Georgia Voter ID Law Upheld…Again

[Fulton County] Superior Court Judge Tom Campbell, in a three-page order signed Monday, rejected claims by the Georgia’s Democratic Party and others that the voter ID law unduly burdens the right to vote. Campbell noted that the U.S. Supreme Court has already upheld Indiana’s voter ID law. The federal appeals court in Atlanta also has rejected a similar challenge to Georgia’s statute.

Georgia’s voter ID law “is an ‘evenhanded restriction’ designed to protect the ‘integrity and reliability of the electoral process,'” Campbell wrote. “It is reasonable, narrowly tailored and related to a legitimate and important state interest.”

More here, here and here.

Georgia SoS Brian Kemp (website | Twitter) was quick to jump on the bandwagon of joy.

“The denial of the Democratic Party of Georgia’s challenge to photo ID is a victory for the integrity of the State’s elections process. Photo ID helps to ensure that every vote cast in person is not cancelled out due to voter fraud,” said Secretary Kemp.

Meanwhile, the DPG will continue to search for an illiterate 134 year old woman living in a cave in north Georgia without any photo identification who shuns the world except on election day to prove that the law is not valid.


  1. benevolus says:

    “illiterate 134 year old woman living in a cave “..

    While Republicans are still looking for illegal aliens picking library cards out of trash cans so they can risk deportation to vote for less restrictive zoning ordinances.

  2. Republican Lady says:

    I really don’t understand the problem with presenting ID to vote. I have been asked for my driver’s license for the __+ years I have voted. I have to present ID at the doctor’s office, when I want to pay with a check, take a test when applying for my master’s degree, and several other places I can’t think of at this moment. I haven’t notice any of the places where I was asked for ID making an exception for someone not having ID.

    Would someone who does not like the Voter ID law please explain your opposition to me so I can see the other side of this issue?

    • benevolus says:

      Because it doesn’t solve any problem, it just makes it worse, but in the meantime there are a few elderly, mostly African-American, mostly urban, voters who don’t have the ID needed even though they have been voting forever, who now have to jump through a couple of more hoops to vote.

      No one commits voter fraud here by impersonating another voter. To pull it off, you would have to impersonate someone you knew was eligible to vote, get there before they did, hope no one in line or working recognized you (or the person you were impersonating), and be willing to commit a felony by signing that affidavit. Not to mention the hassle of figuring out their polling location. All this to cast one vote.

      It doesn’t happen. It’s absurd, and therefore there is a different motivation for it, which is probably anti-immigrant mania with a few less urban Dem votes thrown in as a bonus.

      • benevolus says:

        And I forgot to mention, adding a “facial recognition” component to the poll workers tasks is asking for trouble. What happens if someone tries to vote if they look different than their picture? Maybe they’ve had cancer, or just lost weight or changed their hair. As far as I know, there is no procedure for challenging a rejection.

      • Game Fan says:

        “No one commits voter fraud here by impersonating another voter”.

        That’s absolutely ridiculous, unless you were omnipotent and KNEW that NOBODY has ever impersonated another person to vote.

        • benevolus says:

          I have explained elsewhere on this thread what one would need to do to pull this off. It would be very difficult and risky and almost certainly doomed to fail. We have a robust system even without the photo ID on election day rule.

          On the other hand, there is no evidence of the fraud occurring at all. You would think they would create a law like this because they busted into a house in Doraville and found a bunch of fake ID’s and a computer with the voter file on it and maps to precincts or something. Nope. Nothing. Nada. Zip. It’ s totally a paranoid figment of someone’s imagination.

          In some other states you can register to vote when you show up to the precinct on election day. In that case they probably should have some way to verify your identity instantly. But hopefully they have procedures in place to deal with people who don’t look much like their photo.

      • Ambernappe says:

        Based on what I have heard from some poll monitors in the last election, there were many ostensible voters who were attempting to utilize what we would call questionable identity. I will not specify the precinct in which the most ridiculous attempts occurred, but be assured that “higher education”, or the pursuit thereof does not innoculate some individuals from efforts at defrauding the election process. Why do you think the “provisional” ballot has been implemented ?

  3. Tenacious G says:

    I really resent the condescending tone of this post. We have some very nice caves in North Georgia.

