Results 1 to 12 of 12

Thread: Voter-Purge List Made Public

  1. #1
    Veteran Member Isis's Avatar
    Joined
    Mar 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    335
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Voter-Purge List Made Public

    TALLAHASSEE - Florida's error-prone list of 47,763 suspected felons who could be tossed from voter rolls before November's presidential election contains nearly three times as many registered Democrats as Republicans. Almost half are racial minorities. Although activists have speculated for months that most of the voters on the controversial list are likely Democrats, precise numbers were difficult to calculate because state law forbade releasing copies to the public.

    That law, however, was overturned Thursday by a Leon County judge at the request of CNN and several other news organizations, including The Tampa Tribune.

    Circuit Judge Nikki Ann Clark said in her ruling that the Florida Constitution ``grants every person the fundamental right to inspect or copy public records.'' Further, the state had previously allowed the public and news media to inspect the list and not make copies, but Clark cited previous state court rulings that said the public's access was ``valueless without the right to make copies.''

    News organizations, advocacy groups and others argued that public release of the list would enable greater scrutiny so that mistakes could be identified and fixed before eligible voters are wrongly turned away at the polls, as they were in the 2000 presidential election. Already, several mistakes have been discovered statewide.

    The state Elections Division provided copies of the list for the first time Thursday evening in response to Clark's ruling. The agency had argued it simply was following state law created by the Legislature and approved by Gov. Jeb Bush, citing the need for privacy.

    Calls to Bush's office weren't returned Thursday. It was unclear whether the state intends to appeal the decision, which could also open public access to the full database of voter names, party affiliations and other information, because it was protected in the same statute that prevented access to the list of felons.

    Among racial groups, the largest reported group was non-Hispanic whites with 24,197, followed by 22,084 non-Hispanic blacks, 1,384 unknowns, 61 Hispanics, 14 Asian or Pacific-Islanders, 12 American Indians and 11 others. The list consisted of 37,777 men and 9,986 women.

    Mistakenly purging eligible voters from the rolls was among the state's biggest stumbles in the 2000 presidential election in Florida, which decided the presidency by 537 votes.

    The list included voters who had never been convicted of crimes, some whose rights had been restored by other states and others whose names matched those of felons. Nobody knows how many valid voters were disenfranchised.

    In response to those errors, the state asked the counties to verify the list in advance of elections and, if they could not, to remove questionable voters from the rolls. Florida is one of just seven states where felons must petition to regain voting rights after serving their time.

    Counties must issue letters to voters who could be declared ineligible. Only those who can prove they're eligible to vote will be left on the rolls.

    Secretary of State Glenda Hood said in a statement announcing the release of the information that it contains potential matches and is not a final list.

    Some, including Pasco County Supervisor of Elections Kurt Browning, said it's possible that the process will prove lengthy and that no voters will be removed in their county before Nov. 2.

    Felons, meanwhile, continue to be purged from voter rolls - sometimes improperly - because processes exist separate from the statewide list of potential felons.

    As a result of records that were provided directly by the courts, Daren Jones, 30, a salesman from Miami, saw his voting rights improperly taken away last month.

    He won restoration of his civil rights in 2003 after a drug conviction but last month received a letter from the Miami- Dade elections supervisor informing him he was being yanked from the voter rolls.

    He took his case to talk radio, and after showing elections officials his clemency paperwork, was reinstated.

    ``I'm fortunate because mine was caught early,'' Jones said in an interview from Miami.

    Reporter William March contributed to this report by Reporter Garrett Therolf

  2. #2
    Veteran Member Rayleen's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    648
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

    Default Re:Voter-Purge List Made Public

    Obviously Bush knew he couldn't win the election honestly so he had his brother fix the election results in FL by eliminating voters and vilolating the Voting Rights Act.

  3. #3
    Featured Member Lilith's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,309
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 14 Times in 11 Posts

    Default Re:Voter-Purge List Made Public

    *sigh*

    To the best of my knowledge, this is done in every state before every election. It has been going on for a looooong time, but no one (Democrats) has ever questioned it before. Now they act like it's some new thing invented strictly by the Bush family.

