READER COMMENTS ON

"Missouri Voter Refuses Illegal Demand to Show Photo ID at Poll, Gets Thrown in Jail"

(48 Responses so far...)





COMMENT #1 [Permalink]

... Karen said on 8/7/2008 @ 10:38 am PT...





[Ed Note: Comment was meant for latest anthrax thread. So it is deleted here, as it's now been posted over there. --- BF]

COMMENT #2 [Permalink]

... Jams Q. Jacobs said on 8/7/2008 @ 11:16 am PT...





The charge is false on its face: "Did knowingly cause a disturbance/disorderly conduct to wit: acts in a violent or tumultuous manner toward another, placing such person(s) in fear of safety by refusing to show proper I. D. when voting" He did show proper ID. This will be throw out. What matters is, Will this situation be corrected in 89 days? Perhaps a legal action can hasten that necessary solution by seeking a judicial order.

COMMENT #3 [Permalink]

... 72dawg said on 8/7/2008 @ 11:21 am PT...





Connect the dots with the story about Jesse Jackson, Jr. and the right to vote. It is being taken away.

COMMENT #4 [Permalink]

... anonymous said on 8/7/2008 @ 11:39 am PT...





The article MO voter arrested for trying to vote on dKos is an easy to read post on this event, cutting right to the arrestee's version.

COMMENT #5 [Permalink]

... anonymous said on 8/7/2008 @ 11:41 am PT...





Thom Hartmann dicussing this LIVE right now:

http://airamerica.com/thomhartmannpage/

COMMENT #6 [Permalink]

... chabuka said on 8/7/2008 @ 12:23 pm PT...





This story needs to "come out of the shadows" and be put on all the MSM and blogs..the people of Missouri, (and all other states) get out in the streets..go to the elections board and raise some hell..this can not be ignored....do you want McCain and another GOP majority in Congress..? That's what they are intending to do ..AGAIN!! (maybe they will allow a few spineless Democrats a win..so it will fool people)this is imperative..they are screwing with OUR VOTES AND ELECTIONS..not just a little....a LOT..do something!! Nothing will "change" if this is condoned..its not just a "few bad apples" its systemic

COMMENT #7 [Permalink]

... TEDEGER said on 8/7/2008 @ 12:36 pm PT...





The worst part of it is that the arresting officer knew damned well that HE was committing an illegal act. I certainly hope that the badge no. was gotten, and a suit for false arrest brought. That's the only way to take care of arrogantr cops.

COMMENT #8 [Permalink]

... Ed Siegel said on 8/7/2008 @ 12:59 pm PT...





As of the last canvas prior to this most recent election, Kansas City (Jackson County) has purged nearly 50,000 from the voter roll since Nov. 2004. They are working overtime to keep us from voting. I hope this victim goes after the election judge at the precinct and the cops who arrested him for voting rights and civil rights violations. If I were in his place I'd start suing right now. If Lindsey decides to go after him, I'll be happy to throw some $$ in the hat. Only by going after the individuals will there be any influence on the behavior of the election workers and police officers. They're only tempted to abuse their authority when they think they can do it with impunity. Make 'em think twice!

COMMENT #9 [Permalink]

... Debbie B. said on 8/7/2008 @ 1:04 pm PT...





Thank you for running you this story. I had sent a link last night but don't know if that prompted your posting. When I read this, I was horrified. Decided the best way to fight back was to sign up to be a poll worker here in California. Please keep up the great work. I check your site daily for news in the election world. Also got to see you and Peter B Collins at the premier of Uncounted and was blown away! Thanks again!

COMMENT #10 [Permalink]

... Anthony Look said on 8/7/2008 @ 1:36 pm PT...





Someone has to start a blog/website that organizes nationally with oversight groups on election day.

COMMENT #11 [Permalink]

... Debbie B. said on 8/7/2008 @ 2:30 pm PT...





