btbg wrote:
How do you honestly think that requiring ID disenfranchises voters? Do you have proof of who you are? I do, and so does everyone that I know. Everyone has social security cards, they are now issued at birth. Most people have drivers licenses, etc... If you can't meet the minimal standard of proving who you are why should you be allowed to vote?
Remember, constitutionally it is the states that are supposed to make the voting rules for their state and define the rules concerning who votes and how they register and or show proof of who they are. As much as I disagree with the results in Minnesota, that is exactly how the system is supposed to work. The state proposes a rule and after much debate the public decides what they want or don't want. Now, good or bad, Minnesota has to live with their results.
However, other states, who have also followed the process legally and with reasonable debate have had the courts disallow the will of the people by ignoring what the Constitution actually says about voting and claiming that the constitution doesn't allow voter ID, an absurd claim.
The system works when it is allowed to, so what is it that you are afraid of when it comes to voter registration laws and IDs?
How do you honestly think that requiring ID disenf... (
show quote)
In Wisconsin, nine percent of the adult population does not have the required identification. Especially minorities and college students--precisely the population republicans want to disenfranchise...And They Admit That Is The Reason For The Law!
Second, Social Security cards weren't issued at birth 60-70 years ago. And they aren't issued as a means of Identification.
Then, you are allowed to vote Because It Is Your Constitutional Right To Vote!
These laws are Not about reasonable debate; they are about states in which republicans control the legislature, and they ram through whatever they want that will improve their chances in an election--And They Admit It!
BTW, Minnestota is satisfied with its law.
I recently posted 3,000 words on the subject from the New Youk Times. It would improve your argument if you read it.
Twardlow wrote:
I have been registered to vote in at least five locations, over fifty-five years, and I have never been asked for proof of citizenship.
Not even affirming that you are a citizen?
Zophman wrote:
Not even affirming that you are a citizen?
I fill out a form like a postcard, sometimes. Other times, the drivers licence office asks if I want to register and I say yes and that's it.
So if you did not have a driver's license, how would you register? What if one of the folks you reference in earlier posts lived in Arkansas and had no driver's license or no birth certificate, how would they register to vote?
Zophman wrote:
So if you did not have a driver's license, how would you register? What if one of the folks you reference in earlier posts lived in Arkansas and had no driver's license or no birth certificate, how would they register to vote?
I don't pretend to know, but if you're really interested, I'll look it up for you.
Twardlow wrote:
I don't pretend to know, but if you're really interested, I'll look it up for you.
I think you are probably smart enough to see where I am going with this. My opinion is the act of registering to vote in the particular state of residence requires some form of identification (driver's license, birth certificate, etc.) depending upon the particular state. I suppose some states just might require an affirmation that the applicant is a citizen, but I am not willing to spend the time to research in detail. So, the argument that requiring voters to produce ID to vote is really no more onerous than having to produce ID when registering to vote. To me, if a person cannot produce ID at the time of voting how did they register to vote in the first place?
You're using a circular argument. The ID required in the new laws is to register, which can be done on the same day as voting.
You ignore the fact that republicans regularly admit the purpose of the new laws is to inhibit voting, and it works.
Twardlow wrote:
You're using a circular argument. The ID required in the new laws is to register, which can be done on the same day as voting.
You ignore the fact that republicans regularly admit the purpose of the new laws is to inhibit voting, and it works.
Do the Republicans want to deny voting for U.S. citizens or for non citizens?
Twardlow wrote:
I have been registered to vote in at least five locations, over fifty-five years, and I have never been asked for proof of citizenship.
That's part of the point. if you don't have to prove citizenship to register what prevents an illegal from registering. Absolutely nothing. Don't you think that would be a problem?
Zophman wrote:
Do the Republicans want to deny voting for U.S. citizens or for non citizens?
Non-citizens, felons and anyone who is not a legal resident of the state they are trying to vote in.
Zophman wrote:
Do the Republicans want to deny voting for U.S. citizens or for non citizens?
For US citizens, of course.
Did you read the 3,000 word article II posted (in 3 parts)?
Twardlow wrote:
I have been registered to vote in at least five locations, over fifty-five years, and I have never been asked for proof of citizenship.
I accept that many of the ID laws are set to reduce the Democrat voting base.
But, do you not see the problem with what you just stated?
In many states, no proof of citizenship is required for voter registration. The form contains an oath affirming that you are a citizen and eligible to vote. Violating the oath is perjury and is subject to prosecution.
But who checks the true status of the person registering, verifies their citizenship status ... nobody.
It is a big loophole.
So maybe the issue is the registration process? How many are registered in multiple states? Maybe we need a federal registration. Is there a central data base? Why can't we register all birth certificates in a central database and issue a voting ID at age 18?
Zophman wrote:
So maybe the issue is the registration process? How many are registered in multiple states? Maybe we need a federal registration. Is there a central data base? Why can't we register all birth certificates in a central database and issue a voting ID at age 18?
We don't need federal registration because the Constitution gives the authority for voter registration to the states not the federal government. We need to quit looking to the federal government as the answer for everything. Voter registration and voting ID's are a states rights issue, nothing more and nothing less.
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.