Texas: Our Voting Laws Aren't Racist, Just Partisan

HorsieJuice · Aug 21, 2013

NightHawkeye said:
LOL ... crazy?

I'd go for "asinine."

You're the one concerned about the redistribution of wealth from California and New York to "Republican" states. Just offering you a chance to set that right.

No, I'm not "concerned" about it. I was merely concerned with correcting jpcedotal's ridiculous assertion.

MachZer0 said:
Then the point is moot since a large of amount of that money goes for federal installations and operations

I still have no idea what you're getting at. Does your point contradict mine, and if so, how?

Vylo · Aug 21, 2013

knee-v said:
I know very little of Texas' voting laws, so this is simply a general statement about voting laws:

Every state has the privilege of deciding for itself how it handles voting and elections. Every state has the ability to make voting as restrictive as they want it to be, and can "discriminate" against anyone they see fit, provided that that discrimination is not based on sex, race, or age for people over 18. Thus, for example, while no state can limit voting to white male land owners, any state can still limit voting solely to land owners, or to business owners, or whomever. Nothing in the constitution gives anyone the right to vote, per se. The constitution simply limits the limitations that states can impose on people.

Your example would actually be false, as require people to buy land would count as a poll tax and would be a violation of the constitution.

Knee V · Aug 21, 2013

Vylo said:
Your example would actually be false, as require people to buy land would count as a poll tax and would be a violation of the constitution.

How is that considered a poll tax? Taxes go to the government. Having purchased land has nothing to do with that.

Vylo · Aug 21, 2013

knee-v said:
How is that considered a poll tax? Taxes go to the government. Having purchased land has nothing to do with that.

If you have to pay a fee (and buying land is a hefty one) to vote, that could be considered a poll tax.

jgarden · Aug 21, 2013

Federal Taxing and Spending Benefit Some States, Leave Others Paying Bill - Fiscal Year 2005 spending data from the Census Bureau's annual Consolidated Federal Funds Report
October 09, 2007

"All taxpayers know that the federal government uses tax and spending policy to redistribute income from citizens with high incomes to those who make little," said study author Curtis Dubay, a Tax Foundation economist. "Citizens are less aware of geographically based income redistribution."

Dubay continued, "High-income states cannot hope to receive back from the federal government more than they send in federal taxes because of the progressive nature of the federal income tax. Since the tax structure is unlikely to change, and federal spending is largely on auto-pilot, donor states are almost certain to keep sending more to Washington than they get in return."

Ranking - State - Outlay to Tax Ratio
***************************************************************************************************
1. New Mexico $2.03 - for every dollar that New Mexico collects in federal taxes annually, it receives $2.03 back in federal spending

2. Mississippi $2.02

3. Alaska $1.84

4. Louisiana $1.78

5. West Virginia $1.76

6. North Dakota $1.68

7. Alabama $1.66

8. South Dakota $1.53

9. Kentucky $1.51 - Rand Paul's state

10. Virginia $1.51

11. Montana $1.47

12. Hawaii $1.44

13. Maine $1.41

14. Arkansas $1.41

15. Oklahoma $1.36

16. South Carolina $1.35

17. Missouri $1.32

18. Maryland $1.30

19. Tennessee $1.27

20. Idaho $1.21

21. Arizona $1.19

22. Kansas $1.12

23. Wyoming $1.11

24. Iowa $1.10

25. Nebraska $1.10

26. Vermont $1.08

27. North Carolina $1.08

28. Pennsylvania $1.07

29. Utah $1.07

30. Indiana $1.05

31. Ohio $1.05

32. Georgia $1.01

33. Rhode Island $1.00

34. Florida $0.97 donor state

35. Texas $0.94 donor state

36. Oregon $0.93 donor state

37. Michigan $0.92 donor state

38. Washington $0.88 donor state

39. Wisconsin $0.86 donor state

40. Massachusetts $0.82 donor state

41. Colorado $0.81 donor state

42. New York $0.79 donor state

43. California $0.78 donor state

44. Delaware $0.77 donor state

45 Illinois $0.75 donor state

46. Minnesota $0.72 donor state

47. New Hampshire $0.71 donor state

48. Connecticut $0.69 donor state

49. Nevada $0.65 donor state

50. New Jersey $0.61 donor state

Federal Taxing and Spending Benefit Some States, Leave Others Paying Bill | Tax Foundation

There is only one "red" donor state that collects more in federal taxes than it receives - Texas!

While "red" state politicians may denounce redistribution of income of income as an example of Democratic "socialism," all but one (Texas) are willing recipients of more federal dollars than they contribute in federal taxes.

Even Michigan, whose largest city faces bankruptcy, collects approximately $1 billion more in federal taxes annually than it receives in federal funds.

jgarden · Aug 21, 2013

The Great Gerrymander of 2012 - NYTimes.com
http://www.christianforums.com/t776...02/03/.../the-great-gerrymander-of-2012.html?...
Feb 2, 2013 - Arizona was redistricted by an independent commission, Texas was a ... But in 2012 the net effect of intentional gerrymandering was far larger ...

