Thread: Dems challenged by Iowa's new Hispanic voters

Dems weigh Iowa's new Hispanic voters
Candidates balance courting of interest group with immigration debate
By Leslie Wayne
The New York Times
Updated: 3:12 a.m. PT Oct 29, 2007
DES MOINES - At La Favorita, a Mexican grocery store here, there is plenty of food for sale — and also a new brand of politics.

A handwritten sign, hanging over the door, proclaims in Spanish: “Wake up! Register to vote! It is the hour to unite and change our future, the future of our children — and the future of this country!â€

Short version: Illegal aliens are going to be voting in droves.

The Demactrates are liars, as far as I'm concerned avoiding the subject is the same as lieing. The people are going to have to force them to talk about it in public!!



------------ACTION ALERT! ---------Monday..10/29
ACTIVIST...."AG'S JOB BILL RAISES IT'S UGLY HEAD AGAIN" PLEASE MAKE CALLS, E-MAILS AND FAXES!! NOW!!!
Link to action thread!!
http://www.alipac.us/ftopict-88376.html
Contact Info...Senators, Representatives & USEFUL INFORMATION
http://www.alipac.us/modules.php?name=F ... c&p=384761

illegals will be voting.

They will allow for open borders and a union with Mexico..

Our country is doomed. I am sorry to say. I try to stay optimistic, but the Elites and special interests have struck fast and hard, and all of us believe in our politicians to do the right thing.. instead they sat back and let it all happen. Now, its almost too late..

25+ million illegals. All having babies at such a momentous rate.

Soon america will be a big government socialist state, ruled by a few.

Originally Posted by BrightNail

illegals will be voting.

They will allow for open borders and a union with Mexico..

Our country is doomed. I am sorry to say. I try to stay optimistic, but the Elites and special interests have struck fast and hard, and all of us believe in our politicians to do the right thing.. instead they sat back and let it all happen. Now, its almost too late..

25+ million illegals. All having babies at such a momentous rate.

Soon america will be a big government socialist state, ruled by a few.

300 million American citizens... who has the advantage here? We just can not give up we must wake up America. They think they have more power than they do.... divide and conquer it is their strategy.

Latino leaders like Bernard Ortiz, who came to Iowa 30 years ago and is the Latino outreach organizer for the Service Employees International Union, has made it a mission to register Hispanic voters.

Ortiz probably benefited from the 1986 amnesty.

48A.5 Voter qualifications.
1. An eligible elector wishing to vote in elections in Iowa shall register to vote as required by this chapter.
2. To be qualified to register to vote an eligible elector shall:
a. Be a citizen of the United States.
b. Be an Iowa resident. A person's residence, for voting purposes only, is the place which the person declares is the person's home with the intent to remain there permanently or for a definite, or indefinite or indeterminable length of time. A person who is homeless or has no established residence may declare residence in a precinct by describing on the voter registration form a place to which the person often returns.
c. Be at least eighteen years of age. Completed registration forms shall be accepted from registrants who are at least seventeen and a half years of age; however, the registration shall not be effective until the registrant reaches the age of eighteen.
d. Not claim the right to vote in more than one place. A registrant shall be presumed to revoke any earlier claim of residence for voter registration purposes.
3. If a person who meets the requirements set forth in subsection 2 moves to a new residence, either in Iowa or outside Iowa, and does not meet the voter requirements at the person's new residence, the person may vote at the person's former precinct in Iowa until the person meets the voter requirements of the person's new residence. However, a person who has moved to a new residence and fails to register to vote at the person's new residence after becoming eligible to do so shall not be entitled to vote at the person's former precinct in Iowa.
4. A citizen of the United States who lives outside of the United States has the right to register and vote as if the person were a resident of a precinct in Iowa if the citizen was an eligible elector of Iowa immediately before leaving the United States. A citizen who was not old enough to register to vote before leaving the United States but who met all of the other requirements for voter registration at that time also has the right to register and vote as if the person were a resident of a precinct in Iowa. This right applies even though while living outside the United States the citizen does not have a residence or other address in the precinct, and the citizen has not determined whether to return to Iowa. To qualify to vote in Iowa a United States citizen living outside the United States shall:
a. Comply with all applicable requirements of sections 53.37 to 53.53 relating to absentee ballots for members of the armed forces and other citizens living outside the United States.
b. Not maintain a residence, shall not be registered to vote, and shall not vote in any other state, territory, or possession of the United States.
c. Possess a valid passport or identity card and registration issued under authority of the United States secretary of state, or, if the citizen does not possess a valid passport or card of identity or registration, an alternative form of identification consistent with the provisions of applicable federal and state requirements.
5. If a United States citizen living outside the United States meets the requirements for voting, except for residence, has never lived in the United States, and has a parent who meets the definition of a member of the armed forces of the United States under section 53.37 , the citizen is eligible to register to vote and vote at the same voting residence claimed by the citizen's parent.
6. The deadlines for voter registration shall not apply to a person who has been discharged from military service within thirty days preceding the date of an election. The person shall present to the precinct election official a copy of the person's discharge papers. The person shall complete a voter registration form and give it to the official before being permitted to vote.
94 Acts, ch 1169, §5
Iowa Constitution, Art. II, §1

