6th Circuit Ruling good for Georgia?

As Erick posted, Georgia has responded to the DOJ’s challenge of Georgia’s voter verification process. Something in the article stuck out to me. Compare the description of what the Georgia SoS is doing with what the 6th Circuit ordered Ohio’s SoS to start doing immediately.

What Georgia is doing:

The state has been cross-checking voters’ registration information against data in the state Department of Driver Services database and, in some cases, against the U.S. Social Security Administration database.

What Ohio was ordered to start doing:

Tuesday’s order directs Brunner to verify new registrations by comparing that information with data from the Ohio Bureau of Motor Vehicles or the Social Security Administration.

So what’s wrong with what Georgia’s doing?

I admit I’m not an intelligent left winger but it seems to me the common thread here is that Dems in Ohio don’t want to start verifying voters’ eligibility and Dems in Georgia want us to stop verifying voters’ eligibility.


  1. SavannahDem says:

    Georgia did not get preclearance from the DOJ. Georgia is covered by the VRA and is required to do so. Thus, the action violated the law.

    Ohio is not covered by the VRA. Also 6th Circuit precedent is not binding on the 11th Circuit.

    In the eyes of the law comparing GA to OH in this scenario is apples to oranges.

  2. bucky says:

    SD’s, right, Buzz. You can’t compare the two states because different laws apply. According to federal law, all elected and appointed officials in Georgia are presumed to be closet racists who trot out the bones of their Confederate ancestors on the weekends and who can’t be trusted to treat people equally. Ohioans, on the other hand, are presumed pure and free of any racial animus.

  3. My kin folks call me Nick says:

    The devil is in the details.

    What are the exact numbers for “in some cases” for Georgia.
    Ohio has the descretion of using either “or”.

    I agree with SD, you may not like the law but your elected reps. agreed to the VRA.

  4. ChuckEaton says:

    It’s a good example as to why that clause in the VRA is unconstitutional. While 6th Circuit precedent isn’t binding, it’s certainly persuasive.

  5. It bothers me that the Dems have no problems cheating in order to win. They’ll use felons and illegals to get their votes. And that’s who we want running our nation?

    Verifying driver’s licenses won’t stop the problem either. Obama supports giving licenses to illegals. There are plenty of Americans who hate their own nation enough to help illegals and felons vote, so they can assist Obama in winning the election.

    What does it matter what laws are in place? People who break the laws don’t care about integrity in voting. Do you really think the Dems are going to lose this election when there are so many Americans who are working hard to destroy America? He isn’t short of helpers to make sure he wins.

  6. slyram says:

    I think the whole Voting Right Act should be reconsidered. Alert the media: I agree with Rep. Lyn Westmoreland.

    I am one African American who thinks the congressional districts after the 1990 census inadvertently created the Republican Revolution. Come on; should Covington and Moultrie be in the same district; Valdosta and Columbus both in the 2nd.

    Regarding cross-checking information, the state and federal governments should be doing that across agencies and branches anyway. (Cue: the civil libertarians)

  7. SavannahDem says:

    FTS –

    Obama does not have a 10+ point lead based upon the strength of illegal registrations. When McCain goes down it will be due to the campaign he’s running.

    Here’s a news flash – “it’s the economy, stupid.” When a family is worried about losing everything they’ve worked for they don’t want to topic changed. They want a plan.

    Ayers, ACORN, lack of patriotism, etc… The McCain campaign is so far in the weeds I can’t even see them any more.

  8. SavannahDem – Do you really believe Obama has a plan to help Americans? Come on. He approved the bailout as much as the Republicans did. He’s spending money America doesn’t have. He’s aligning himself with foreigners.

    Same old stuff we’ve been dealing with. At least the REST of the politicians have the decency to salute the flag instead of standing there like an anti-American fraud who can’t wait to take a bigger leadership role so he and his church can flaunt their hatred for Whites and Jews.

    He doesn’t have change for the good of America in mind. He has dictatorship. He has plenty of anti-Americans at his disposal to fund his agenda, both American and foreign funding.

  9. SavannahDem says:

    FTS –

    Hello? Can you hear me? It looks like you’ve wandered off into the weeds. You might want to turn around and come back. If you go any deeper you might just get stuck in paranoia land out there.

    Rest of the group –

    Sorry, I didn’t realize FTS was batsh*t crazy until after I replied to his post. I apologize for encouraging him.

    Hopefully he’ll just relax and realize that the people in the white coats are there to help him…

  10. SavannaDem,

    We could go back and forth like this all day long. You will be loyal to your party and ignore the ads, the videos, the comments made by Obama, etc. etc. etc.

    I am neither a Republican nor a Democrat. You can’t tell either party apart any more. They will tell you what you want to hear, yet are still working behind the scenes to cater to the major corporations. They could care less about “we the people”

    To each their own interpretation about how they see each of the candidates and their agendas.

    I was simply commenting about your views, but did not resort to name calling you. I’m sorry you felt it was necessary to respond the way you did. Perhaps when you can calm down and accept the fact that other people have different views than you, and stop relying on name calling insults, we can debate a little more civilized.

    By the way, I’m female.

  11. Bill Simon says:

    “I think the whole Voting Right Act should be reconsidered. Alert the media: I agree with Rep. Lynn Westmoreland.”

    Wow, Sly! So, you think the VRA is an uppity law?

  12. Game Fan says:

    I would encourage everybody to click onto the “Facing the Sharks” moniker. This person is attempting to do what Reagan attempted, reduce fraud and corruption.

  13. WaterGuru says:

    I don’t understand why they are verifying them in the first place. Aren’t you required to show a photo ID when you vote?… Doesn’t the DOT verify your identity when you get a photo ID? Seems kinda redundant to me.