Anthony, check out this site: http://www.credoaction.com/ They are trying to do just what you suggested. Anyone who signs up through them to do poll woin wilso get materials on how to report problems to them. I bet they will be very busy in November!

COMMENT #12 [Permalink]

... Elizabeth Weatherford said on 8/7/2008 @ 3:10 pm PT...





Advancement Project (dot org)also has a polling integrity project, with materials on how to detect and report improper procedures. Available on their eponymous website. Does nationalizing the software make sense to anyone? How can the national interest be held hostage to proprietary interests?

COMMENT #13 [Permalink]

... Robin said on 8/7/2008 @ 4:20 pm PT...





I live in Missouri. I got a card in the mail telling me that Photo ID was required. I've voted three time since and no one has asked me for my ID. I called the county office and was told that yes this was correct, so I then emailed Carnahan's office and received the reply that yes, I was required to show the photo id. I never saw any law that was changed to allow it since it was struck down in 06. There have been signs at my polling place telling you to have your photo id. I wish I would have taken pictures, but didn't think about it, because I was told by Carnahan's office this is legal.

COMMENT #14 [Permalink]

... JasonOfallon said on 8/7/2008 @ 5:38 pm PT...





I'm from Missouri and heard about this on Thom Hartman today. Immediately called to volunteered to be a poll worker in my district. I encourage you all to volunteer. We need to make sure this election is fair.

COMMENT #15 [Permalink]

... wayne3 said on 8/7/2008 @ 6:11 pm PT...





Almost the same thing happened to me. I live in Missouri and left my home with my ID card which I received in the mail. Normally I would have also brought along a copy of my utility bill but after leaving home I realized that I forgot the utility bill. I figured okay I would just show the voter ID card which I received in the mail. The election judge asked for a drivers license. I told him that I had no drivers license (a lie) but instead gave him my voter ID card. He said since it was not signed he could not accept it. I offered to signed it and he said it had to be signed before I came in. I offered to leave and sign it and then return. The judges said it was too late. Did I have any other signed ID. After looking through my billfold I found an old and outdated (but official) travel agent ID card. They said they would not accept that. I did have my photo on it and since it was about five years old it was obviously my photo. I then continued to search my billfold until I found a signed copy of my medicare card. It did not have a photo but after some period of consultation the judges allowed me to cast my vote. I choose paper! I guess in retrospect I am lucky that I did not also end up in jail. The voting booth was located in city hall. The police department is also in city hall.

COMMENT #16 [Permalink]

... dkmnow said on 8/7/2008 @ 7:11 pm PT...





I have just visited the ShowMeTheVote site, and there are major problems there, missing graphics. broken and misdirected links, etc. Are they in the middle of a major site maintenance/overhaul job, or is it possible that they've been hacked?

COMMENT #17 [Permalink]

... James Helenthal said on 8/7/2008 @ 7:22 pm PT...





And guess what, in June 1008, President Bush named "Damien" Thorne Hearn, of Lathrop and Gage, as one of 15 in the country to be a "White House Fellow"...google search "Thor Hearne Lathrop Gage" and it will take you to St. Louis Biz Journal story, talking all about one of President Bush's best buddies... Damien Thorne Hearne

COMMENT #18 [Permalink]

... Debbie B. said on 8/7/2008 @ 7:30 pm PT...





James, on this page look up and to the right for one of the best coverages of Thor Hearne and the ACVR. It's in Special Coverage pages.

COMMENT #19 [Permalink]

... xargaw said on 8/7/2008 @ 9:36 pm PT...





Has anyone attempted to speak to Claire McCaskill about this outrage? She seems like a very pro-active Senator. As a former prosecutor, it seems she would respect the law and attempt to fix this obvious attempt at voter suppression.

COMMENT #20 [Permalink]

... lottakatz said on 8/7/2008 @ 10:23 pm PT...