Lou Dubose: The Supreme Court and the Texas Gerrymander
http://www.christianforums.com/t776...redistricting-gerrymandering_b_1223...‎
The Supreme Court and the Texas Gerrymander. Posted: 01/23/2012 2:04 pm. React. Important Funny Typical Scary Outrageous Amazing Innovative Finally.

Anti-Hispanic Gerrymandering Struck Down in Texas -
open.salon.com/.../2012/.../anti-hispanic_gerrymandering_struck_down_...‎
Aug 29, 2012 - Even as the Republican convention coverage makes a big show of big names in the way of Hispanic leadership, a federal appeals court in ...

The GOP's big Texas gerrymander - The Washington Post
http://www.christianforums.com/t776...post.com/...texas-gerrymander/.../AGP56VHH_bl...
by Aaron Blake - in 115 Google+ circlesJun 2, 2011 - A new proposed congressional map in Texas goes to surprisingly .... He previously covered the 2008 and 2012 campaigns and reported on ...

It's Appalling that Gerrymandering Is Legal - Slate Magazine
http://www.christianforums.com/t776...../the_supreme_court_may_gut_the_vo...‎
by Emily Bazelon - in 75 Google+ circlesNov 9, 2012 - Gerrymandering is an American game both parties play because the ... The lopsided size of the congressional districts in states like Texas, ... As the plan bounced all over the courts, the map mostly stayed in place for 2012.

Federal court rejects GOP-drawn Texas voting maps | Politics | The ...
seattletimes.com/html/.../2019008712_apustexasredistricting.html‎
Aug 28, 2012 - Gerrymandering is SOP in Texas...ask the infamous Tom Delay, an expert at this... (August 28, 2012, by Ballena) MORE. "Aren't the Dems trying ...

Vote 2012: Racial Gerrymandering Resegregates the U.S. South ...
http://www.christianforums.com/t776...racial-gerrymandering-resegregates-...‎
Feb 15, 2012 - Vote 2012: Racial Gerrymandering Resegregates the U.S. South ... Further south in Texas, now a “majority-minority” state that gained four new ...

Dallas Redistricting 2011: The Texas Congressional Map for 2012 to ...
dallasredistricting2011.blogspot.com/2012/.../gerrymandered-texas-cong...‎
Mar 8, 2012 - Except for the Texas Legislature itself, Texas is only 45% Anglo. But, due to classic gerrymandering, Anglos are the majority in 61% of districts, ...

'No Compromise' on Gerrymandering Travis - The Austin Chronicle
Page Not Found - The Austin Chronicle
Feb 13, 2012 - 13, 2012. State of Texas: "Cannot compromise" on CD-25 ... They refuse to back down on the vicious gerrymandering of Travis County and in ...

Daily Kos: The Texas Republican Gerrymander Cowards
http://www.christianforums.com/t776...The-Texas-Republican-Gerrymander-Co...‎
May 19, 2012 - When the Texas Republican Party is not imposing more government regulation on a woman's right to choose or when it is not busy passing ...

gerrymandering texas 2012 - Google Search

Texas: Our Voting Laws Aren't Racist, Just Partisan

With Hispanics and "blacks" accounting for more than 87% of the population growth in Texas over the last 10 years, Texas Republicans have been active in gerrymandering the voting districts to ensure that this influx of traditional Democratic voters will not be reflected in their winning more House seats.

MachZer0 · Aug 21, 2013

HorsieJuice said:
I'd go for "asinine."

No, I'm not "concerned" about it. I was merely concerned with correcting jpcedotal's ridiculous assertion.

I still have no idea what you're getting at. Does your point contradict mine, and if so, how?

Your point was proved moot

jpcedotal · Aug 23, 2013

See I am a sales tax only type of guy...no tax on earned income period for any reason. If you work, you keep 100% of your wage. It is only when you spend should there be a tax.

Texas is pointed in the right direction...no, it aint perfect, but there is a reason folks with jobs are leaving Cali and NY for the more red states...

HorsieJuice · Aug 23, 2013

jpcedotal said:
See I am a sales tax only type of guy...no tax on earned income period for any reason. If you work, you keep 100% of your wage. It is only when you spend should there be a tax.

Texas is pointed in the right direction...no, it aint perfect, but there is a reason folks with jobs are leaving Cali and NY for the more red states...

You're right - Texas is pointing in the right direction. They're turning blue.

The most jobs and the best economic conditions in NY are in the NYC and immediate areas which are, by far, the most liberal "big government" areas of the state. The rest of the state is fairly conservative and is an economic wasteland outside of a couple of small-ish urban pockets which are also more liberal than their surrounding areas.

jpcedotal · Aug 23, 2013

If everyone was a liberal democrat, who would make the money for them to give away?

