Voter ID Redux

[carpedm9587]

This is the kind of thing being pushed by the right and Republicans that earns them the reputation for working to disenfranchise voters that don't vote Republican. At issue is a simple problem: the voter ID law (as implemented) requires the Voter ID to provide a street address. But the USPS does not provide home delivery in many autonomous reservations, and many of the people living within them don't necessarily live on streets in the conventional sense. So all they have is a P.O. Box. But the Republicans have pushed the courts to reject mailing address in favor of street address, effectively disenfranchising tens of thousands of Native American voters in North Dakota. Given the tightness of the race in that state, this is highly likely to shift the tide in favor of the Republican challenger.

"Win at any cost" - even unethical and unscrupulous strategies - should not be the approach of EITHER political party. If you cannot win on the merits of your arguments, winning by stacking the deck is simply unacceptable, IMO

[Cow Poke]

This is the kind of thing being pushed by the right and Republicans that earns them the reputation for working to disenfranchise voters that don't vote Republican. At issue is a simple problem: the voter ID law (as implemented) requires the Voter ID to provide a street address. But the USPS does not provide home delivery in many autonomous reservations, and many of the people living within them don't necessarily live on streets in the conventional sense. So all they have is a P.O. Box. But the Republicans have pushed the courts to reject mailing address in favor of street address, effectively disenfranchising tens of thousands of Native American voters in North Dakota. Given the tightness of the race in that state, this is highly likely to shift the tide in favor of the Republican challenger.

"Win at any cost" - even unethical and unscrupulous strategies - should not be the approach of EITHER political party. If you cannot win on the merits of your arguments, winning by stacking the deck is simply unacceptable, IMO

Right off the bat, in this OPINION piece, I was struck with...



Cramer is ahead in the polls, but this could swing the election toward Cramer.

[carpedm9587]

Right off the bat, in this OPINION piece, I was struck with...



Cramer is ahead in the polls, but this could swing the election toward Cramer.

Bad writing doesn't change the reality of what is happening in ND. We should not be disenfranchising voters - ever. And the specious decision to omit mailing addresses, knowing it will have that effect, is exactly that.

[Cow Poke]

Bad writing doesn't change the reality of what is happening in ND. We should not be disenfranchising voters - ever. And the specious decision to omit mailing addresses, knowing it will have that effect, is exactly that.

They should be assisted to get whatever credentials they need to vote.

Next?

[carpedm9587]

They should be assisted to get whatever credentials they need to vote.

Next?

CP- they can't GET credentials because they lack the requirement - a street address. They lack it because the USPS does not deliver and they do not HAVE street addresses - only PO Boxes. So the law is specifically designed to exclude them. THAT'S the point.

[mikewhitney]

How many among these prospective voters has not desired to have citizenship within the US or the state?

How is it sorted out who wants to be a part of their tribal nation vs. who wants to be under rule of the state?

[carpedm9587]

How many among these prospective voters has not desired to have citizenship within the US or the state?

As best I can tell - they are U.S. citizens.

How is it sorted out who wants to be a part of their tribal nation vs. who wants to be under rule of the state?

Tribal nations may be independent, but the tribal nation falls within the bounds of the U.S. and they are considered U.S. Citizens with the right to vote in federal elections. They are sort of like a "state" unto themselves. Local and state elections are a bit more iffy - as best I can tell, it depends on whether the reservation falls completely within one state or one township.

[mikewhitney]

So it seems there is no clarity on also designating such people as part of the 50 states. So far it would be arbitrary to claim that someone holding to identity to a tribal nation should have access to vote through one state or another. How do you decide which state they would vote through? There also would be a need to have different ballots for native Americans who held state citizenship from native Americans who prioritized their tribal nationality. Next you have to figure out how to associate tribal nation population with this or that state.

How will the relationship between various aspects be resolve? States are supreme in their rule when the US constitution hasn't granted power to the US Government. Treaties between the US and the tribes have supremacy between those two entities. The US Constitution hasn't sought to grant representation to tribal nations. It seems that the tribal nations come closest to US territories which are not generally granted representation. It may even be easier for a Puerto Rican than a native American to move to a state and be a citizen there.

[Cow Poke]

CP- they can't GET credentials because they lack the requirement - a street address.

Sorry, I stopped reading after that nutty "Cramer is ahead in the polls, but this could swing the election toward Cramer."

Carry on!

[Cow Poke]

Just for grins, rather than take the word of an opinion piece, I went to the North Dakota Secretary of State website:

https://vip.sos.nd.gov/idrequirements.aspx

[rogue06]

Just for grins, rather than take the word of an opinion piece, I went to the North Dakota Secretary of State website:

https://vip.sos.nd.gov/idrequirements.aspx

I wouldn't be surprised if they envision them as nomads still wandering around and building a teepee and living there for a few weeks before moving on.

[Sparko]

IF there is a problem with the Indian's not being able to vote, they need to fix it. But I am thinking this is more of a liberal whine than something real. But it really isn't a Voter ID thing is it? more of a voter address thing. Having a valid residence in a voting district is paramount to knowing who can vote in which elections. This isn't something new and it is a universal requirement everywhere.

[Bill the Cat]

https://vip.sos.nd.gov/idrequirements.aspx

The full scoop.

[One Bad Pig]

Right off the bat, in this OPINION piece, I was struck with...



Cramer is ahead in the polls, but this could swing the election toward Cramer.

FWIU, Cramer is sufficiently ahead in the polls that Heitkamp didn't think that voting for Kavanaugh would be sufficient to swing things her way. Sounds like someone's using the time-honored tradition of scare tactics.

[JimL]

This is the kind of thing being pushed by the right and Republicans that earns them the reputation for working to disenfranchise voters that don't vote Republican. At issue is a simple problem: the voter ID law (as implemented) requires the Voter ID to provide a street address. But the USPS does not provide home delivery in many autonomous reservations, and many of the people living within them don't necessarily live on streets in the conventional sense. So all they have is a P.O. Box. But the Republicans have pushed the courts to reject mailing address in favor of street address, effectively disenfranchising tens of thousands of Native American voters in North Dakota. Given the tightness of the race in that state, this is highly likely to shift the tide in favor of the Republican challenger.

"Win at any cost" - even unethical and unscrupulous strategies - should not be the approach of EITHER political party. If you cannot win on the merits of your arguments, winning by stacking the deck is simply unacceptable, IMO

Take a look at the Georgia Governors race. The republican candidate, in this neck and neck race, also controls the voter registration rolls and is rejecting on ridiculous technicalities some 50 thousand majority black registrations, unbeknownst to the registrants themselves, in order to suppress the vote of his democrat opponent.