I took my notification card to my St. Louis Missouri precinct but the judges wanted other identification also. I have in the past been asked for a photo ID. In 2000 I was purged from the voter rolls and a provisional ballot was not offered. I am not the typical target demographic for vote suppression either, I'm caucasian and live/vote in a middle class suburb. I do though identify myself as Democratic for the purpose of the primaries. This happened to at least 2 other voters that I know in my precinct in 2000 and I don't know more than a handful of voters in my pricienct. I also visited ShowMeTheVote.org and the site is a complete mess and does not seem to work. I'd been there many months ago and it was in working condition so I have no way of knowing if these are recent problems with the site or not.

COMMENT #21 [Permalink]

... Phil said on 8/8/2008 @ 12:16 am PT...





(another big long rant by phil - enjoy!) Violently showing election card ID?

I never heard of that before. Was it just made up on the fly? It's amazing nobody got any paper cuts from that dangerous election card. The next thing you know they'll be arresting people for violent dice throwing at a craps game. Or arresting people at park tables for slamming dominoes on the table. I have to wonder if these actions magically get you on the "no-fly list" as well? The way things stand, it would seem that in November the steps to vote "ought" to be:

Steps

1. Call the police

2. Show the police the state law that is about to be broken.

3. Attempt to vote

4. Be unconstitutionally refused

5. Nullify the election

5. Arrest the rogues or a common sense

5. Cop tells pollworker they are wrong, and your allowed to vote.

But what will actually happen is 1. Call the Police (They will either arrest you for false reporting, or deny sending someone out, not take you seriously, or deny jurisdiction)

2. Attempt to vote (if your not in jail from step one)

3. Allow the rogues to rig the count, and deny voters.

4. The corporate media will report the numbers feel like, and your jailing won't be on the news at 5pm.

5. After everyone is sworn in and the new measures, and laws are passed, the lawsuits will be filed that take another 8 years before anyone even bothers to begin to do anything. When they finally do something it will be another crappy hastily crafted piece of junk that will pass right though. And for the POTUS race, if we always go to the (Well Stacked) Supreme court Am this what they call whining? Must be. Should be a way to rescind laws, and remove sworn in officials when facts change. And to do it quickly. But this would be common sense, we can't have that. Too bad there was no place in all that for a video camera to document it. Or a TV station with actual news journalists to broadcast it. It seems to me this exposes the kink in the flaw that is plaguing all United States elections. The flaw is that the SoS hires pollworkers, and enlists pollwatchers, and state troopers to escort the ballots, but if a law is being broken in the process, there's nobody with authority to stop it. Sure sometimes there might be someone there to document it, but documenting doesn't alter the crimes! And Corporate Media documenting whenever it amazingly manages to exist, always seems to be out of context, or biased, but usually just not reported. There needs to be a cop that knows the laws and enforces them. That's why it's called "law enforcement" I thought. The focus of this election cop should not be so much with eyes on the voters as focused on those running the election itself. The voter, or pollwatcher should be able to CALL this cop. I think this election stuff doesn't happen frequently enough that anyone can justify creating election cops. I don't really like the idea of having a modern day version of Zorro watching the ballot box, but it's actually what might be needed to protect the votes. While all these methods of caging, interfering, disrupting, and rigging elections and manipulating voters might be different, consistently a plethora of half-measures, reasons and lame excuses conveniently deny justice and there's never cops on the scene at the time when they happen, with knowledge of the laws and the authority to swiftly act correctly, or even use common sense. It's like everyone involved plays a faux game where submission (even if illegal) begets respect, and where dissent begets getting framed, judged and punished for imaginary violent acts. Rogue Officials always escalate things disproportionately, it never comes out good for the protester. And again, you have to wonder how many different agency "watch lists" you've been added to, for simply questioning authority and pointing out when things are not right. Then there's that communications problem that cropped up as well. With all this technology we have we still can't reach someone in authority when needed. If someone can't use a cellphone to call the Secretary of State, at an official office shouldn't someone use the phone in that OFFICE?! This should have been de-fused early on, yet again common sense consistently goes out the window when the end game is to deny citizens voting rights and have it actually counted correctly. If it was me, I probably wouldn't have been offered a provisional ballot because I would still have been in jail without money for bail.

