The companies that administer two key college entrance exams have adopted new measures arguably designed to decrease participation in the tests - and, ultimately, enrollment in colleges in university - by minority and elderly students.
The two companies that administer the tests, the College Board and ACT Inc., which administer the SAT and ACT tests, have announced that students taking the tests will be required to present photo IDs.
The new requirement is being called a "key security upgrade" and comes in response to an alleged cheating scandal in which students allegedly paid someone else to take the tests for them.
Cold medicine, SATs--what's next? Driving??
Hmmm, I wonder what the statistics are for SAT/ACT impersonation versus voter impersonation.
I think it was a report from the Republican Lawyers association that found that there were something like six (6) cases of voter impersonation over the most recent 10 year period across all 50 states. Six.
Oh, and please provide any evidence that students taking an SAT/ACT test do not already have a photo ID which they must have in their possession each school day.
Do you watch 60 minutes, Jim? Ever see the dummy who made thousands taking the SAT's for other kids?
Jimbo, why don't you find new talking points?
Your "pubbie lawyers'" tommyrot can't stand the first question of a six-year-old inquisitor--which would be "Isn't fraud meant to be un-detected, Jimbo??"
To which his 5 year-old sister might respond, "What do policemen do, then?" (Who is Jimbo?)
Almost all crime is meant to be "un-detected", isn't it?
Seems like we have the FBI, the state police (at least 50 of them), thousands of county sheriffs departments, local police departments, the SEC, the FEC, BATF, DHS, the IRS...Who am I forgetting, Strupp?
Seems like all these agencies can detect check kiting, securities fraud, bootlegging, drug smuggling, burglaries, terrorist plots, conspiracies, registration fraud, money laundering, counterfeiting, stolen identities...What am I forgetting, Strupp?
And yet all of law enforcement can only find six cases nation-wide of voter impersonation in 10 years.
What it's all about
Widespread voter fraud is a myth, Dad29. It is the BIGGEST lie perpetrated by the right!
Yah. A myth.
Like the 300,000 fraudulent signatures on Walker recall petitions--out of 1 million.
Sure. A myth.
How ignorant do you have to be not to understand the difference between a fraudulent vote perpetrated by an impersonator (remember: fewer than 10 in 10 years) and fraudulent signatures on a petition (most of which were probably done by Walker supporters)?
If you are worried about signatures on a petition, why don't you have a law that requires a photo ID to sign a petition. At least you apparently have some proof that that sort of fraud actually occurs.
Get your facts straight! 900,938 were deemed valid by the GAB out of 931,053 signatures.
In ANY petition of this magnitude, there will be fake signatures. It is unavoidable. But not all signatures were deemed fraudulent. Some did NOT meet the requirements necessary to be considered valid, such as duplicates.
"....deemed valid..." after GAB decided NOT to run a line-by-line analysis of the signatures.
Under those conditions, GAB could "deem" that the year is 300 days long, too.
More reliable reports put the fraud-numbers at or very near 30%. You say "mistakes" of course.
So you're saying that the non-partisan GAB failed to do its job properly, that the process conducted by "more reliable groups" are the real figures?
Yes, the lazy-assed GAB simply decided NOT to do their job thoroughly.
Par for the course in Madison.
Yeah, spending months sifting through petition signatures under tight security is "laziness".
And if there had been a recall petition against Doyle (who I am not a fan of) and the GAB released similar results, I wonder what the righties on the blogs would be saying about its diligence.
Notice: I do NOT argue that the number of signatures is insufficient for a recall.
I simply note that once GAB got to 'sufficient', they went to sleep.
There are criminal violations on those petitions, and GAB should be a complainant.
"I simply note that once GAB got to 'sufficient', they went to sleep."
The non-partisan GAB performed their duties, period.
YOU don't like the results. So you are desperate to create the illusion that the petitions are rife with criminality. Evidence required, not supposition.
And I'll pitch this unsupported assertion: Most of the complaints would likely have to be against Walker supporters who are the most likely to have illegally sign petitions in order to make it more difficult to reach the required threshold.
Post a Comment