ACORN's huge victory for Missouri's low-income voters

True, there is nothing written other than the legistature gets to decide.

So if they decide on registering at a govt office then that's what you do. If you have a problem with that then talk to them.

I would suspect Apop (again without actually doing any research) that States could place reasonable restrictions on where, when and how people register, in fact I’m pretty sure they do. They just can’t do anything discriminatory.

I don’t know whether they could require competency (beyond general mental competency) or not. It would probably be pretty hard to do a competency test that didn’t discriminate against someone, and people I think are incompetent is probably far different than who some others might think are.

Nothing about registering at a govt office and nothing about voter competence.

Thank you for posting.

I apologize for my laziness (or ineptitude) in not looking this up.

Article. I.

Section. 2. Clause 1: The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the People of the several States... so the House was the people's representative

Section. 3. Clause 1: The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, chosen by the Legislature thereof... and the Senate was the State's representative. This was changed (for the good I wonder?) in the Constitution by Amendment 17 - The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each State, elected by the people thereof...

Section. 4. Clause 1: The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof…

Article. II.

Section. 1. Clause 2: Each State shall appoint, in such Manner as the Legislature thereof may direct, a Number of Electors, equal to the whole Number of Senators and Representatives to which the State may be entitled in the Congress...

I hope I don’t get into too much trouble for not researching this, but my recollection of voting rights is that the right to vote is derived from State laws. Federal legislation and at least 3 Constitutional Amendments have basically said you can’t discriminate for one reason or another (race, gender and 18 year olds), but do not create the right to vote. It is also my recollection that many States (maybe most or all) at one time did not have elections for the Senate, they were appointed by the Governor or State Legislatures. I think somewhere in the constitution it says that Representatives are elected; but doesn’t say how that process is to work. (Part of the reason it is called the People’s House). We saw the difference between the Senate and House play out in Illinois where the Governor was allowed to appoint someone to fill out Obama’s term as Senator, but Rahm Emanuel’s House seat required an election.

Since I don’t think it is very likely that a State would now deny the right to vote in any kind of general way, I don’t seen any need for a Constitutional Amendment guarantying that right.

Now go find where it says voters have to register in person at an election office and that they have to prove a certain level of competence.

I'll wait.

Has anyone found that "right to vote" in a federal election in the constitution yet? All those quoted by apop just say you can't discriminate. If you let one group vote you've got to let the others vote.

The Supreme Court says it doesn't exist.

"...the individual citizen has no federal constitutional right to vote for electors for the President of the United States." (Bush v. Gore, 531 U.S. 98, 104)

There are people who want to pass a new constitutional amendment to give us that right. Among others Congressman Jesse Jackson, Jr. already introduced such legislation into Congress on March 4, 2003 as House Joint Resolution 28. Now if they want to do this then I’m guessing that right doesn’t currently exist.

Anyone??? Feel free to chime in here.

'Go after ACORN,' judge says
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/s_631577.html

A district judge who held another ACORN worker for trial Monday on election law violations urged prosecutors to go after the real culprit, the organization that employed him.

"Somebody has to go after ACORN," Senior District Judge Richard H. Zoller said about the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.

"It's happening all over the country. All you have to do is turn on the television," he said, referring to voter registration fraud charges brought recently against ACORN and its workers in Nevada.

"We will," Allegheny County Detective Robert F. Keenan promised as he wrapped up his testimony.

"11,000 a month? That's not going to make them happy over at the state Republican headquarters."

It shouldn't make any taxpayers happy. ACORN is not a joke--it's a corrupt organization that is using our taxpayers to furhter its corruption.