That's a nice clean way to shut people up. The way I see it, there isn't any part of this election system that can be trusted. If that's really the case then voters, and pollwatchers need some kind of law enforcement authority. I am not suggesting they do it themselves, we already have cops, why not election cops? Or course there's plenty of people that read this and say our elections can be trusted fully and authentically validated. In my opinion, they'd be wrong. What a mess.

COMMENT #22 [Permalink]

... jacki penny said on 8/8/2008 @ 2:34 am PT...





i am an election judge in Jackson County, Missouri. much of what has been reported here at this blog seems to be from the denied voter's perspective. from what i understand, the voter took the voter notification card he received in the mail to the poll & tried to use that to identify himself as a registered voter. up until recently these cards have stated in large print at the top of the card "voter i.d. card". if those from Mo. will take out the cards they recently received & look at them, they will see that now the top line reads "voter notification card".

these cards are only meant to inform the voter that they are indeed registered to vote & where their precinct is located. they are not valid forms of i.d.

there are 20 valid forms of i.d. available to post card voters & 23 valid forms of i.d. available for regular voters.

in the training sessions i attended, all election judges were specifically told not to use the verbage "driver's liscense" when asking for i.d. & to have all valid forms of i.d. posted at the 1st station of the sign in table.

many people asked if a driver's liscense was acceptable & the answer is yes. however, it is not required as there were many other options one could choose in this process.

sadly, it seems to me that the election judges/supervisors didn't pay attention at the training classes. it also seems to be a misunderstanding on the voter's part for not reading his now voter "notification" card a little more closely.

COMMENT #23 [Permalink]

... outtahere said on 8/8/2008 @ 3:05 am PT...





{Ed Note: First part of comment removed. Personal attacks on other commenters is in violation of the Rules for Commenting at The BRAD BLOG. Please review those rules, and consider yourself warned. We don't like removing posting privileges, so please mind those very few rules. Thank you! - BF}

The only identification a sane state requires at the polls is a signature that matches the one on the voter registration books. How difficult is that to understand? It's never been challenged in my (former) state. But it does make it very difficult to block inconvenient voters from the polls.

The Republican Party should be outlawed, Thor Votestealer and his Decider should be in jail.

COMMENT #24 [Permalink]

... jacki penny said on 8/8/2008 @ 4:51 am PT...





wow, a hater hit. i just came off of a 12 hour shift so my spelling might have been lacking. i do have a personal note making style that doesn't adhere to strict rules of writing, yes- but i think you could look past that to get the general message.

your meaning is quite clear though. bashing the election judges is as ok with you as blaming the voter is for the higher ups in L.A. i don't excuse the election officals & believe they should be relieved of future duty. my point is that there may have been a misunderstanding on both sides. however before it could be resolved, the voter regrettably lost his temper in a public place.

election judges get abused more often than people realize when they are only there to help.

COMMENT #25 [Permalink]

... War Is Not Pro-Life said on 8/8/2008 @ 6:01 am PT...





Wow, Jacki is absolutely correct! I looked closely at my "new" card I received a year or more ago & it DOES say "Voter Notification Card" on it! I always take both my card & my driver's license to the poll with me, but so far have only shown my card and been able to vote.

COMMENT #26 [Permalink]

... Kmac said on 8/8/2008 @ 6:47 am PT...





Let's face it ... without voter supression, among many other shady methods, how can the Rethugicans stay in power. They're sleezy and desperate.

COMMENT #27 [Permalink]

... mr.ed said on 8/8/2008 @ 7:00 am PT...





My experience with police is that they don't know much law, and can't be expected to do other than react the way these guys did. Perhaps a nice lawsuit would influence further actions. It appears that a first year law student could win it, but the ACLU could do a much better job.

