quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

There`s many good reasons why folks don`t like this.

Many folks and countys don`t want government telling them what to do and forcing un-funded mandates.

There are plenty of folks who`s voted legally for years,that will say it`s to much bother to have to get/do one more thing ,and many won`t.

Folks with no extra time or money,the folks that are the target of this suppression technique,poor(er) older,home-bound,or homeless folks,working families,etc.Folks who don`t have time to balance the check book or open mail.This are the people who will be discouraged.

We should be doing the very opposite of discouraging people or making any more trouble/tasks for them.

In my state,there`s no law saying one must carry ID.It`s a presumption of innocents thing.

The same should be true for voters.We should presume that they are who they say they are.If they`re registered to vote,that should be enough.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomAviator

I say again what kind of a scumbag lowlife subhuman existence can a person with no ID eek out in america? .....................................................I mean really the people that this would "disenfranchise" shouldnt be voting anyway because they simply arent stakeholders or even participants in our society!

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomAviator

Homeless people dont need to vote - they dont have a residence in the precinct / district / etc... RESIDENCY is a requirement for voting. Obviously I dont want homeless people choosing my mayor and city council cause they happened to be sleeping on a bench in my town on election day... Working familes needed to produce ID to get the job...

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomAviator

I say again what kind of a scumbag lowlife subhuman existence can a person with no ID eek out in america? .....................................................I mean really the people that this would "disenfranchise" shouldnt be voting anyway because they simply arent stakeholders or even participants in our society!

......so, let me get this straight. You're saying that if you either choose or are forced by circumstances to live off the grid you get no vote? i thought the whole idea of the grand social experiment that is the USA was that one could live however they wanted provided it didn't stop other people living how they want. Perhaps i've misunderstood you, but from what you've typed you seem to be arguing a wholly unamerican viewpoint.

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomAviator

I say again what kind of a scumbag lowlife subhuman existence can a person with no ID eek out in america? .....................................................I mean really the people that this would "disenfranchise" shouldnt be voting anyway because they simply arent stakeholders or even participants in our society!

......so, let me get this straight. You're saying that if you either choose or are forced by circumstances to live off the grid you get no vote? i thought the whole idea of the grand social experiment that is the USA was that one could live however they wanted provided it didn't stop other people living how they want. Perhaps i've misunderstood you, but from what you've typed you seem to be arguing a wholly unamerican viewpoint.

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomAviator

I say again what kind of a scumbag lowlife subhuman existence can a person with no ID eek out in america? .....................................................I mean really the people that this would "disenfranchise" shouldnt be voting anyway because they simply arent stakeholders or even participants in our society!

......so, let me get this straight. You're saying that if you either choose or are forced by circumstances to live off the grid you get no vote? i thought the whole idea of the grand social experiment that is the USA was that one could live however they wanted provided it didn't stop other people living how they want. Perhaps i've misunderstood you, but from what you've typed you seem to be arguing a wholly unamerican viewpoint.

quote:

ORIGINAL: philosophy

i'm sure residency requirements are part of electoral law in some places in the USA, but i think K-sol has linked to at least one place where it is not a requirement. Would you support a program where homeless people are allowed to vote but that the vote is only used for presidential elections?

You spoke of it not being possible "to eek out anything remotely resembling a life in america without ID.". Should not leading a normal life be a reasonable cause to disenfranchise a citizen? Furthermore i have read that a percentage of homeless people are vets....haven't they earned the right to vote?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomAviator

Considering that its illegal to not have ID in the first place... what is the harm in requiring voters to have it? Ya know, I really dont get the democratic anger over this ID thing. Whether it is a drivers license, or a state issued "non driver ID" you must have an ID... Vagrancy issues aside, how in the hell can you do anything in life without ID?  Frankly, if someone is such a loser that they dont drive, dont have a bank account, dont own anything of any substance, and essentially have no identity, no roots to the community, etc do we really want them voting? For christs sake you cant even pick up a moneygram or hock something in a pawnshop without ID much less lead a normal life. The only reason someone without ID would need to vote is if they were committing voter fraud, or if they were a felon and were hence not supposed to vote anyway....

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Considering that its illegal to not have ID in the first place...

Huh?  Did this suddenly become Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union?  Even though Bush and Company have tried their best.  There is absolutely no legal requirement to carry ID anywhere in this country.  The only exceptions to that are when you are performing an activity that specifically requires you by law to do so. 

quote:

ORIGINAL: Irishknight

Again, I guess that there was no voter fraud in Ohio.  But wait, that was what the dems claimed lost Kerry th election last time.  Either it was or it wasn't, you can't have it both ways.

There are no recorded cases of me catching an STD but I still take precautions against it.  Prevention could have kept 9/11 from happening but we were too worried about convenience for that to be allowed.  How many people are dead because we didn't prevent something that we knew was a possibility? 

I think that this is just someone trying to hold on to an excuse they have used for the past 2 elections.  We all know that Bush was never elected (twice) except by voter fraud that now doesn't exist.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomAviator

quote:

ORIGINAL: Owner59

There`s many good reasons why folks don`t like this.

Many folks and countys don`t want government telling them what to do and forcing un-funded mandates.

There are plenty of folks who`s voted legally for years,that will say it`s to much bother to have to get/do one more thing ,and many won`t.

Folks with no extra time or money,the folks that are the target of this suppression technique,poor(er) older,home-bound,or homeless folks,working families,etc.Folks who don`t have time to balance the check book or open mail.This are the people who will be discouraged.

We should be doing the very opposite of discouraging people or making any more trouble/tasks for them.

In my state,there`s no law saying one must carry ID.It`s a presumption of innocents thing.

The same should be true for voters.We should presume that they are who they say they are.If they`re registered to vote,that should be enough.

1) What unfunded mandate. If you are going to have ANY semblance of a life worth living in America you will have at least one - if not a half a dozen forms of ID. This isnt something new... You have to have it anyway just to get around your daily life....

2) You dont have to "get / do one more thing" you have to reach into your wallet at the polling place to remove something that should already be there.

3) The argument presented here makes no sense at all. The person who doesnt have time to balance their checkbook WONT HAVE a checkbook unless they produced ID at the bank. They certainly wont be able to actually USE the checks anywhere... Homeless people dont need to vote - they dont have a residence in the precinct / district / etc... RESIDENCY is a requirement for voting. Obviously I dont want homeless people choosing my mayor and city council cause they happened to be sleeping on a bench in my town on election day... Working familes needed to produce ID to get the job...

4) You may think there is no law in your state requiring a person to have ID... and there probably isnt. But there will be fifty other state and federal laws that require you to have them for every day life... Such as the banking code requiring them to open an account, the alcohol beverage control law requiring you to produce it on demand if you attempt to purchase alcohol, the commercial code requiring you to provide it if you attempt to pass a check, the TSA laws and FAR part 108 requiring them to board an airplane, and so forth.

I say again what kind of a scumbag lowlife subhuman existence can a person with no ID eek out in america? They cant drive, buy tickets on any interstate conveyance, own a firearm, purchase any age restricted products, open a bank account, pick up a prescription medication, buy over the counter sudafed for their cold, write a check, leave the country, enroll in a school, work a job, join the military, buy a lottery ticket, own anything of any value, buy a hunting or fishing license, get married, etc.... For christs sake they cant even hock whatever they steal at a pawnshop LOL I mean really the people that this would "disenfranchise" shouldnt be voting anyway because they simply arent stakeholders or even participants in our society! Even welfare parasites have a social services ID card!!!  

For EVERYTHING mentioned above - You NEED to have ID - either a driver's license or non-driver ID. Who does this disenfranchise besides felons, illegal aliens, and the UnaBomber??? LOL

As for them saying they are who they say they are... I disagree. Kevin _____ , aka ME, is a registered voter and his vote is going to John McCain. I dont want the democrats printing out the voter rolls and busing in some lowlife homeless jerk to go to my polling place to say they are Kevin _________ so that they can cast MY vote for Osama BinBanannarama. I would much rather I walk in, pull out my wallet and show them my license (that I needed to drive to the polling place anyway) and cast MY vote for who I want it to go to.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomAviator

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Considering that its illegal to not have ID in the first place...

Huh?  Did this suddenly become Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union?  Even though Bush and Company have tried their best.  There is absolutely no legal requirement to carry ID anywhere in this country.  The only exceptions to that are when you are performing an activity that specifically requires you by law to do so. 

Yes an activity like failing to produce it on request when asked for it by a police officer. Texas Penal Code 38.02 to be exact "FAILURE TO IDENTIFY" LOL So yes there is no legal requirement to carry it - just to produce it, for any of a zillion things from being asked for it by a cop detaining you to driving to making a transaction in a pawn shop to opening a bank account to going into a bar etc etc etc...

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomAviator

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

Considering that its illegal to not have ID in the first place...

Huh?  Did this suddenly become Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union?  Even though Bush and Company have tried their best.  There is absolutely no legal requirement to carry ID anywhere in this country.  The only exceptions to that are when you are performing an activity that specifically requires you by law to do so. 

Yes an activity like failing to produce it on request when asked for it by a police officer. Texas Penal Code 38.02 to be exact "FAILURE TO IDENTIFY" LOL So yes there is no legal requirement to carry it - just to produce it, for any of a zillion things from being asked for it by a cop detaining you to driving to making a transaction in a pawn shop to opening a bank account to going into a bar etc etc etc...
[/quote 

This was from the Texas ACLU newsletter of last year.  If something changed since then I'll stand corrected, but I haven't heard about it.


Failure to Show ID.  HB 855byRep. Delisi, R-Temple, would have allowed officers to arrest a person solely for failure to produce identification during any lawful detention. This bill would have expanded police powers in a pedestrian or traffic stop dramatically and disproportionately impacted communities of color. The ACLU of Texas aggressively opposed the legislation and, after a lively debate in which civil liberties were invoked, the bill failed on a record vote on the floor of the House. 

(in reply to DomAviator)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Archer

Sister Julie McGuire said she was forced to turn away her fellow sisters at Saint Mary's Convent in South Bend, across the street from the University of Notre Dame, because they had been told earlier that they would need such an ID to vote.The nuns, all in their 80s or 90s, didn't get one but came to the precinct anyway.
They weren't given provisional ballots because it would be impossible to get them to a motor vehicle branch and back in the 10-day time frame allotted by the law, Sister McGuire said......You can't do this like school kids on a bus," she said. "I wish we could."


10 days to get the someone from Notre Dame (located right accross the street) to requisition a handicap bus and drive them to a get a FREE voter ID card is not impossible at all it's an excuse.

One newly married woman said she was told she couldn't vote because her driver's license name didn't match the one on her voter registration record,

The law says when you change your legal name you have to change your voter registration as well, so she failed to do her part and wants someone else to blame for her laziness. (Somehow it's not surprizing)

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

Between 'worthless homeless vagrants' who shouldn't have the right to vote, nor to live, really (sic) and good hardworking credit worthy families (sic) there is a category of voters that encompasses a wide range of people, from seasonal workers to temporary ones. People who frequently change addresses. That is why Congress decided that:

(a) Congressional findings
The Congress hereby finds that the imposition and application of the durational residency requirement as a precondition to voting for the offices of President and Vice President, and the lack of sufficient opportunities for absentee registration and absentee balloting in presidential elections—  (1) denies or abridges the inherent constitutional right of citizens to vote for their President and Vice President;  (2) denies or abridges the inherent constitutional right of citizens to enjoy their free movement across State lines;  (3) denies or abridges the privileges and immunities guaranteed to the citizens of each State under article IV, section 2, clause 1, of the Constitution;  (4) in some instances has the impermissible purpose or effect of denying citizens the right to vote for such officers because of the way they may vote;  (5) has the effect of denying to citizens the equality of civil rights, and due process and equal protection of the laws that are guaranteed to them under the fourteenth amendment; and  (6) does not bear a reasonable relationship to any compelling State interest in the conduct of presidential elections.  (b) Congressional declaration: durational residency requirement, abolishment; absentee registration and balloting standards, establishment
Upon the basis of these findings, Congress declares that in order to secure and protect the above-stated rights of citizens under the Constitution, to enable citizens to better obtain the enjoyment of such rights, and to enforce the guarantees of the fourteenth amendment, it is necessary  (1) to completely abolish the durational residency requirement as a precondition to voting for President and Vice President, and  (2) to establish nationwide, uniform standards relative to absentee registration and absentee balloting in presidential elections.  (c) Prohibition of denial of right to vote because of durational residency requirement or absentee balloting
No citizen of the United States who is otherwise qualified to vote in any election for President and Vice President shall be denied the right to vote for electors for President and Vice President, or for President and Vice President, in such election because of the failure of such citizen to comply with any durational residency requirement of such State or political subdivision; nor shall any citizen of the United States be denied the right to vote for electors for President and Vice President, or for President and Vice President, in such election because of the failure of such citizen to be physically present in such State or political subdivision at the time of such election, if such citizen shall have complied with the requirements prescribed by the law of such State or political subdivision providing for the casting of absentee ballots in such election. " http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/usc_sec_42_00001973--aa001-.html