http://nxtsearch.legis.state.ia.us/NXT/ ... efault.htm




48A.6 Disqualified electors.
The following persons are disqualified from registering to vote and from voting:
1. A person who has been convicted of a felony as defined in section 701.7 , or convicted of an offense classified as a felony under federal law. If the person's rights are later restored by the governor, or by the president of the United States, the person may register to vote.
2. A person who is incompetent to vote. Certification by the clerk of the district court that any such person has been found no longer incompetent by a court shall qualify such person to again be an elector, subject to the other provisions of this chapter.
94 Acts, ch 1169, §7; 98 Acts, ch 1185, §2; 2002 Acts, ch 1134, §18, 115
Proceedings regarding competency to vote, see § 222.16 , 229.27 , 633.551
Restoration of rights by governor, see chapter 914


http://nxtsearch.legis.state.ia.us/NXT/ ... efault.htm


48A.14 Challenges of voter registrations.
1. The registration of a registered voter may be challenged by another registered voter of the same county subject to the conditions and limitations of this section. A challenge shall be a statement in writing to the commissioner alleging one or more of the following reasons the challenged registrant's registration should not have been accepted or should be canceled:
a. The challenged registrant is not a citizen of the United States.
b. The challenged registrant is less than seventeen and one-half years of age.
c. The challenged registrant is not a resident at the address where the registrant is registered.
d. The challenged registrant has falsified information on the registrant's registration form.
e. The challenged registrant has been convicted of a felony, and the registrant's voting rights have not been restored.
f. The challenged registrant has been adjudged by a court of law to be a person who is incompetent to vote and no subsequent proceeding has reversed that finding.
2. A challenge shall not contain allegations against more than one registered voter.
3. A challenge shall contain a statement signed by the challenger in substantially the following form: "I swear or affirm that information contained on this challenge is true. I understand that knowingly filing a challenge containing false information is an aggravated misdemeanor."
4. A challenge may be filed at any time. A challenge filed less than seventy days before a regularly scheduled election shall not be processed until after the pending election unless the challenge is filed within twenty days of the commissioner's receipt of the challenged registrant's registration form or notice of change to an existing registration.
5. A challenger may withdraw a challenge at any time before the hearing held pursuant to section 48A.16 by notifying the commissioner in writing of the withdrawal.
94 Acts, ch 1169, §15; 95 Acts, ch 67, §7; 98 Acts, ch 1185, §4; 2002 Acts, ch 1134, §22, 115

http://nxtsearch.legis.state.ia.us/NXT/ ... efault.htm

What happens to a person if they knowingly vote illegally?

What happens to a person or group that assists and helps in making it possible for people vote illegally?

What do our laws say about this?

Election
39A.2 Election misconduct in the first degree.
1. A person commits the crime of election misconduct in the first degree if the person willfully commits any of the following acts:
a. Registration fraud . Produces, procures, submits, or accepts a voter registration application that is known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, forged, or fraudulent.
b. Vote fraud .
(1) Destroys, delivers, or handles an application for a ballot or an absentee ballot with the intent of interfering with the voter's right to vote.
(2) Produces, procures, submits, or accepts a ballot or an absentee ballot, or produces, procures, casts, accepts, or tabulates a ballot that is known by the person to be materially false, fictitious, forged, or fraudulent.
(3) Votes or attempts to vote more than once at the same election , or votes or attempts to vote at an election knowing oneself not to be qualified.
(4) Makes a false or untrue statement in an application for an absentee ballot or makes or signs a false certification or affidavit in connection with an absentee ballot.
(5) Otherwise deprives, defrauds, or attempts to deprive or defraud the citizens of this state of a fair and impartially conducted election process.
c. Duress. Intimidates, threatens, or coerces, or attempts to intimidate, threaten, or coerce, a person to do any of the following:
(1) To register to vote, to vote, or to attempt to register to vote.
(2) To urge or aid a person to register to vote, to vote, or to attempt to register to vote.
(3) To exercise a right under chapters 39 through 53 .
d. Bribery.
(1) Pays, offers to pay, or causes to be paid money or any other thing of value to a person to influence the person's vote.
(2) Pays, offers to pay, or causes to be paid money or any other thing of value to an election official conditioned on some act done or omitted to be done contrary to the person's official duty in relation to an election .
(3) Receives money or any other thing of value knowing that it was given in violation of subparagraph (1) or (2).
e. Conspiracy. Conspires with or acts as an accessory with another to commit an act in violation of paragraphs "a" through "d" .
2. Election misconduct in the first degree is a class "D" felony.