    • benevolus says:

      The other problem related to this Grift, is that the AHA is getting out of the housing business. They have been busy demolishing all the public housing, including elderly high-rises, and giving the former residents vouchers. Many, if not all, of those residents will have to re-register in their new location, with transportation being a bit of an issue.
      It just makes me furious that someone who may have withstood a fire hose to gain the right to vote now has to go through this B.S. to KEEP that right for no good reason.

      • Ambernappe says:

        There is an obvious need for special treatment of the citizens to whom you refer. However, that does not magically eliminate the BS of those persons who waste their God-given intelligence trying to game the system. Think ACORN.

  4. Republican Lady says:

    Why is it not needed? Give me more of your viewpoints.

    With no ID, how would you assure that after the person votes, he/she doesn’t go to a cemetery, come up with a new name and DOB, and votes again?

    • benevolus says:

      We don’t have registration on election day. You have to register beforehand and be verified at that time. You can’t just show up and vote. You have to be someone on the voter roll.

      • Ambernappe says:

        Perhaps you should look into the proposed legislation to provide just that -election day registration. Wonder just how many states an energetic person could cover in one day!

  5. griftdrift says:

    Because you are asked for ID when you register, although it’s more expansive than just drivers license. Because you every time you sign your voter card when you vote, you are signing an affidavit that you are who you are.

    But mostly because just like the Democrats can’t seem to find anybody who can’t produce ID, the Republicans can’t seem to find these mythical fraudulent voters.

    The number of voter fraud cases in this state are so few that they are practically nil.

    • Great point Grift.

      I would like to add that the biggest “fraud” on the public is that they are made to think we have “free and open” elections. The fraud is on the ballot access side of the elections not on the voting side as much… except for the potential fraud of not having truly auditable electronic voting machines.

    • Ambernappe says:

      Please find out if you are eligible to serve as a Precinct Poll Monitor, take the training, and show up for service. Then let us know if your perspective has changed. Please.

  6. swgolde says:

    GriftDrift is totally right. What this law does is disenfranchise poor, young, and minority voters, who all (surprise!) vote Democratic overwhelmingly. Given, it’s a great ploy to turn away Democrats from the polls, but that’s plain and simple what it is.

    • GOPGeorgia says:


      Produce 1 voter in the state who would be disenfranchised by this law and we will talk about that persons ability to get a voter ID card, or why they don’t have any of the other applicable documents. It’s spin to say that this law disenfranchises anyone who has a right to vote. Produce a real name, not a theory, and we’ll talk about it.

      • griftdrift says:

        Given your earlier use of mythical illegal immigrants committing fraud to support “amnesty”, I find your use of the term “spin” amusing.

        • GOPGeorgia says:

          So in otherwords, you can’t do it.

          “It is important to underscore that not a single person has come forward to say he or she could not vote because of the verification process:”

          If you like, I can find a case of an illegal vote attempt in Georgia. When I do, I expect you to admit you are wrong. Tell me you are ready to admit you are wrong, and I will look it up. JUST FOR YOU.

          • benevolus says:

            It would have to be a case of impersonating another voter, since that’s the only thing a photo ID could hope to prevent.

          • griftdrift says:

            “So in otherwords, you can’t do it.”

            Did I say that? No. Love it that this vapid little thread has led both sides to put words in my mouth.

            But let’s see your case. And I’d rather see the merits before making any agreements. Only a fool agrees to do something based on no knowledge of what he’s facing. I’ve fought too many creationists to be that naive.

              • griftdrift says:

                And now you understand why I didn’t agree to your terms.

                Three problems there, kemosabe.

                1. This was caught by database search, not ID check, which leads to…

                2. She had a driver’s license, which is a qualified ID so this law would not have affected her, and finally…

                3. She was…wait for it…here it comes…LEGAL

                So, sorry. That doesn’t even come close to the parameters you presented.

                • GOPGeorgia says:

                  It’s impossible to cite someone who wasn’t caught because they weren’t caught.

                  The question at hand was she able to vote legally? The answer is no. Many illegals come here legally and over stay how long they were originally granted. Not all illegals come over a fence. The comment was implied that illegals don’t try to vote. I have shown you that they do. Voter ID check is another tool to combat that.

                  • benevolus says:

                    I don’t think that was the question at hand. The question is if there is a case where photo ID would solve a problem, any problem.

                    And it is not impossible to cite evidence of fraud, if it exists. One would think there would be some scrap of evidence of an attempt to impersonate another voter. Are there any reports that voters show up to vote and are told that they have already voted? Any illegal immigrants who get busted for something else and cop to voting illegally during questioning? Somebody getting busted for trying to get homeless people to vote as someone else?

                    I’ll help you- The only evidence anyone can ever cite is that apparently dead people sometimes vote. But when analyzed it’s determined to be poll worker error, because the dead person is almost always the spouse of someone else also on the roll, right next to the dead person’s name. But that adds even more complexity for someone to try to use that name to vote fraudulently- They would have to know that the person died recently, and also that the state wouldn’t get their name off of the roll in time, AND get the info they need for the affidavit in time to commit that felony.

                    • Republican Lady says:

                      Since this issue came up, I have been researching New York’s Tamminy Hall and Chicago’s Richard Daley’s Voter Precinct Captains actions. Then I went to the attic and pulled out my old textbooks and class notes from my Political Science bachelors and Public Administration master’s. I had forgotten about some of the rampant fraud committed by these people. I will research more before posting those findings.

                • griftdrift says:

                  You showed that someone who was here LEGALLY attempted to vote (apparently because the poor woman was confused). Do facts not matter in your fantasyland?

                  • GOPGeorgia says:

                    Dad gum it, I hate it when I am wrong. I will admit it when I know that I am. I read the above link as she was here legally and over stayed her welcome. I make mistakes and I made one here. I searched google for an actual case of attempted voter fraud by an illegal in Georgia for about two hours. Google is not the best search engine to find actual cases that went before a judge. It’s better for blogs and news stories. I may make a few call tomorrow to see what I can come up with.

                    However, I’m still waiting on the name of a disenfranchised voter.

                    • benevolus says:

                      Why don’t we make people do a handstand before voting? It makes about as much sense. And the state could offer free handstand lessons.

                      The point is, if you are going to pass a law that even MIGHT disenfranchise someone, there should be a good reason to have that law.

                    • hannah says:

                      “disenfranchised voter” is an oxymoron. What you probably mean is “disenfranchised citizen,” of which there are many sitting in some states’ prisons.

      • benevolus says:

        I think Shirley Franklin’s mother couldn’t get an ID because she didn’t have a birth certificate.

        Which brings up another point: You need a photo ID to vote, but to get the photo ID you use the same (non-photo) ID’s you currently can use to vote? That doesn’t make any sense. It just adds an extra step.

        • griftdrift says:

          Attorney for the plaintiff: “Your honor, may I present the mother of Shirley Franklin who is unable to obtain ID and therefore being denied her right to vote.”

          Judge: “Your case rest on one of the most powerful women in the state being unable to obtain the appropriate documents for her mother and being unable to transport her to one of the sites where she can get a free ID?”


        • hannah says:

          There are lots of people who don’t have birth certificates and, of course, none of us know when and where we were born. All we know for certain is that we are here. We have to rely on other people to vouch for the details.
          The spouse was born in New Orleans in 1937. His story is that they didn’t think he’d live, so they didn’t bother to issue a birth certificate. There was a baptismal certificate, but that was lost by the church. By the time he thought to see about getting a certificate from the state of Louisiana, all the people who could attest to the particulars of his birth were dead.
          Germany under the Nazi regime was more efficient. Even though the place was bombed to smithereens, my birth certificate was available by return mail. On the other hand, when I tried to replace the citizenship papers that were issued in 1954 and destroyed in a house fire twenty years later, the federal government couldn’t find them. The solution to that problem was for me to trek over to Jacksonville with my spouse and, after a cursory interview by an immigration official in a closet-sized office with a metal desk and three chairs, be sworn in as a citizen, yet again.
          Of course, that was before September 11th, when everything changed!

          • I’ve always brought my DL when I vote, so this mental excercise is merely academic to me. But the New Orleans and birth certificates comment reminded me of something very important.

            Georgia has a coast. I know, I used to live there. A lot of my friends and family still live there. You can sit around and say “this won’t affect any real people” or “we have to look for a cave in North Georgia,” but has anyone considered what happens when (not if) Georgia’s coast is hit by a major hurricane?

            What do you think are some of the items that many evacuees forget to take with them once a mandatory evacuation is called? Birth certificates & Social Security cards.

            Quick replacement is contingent on where the evacuees end up living and how fast a state can process replacement requests for lost records. Local offices of elections will be swamped trying to figure out who is who and who is voting where, based on the extent of the damage. Lord help you if your coastal counties keep only paper records.

            You can look for your 134 year old in a North Georgia cave all you want, but all I have to do is get in my car, drive east on Interstate 10 on my way to visit my parents in Georgia. I go through Orleans Parish, New Orleans East, St. Tammany Parish, the Mississippi Gulf Coast and Pensacola – where an awful lot of folks have lost a lot of identification paperwork since 2000.

            And hurricane season usually comes before election season. Now, I don’t like designing legislation based on worst case scenarios, but this is not some pie in the sky theory I’m talking about here.

          • benevolus says:

            It might not be a problem Grift, but then again, it might. I would think conservatives and pseudo-libertarians would be more upset than I am about laws passed with no discernible purpose especially when it creates extra (stupid) hurdles for legally registered citizens to go through just to keep their existing right.

            • griftdrift says:

              Oh I agree with the last portion. A law that has no real purpose is anathema. But it’s hard to get too upset when this purposeless law hasn’t shown any real harm.

    • Ambernappe says:

      Plain and simple, your comments are slanderous – see suggestion to above poster regarding service as a poll monitor.

  7. griftdrift says:

    “GriftDrift is totally right. What this law does is disenfranchise poor, young, and minority voters, who all (surprise!) vote Democratic overwhelmingly. Given, it’s a great ploy to turn away Democrats from the polls, but that’s plain and simple what it is.”

    Ummmmmm. That’s not what I said at all. Go back and re-read or better yet turn in your 6th grade reading comprehension homework.

    • swgolde says:

      Hey Grift- I was not expanding on your point, but making one of my own. I understand that what you were saying is, essentially, that there is redundancy in a voter ID law, I agree with that, but I wanted to add my own part.

      GOP- produce one person who has fraudently voted in Georgia, and got away with it because of not being ID’d at the polls. And then prove to me that there is an epidemic that would warrant this sort of thing

      • GOPGeorgia says:

        You want me to cite a specific crime where the perpetrator was not caught? Be real. See my challenge above and we will talk.

      • Ambernappe says:

        And individuals who have succeedeed are going to admit it publically because ………………………………….?

  8. Bill_k says:

    Don’t forget while they were tightening the laws on voting at the polls they were loosening the rules for absentee ballots. These ballots are more at risk for fraud than poll voting. Imagine, for example, a person rounding up all the absentee ballots at a nursing home and filling them out himself and mailing them in.

    Coincidentally absentee ballots are also more likely to be used by Republican voters. To me that was the indicator that this was done for political purposes, not from any concern about voter fraud.

      • griftdrift says:

        They certainly did. And what’s also left out of the story was they gave everyone access to a free id thus eliminating the financial barrier. Both of these actions were in response to flaws in the original bill. Your government in action

  9. swgolde says: –near miss — just a good article -and there’s one with examples from across the nation

    So basically the Voter ID law “solves” a non-existent problem, while systematically disenfranchising people from voting.

    And not to mention the fact that it is just plain redundant, since you need to prove citizenship in order to register in the first place.

  10. griftdrift says:

    “while systematically disenfranchising people from voting”

    Except the Democrats can’t seem to find anyone who’s been “disenfranchised”.

    So they’re solving non-existent problems.

    And you are making up non-existent problems.

    This debate is never going to end because both sides are so entrenched in their self-made myths, they no longer recognize reality. A pox on you both.

  11. Harry says:

    We’re not just talking about prevention of potential abuse by groups that work on behalf of illegal aliens in certain areas. A larger potential for abuse are felons who have lost the right to vote but have been registered to vote in many states, as well as the deceased and people who have moved but still find a way to vote! In some precincts around the country many on the rolls who haven’t cast their voted are “voted” after the polls close. These details do matter in close elections. ACORN is still alive and operating under a variety of new names. Voter ID procedures make it far more difficult to perpetuate fraud. That’s what we’re really talking about.

    • benevolus says:

      Photo ID would have zero effect on any of those scenarios.

      Those seem to be a function of how well the states keep up with the voter rolls. If we spent nearly as much attention to that as we do this stupid extra ID we would be in much better shape.

  12. South Fulton Guy says:

    Ditto GriftDrift,

    If there were all these folks in GA being disenfrenchfried for not having a state issued ID, some of the hungry DPG lawyers would find them, at least one!

  13. Progressive Dem says:

    When is this state going to do something to encourage higher voter turnout? Why do we hold primaries in the middle of the summer? Why do we vote on Tuesday? Why don’t we make it easy or automatic to register? Why don’t we have instant run offs?

    Because in Georgia, we don’t really want people to vote.

    • Henry Waxman says:

      Well, if we voted on the weekend (either Saturday or Sunday) millions of people nationwide wouldn’t vote for religious reasons. I haven’t seen any data to indicate whether the number of voters would increase or decrease if the election were held on Saturday or Sunday instead of Tuesday, but I haven’t done that much digging on the subject.

      Of course, if the polls were held open on Saturday and Sunday this would almost certainly alleviate most the religious observance problems.

    • Ambernappe says:

      I want every eligible citizen to vote. Every time I vote, the weight of making a decision that affects so many people is heavy. I never discuss the outcome of an election with someone who admits to not having voted. I campaign for candidates everywhere except church (can’t explain that). Grocery store cashiers, doctors’ offices, doesn’t take a second to offer a auto decal or hand out a small brochure. By the way, the modern decals do not leave a sticky mess when they are removed.

  14. hannah says:

    Ever since the advent of the universal franchise, those interested in conserving the old order have resorted to various strategies to suppress and depress the electorate. That is, low voter turn-out is not a happenstance; it’s the result of a lot of effort. The object of the Southern Strategy wasn’t to prevent the participation of particular segments of the population, but to eliminate the participation of all those people whose vote could not be pre-determined through propaganda and social control.
    Also, since it is not possible to exercise control on election day (much too late), the effort has to be ongoing and thorough, involving many facets of the community. Here’s a sample:
    1) Legislating additional requirements such as length of residency, advanced registration, documentation (personal ID, birth certificate, etc.) and criminal record checks (used to “trim” the voter rolls in Florida in 1999).

    2) Political propaganda to project the inevitability of results and voting as a waste of time.

    3) New mechanical voting systems that are unfamiliar to traditional and new voters.

    4) Some voters rendered ineligible to participate in certain elections by virtue of arrests, convictions or residency tests (the homeless can’t vote).

    5) Subverted voting equipment to provide inaccurate tallies.

    6) Candidate participation restricted by limiting access to the ballot via petition requirements and fees.

    7) Primary elections scheduled at times that are inconvenient for some populations.

    8) Intimidation of candidates and voters via verbal and physical aggression and/or threats.

    9) Rumors, lies and misrepresentation of political issues.

    10) Unqualified or joke candidates (e.g. a promoter of prostitution in New York) to minimize the importance of the political process.

    11) Distraction of the electorate (FOX News).

    12) Harassment of public officials.

    • South Fulton Guy says:

      Hannah Pew Brennan?

      Touch screen voting machines were introduced in GA by Democrat Secretary of State Cathy Cox.

    • Ambernappe says:

      I am Southern and resent your accusations. I have worked as a volunteer to educate people to their responsibilities as citizens since before I was old enought to vote!

    • Doug Grammer says:


      Lets go through these voter suppression techniques one by one.
      1) Legislating additional requirements such as length of residency, advanced registration, documentation (personal ID, birth certificate, etc.) and criminal record checks (used to “trim” the voter rolls in Florida in 1999).

      Rebuttal: Length of residency. I just moved here today. Can I vote? No one would take advantage of that. Surely not. I think we want people who are members of that community to vote and they should have at least a 30 day interest in that community. They can still vote from their old residence, provided they were registered there. If they have a felony, and their voting rights have not been restored, they don’t get to vote. They gave up those rights when they committed their crime. I don’t care if it’s Florida, Georgia, or New York; or if it’s 1999, or 2010. Felons don’t get any sympathy from me.

      2) Political propaganda to project the inevitability of results and voting as a waste of time.

      Rebuttal: They can still vote. That’s their decision.

      3) New mechanical voting systems that are unfamiliar to traditional and new voters.

      Rebuttal: Are you honestly saying that Georgians can’t figure out how to use the touch screen system?

      4) Some voters rendered ineligible to participate in certain elections by virtue of arrests, convictions or residency tests (the homeless can’t vote).

      Rebuttal: See above for my sympathy for those in trouble with the law. I could be wrong, but I think homeless people can use the address of a homeless shelter of church to register to vote.

      5) Subverted voting equipment to provide inaccurate tallies.

      No rebuttal: Prove it and I’m on your side. Votes should be accurate.

      6) Candidate participation restricted by limiting access to the ballot via petition requirements and fees.