COMMENT #28 [Permalink]

... Robin said on 8/8/2008 @ 9:45 am PT...





I'm still wondering why Carnahan's office told me I'm required to show a Photo ID if I don't have to. And Jacki Penny, I think your post is way off base. They told the judges not to specifically say "driver's license" because it's illegal. They think they can get away with it saying it the other way. An "election judge" should know better. Maybe if you want to be an election judge, you need to get educated on the law. No wonder MO and it's elections are in such a crap hole.

COMMENT #29 [Permalink]

... GWN said on 8/8/2008 @ 10:18 am PT...





Jackie # 24. You say the voter lost his temper. I have not read that anywhere. I believe Mr Lindsey kept his cool and just stated the facts. Do you have a link or evidence that Mr Lindsey lost his temper?

COMMENT #30 [Permalink]

... Jason Bolgos said on 8/8/2008 @ 10:34 am PT...





Well it seems that some people in Missouri have been VERY successful in muddying up the waters on the "proper ID" issue. According to the Missouri SoS website one of the four options for proper ID is : "A copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, government check or other government document that contains the name and address of the voter" Now I don't know what the election judges in MO are being told about these "voter notification cards", but whether the card says "voter ID card" or "voter notification card" it still would seem to fall under the category of "government document that contains the name and address of the voter". Jacki are you telling me that the SoS will allow utility bills and bank statements as ID, but not a government-issued voter notification card? Come on that sounds like BS to me. In addition the orginal story on Democratic Underground says the election worker asked for ID with a signature - no such requirement on the SoS website The prospective voter also stated he had both utility bill and bank statement in addition to the voter id/notification card. Now obviously we haven't heard the other side of the story (and probably won't for a while since it sounds like there are grounds for a voting rights lawsuit). So granted there may be more to the story. If we just look at what HAS been reported though it is VERY obvious - election judge was WRONG and voter was RIGHT.

COMMENT #31 [Permalink]

... JAMES LEWMAN said on 8/8/2008 @ 10:45 am PT...





People use technology against them take you camera phone if they play these games tape them go home upload on to you tube let the world judge

COMMENT #32 [Permalink]

... Agent 99 said on 8/8/2008 @ 12:23 pm PT...





Since when is getting angry illegal? He was arrested because he's an activist. Period.

COMMENT #33 [Permalink]

... Name said on 8/8/2008 @ 1:44 pm PT...





http://www.sos.mo.gov/el...ions/voterid/default.asp If you do not possess any of these forms of identification, you may still cast a ballot if two supervising election judges, one from each major political party, attest they know you.

COMMENT #34 [Permalink]

... EMPY said on 8/8/2008 @ 2:09 pm PT...





Most polling places are hip to the cell phone camera and post illegal rules at the door. "Cell Phones Must Be Turned Off" and "No Cameras" Both of these greet each voter in my poling place. This year I made a point of checking my cell phone while at the sign in desk and having my video camera slung over my shoulder. I was not challenged about either.

COMMENT #35 [Permalink]

... jacki penny said on 8/8/2008 @ 2:29 pm PT...





GWN #29- the link for the local fox affiliate is located at the bottom of the 4th paragraph in the above report.

COMMENT #36 [Permalink]

... Joe said on 8/8/2008 @ 3:25 pm PT...