    There were more than 6 million Florida voters in the 2000 election. Somewhere in the vicinity of 50,000 convicted felons were denied voting rights, as laid out by criminal law. At best, there exists only evidence that a portion of them may have been mistakes. Anecdotal evidence does not directly prove that this number was significant.

    I find it very odd that there was no mention of the several thousand (as many as 75,000 by some reports) mail-in ballots thrown out. Of course, those ballots were exclusively military who usually vote Republican, so perhaps that makes them unimportant. It must, because no one ever mentions them when they talk about an election fiasco.
    He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

  4. #4
    Veteran Member Rayleen's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    648
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts

    Default Re:Voter-Purge List Made Public

    It's one thing to uphold the no felons voting but another thing to intentional stop non felons from voting.

    What other purpose is there in that except to sway election results in a state that could have really made a difference in the election and if memory serves correct the state that Bush was the most worried about in 2000 ?

    I don't think this was a mistake, if it were it wouldn't have been 3x as many democrates and it wouldn't be mostly non white voters either. Those voters were the most likely to NOT vote Bush. Coincedence I don't think so

    Also I think the reason the 75,000 ballots you brought up aren't part of this story is because it's a story about the list voters denied the right to even cast a votebecoming public, not about the other problems such as the butterfly and ofcourse the ballots you mentioned. Those problems are talked about as well just not always at the same time .

  5. #5
    God/dess Casual Observer's Avatar
    Joined
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Boston MA
    Posts
    5,670
    Thanks
    35
    Thanked 144 Times in 74 Posts

    Default Re:Voter-Purge List Made Public

    I don't think this was a mistake, if it were it wouldn't have been 3x as many democrates and it wouldn't be mostly non white voters either. Those voters were the most likely to NOT vote Bush. Coincedence I don't think so
    Then you need to look at the annual crime statistics on the FBI website and check out the breakdown of demographics for crime..
    Idealism is fine, but as it approaches reality, the costs become prohibitive.

    William F. Buckley, Jr.

  6. #6
    Featured Member polecat's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    1,391
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 15 Times in 13 Posts

    Default Re:Voter-Purge List Made Public

    I can't believe anyone would be stupid enough to fall for this piece of propaganda. It really bums me out that a CNN instigated political agenda move with such clear and obvious bias could actually fool anyone above the age of 18 in this country. Sad sad sad sad...

    I'm no Bush fan, but this current Democratic party device is the kind of thing that makes us true liberals ashamed and disgusted at what the party has devolved to.

    CNN is the one that took the state of Florida to court to release these voter purge records. The fact is every state has massive voter purge records, such as my own home state of California, who's felony purge lists are over 2x the amount of those in Florida!!

    I'm unsure of Florida's voter laws, but in California, it is illegal to require voter identification and proof of nationality at polling places. In fact, no one can bring evidence of any kind to a polling place challenging any voters' eligibility. Such challenges can be made only to the registrar of voters and only after registration has taken place. This is why votes go through a "purging" process, after they are deemed ineligible by state laws. At the federal level, felons have discarded their right to vote and therefore any votes claimed by felons on file are rejected/purged. This is a NATURAL process that happens in all states.

    Clinton tried to put an act into place several years ago that required hispanic and immigrant voters to bring a voter identification card with them to their place of polling in hopes their votes wouldn't be purged.. i.e. create a work-around that if a poller ID card/# was presented, they could be pushed through a different stack that didn't go through any kind of verification system... since now, if the voter's polling identification couldn't be immediately found, their vote was discarded (i.e. assuming an illegal alien or non-resident). Otherwise they go through the same checks and balances, and if found to be a registered current or past felon, they are also rejected.

    The thing I find the most funny about this 'article' is that it picks Florida of all states and tries to create a conspiracy theory. When looking at "disenfranchised" voters, Florida's numbers are VERY small when compared to California, New York, Texas and other big states. A large quantity of votes are discarded with every election and Florida's numbers are quite tame compared to other regions.

    Lastly, the funny thing is- this CNN tomfoolery also doesn't even bother to quantify the very basis it's trying to build!
    The list included voters who had never been convicted of crimes, some whose rights had been restored by other states and others whose names matched those of felons. Nobody knows how many valid voters were disenfranchised.
    So, what it's really saying is- "Florida had X number of purged felon votes withdrawn from it's campaign [ which every state also has, and in this case fewer than other states], but we have absolutely no clue how many of those that popped up as past/current felons may have been in error, if any! Nobody knows!"

    Then it proceeds to give racial breakdown of voters rejected as being past/current felons. Well, duh! Due to whatever- racial bias, racial enforcement or whathaveyou, minorities are often the highest percentage of felons for most big states. I'm betting the jails here in Oakland and down in LA aren't exactly racially balanced as far as inmates. You can bet your bottom dollar the highest majority of inmates are blacks, hispanics and other minorities. Talk about exploiting a trend without even commenting on the problem WITH the trend! This is NOT liberalism folks.

    I'm utterly dissapointed that anyone would fall for such a loaded, lopsided, politically biased and party/state specific effort from a single news organization.
    It doesn't matter if you're somebody in this world, it rather matters you mean the whole world to somebody.

  7. #7
    Featured Member Lilith's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,309
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 14 Times in 11 Posts

    Default Re:Voter-Purge List Made Public

    Quote Originally Posted by Rayanna link=board=1;threadid=10696;start=msg132258#msg132 258 date=1088802966
    It's one thing to uphold the no felons voting but another thing to intentional stop non felons from voting.
    There has never been anything that proves the voter-purge list was intentionally preventing people from legally voting. All evidence shows that this is nothing more than an embarrassing mistake. Gee, it's not like the government is known for making embarrassing mistakes.

    What other purpose is there in that except to sway election results in a state that could have really made a difference in the election and if memory serves correct the state that Bush was the most worried about in 2000 ?
    As stated before, this has been going on for a long time and nationwide. It was not invented solely for the 2000 elections and Florida.


    Also I think the reason the 75,000 ballots you brought up aren't part of this story is because it's a story about the list voters denied the right to even cast a votebecoming public, not about the other problems such as the butterfly and ofcourse the ballots you mentioned. Those problems are talked about as well just not always at the same time .
    I've debated this topic for four years. Funny how the only person I've seen mention it is another poster on my debate board and Monty. You would think a story like that would fit right in with the topic of "disenfranchised voters", wouldn't you? Thousands and thousands of votes thrown out from a group that traditionally votes a certain party. Huge story there, eh wot?
    He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

  8. #8
    Banned LauraLove's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    429
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:Voter-Purge List Made Public

    Quote Originally Posted by polecat link=board=1;threadid=10696;start=msg132272#msg132 272 date=1088805829
    I can't believe anyone would be stupid enough to fall for this piece of propaganda.
    Questioning or being suspicious of political intentions does not make a person stupid.


    So, what it's really saying is- "Florida had X number of purged felon votes withdrawn from it's campaign
    Polecat you seem to have missed the fact that many of them were not felons. Many of them had never even been charged with crimes.

    Was this a just a mistake- maybe, or maybe not.

    It was awful convenient for Bush though. Too convenient in my opinion.

    Go right ahead and call me stupid and a fool if you wish for not sharing your point of view

  9. #9
    Featured Member polecat's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    1,391
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 15 Times in 13 Posts

    Default Re:Voter-Purge List Made Public

    Quote Originally Posted by LauraLove link=board=1;threadid=10696;start=msg132384#msg132 384 date=1088818253
    Questioning or being suspicious of political intentions does not make a person stupid.
    There is nothing stupid about questioning it. But it IS stupid to adopt the Bush-Conspiracy theory this article concludes.

    Polecat you seem to have missed the fact that many of them were not felons. Many of them had never even been charged with crimes.
    No, you seem to have "invented" the fiction that "many" or even "any" were not felons. The article itself makes this very clear that is has no basis of fact whatsoever.

    The singular sentence from the report that says:
    Nobody knows how many valid voters were disenfranchised.
    This clearly dictates that NOBODY knows.. there is no quantity (possibly even zero, although I'd expect some reasonable amount of errors.. it happens everywhere).


    Was this a just a mistake- maybe, or maybe not.
    Was WHAT a mistake? This is the part I consider stupid. There is already an assumption of a "mistake" when the article clearly forms no basis of a "mistake"... in fact, it equally leads "0 non-felons" as logically formed as "all were non-felons" because it totally fails to provide any evidence or quantification of the crisis it creates.


