first?

Christy!

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Well, I have to call it a day early. I’ve got a “leadership” retreat to go to. Perhaps I should invite some of our Democratic congresscritters.

Keep up the good work everyone!

Voter fraud is a well documented and existing problem in the United States. In the next paragraph he writes that investigations in Milwaukee, Wisconsin “found thousands of fraudulent and suspicious votes in that city, in a state where John Kerry won by only 11,384 votes in the 2004 election.” (027886). And who are among the authorities cited by von Spakovsky for these two statements ? His own law journal article that he published under the name Publius! So Hans von Spakovsky has finally found someone who agrees with his take on voter ID laws: himself.

wow, a man modeled right after the administrations own strategy

remember this administration as they were running up to invading Iraq for no reason what so ever?

they first leaked fake information to the new york times and then had the nerve to use the new york times as confirmation of their own fake data?

man, daja vu…all over…again

Hello Christy…

I swear, Whack a mole run amok with these people.

Actually, I have to add my confusion to that already stated. Why is showing a photo to prove that you are who say you are voter oppression?

You need a photo id to get a job, to fly, to drive… what exactly is wrong with showing ID to prove who you are before being handed a ballot? Otherwise, anyone could go in and claim they were me and steal my vote!

I’d have no problem at all with walking in and showing my Driver’s License, or State ID card to prove my identity before being handed my ballot. I have a voter registration card (no photo), but I’ve NEVER been asked to show it.

Why is this an issue?

Sewmouse @ 8

Actually, I have to add my confusion to that already stated. Why is showing a photo to prove that you are who say you are voter oppression?

You need a photo id to get a job, to fly, to drive… what exactly is wrong with showing ID to prove who you are before being handed a ballot? Otherwise, anyone could go in and claim they were me and steal my vote!

I’d have no problem at all with walking in and showing my Driver’s License, or State ID card to prove my identity before being handed my ballot. I have a voter registration card (no photo), but I’ve NEVER been asked to show it.

Why is this an issue?

How about because there are more people than you might think who don’t drive, don’t fly, and don’t have jobs and who might still like to vote.

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Because those folks least likely to have a photo ID are the same folks most likely to be afraid to vote. You know, the poor, the racial minorities, the elderly.

The ones who don’t drive a car, don’t fly an airplane, don’t have checking accounts.

You know, the folks left behind in this “wonderful” economy and “color blind” society we are supposed to be living in.

thanks for the Heads-up Christy. I’ll see if I can get through Ted Stevens’s lawyers to his office and explain Von Spakovsky to a staffer.

dakine01 @ 10

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Because those folks least likely to have a photo ID are the same folks most likely to be afraid to vote. You know, the poor, the racial minorities, the elderly.

The ones who don’t drive a car, don’t fly an airplane, don’t have checking accounts.

You know, the folks left behind in this “wonderful” economy and “color blind” society we are supposed to be living in.

An ID is a requisite to living in a civilized society. Requiring a photo to identify oneself hardly strikes me as burdensome for anyone.

If Rove hadn’t stolen two elections for Shrub, voter integrity wouldn’t even be an issue. Thanks alot fuckwads!

dakine01 @ 10

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Because those folks least likely to have a photo ID are the same folks most likely to be afraid to vote. You know, the poor, the racial minorities, the elderly.

The ones who don’t drive a car, don’t fly an airplane, don’t have checking accounts.

You know, the folks left behind in this “wonderful” economy and “color blind” society we are supposed to be living in.

beautifully said, dakine.

dakine01 @ 9

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Because those folks least likely to have a photo ID are the same folks most likely to be afraid to vote. You know, the poor, the racial minorities, the elderly.

The ones who don’t drive a car, don’t fly an airplane, don’t have checking accounts.

You know, the folks left behind in this “wonderful” economy and “color blind” society we are supposed to be living in.

the real problem is there is no voter fraud, it hasn’t been shown and what little there might be cannot affect the outcome of an election

the only reason to require information the restricts a demographic is if you don’t like how that demographic votes

thus they invent a ‘voter fraud” issue that doesn’
t exist so they can initiate programs the eliminate the voters that would vote against their corporate agenda

LibertyLee @ 12

dakine01 @ 10

Because those folks least likely to have a photo ID are the same folks most likely to be afraid to vote. You know, the poor, the racial minorities, the elderly.

The ones who don’t drive a car, don’t fly an airplane, don’t have checking accounts.

You know, the folks left behind in this “wonderful” economy and “color blind” society we are supposed to be living in.

An ID is a requisite to living in a civilized society. Requiring a photo to identify oneself hardly strikes me as burdensome for anyone.

ID yes. Photo id, maybe not. I have personal experience with this - no car, so no driver’s license. Self-employed, so no employer-provided photo id. I had to get a passport just so I could get onto a plane. And believe it or not, there are people even in civilized countries that can’t afford a passport.