With regards to the claim that Mr. Lindsay was having a fit at the precinct, I would be hesitant to believe anything that a FOX News affiliate is reporting, especially when it's only based on the testimony of an election board official who wasn't even present during the incident. In addition, if I was denied my legal right to vote by some moron who is supposed to know what the rules are, I would be furious as well. I mean, come on! If you aren't intelligent enough to pick up on the fact that a legal form of ID doens't need ot have either a signature nor a photo, then maybe you shouldn't be allowed to be an election judge, or the training is highly flawed. People who take it with a smile when their Constitutional rights are stepped on embolden further assults on the rest of us. If everyone who was denied the RIGHT TO VOTE started to scream at their polling places, I think we'd have a lot better chance of having fair elections. At the very least, this might rouse the MSM from their exit polling and come on in to see what the disturbace was all about. Hey, people might even realize that they had been turned down inappropriately in the past, and come back to cast their votes. Change won't happen by passively sitting around and hoping that people will do the right thing. The Democrats have been trying that for 8 years, and look where it's gotten us. Change is often times obtained through conflict. If you are denied the right to vote, scream, shout and yell!! Don't take the destruction of our country lying down!!!

COMMENT #37 [Permalink]

... GWN said on 8/8/2008 @ 8:37 pm PT...





Jackie # 35. Ahhh Fox , oh that relieves my mind. It must be the truth if Fox is saying so! (snark) I treat Fox the same way I treat Free Republic. I don't read them. I made an exception this time and all they say is that Mr Lindsey is charged with disorderly conduct. My view is that Mr Lindsey was stating his rights , maybe loudly, and rightfully so, and Republican Fox or others may call it disorderly conduct because they really don't like anyone to fight the "system" they have set up. (to win in 08.) Like 99 said, he was arrested because he is an activist. Period.

COMMENT #38 [Permalink]

... Russ Weiss said on 8/8/2008 @ 9:50 pm PT...





I still have my Primary Election Notice card that was mailed to my home address. On the back it states "Remember to bring identification with you". Now why would that be on the notice when the law was overturned in 2006? The card itself should be enough to verify my identity. This is taking the state motto "Show Me" to ridiculous levels. I can't wait until November but I suppose I should have bail money ready.

COMMENT #39 [Permalink]

... jacki penny said on 8/9/2008 @ 12:51 am PT...





my remark was in answer to GWN#29's question about the voter losing his temper. i'm not an investigator. i'm a waitress. one that cared enough about what is wrong with the election systems in this country to lead by example & offer to help with the process in my area. my statements here on this blog have only been the best guesses i could make according to the info at hand.

i agree with the let down we have all experienced when it comes to our news media, but being there, on the front lines (so to speak), i thought i could offer some insight as to how this may have occured.

no one has asked the important Q of as to why the voter "i.d." cards were changed to voter "notification" cards (not a valid form of i.d.)- which, in my oppinion, has been the root cause of most of this particular snafu.

COMMENT #40 [Permalink]

... TEDEGER said on 8/9/2008 @ 4:16 am PT...





Again, recourse to the courts is indicated. Cops get awfully sick when they are forced to justify illegal behavior in court. If a well-publicized case is brought, other cops think a few times before repeating the illegal behavior - providing they know it's illegal. Also, the election official who invoked the illegal arrest should be made a party to the lawsuit, so that officials will be put on notice that their position does not make them immune from punishment for illegal activity. This is supposed to be a "Nation of Law, not Men." But, if the victim of illegal activity does not seek recourse, the scofflaws are emboldened.

COMMENT #41 [Permalink]

... Archie1954 said on 8/9/2008 @ 10:49 am PT...





The officials at the poll should be removed from office and sued for malfeasance in office. It's not enough for the victim to be offered the ability to vote elsewhere. The reason he couldn't vote and was arrested was because of the irresponsibility of the poll officials and they should pay the penalty and it should be stiff.

COMMENT #42 [Permalink]

... lottakatz said on 8/9/2008 @ 1:18 pm PT...





COMMENT #39 ... jacki The posting makes two good points. Add a signature line (if signiture is required in your State) and an instruction to sign it before bringing it to the polls and the problem is solved. The danger is that the party in power (Election Commissioner is generally an appointed/patronage position) will just print up 'extras" and hand them out to winos to commit election fraud. A variation of that used to happen in my city in my youth. Nothing new there and not much of a problem either compared to the sophistication and efficiency of the methods used today. Suppression and a malleable technology are more effective than fraud involving an army of co-conspirator's. If you want good judges at the polls then sign up to do the job. If you work that could pose a problem regarding taking off but if enough people can sign up it would be step in the right direction. And, um, watching FOX for news is like closing the garage door before you turn off your cars' engine; needless and harmful pollution to an otherwise healthy system. Srsly. Not putting Jacki down or getting snarky like that, just a word to the wise is all.

