suppression tactics?

      3) Did you know that in 2009, Democrats in the legislature promoted a Mark Ritchie plan to safeguard voting in Minnesota, and do it far better and cheaper than the Kiffmeyer Amendment would — only for Pawlenty to veto it while Kiffmeyer claimed it would cost too much?

      4) Did you know that a growing number of Minnesota local governments are realizing with horror that the Kiffmeyer Amendment, if ratified, would blow huge holes in their budgets? (Kittson County alone would have to shell out $160 for each person in the county — not each voter, but each man, woman and child — in order to comply with that.) Where do you think the money will come from, especially with the Republican-controlled legislature slashing Local Government Aid?

      5) Have you watched the video I put in this post?

      • Mike Mainello said

        1. I do not favor a mandatory national ID. I carry one as a retired member of the military, but I don’t favor forcing anyone to have to obtain one.

        2. I do favor an ID to vote. Voting is a voluntary action by a citizen. It that citizen wants to vote, then they should have an ID.

        3. This is not a party issue to me. If the Democrats had suggested it (which former President Carter has endorsed IDs for voting) I would support it.

    • Charles II said

      Mike Mainello says, “The Democrats are using it [anger at voter suppression] as a smokescreen to fire up their base because voters are disappointed with the results President Obama has experienced.”

      Did any Democrat except John Lewis talk about voter suppression at the Democratic National Convention? Yes: Obama gave it a grand total of 10 words. Which Democratic leaders are mentioning voter suppression?

      The only place I regularly hear about voter suppression is from grassroots people who are just d–ned tired of Republicans buying and bullying their way to power.

      As for “combin[ing] events to come to your conclusion,” it’s called knowing history.

      • Mike Mainello said

        Charles, II hopefully a compromise can be reached and system can be created that can safeguard the elections and limit voter intimidation.

        You mentioned Corporate influence and I saw the opinion piece in the New York Post. I realize the newspaper is fairly conservative, but reading the facts of the article are what I find interesting. For your review, if you are interested.

        http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion/opedcolumnists/soft_on_wall_street_hLRbrpn9LH6QULzx47UcaI

      • Charles II said

        I’m always willing to consider other points of view. And Charles Gasparino is correct to say that Obama has been soft on corporate crime. The Corzine case is outrageous, and I hope it will be prosecuted. And Clinton was no exemplar in corporate crime, though I don’t think his record was worse than that of Reagan–remember the S&L scandal for which taxpayers paid $300B?

        But Gasparino is lying about Bush’s record. A more realistic view is <a href="http://www.alternet.org/story/82030/in_bush%27s_america,_corporate_criminals_walk:here. At the end of the article, Gasparino concedes that “Much of the risk-taking that led to the 2008 collapse occurred under the nose of his regulators — but these practices started to explode during the Clinton years.” Uh, well, yes, but Bush had eight years to do something about it, and he didn’t. So… doesn’t that make him even more culpable than Clinton?

        The real problem with Gasparino’s article is that he doesn’t count the big corporate crimes, crimes so big that they just aren’t prosecuted. The Pentagon cannot account for over $2T dollars of spending, most of it presumably disbursed to Pentagon corporate contractors. While some of that is legitimate, who really knows how much? Has just $500B been stolen? $1T? No one can or will tell us, because the whole system is corrupt.

        Or healthcare. Part of Obamacare is cutting $700B from unjustified payments to providers. Those unjustified payments were there because the healthcare companies have bought Washington. Same for Medicare D, where the government is paying a lot more than it has to because the drug companies bought the right votes.

        Or take a look at Iraq and, now, Afghanistan. Sixty billion dollars in contractor fraud. ?

        These crimes make even Enron and Worldcom pale in comparison. And they’re precisely the crimes that Gasparino won’t talk about, because he’d have to admit that the whole system is rotten.

        So, see, I do read opposing views, think about them, and–where appropriate–agree with them. I agree that both parties are guilty of participating in corporate corruption.

  3. Isn’t it funny how Republicans like Mike Mainello, who are normally obsessed with penny-pinching and cost-effectiveness, suddenly don’t care that legislation like this will cost tens of millions and not catch many more (if any) than are already caught now?

    Gee, it wouldn’t be because for every possible actual fraudster caught, a few thousand legitimate voters (many of whom happen not to be white people) won’t be able to vote at all — or won’t have their ballots counted?

    Speaking of Republicans and racism-driven voter suppression (and notice that Mike Mainello’s history book apparently skips that part of the 1960s where the GOP creates the Southern Strategy in order to get the South — and frightened white voters in general — into the GOP fold?), here’s what former Florida Republican Party head Jim Greer has to say about that:

    In a lawsuit filed against the Republican Party in Florida, former chairman Jim Greer said that party officials discussed ways in which they could prevent blacks from voting, the Tampa Bay Times reports.

    Greer alleged that party officials, some of whom he called “whack-a-do’s,” discussed suppressing the black vote in a December 2009 meeting.

    “I was upset because the political consultants and staff were talking about voter suppression and keeping blacks from voting. It had been one of those days,” he said. Greer also said that the party wanted to oust former governor Charlie Crist, a Republican, in part because Crist appointed a liberal black judge to the state’s Supreme Court.

    • Mike Mainello said

      Phoenix Woman, Democrat Loyalist and Apologist, just like the Democrat party has many violent wack-a-dos that they disavow, so does the Republican party. The party of 40 years ago is not the party of today. Most of us believe in equal opportunity for all people. I find it very condescending that you believe in your heart that minority voters are incapable of getting an ID so they can board an airplane to see a loved one, get a job, buy a can of beer or package of Sudafed, and yes even vote. It illustrates the difference between the party of the hand up and the party of the victim.

      • Charles II said

        And on tbat note, it’s very obviously time to close comments on this thread so that Mike can go and read some of the really good links he has been provided and come up with something better than an Examiner article filled with obvious lies.

        See you in a month or so, Mike.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

 
%d bloggers like this: