>>> welcome back. activist groups and democrats have largely neutralized efforts to disenfranchise millions of voters across the country with new laws at the polls. in pennsylvania a judge decided not to rule today on whether did y to block it. the judge is facing an early october deadline for a ruling. let's bring in perry bacon. perry, let me point out the activists have said or pointded out they believed this would disenfranchise millions of voters. the bottom line in your report is some of these concerns sparked activist groups to take action and they may have put the co-bash for lack of a better word on some of the voter i.d. laws or have they amended.
>> you've seen over the last year republicans pass a lot of voter laws. they were designed to change the voting laws in ways democrats thought were discriminatory. democratic groups, liberal groups and naacp in a lot of states went to court to dispute the laws. in texas, ohio, florida and wisconsin the liberal groups have won and they got the laws struck down in court. these laws in a lot of places won't go into effect sxwoent be enforced. pennsylvania may do the same thing next week.
>> there's interesting polling out there. " washington post " asked the question should voighter i.d. be required at the polls? 74% said yes. a couple other polls out of pennsylvania showed people in that state supported voter i.d. laws. so how do you jive all of that or gel that with what you're hearing from activists to what people say in the polling?
>> it's spridzing. even on these polls democrat support the edeals. the general idea -- it seems logical when you're asked in the poll should someone have an i.d. to vote. the answer is yes, in the same way to get on a plane. when you break down the numbers, african-americans and elderly people both black and white and other races as well tend not to have driver's license in a lot of states. you end up finding the people having the hardest time being able to register to vote in pennsylvania are 90 years old and voted a burchl of times and we put up a roadblock. that's why the laws are so controversial.
>> to your point when people are asked the question should it be required, you need an i.d. to get on a plane. what's not factored into the question and chris matthews did a great job on this who described in great detail what the process was like in pennsylvania for one person. it took around four hours to get an i.d. imagine if you're an 80-year-old or person working a couple of jobs and you have to carve this out and never been required to do this before and always voted responsibly.
>> what the courts have generally found what you said. the republicans argue there's a big voter fraud problem and we need these laws. with these courts even republican judges have said, we don't see a voter fraud problem that exists, and we certainly don't stee one that exists in the way we should make 90-year-olds spend so much time getting new voting applications to vote. it's not a big enough problems to justify the new
Source: http://video.msnbc.msn.com/newsnation/49199616/
amanda bynes dui ghost ship tiger woods masters jet crash virginia beach petrino clayton kershaw tyler perry
No comments:
Post a Comment