http://nxtsearch.legis.state.ia.us/NXT/ ... efault.htm

Opinion
The myth of the Latino voting bloc
The GOP has less to fear from a backlash than many claim.
By Steven Malanga
Los Angeles Times
October 18, 2007

When President Bush's immigration reform bill collapsed this summer, largely because of objections from his own party, open-borders advocates warned that the GOP would pay a harsh political price for killing the bill. Latino support had been crucial in electing Bush, the argument went, and Latino voters represented a rising electoral tide that Republicans were ignoring at their peril.

But such commentary is based on an inaccurate picture of the Latino voting public that emerged after the 2004 election and persists today. Just days after the election, for instance, Dick Morris, a former pollster and advisor to President Clinton, declared that Latinos had elected Bush; they represented 12% of the electorate, Morris reasoned, and 45% of them had pulled the levers for the president, enough to be decisive.

The Latino vote for Bush was far from decisive, however, and it may be years before it plays a pivotal role in a national election. Latinos may represent about 14% of the U.S. population, but they constituted just 6% of the 2004 electorate -- 7.5 million voters out of 125 million. According to Census Bureau data, only 34% of the nation's adult Latino population registered to vote in 2004, and 28% voted. By contrast, 67% of the country's adult white, non-Latino population and 56% of its adult black population voted in 2004. Black voters outnumbered Latino voters nearly 2 to 1 in 2004.

Exit polls taken during 2004 also indicate Latino support for Bush may have been exaggerated. In different polls, Bush's share of the Latino vote ranged from a high of 44% to a low of 33%. Yet subsequent academic studies have estimated Bush's actual level of Latino support at the lower end, somewhere between 35% and 37%. Seen in this context, the "swing" of voters from Bob Dole, who garnered 21% of the Latino vote in 1996, to George W. Bush was hardly historic. In 1984, Ronald Reagan captured 37% of the Latino vote -- a performance at least equal to Bush's.

This suggests that the key to winning Latino votes may be running good candidates, not pandering. Latino voters themselves seem to agree. A 2004 Washington Post poll found that immigration was the least important issue among Latino voters, with only 3.5% placing it at the top of their concerns.

The decline in Latino support was not a unique phenomenon for Republicans; from 2004 to 2006, the GOP lost support among virtually all constituencies, including union members (down 10 percentage points) and even white evangelicals (down 8 percentage points). In many places, the falloff was larger among core Republican voters than among Latinos. In California, for instance, 2006 GOP Senate candidate Richard Mountjoy's share of the Latino vote was 10 percentage points below Bush's 2004 share -- while his share of white male voters was a whopping 12 percentage points below Bush's comparable showing two years earlier.

Many commentators make another mistake by assuming that a liberal immigration policy will attract voters for a candidate but not cost him any votes. In fact, polls suggest that Bush's immigration policy might be more of a detriment at the ballot box in some places. In Arizona, a state with a large Latino population that some commentators have suggested could wind up in the Democratic column in future elections, 78% of the electorate told pollsters in 2004 that immigration should either be maintained at current levels or decreased.

One can only imagine how those voters would have reacted in the 2004 election if the president had introduced an immigration reform bill that offered a path to citizenship for about 12 million illegals along with vastly expanded legal immigration slots.

Given what the voting numbers show us, it's unlikely that Latinos will become an important voting bloc in most places as soon as many predict. And by the time that they do, Latino citizens might find that an immigration policy based on enforcing borders and increasing the number of better-skilled immigrants, which many Republicans advocate, actually benefits them. Recent economic studies show that the country's current levels of immigration are hurting immigrants who are already here -- and hurting native-born Latinos more than most U.S. residents. A saner immigration flow is likely to boost the average wages of our current Latino population and free up resources, like housing, in Latino communities.

But much of the commentary on Latino voting power tends to ignore such issues, focusing instead on Latino voters' supposed anger at Republicans and comparing it to black voters' desertion of the party after key Republicans opposed civil rights legislation in the 1960s. But the analogy hardly stands up. American blacks were striving to obtain rights guaranteed in the Constitution but denied to them. By contrast, the current immigration debate is not about denying immigrants anything; it's about dealing with those now here illegally and those yet to come.

Steven Malanga is the coauthor of the forthcoming "The Immigration Solution" and senior editor of City Journal, from whose forthcoming issue this is adapted.

http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la- ... -rightrail