Bedford · Aug 23, 2013

jpcedotal said:
If everyone was a liberal democrat, who would make the money for them to give away?

Do you believe that liberal democrats don't work?

WalksWithChrist · Aug 23, 2013

Bedford said:
Do you believe that liberal democrats don't work?

My wife and I qualify as liberal Democrats. And we have three jobs between the two of us.

Liberals don't work. Right.
:doh:

MachZer0 · Aug 23, 2013

WalksWithChrist said:
My wife and I qualify as liberal Democrats. And we have three jobs between the two of us.

Liberals don't work. Right.

Hopefully you won't need a 4th and fifth job as a result of Obamacare

jpcedotal · Aug 23, 2013

WalksWithChrist said:
My wife and I qualify as liberal Democrats. And we have three jobs between the two of us.

Liberals don't work. Right.

You are not in the majority which is the key to the argument. If the majority does not work, money will run out and the folks who do work, liberal or conservative, are going to get tired of giving this growing number a free ride.

SharonL · Aug 23, 2013

Holder thinks he is above the law. The Supreme Court has ruled that the states decisions on voter laws apply but that doesn't satisfy Holder and his crew - they are now suing Texas. But Gov. Perry says he will follow the Supreme Court and not Holder's dictatorship. (my word - not Perry's)

Bedford · Aug 23, 2013

SharonL said:
Holder thinks he is above the law. The Supreme Court has ruled that the states decisions on voter laws apply but that doesn't satisfy Holder and his crew - they are now suing Texas. But Gov. Perry says he will follow the Supreme Court and not Holder's dictatorship. (my word - not Perry's)

Is this any different than politicians and governors challanging and suing over Obamacare? Should we accuse republican politicians and governors as people who believe they are above the law?

Bedford · Aug 23, 2013

jpcedotal said:
You are not in the majority which is the key to the argument. If the majority does not work, money will run out and the folks who do work, liberal or conservative, are going to get tired of giving this growing number a free ride.

He is a liberal democrat, one of those who you say does not make money.

HorsieJuice · Aug 24, 2013

jpcedotal said:
If everyone was a liberal democrat, who would make the money for them to give away?

This is both laughable and pathetic in its ignorance.

You don't live in a big city, do you? Try visiting one some time; you may be surprised to find yourself surrounded by a whole bunch of liberals with good jobs. I see more BMW's driving around every day than I do Fords, but I don't meet too many people who'd identify as conservative.

jpcedotal said:
You are not in the majority which is the key to the argument. If the majority does not work, money will run out and the folks who do work, liberal or conservative, are going to get tired of giving this growing number a free ride.

This is at least the second thread in which you've been made aware of, and subsequently ignored the fact that it's primarily the wealthy liberal areas of the country that subsidize the poorer, more conservative areas. Why do you keep ignoring this point and repeating claims that are false? Did you miss the times this was pointed out to you? Did you not understand the points when they were made? Did you forget about them? Did you disagree with them? Or did you just choose to be dishonest and ignore this fact, because it doesn't suit your agenda of slandering liberals?

USincognito · Aug 24, 2013

jpcedotal said:
If everyone was a liberal democrat, who would make the money for them to give away?

If every horse was a unicorn, would their farts smell like cotton candy? :scratch:

USincognito · Aug 24, 2013

SharonL said:
Holder thinks he is above the law. The Supreme Court has ruled that the states decisions on voter laws apply but that doesn't satisfy Holder and his crew - they are now suing Texas. But Gov. Perry says he will follow the Supreme Court and not Holder's dictatorship. (my word - not Perry's)

No it did not. What was struck down was the preclearance requirement. Other sections of the VRA that deal with non-discrimination are still the law of the land.

USDOJ: Justice Department to File New Lawsuit Against State of Texas Over Voter I.D. Law

A federal court in the District of Columbia has previously held that Texas had failed to meet its burden of proving that its 2011 redistricting plans and its 2011 voter identification law were not discriminatory under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. These decisions were vacated after the Supreme Courts June decision in Shelby County v. Holder. The Supreme Courts decision left unaffected the non-discrimination requirements of Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act, as well as the bail-in provisions of Section 3 of the Voting Rights Act, and todays filings seek to enforce those important protections.

Bold mine.

Texas: Our Voting Laws Aren't Racist, Just Partisan

HorsieJuice

Guest

Stick with the King!

It's phonetic.

Stick with the King!

Senior Veteran

Senior Veteran

Caught Between Barack and a Hard Place

Old School from the Backwoods - Christian Style

HorsieJuice

Guest

Old School from the Backwoods - Christian Style

Newbie

Seeking God's Will

Caught Between Barack and a Hard Place

Old School from the Backwoods - Christian Style

Senior Veteran

Newbie

Newbie

HorsieJuice

Guest

a post by Alan Smithee

a post by Alan Smithee

Similar threads