#sweepstweet @lisalampanelli wins $100,000 for her charity and that’s a nice gift.

My @foxandfriends interview discussing the 9/11 Trials at Gitmo, @MittRomney, the job numbers and @CelebApprentice http://t.co/rYX1QAaB

It’s clear to me that @teresa_giudice needs some lessons in negotiation #sweepstweet

The question, though, is whether or not we want to deny an opportunity to vote for those who have similar hardships and inconveniences.

Minorities are impacted, young people are impacted, people who live in cities are more adversely impacted by this.

We are a stronger democracy when more people participate in this democracy.

It only creates an opportunity for people to register.

If it is not about suppressing fraud, it is about suppressing votes.

If you cannot even point to a prosecution of more than a handful of people, then I think it argues that it is about suppressing the vote rather than suppressing fraud.

We need more eligible people voting, not fewer.

Voting is a right, a privilege, and a responsibility that we should all take very seriously.

We do not want to return to the problems of 2000 and 2004. We want to move forward, not backward.

There is no evidence of fraud that gave rise to this change in the law.

Critics of HB 194 say that, in fact, what they are doing is just suppressing the vote.

There was consensus--there was consensus in Ohio about voting--and now there is an effort by one political party to undercut that consensus.

Senator Brown and I call on the legislature to do just that.

This hearing today is entitled 'New State Voting Laws III: Protecting Voting Rights in the Heartland.'

The clouds over the 2004 election were caused by process, not by individual voters.