      Rebuttal: It costs money to run elections and qualifying fees help defray those costs. I don’t believe in giving ballot access to those who haven’t show that they or their party have the support of the people enough to produce a possible winner. As I said before, elections cost money.

      7) Primary elections scheduled at times that are inconvenient for some populations.

      Rebuttal: I think it’s on Tuesday, 7 to 7. I like the idea of making it a national holiday so everyone is off work, but I think early voting addresses this issue.

      8.) Intimidation of candidates and voters via verbal and physical aggression and/or threats.

      No Rebuttal: In Georgia there are laws against threatening people and they can go to jail for that. Verbal aggression for a candidate goes hand in hand with deciding to run (or serve.)

      9) Rumors, lies and misrepresentation of political issues.

      Rebuttal: In a campaign? That would never happen. These people need to become a little street savvy and realize that not every tells the truth in every situation. If they can’t, I have a house for sale and the price just doubled.

      10) Unqualified or joke candidates (e.g. a promoter of prostitution in New York) to minimize the importance of the political process.

      Rebuttal: There are those who would say that we have people serving who fit this description. Another reason for no free ballot access. Side note: I think a porn star was elected to Italy’s congress.

      11) Distraction of the electorate (FOX News).

      Rebuttal: You left out CNN, ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, lobbyists, 527’s, and candidates. People can still vote. That’s their decision on whom to listen to.

      12) Harassment of public officials.

      Rebuttal: Some harassment is excepted as part of their job. Too much, and there are laws against that.


  15. Game Fan says:

    f.y.i. Game Fan is for the highest standards possible with voting. Like Neal Boortz has said, (back when I listened to Neal Boortz) voting isn’t a right, it’s a privilege and a responsibility. You just don’t want the dregs of society voting, unless you’re trying to bring down society. Now, many-an-educated leftist wishes for just that, but that’s another story. And simply because nobody ever seems to get arrested, this should hardly be considered proof that there’s nothing shady going on. And speaking of being disenfranchised I’m of the opinion that Bob Dornan was defeated by Loretta Sanchez due to illegal aliens voting.

    # In California, former Republican Rep. Robert K. Dornan was defeated by Democrat Loretta Sanchez by 984 votes in the 1996 election. State officials found that at least 300 votes were cast illegally by non-citizens.[7]

  16. Game Fan says:

    I especially love this little jewel:

    In 1996, Congress enacted the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act, making it a federal crime for non-citizens to vote in any federal election (or state election, unless authorized by state law). As a penalty, ineligible non-citizens who knowingly vote may be deported.

    “may be deported” eh? So I guess that places them in the same category as every other illegal alien across the country. However, if enough illegal aliens are rallied to brave the “additional” risk of voting when someone good comes along, this type of legislation may one day be repealed.

  17. Republican Lady says:

    The following comments relating to prisoners, parolees, and probationers voting privileges’ came from pages 337-340 of Schmalleger, Frank, and John Ortiz Smykla. Corrections in the 21st Century, 4th edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill, 2009. ISBN-13 9780073375021.

    1) There is no federal law governing the voting rights of people convicted of crimes. Article 1, Section 2 of the U.S. Constitution leaves voting matters to the states.

    2) The District of Columbia and 45 states deny felons the right to vote. California, Florida, Maine, Maryland, and Vermont restored ex-offender voting rights.

    3) Georgia and sixteen other states deny felons voting rights while serving probation or parole sentences or while incarcerated.

    4) Twelve state deny voting rights to incarcerated felons.

    5) Eleven states have lifetime bans for all or some convicted felons.

    6) Five states ban voting for felons on parole or while incarcerated.

    7) Prisoners in Vermont and Maine can vote by absentee ballot and voting rights are restored to these convicted felons.

    8) U.S. Term Limits, Inc. v. Thornton, 1995 ruled that inmates can run for Congress.

    9) Taken verbatim from the book – In 2002, eight-term U.S. Representative Jim Traficant (D-Ohio) was sentenced to eight years in federal prison on charges of corruption for taking campaign funds for personal use. While incarcerated in White Deer, Penn, he ran as an independent candidate for another term and received 15% of the vote (27,487 votes) and became one of a handful of candidates in the United States to run for a federal office from prison.

    10) Former presidents Gerald Ford and jimmy Carter stated that ex-felons completing their sentences should be allowed to vote.

    11) Attempts at removing voter restrictions failed in Alabama, Arizona, and Nebraska.

Comments are closed.