COMMENT #43 [Permalink]

... jacki penny said on 8/9/2008 @ 7:57 pm PT...





loddakatz #42 my 1st response to your post would be that Missouri used to require proof of signature, but the laws keep changing on us. as recently as our 2 previous elections the i.d. laws kept coming back as more redefined, but not concrete.

signiture is not required now. this is possibly the 2nd mistake the election judge made. firstly, to ask 4 photo i.d. as to when we required signatures on the voter i.d cards, you wouldn't believe how many people didn't sign the cards even though they were clearly directed to ( if they had read their cards).

many were told that these cards were no longer valid i.d. on their own, & probably threw them away. however in our most recent primary these cards would have been acceptable on their own. the 2nd response would be about how companies used donate employees hours so that their people could go & run the polls. persons that worked on election day got kick backs from their company- like paid leave...

i'd like to see more companies look into that & encourage their employees to sign up to help.

it could also be a great fundraiser to donate all or part of your earnings to a charity.

COMMENT #44 [Permalink]

... Soul Rebel said on 8/9/2008 @ 10:11 pm PT...





here's a thought, maybe half a thought... if the Republicans are so bent on having people produce official ID at the polls, can we not move to make driver's licenses (or state ID) FREE? If ID is required in many daily circumstances simply to navigate, voting aside, shouldn't this be a service provided to everyone free of charge? Isn't the main argument against providing ID at the polls that it is biased against those who can't afford ID? Correct me if I'm wrong.

COMMENT #45 [Permalink]

... Brad Friedman said on 8/10/2008 @ 1:03 pm PT...





Your wrong, Soul Rebel. Sort of. For example, in Indiana, where they have the most draconian of Photo ID restrictions (now approved by the SCOTUS) in order to keep folks from voting, they offer FREE ID to those who can't afford a drivers license, etc. Only prob? To get those ID's you have to a) be able to afford to drive to the county seat to get one and b) Have a birth certification (about $20) or a passport (about $100, and you'd need a birth cert to get one of those!) These are poll taxes plain and simple, meant to keep perfectly legal (largely Democratic) voters from being able to cast a vote. Some 40 year ago, SCOTUS turned down a $1.50 poll tax. Today, they allowed the Indiana law. If MO could have adopted that same law prior to recessing this year, they would have. So they're doing all they can to keep folks from voting anyway. Thanks to our friend Thor, the democracy terrorist.

COMMENT #46 [Permalink]

... Soul Rebel said on 8/10/2008 @ 3:00 pm PT...





OK. My thought is to just have the whole ID process/birth certificate issue to be free. Passports too. Whatever the "fee" and "poll tax" issues are, they could be nullified potentially.

COMMENT #47 [Permalink]

... moose said on 8/11/2008 @ 11:34 am PT...





The eastern jackson county board of elections informed me that they are switching to a system which one notification card is sent to a residence for multiple people with the same surname. This card is not going to be a Voter ID card. However the Help America Vote Act states that a voter may use "other government document that shows the name and address of the voter". The notification is from the government and has the name and address of the voter so it should be accepted under federal law. The Missouri Sec. of State's website says the same. The notification card, under Missouri law should also work. What it comes down to is poll worker training. This whole problem could have been avoided if the poll worker would have known his/her duties. If poll worker training is streamlined statewide, the 116 different local election authorities in Missouri may get on the same page.

COMMENT #48 [Permalink]

... Rhiannon Ross said on 8/12/2008 @ 12:55 am PT...

