New Mexico Voter ID reform splitting parties

Dzika posted this interesting article on the Saturday 1/29 Election Fraud, Reform, & Updates Thread.

January 28, 2005

New Mexico Voter ID reform splitting parties
By Shea Andersen
Tribune Reporter


SANTA FE - Rep. Danice Picraux doesn't think a voter identification bill will get too far this session.

Why not? Because Picraux, an Albuquerque Democrat and former House majority leader, has tried one herself, once.
..
On Thursday, Picraux voted to table a similar bill sponsored by Rep. Justine Fox-Young, an Albuquerque Republican.

"My bill was a little bit different," Picraux said.

Her bill, she said, gave the benefit of the doubt to a voter whose signature didn't match up on Election Day. They would get to vote, but their record would be checked later.

In Fox-Young's bill, voters whose autograph doesn't match their registration signature has to return on Election Day with some form of identification or their vote doesn't count.

"There's a real difference between innocent until proven guilty and guilty until proven innocent," Picraux said.

But after watching two of her bills get tabled by a Democrat-dominated committee, Fox-Young may have learned the same lesson Picraux learned years ago: Voter identification doesn't get a lot of traction in the Roundhouse.
..
On Thursday, two of 12 bills she prepared on election reform were tabled by the House Voters and Elections Committee, chaired by Rep. Ed Sandoval, an Albuquerque Democrat.

<http://www.abqtrib.com/albq/nw_local_state_government/article/0,2564,ALBQ_19859_3505363,00.html>

But there probably could be bi-partisan support for a means to do it. That's what hurts reading this article.

See:

<http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=1191221&mesg_id=1191221>

their big worry seems to be illegal immigrants voting seven times.

"In Fox-Young's bill, voters whose autograph doesn't match their registration signature has to return on Election Day with some form of identification or their vote doesn't count."

So, people who do not write well will have to go to the polls twice, once to be told they don't write well, and once after they go get proof that they are who they say they are?

How about if we just make poor people produce documentation, and if you wear a suit you can vote without proof?

This is the sort of idea that just opens up the door to discriminate against minorities and educationally disenfranchised individuals.

I preferred the one where they could vote provisionally if there was a hang-up.

New Mexico(& Ohio & Florida)
http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html

U.S.(over 20 states)
http://www.flcv.com/ussumall.html

Per DU copyright rules
please post only four
paragraphs from the
copyrighted news source.


Thank you.


DU Moderator