Florida to Sue Governement for Access to Data

Anybody following this story in Florida? Here's the basics, last October Florida requested access to a database that is used by government agencies to determine citizenship. One of the uses for this database could be for voter eligibility. Under the direction of the DOJ Homeland Security has blocked Florida from using this data for that purpose. Fast Forward to a few weeks ago and Florida announced they had a list of potentially 180K ineligible voters on the rolls. They used what data they had available to them which is no where near as accurate as the data they requested from the Feds. It's been found that the initial list of 2,600 culled from the 180K is not that great and contains a lot of eligible voters. The DOJ sent Florida a cease and desist letter and apparently the county election officials are complying which I can agree with to some degree.

Having said that why is Homeland Security under the direction of the DOJ blocking Florida from accessing a database they are legally entitled too to begin with. Frankly if there is anyone to blame for this fiasco it's the DOJ. This data not only would be able to identify ineligible voters but would also keep eligible voters off the list.

If they get this data the results should be interesting, if even 0.005% of those on the 180K list are found to be ineligible that's 900 votes and enough votes to swing a presidential election in 2000.

http://thehill.com/video/in-the-news/23 ... ion-battle
Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) said he will sue the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to move forward with his controversial attempt to purge the voter rolls in his state of ineligible voters.

“I have a job to do to defend the right of legitimate voters,” Scott told Fox News on Monday. “We’ve been asking for the Department of Homeland Security’s database, SAVE, for months, and they haven’t given it to us. So this afternoon, we will be filing a lawsuit, the secretary of State of Florida, against the Department of Homeland Security to give us that database. We want to have fair, honest elections in our state and we have been put in a position that we have to sue the federal government to get this information.”

Seems like a lot of States are finally growing some GONADS & drifting away from the sheep flock. Good post Richard

That's why dems cry RACISM! every time you mention a voter ID law. How else can a democrat get elected except through fraud? MA has been doing that for years. Dead voters outnumber the living ...

Not many people I know - even in MA - want a socialist USA.

So,The DOJ is suing Florida over the voter's list purge, and Florida is suing the Department of Homeland Security, presumably to get access to some secret list that has information on non-citizens living in Florida. My take on it is:

a) The lawsuit by Florida is just a pathetic threat to give incentive to the DOJ to drop their lawsuit, and behind the scenes they're saying "you drop your lawsuit against us, and we'll drop our suit against you," despite the two being more or less unrelated. I say 'pathetic threat' because the voter suppression lawsuit will be easy to prove, while I don't think the Homeland Security lawsuit will get very far. It amounts to Scott bringing a knife to a gunfight because it's better than nothing.

b) The Republican move to hold a vote on holding Holder in contempt of Congress over Fast and Furious is also a threat to encourage DOJ to drop the Florida thing.

Lets see the DOJ depose Scott under oath...

And hear his testimony about the rampant voter fraud. Then, I suppose he could also be asked why the republicans havent done anything about this alleged "voter fraud" until now, despite controlling the Florida legislature, Governorship, and Cabinet for the past 20 years.

xaos wrote: presumably to get access to some secret list that has information on non-citizens living in Florida. My take on it is:

There is nothing to presume, the database is referred to as the SAVE database and is intended to be used by government agencies to determine citizenship for things like voter eligibility. If you're not a citizen you can't vote. They have been asking for this data since October. Due to a lack of cooperation from the feds they were forced to use less reliable data that is not as current and time consuming. The DOJ's argument is the purge lists they are using are not accurate but the main reason they are not accurate is because of the DOJ to begin with. The DOJ is suing Florida over a situation they have had a very large part in creating to begin with.

Could you agree to the following points?

• Eligible voters need to be protected.
• Ineligible voters need to be purged.

The data that Homeland Security has would accomplish both of these goals. Why would you defend the DOJ for blocking that?

coalnewbie wrote:The whole libtard/.......

Unnecessary, pleas don't use that term. It accomplishes nothing.

xaos wrote:And hear his testimony about the rampant voter fraud.

He can start by siting these numbers:

http://www.wctv.tv/news/headlines/Flori ... 51895.html

But in the last few days, the Division of Elections released a list of the names of 86 voters it says have been removed by local supervisors because they were non-citizens between April 11 and June 8. About half of them are listed as having voted.

What is important about those 86 names is 44 of them are from a single county.

Of the 86 registered voters the state said local supervisors had removed in the last couple months, more than half – 44 of them – were in Lee County. No other county came close – Miami-Dade was next with 15 – suggesting the Lee County Supervisor of Elections office was much more aggressive during the period in culling the voter rolls of ineligible voters

No voter fraud is the claim you always hear? Even samll numbers like this are imporatant as history has shown us, a presidential election could swing on a few hundred votes.

Found this interesting, it's about Pa. since that's the state I live in. Personally I don't see a big deal with some sort of voter ID but question why all of a sudden, why wasn't it ever an issue before & could have been started right after an election instead of right before. Anything involving politics takes more time than it should & costs way more than it should so why wouldn't & shouldn't it have been done in a timely manner? Don't know if this is a political site or just a rag, it's unfamiliar to me.
http://www.pennlive.com/editorials/inde ... law_i.html

samhill wrote:.. why wasn't it ever an issue before

This has always been a thorn for Republicans.

& could have been started right after an election instead of right before.

As far as PA goes that legislation was passed before the primaries . ID was requested in the April elections but wasn't required to vote. If you still do not have an ID in the November election you can take a provisional ballot and have to provide a valid ID in ten days. Because of the considerable length of time, the considerable press coverage and other warnings starting from when this legislation was passed if you don't have ID by the November election which is still 5 months away then it's really nobody's fault but your own.

Florida started this process back in October at the very latest, it's the DOJ that has delayed this with their stonewalling tactics. A letter is sent to those found ineligible and they have either 30 or 60 days (I've seen both cited) to prove citizenship before their names are purged from the rolls. Once purged they can re-register and in the worse case scenario they can use a provisional ballot in November if necessary.

As I stated Richard I don't see a problem with it but just question the timing, even in Pa. where you have to be on the residence & registration list to begin with. Resident to make sure your in the right polling place & being registered is obvious, I'm not sure about PA. since I have ID I don't really care but some states charge a fee & from what I have read still to this date don't have a definite process, I always thought that voting was a right & a privilege so how can a fee to do so be constitutional? Not trying to make anything of this it's just something that I thought would be akin to a poll tax.

samhill wrote:but some states charge a fee &

No state that has instituted voter ID is charging for the ID. They can't do that, It would be successfully challenged as a poll tax . The only thing required in PA for the free ID is that you sign documentation that you don't have any other form of acceptable ID on the list.

It's being challenged is Texas and other states that fall under the Voting Rights Act. Doesn't apply in PA.

http://blog.chron.com/txpotomac/2012/06 ... er-id-law/

The states claim the Obama administration is overreaching in its opposition to voter ID laws, which have been found to be constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court.

“Texas should not be treated differently and must have the same authority as other states to protect the integrity of our elections,” said Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott.

But minority rights groups have sided with the Justice Department, saying the new Texas voter ID law that requires a valid photo is aimed at suppressing balloting by African-Americans, Latinos and other minorities.

Holder said a similar law in South Carolina was blocked by the Justice Department because it would have placed an unfair burden on non-white voters.

In each case, the Justice Department blocked the new voter photo ID laws by not granting a clearance under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act, first passed in 1965 and requiring mostly southern states with a historical pattern of discrimination to “pre-clear” changes in voting laws or political lines.

It's being challenged here in PA too but that is by the ACLU and I would suggest it will fail because SCOTUS has already ruled it constitutional.

From what I had read almost every state wanted to charge because of the cost to them, up until a while ago in Pa. it could cost $13.50 if you didn't have the necessary ID to get your ID & then it would take up to a Gov. week to 10 days but I guess they say the error of their ways. And that was after filling out all the paperwork, where I am there is only one place to get the ID at least on this side of the county, they are open 4 days a week & no where near bus service so it is a hardship for some. My neighbor works for a elderly care home & until a short while ago their home IDs weren't good enough then they changed that, they went ahead & got them all photo IDs anyway but at first the state couldn't make up their minds. It still doesn't answer my question as to why this wasn't done long ago?

samhill wrote:From what I had read almost every state wanted to charge because of the cost to them, up until a while ago in Pa.

Sam I don;t recall that and I'm not even sure why such a move would be considered. It would never survive a court challenge.

It still doesn't answer my question as to why this wasn't done long ago?

Sam , when is the last time the Republicans controlled the House, Senate and Governors mansion in PA where they could of had this passed? Certainly it would have been vetoed by Rendell the eight years he was in office even if they were able to get it passed in the legislature. It's the same thing in these other states, as they say elections have consequences and this is one of the consequences of the Republican sweep in 2010.

Richard, are you trying to tell me that Toll Gate Ed was a concerned Governor? Just like Bush, they were so bad that the majority of voters wanted to try something else. That being aside Pa. wasn't the first on the list of states to try for one there are plenty of states that all of a sudden like decided that there is too much voter fraud even if they could find no recent records of any large or in most cases small amounts. I would think that if there is fraud it is after the vote that you have to watch out for. Most cases that have been found turned out to be mistakes & most of those seem to deal with absentee ballots & once again I don't have any problem with it other than the timing & finding out how it does affect some, I think turning away one legal voter is far worse than an illegal one slipping thru, whats to stop a group from counterfeiting voter ID if they want fraud?