  14. Bill Simon says:


    If you have been convicted of a crime of “moral turpitude”, you are not eligible to vote. The check for that does NOT happen at the polling place when you show photo ID.

    So, when people register to vote for the FIRST time, their citizenship has to be verified and their background as well, I believe.

    Fake IDs can get around photo ID checks. Background checks don’t care about fake IDs.

    Also, before you jump all over a Republican Secretary of State for this, the “moral turpitude” stipulation was embedded in our state laws back in the days of 1000% Democrat rule.

    So, if you have an issue with that law, go talk to your friendly, neighborhood whackjob Democrat.

  15. atlantaman says:


    I have firsthand knowledge of an illegal alien coming to GA, from NC, only to acquire a driver’s license. He went to three different driver’s license centers until he was able to until find an idiot who gave him a license. Apparently GA has quite a reputation within the illegals community of handing out driver’s licenses without much due diligence.

    Between hearing about people illegally voting through groups like ACORN and the extreme influx of illegal aliens we’ve had, I want GA to be vigilant in ensuring my vote is not diluted by foreign nationals.

    Hopefully the state is coming up with new processes to ensure voter integrity. Just like the kids who are under 21 are the only ones who protest showing identification to drink, it seems the only ones who protest better voter integrity seem to feel a free-for-all system benefits their candidates.

    I think there have been plenty of examples of voter fraud in GA, just talk to Jeff Mullis, but if you don’t believe there has been a problem it still doesn’t justify ignoring controls. A person who has never been robbed should still have an alarm system and a corporation who has never had a case of embezzling should still have proper accounting controls.

  16. Bill Simon says:

    “A person who has never been robbed should still have an alarm system and a corporation who has never had a case of embezzling should still have proper accounting controls.”

    HA! Good analogy. Unfortunately, people like Rugby and HardcoreChris would disagree vehemently with you on this.

    They strongly believe a disarmed, unprepared population is the way Americans should live and work.

  17. jkga says:

    Bill –

    Regarding the alarm system analogy – it’s all a question of cost v. benefit. A retail establishment could frisk everyone leaving their store to prevent shoplifting, but that would damage their business.

    I honestly don’t think that any Democrats want to see people voting unlawfully; they are concerned with 1) discouraging voting in general and 2) placing extra burdens on some groups of people – for example, those who don’t have cars and wouldn’t ordinarily need a photo ID. In the absence of evidence that non-citizens are actually voting, I don’t see the justification for a lot of extra levels of security that could suppress the vote.

  18. ChuckEaton says:

    So having to show an ID to vote is the equivalent of a retail store giving a full body frisk to everyone who leaves the premises?

    Perhaps Blockbuster should quit requiring an ID to rent video and switch to body frisking – it might be less burdensome.

    The irony is there hasn’t been any evidence, per the countless lawsuits, of anyone actually being denied the right to vote due to not having an ID.

  19. Bill Simon says:


    “In the absence of evidence that non-citizens are actually voting, I don’t see the justification for a lot of extra levels of security that could suppress the vote.”

    JK, in the absence of evidence that anyone has ever taken down a plane with a Bic lighter, those extra levels of security at the airport are ridiculous and cause great delays in people traveling. People don’t like to wait in lines for too long, and they have opted not to travel.

  20. jkga says:

    Bill –

    I’d like to believe that in the case of airport security, somebody has made a careful analysis of the degree of risk, effectiveness of the measures at eliminating risk, and the burden on the airlines, airports, and travelers. (I’m pretty convinced that some of the security stuff is ineffective BS designed to make travelers feel secure, but that’s a different story.) I’d like to see that same analysis made here, by a non-partisan entity.

    My guess is that such an analysis would find that the most plausible scenarios for voting fraud involve voting machine tampering or vote-selling via absentee ballots. It smells fishy to me that the spectre of a few non-citizens voting is the main priority for the GOP, while mail-in absentee balloting has been expanded.

  21. Bill Simon says:


    The idea of vote-machine tampering has been pretty well nullified by the use of the touch-screen machines we use, and have used since the 2002 General Election…a time, by the way, in which a Democrat Secretary of State was in charge of the Elections Division.

    In order to stuff a ballot at a poll via electronic means would require the conspiratorial compliance of ALL poll officers/volunteer workers at the polling precinct on Election Day.

    These people generally ALL take an oath before doing their work at the precinct.

    For YOUR scenario to have the best chance of success, that would mean that 6 random people who were assigned to work that day at the poll would ALL have to agree to allow the stuffing of the poll machines.

    Because…voters walk in on a random basis all throughout the voting day…so, to risk getting caught with tampering with the machines is to risk a LOT, and there is a separation of duties assigned to each precinct officer and worker.

    One person checks ID and checks for the signature on the form.

    A different person looks you up in the record and assigns you an electronic card. For your conspiracy to have to work, those two people have to agree to work in cahoots, both violate their oaths taken, along with the law on election tampering, and work to stuff the ballots.

    The way the ballot CAN more easily be stuffed is that people who are not eligible to vote are granted the right to vote. And that is why these checks are going on. To prevent the ballot from being stuffed by 10,000+ people on a statewide basis.

  22. Bill Simon says:


    “For your conspiracy to have to work, those two people have to agree to work in cahoots, both violate their oaths taken, along with the law on election tampering, and work to stuff the ballots.”

    AND..those two people have to furtively work like hell to avoid getting caught by the other 4-6 poll officers…because, they ALL took oaths, JK.

    You may be of the belief that people violate oaths every day and think nothing of it. Not people at this level. Not volunteers who are simply volunteering their time to work while you spend time on a blog thinking they can easily be suborned into violating the law.

Comments are closed.