    Go right ahead and call me stupid and a fool if you wish for not sharing your point of view
    I have no disrespect for differences in opinion.

    I have all the world of disrespect for people easily persuaded by propaganda that even fails to deliver it's own message (like this does).

    Until there is SOME quantification towards how many felon votes were discarded that turned out to be non-felons, and compared with other states to balance with normal margin for error, there is absolutely NO wrong proven by this article. It's all biased implication with 0 facts.
    It doesn't matter if you're somebody in this world, it rather matters you mean the whole world to somebody.

  10. #10
    God/dess montythegeek's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    2,103
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re:Voter-Purge List Made Public

    Right here, right now, in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts in a town between Lexington and Concord,4 miles away from the Lexington Battlegreen I am subject to being stripped from the voter roles by the Town Clerk for the unspeakable crime of failing to return an annual town Census form in the month of January!!

    This form, although not "Required" by state law, carries the penalty that they excise you from the voter list. The sole purposes of this law is to know how many kids are going to be of school age 7 months before they register for class and to collect the dog tax.

    Are my Senator John and Teddy crying over this law? Have they lifted one finger to stop it!! Does my Congressman give a chit? No. I do not even know his name because they habe gerrymandered me into 3 different Congressional districts in the 13 years I have lived here in the same house. Does my State Rep care? No she is too busy raising taxes and banning smoking cigarettes in public places.

  11. #11
    Banned LauraLove's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    429
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:Voter-Purge List Made Public

    Quote Originally Posted by polecat link=board=1;threadid=10696;start=msg132402#msg132 402 date=1088821615

    No, you seem to have "invented" the fiction that "many" or even "any" were not felons. The article itself makes this very clear that is has no basis of fact whatsoever.
    NO. It was shown that some of these voters were incorrectly labled felons when they have never been convicted as such.


    The list included voters who had never been convicted of crimes
    Was that a mistake made unintentionally, maybe? It is also possible that it was intentional. That is what no one (not involved) will ever know. But considering that Bush directly benefited from those "mistakes" and being that his brother is in fact the state Governor, it is not that far fetched to think the Bush brothers orchestrated these voters being denied their constitutional right to vote, particularly since there was (and still is) plenty of motive. That is why it is a hot debate subject.

  12. #12
    Featured Member polecat's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    1,391
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 15 Times in 13 Posts

    Default Re:Voter-Purge List Made Public

    Well Laura-

    I'm completely "with you" if the percentage of felon voters purged that were actually non-felons exceeds the degree that this happens in other states.

    My beef is that this process has not been quantified to include even one (1) example. It uses wording like "error prone" and the quote that you have provided, quickly followed by the disclaimer that "nobody knows" the true quantity.

    To me, this means this is a non-issue until SOME evidence has been collected or provided. The general public should also be wise enough to realize the perfect timing of this "press release" (4 years later...) and how it tries to make this case with zero facts.

    I'm 100% for an investigation and accountability placed upon the state of Florida ***IF*** those voters disenfranchised are tallied and the amount exceeds the normal margin of error as experienced in the rest of the country. But until that point, I can't understand how anyone would look at this as nothing more than a load of rubbish/hogwash, which is exactly what it is until some NUMBERS are given... seems the only numbers they want to splash at the uninformed reader are how many TOTAL felon votes were purged, and precise/specific racial breakdown percentages.. See the double standard of specifics vs. zero?

    Oh, and I didn't mean nor imply you were stupid. Definately not , and definately not you Laura.
    It doesn't matter if you're somebody in this world, it rather matters you mean the whole world to somebody.

Similar Threads

  1. how to end the binge/purge cycle?
    By knp001 in forum Body Business
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 10-06-2010, 09:03 PM
  2. She made 1200, I made 350
    By bluelight in forum Stripping (was Stripping General)
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 06-28-2009, 09:49 PM
  3. A very 'telling' yardstick re true voter sentiment
    By Melonie in forum Political Poo
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 06-25-2005, 09:20 AM
  4. Replies: 37
    Last Post: 12-10-2004, 11:52 PM
  5. Strip Club Voter Registration
    By Richard_Head in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 07-17-2004, 09:01 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •