51
   

May I see your papers, citizen?

 
 
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Sun 1 Jul, 2012 09:29 pm
@mysteryman,
Quote:
How is it unfair to require anyone to present a valid ID to show who they are?
Getting an ID is not that difficult, nor is it that expensive.
For example, getting a state ID in Indiana to use for voting purposes is free...


I keep answering the question is about how it is unfair. I don't know how I can make this any more clear.

This is unfair because...

1) It doesn't reduce the number of non-citizens who vote.
2) It does reduce the number of American citizens who vote.
3) By reducing the number of American citizens who vote it benefits one party and hurts the other.

This is political cheating. The Republicans are pushing bills through that will make it harder for certain types of Americans, minorities and college students because it gives them a political advantage.

The intent is to reduce the number of American citizens who vote in a way that will benefit them. That is why it is unfair.


revelette
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Jul, 2012 10:00 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
Viviette Applewhite is 93 years old and has voted in nearly every election for the last 60 years. She marched with Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., in Georgia. She has tried for years to obtain photo ID to no avail. Under Pennsylvania's new voter ID law, Ms. Applewhite's vote will not be counted. She is a plaintiff in our lawsuit to stop voter ID.

Mrs. Applewhite doesn't have a photo ID. Her purse was stolen and she hasn't been able to replace her identification because state officials can't find her birth certificate. And she won't be able to vote in Pennsylvania this fall. She's the lead plaintiff in a lawsuit challenging the state's new voter suppression law that was recently filed by the ACLU, the Advancement Project, the Public Interest Law Center of Philadelphia (PILCOP) and the Washington, DC, law firm of Arnold & Porter LLP.

The lawsuit alleges that the state's voter photo ID law violates the Pennsylvania Constitution by depriving citizens of their most fundamental constitutional right - the right to vote. The plaintiffs are asking the Commonwealth Court to issue an injunction blocking enforcement of the law before November's election. If the law is not overturned, most of the plaintiffs will be unable to cast ballots in the fall, despite the fact that many of them have voted regularly for decades.

Among the other petitioners:

Pittsburgh resident Henrietta Kay Dickerson was required by PennDOT to pay for the ID because her old one had not been expired for more than a year, a qualification not contained in the law but which PennDOT is regularly enforcing." In other words, this is a poll tax.

Asher Schor is a transgender man (female to male) whose driver's license has a picture of a woman and says he is female, but because he now looks, dresses and sounds like a man is likely to encounter problems at the polls in November.

Bea Bookler is a 93-year-old woman with limited mobility who uses her walker to get to the polling station next door to her assisted-living facility, but she does not have ID and the burden of getting the necessary documents and the ID itself would be too much for this senior citizen.
Joyce Block is an 89-year-old resident of Doylestown who was rejected for a voter ID by PennDOT because she did not have legal documents proving that her married name on the voter registration really was the same person listed on her birth certificate. Her only evidence was a marriage certificate in Hebrew, which the PennDOT staff could not read.

In order to get the accepted Pennsylvania photo ID, would-be voters have to provide a raised seal birth certificate and an official Social Security card. In a perfect Catch-22, those who don't have Social Security cards need photo IDs in order to obtain them. The $10 fee to get a copy of a birth certificate is non-waivable. The state is supposed to provide state IDs for free, but that's not been the experience of would-be voters. "Dozens of reports have been received about PennDOT's refusal to issue free IDs, insisting, for example, that people must pay because they have had an ID in the past, their ID has not been expired long enough, they don't replace lost ones for free, or people with outstanding child support or fines don't qualify for free IDs."

Pennsylvania's voter ID law, like so many of the other states', is nothing less than a poll tax. Lawyers have asked that the court block implementation of the law, and have requested an expedited hearing of the case, hoping to have the suit settled by November.


links at the source

Quote:
Paul Carroll, an 86-year-old World War II veteran who has lived in the same Ohio town for four decades, was denied a chance to vote in the state's primary contests today after a poll worker denied his form of identification, a recently-acquired photo ID from the Department of Veterans Affairs. The poll worker rejected the ID because it did not contain an address, as required by Ohio law.

Carroll told the Cleveland Plain Dealer that he got the ID from the VA after his driver's license expired because he doesn't drive anymore:


“My beef is that I had to pay a driver to take me up there because I don’t walk so well and have to use this cane and now I can’t even vote,” said Paul Carroll, 86, who has lived in Aurora nearly 40 years, running his own business, Carroll Tire, until 1975.

“I had to stop driving, but I got the photo ID from the Veterans Affairs instead, just a month or so ago. You would think that would count for something. I went to war for this country, but now I can’t vote in this country.”

A local Veterans Affairs employee told the Plain Dealer that the decision not to include the address was likely made at the federal level, and because VA IDs are accepted at any location, "the actual address of a veteran isn't as critical to us." Carroll was offered a provisional ballot, but the type was too small for him to read and "I was kind of perturbed by then," he said.

Republicans across the country have pushed voter ID laws to address a voter fraud "problem" that rarely, if ever, exists. Multiple laws have been challenged in court over claims that they disenfranchise voters, particularly minorities and the elderly. Carroll's story isn't altogether unique - Tennessee voter authorities denied a 96-year-old woman a voter ID last year because she didn't have an original copy of her marriage license.


source




0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Mon 2 Jul, 2012 10:16 am
@Brandon9000,
This is all a solution in need of a problem.
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jul, 2012 03:38 pm
@maxdancona,
maxdancona wrote:

This is political cheating. The Republicans are pushing bills through that will make it harder for certain types of Americans, minorities and college students because it gives them a political advantage.


A bit confused on this. Every college student I know of has to have ID to be in college and every single college requires ID to be a student. Not sure how having to show that ID could put them at a disadvantage. Besides, what small percentage of college students actually vote?

So far as minorities go, what are we talking here? Blacks in the poor areas of large cities? Hispanics here illegally or in the same position as blacks in large, poor urban areas? How do they get their SSI without ID? Surely they have some kind of ID they can show to get their ballot cast.

I don't find your analysis of this to be accurate.
parados
 
  2  
Reply Wed 4 Jul, 2012 03:47 pm
@McGentrix,
Quote:

A bit confused on this. Every college student I know of has to have ID to be in college and every single college requires ID to be a student

Obviously you are confused. Student ID is not accepted as valid ID under most of the voting laws.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  1  
Reply Wed 4 Jul, 2012 03:49 pm
@McGentrix,
Quote:
Besides, what small percentage of college students actually vote?

Oh, so if a only a small percentage of a group vote, then it is OK to make it difficult if not impossible for any of them to vote?
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Jul, 2012 07:50 am
Quote:
State officials are running into problems with the new voter-identification law even before the federal government has approved or rejected it. Voters without a photo ID are facing a circular problem: They need a certified birth certificate to get the voter ID, and they need a photo ID to get the birth certificate.

Pamela Weaver, spokeswoman of the Mississippi Secretary of State's office, today confirmed the catch-22 problem, which the Jackson Free Press learned about from a complaint posted on Facebook. One of the requirements to get the free voter ID cards is a birth certificate, but in order to receive a certified copy of your birth certificate in Mississippi, you must have a photo ID. Not having the photo ID is why most people need the voter ID in the first place.


source

http://www.motherjones.com/files/images/adult-id-mojo.png


UFO Sightings Are More Common Than Voter Fraud
The GOP says election fraud is rampant. A close look at the numbers shows there's no evidence of that.
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Jul, 2012 08:38 pm
@revelette,
revelette wrote:

http://www.motherjones.com/files/images/adult-id-mojo.png



25% of blacks in general don't have ID, or 25% of those without ID are black?
0 Replies
 
McGentrix
 
  1  
Reply Thu 12 Jul, 2012 08:42 pm
@revelette,
I ask because I see this graph from the sources references...

http://www.latinodecisions.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/ld_voterid1.png
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jul, 2012 04:49 am
@DrewDad,
DrewDad wrote:

This is all a solution in need of a problem.

The problem is that over ten million people have entered the country illegally, nothing much is being done about it, and some of them are probably voting. I don't want non-citizens to vote, and I especially don't want illegal immigrants voting against any candidate who advocates enforcing the immigration laws. If the law is being violated by having non-citizens vote, then the people deserve to be able to have some remedy. There is no valid argument that any attempt whatsoever of the people to enforce the law is unfair. No other law has to survive the standard that if anyone is ever falsely accused then the law can no longer be enforced.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jul, 2012 07:11 am
@Brandon9000,
Quote:
The problem is that over ten million people have entered the country illegally, nothing much is being done about it, and some of them are probably voting. I don't want non-citizens to vote

What evidence do you have that they are voting? There is none. It is just paranoia that you have fallen into.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  2  
Reply Fri 13 Jul, 2012 07:21 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

DrewDad wrote:

This is all a solution in need of a problem.

The problem is that over ten million people have entered the country illegally, nothing much is being done about it, and some of them are probably voting. I don't want non-citizens to vote, and I especially don't want illegal immigrants voting against any candidate who advocates enforcing the immigration laws. If the law is being violated by having non-citizens vote, then the people deserve to be able to have some remedy. There is no valid argument that any attempt whatsoever of the people to enforce the law is unfair. No other law has to survive the standard that if anyone is ever falsely accused then the law can no longer be enforced.

The problem, as we keep pointing out, isn't that we have an issue with preventing ineligible people from voting, it is that the prevention measures that are being used will catch too many other folks in the net.

Build a net that only catches what you purport you want to catch, and I'll support it.

Every report I've seen is that the number of ineligible folks getting to vote is statistically insignificant. Meanwhile, you're proposing to disenfranchise thousands of people.

It's like someone saying, "Hey, this litter costs $10,000 a year to clean up. Let's spend $2,000,000 a year to prevent people from littering."
0 Replies
 
revelette
 
  1  
Reply Fri 13 Jul, 2012 10:30 am
@McGentrix,
The link you probably clicked on has two difference sources on it. The graph you posted is here.

The other graph is here

From what I can gather, the first link up above was a survey taken of likely (4,563) voters in 2008. I am not sure if this was only in Indiana. I think they were simply asked if they had a valid ID. The next graph the number decreases for more strident ID laws.

The second link up above was a survey in 2006 of (987) randomly voting age citizens.

The following is the questions that were asked:

Quote:
1) Do you have a current, unexpired government-issued ID with your picture on it, like a driver’s license or a military ID?

2) If yes, does this photo ID have both your current address AND your current name (as opposed to a maiden name) on it?

3) Do you have any of the following citizenship documents (U.S. birth certificate/U.S. passport/U.S. naturalization papers) in a place where you can quickly find it if you had to show it tomorrow?

4) If yes, does [that document] have your current name on it (as opposed to a maiden name)?


So I guess in answer to your question, the one you posted were of likely voters in 2008, the other source with the graph I posted were citizens of voting age conducted in 2006. Don't really know if that is a distinction without a difference or not. But the results of the 2006 survey are explained really simple and point out how many people are without valid ID with a disproportionate number going to minorities. There have been lots of links which have shown just how hard various states have been making getting a valid ID. With the rising population of minorities, republicans are trying every trick they can to keep them from voting even if some of them vote republican.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2012 10:15 am
To suggest that none of the 12 million illegals in the country might try to vote is ludicrous. To suggest that the people have no right to seek any remedy to violation of their laws is ridiculous. You are applying a standard which isn't applied to enforcement of any other law - that no innocent people ever be accused. People are accused of things that they are innocent of every day. As with the enforcement of any other law, you just try to get it right. You cannot say that a law cannot be enforced because mistakes will be made. You cannot say that any attempt to enforce the law is evil. I personally, as one citizen, want some filter in place to prevent illegals from voting, and I have an absolute right to see that happen. Maybe if the number of illegals in the country can be reduced to only a few hundred thousand I won't care, but at the present levels I do.
RABEL222
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2012 10:27 am
@Brandon9000,
What percentage of illegals are voting in the U.S.. No bullshit please fact only.
0 Replies
 
DrewDad
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2012 10:29 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:

To suggest that none of the 12 million illegals in the country might try to vote is ludicrous.

No one has done so, so this is a straw man.
Brandon9000 wrote:
To suggest that the people have no right to seek any remedy to violation of their laws is ridiculous.

No one has done so, so this is a straw man.
Brandon9000 wrote:
You are applying a standard which isn't applied to enforcement of any other law - that no innocent people ever be accused.

No one has done so, so this is a straw man.

What I did say, is that your law should do what you purport you want it to do: protect the validity of elections. If it prevents eligible voters from voting, then it is doing the opposite of what you say you want to do.

Brandon9000 wrote:
People are accused of things that they are innocent of every day. As with the enforcement of any other law, you just try to get it right. You cannot say that a law cannot be enforced because mistakes will be made. You cannot say that any attempt to enforce the law is evil. I personally, as one citizen, want some filter in place to prevent illegals from voting, and I have an absolute right to see that happen.

Actually, you don't have that absolute right. Can you show me where you're granted that right?

Brandon9000 wrote:
Maybe if the number of illegals in the country can be reduced to only a few hundred thousand I won't care, but at the present levels I do.

Whining doesn't suit you.
0 Replies
 
parados
 
  3  
Reply Sat 14 Jul, 2012 10:45 am
@Brandon9000,
Quote:
People are accused of things that they are innocent of every day.

Gosh... You mean like you accusing all those illegals of voting?

Quote:
personally, as one citizen, want some filter in place to prevent illegals from voting
There already is a filter. It's illegal for non citizens to vote. Perhaps you could start prosecuting all those you insist are voting. The voter rolls are public. Most states also make who voted public. It would be pretty easy to find out who is illegal. As we see in Florida, when they started their process of eliminating non citizens from the rolls, they ended up finding almost all those they accused were actually US citizens.
0 Replies
 
ZREX
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Jul, 2012 02:34 pm
@DrewDad,
Personally I have no idea why people have a problem with showing identification. Really all this stink over showing I.D. When asked by a police officer. Or to vote yet nothing about showing proof of age to buy ciggerettes or alcohol. It shouldn't even be an option. Carry your I'd present it upon request this goes for everyone! Ask anyone in the military it s not that big of deal to prove that you are who you say you are. Move on to a bigger real issue.
parados
 
  2  
Reply Tue 17 Jul, 2012 05:22 pm
@ZREX,
Sorry ZREX, dog tags are not valid ID for voting.
I can cash a check at Costco using my Costco ID but I can't use that for voting.

The problem is they have restricted ID to only certain IDs. Then it costs money to get those IDs. THen it costs money to get the documents to get those IDs. That is a poll tax and is illegal under US law.
revelette
 
  0  
Reply Wed 18 Jul, 2012 08:32 am
@parados,
Quote:
The problem is they have restricted ID to only certain IDs. Then it costs money to get those IDs. THen it costs money to get the documents to get those IDs. That is a poll tax and is illegal under US law.


Not only that but in at least one case there is a catch 22 in trying to get a valid photo ID.

Quote:
The law, signed by Gov. Phil Bryant (R) earlier this year but still pending federal approval, includes a measure allowing Mississipians to get free voter ID cards if they present a birth certificate. But Mississippi law also requires its residents to show valid photo identification in order to get a copy of their birth certificate. Most applicants for voter ID cards are presumed to be seeking them because they don't have another acceptable form of photo ID. In other words, no birth certificate, no voter ID -- but also no photo ID, no birth certificate.


source

 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 12/22/2024 at 08:04:32