In response to questions above, I’m not sure how I feel about the ID requirement, but I do have an integrity requirement for those put in charge.

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Because it costs time and money to have an ID created. It dis-enfranchises the poor and less privileged. Duh.

I also want to post this to cheer on firepups.

Platoon, let’s do a little singing this mo’nin’:

Basic Training

perris @ 15

dakine01 @ 9

the real problem is there is no voter fraud, it hasn’t been shown and what little there might be cannot affect the outcome of an election

the only reason to require information the restricts a demographic is if you don’t like how that demographic votes

thus they invent a ‘voter fraud” issue that doesn’
t exist so they can initiate programs the eliminate the voters that would vote against their corporate agenda

Umm, I grew up in de Mare’s City of Chicago. That there was and IS voter fraud is unquestionable. A photo ID is a small price to pay for democracy.

I want US citizens who are purposely undermining National Security wiretapped. Judy Miller, Robert Novak, Micheal Ledeen, John Bolton.

In a 2004 article in the New Yorker, this is what Jeffrey Toobin wrote about this guy:

Von Spakovsky, a longtime activist in the voting-integrity cause, has emerged as the Administration’s chief operative on voting rights. Before going to Washington, he was a lawyer in private practice and a Republican appointee to the Fulton County Registration and Election Board, which runs elections in Atlanta. He belonged to the Federalist Society, a prominent organization of conservative lawyers, and had also joined the board of advisers of a lesser-known group called the Voting Integrity Project.

The V.I.P. was founded by Deborah Phillips, a former county official of the Virginia Republican Party, as an organization devoted principally to fighting voting fraud and promoting voter education. In 1997, von Spakovsky wrote an article for the Georgia Public Policy Foundation, a conservative research group, that called for an aggressive campaign to “purge” the election rolls of felons. Within months of that article’s publication, the V.I.P. helped put von Spakovsky’s idea into action. Phillips met with the company that designed the process for the removal of alleged felons from the voting rolls in Florida, a process that led, notoriously, to the mistaken disenfranchisement of thousands of voters, most of them Democratic, before the 2000 election. (This year, Florida again tried to purge its voting rolls of felons, but the method was found to be so riddled with errors that it had to be abandoned.) During the thirty-six-day recount in Florida, von Spakovsky worked there as a volunteer for the Bush campaign.

I generally don’t like to feed the trolls, but I have to say I can see both sides of this argument. That being said, I’d like to offer a simple solution that I don’t think either side has offered.

You have to register to vote, and that registration requires some proof of ID. Why can’t people who don’t have any sort of photo ID just mail in a Polaroid of themselves with their registration application, which could then be attached to their voter registration card? That way, their voter registration card could function as their photo ID on election day. The state should pay all of the processing charges for this, of course, since the state is the one making the requirement.

As an aside, does anyone know what happened to all of those libertarians who used to rail against ID cards? Didn’t this used to be a big issue among the privacy types?

Didn’t this used to be a big issue among the privacy types?

pre 9-11

Perhaps the Texas Review of Law and Politics ought to require that those who submit articles must show a photo ID.

You know, if photo-ID is going to be mandatory, the doggone states or Federal government ought to provide every voting age citizen with one free of charge.

Not everyone drives (or is able to drive, e.g. the blind), so requiring a driver’s license to vote is right out.

Then there are those who don’t have the money for the photo-ID that some States will issue those who don’t/can’t drive.

Passports? Ah, try at least $100 each. If you can’t afford the State ID, the Federal passport is even more expensive.

Work-ID — not every employer issues such things, and if you’re unemployed, self-employed, or retired* that’s a non-starter as well.

*Most employers who issue work-IDs reclaim them when the employee retires.

Just called Schumer’s office. They are very busy on the telephones but were quite responsive.

Keep up the good work Firepups.This is vintage Rove — and where does it stop?

My nephew was recently asked for two photo IDs in order to complete a transaction (and in his hometown of 15000 people).

LibertyLee @ 20

perris @ 15

Umm, I grew up in de Mare’s City of Chicago. That there was and IS voter fraud is unquestionable. A photo ID is a small price to pay for democracy.

how quaint, “liberty” lee, quaint in a ridiculous way

the voter is a “small price to pay for democracy” when in fact the voter id prevents democracy

this is like ‘fighting terrorism in Iraqis a small price to pay for democracy” when in fact the invasion creates terrorism it doesn’t fight it

you/koolaid/synonymous

me done feeding this troll

CNN

Justices also agreed to decide whether voter identification laws unfairly deter poor and minority Americans from voting, stepping into a contentious partisan issue in advance of the 2008 elections.

The justices will hear arguments early next year in a challenge to an Indiana law that requires voters to present photo ID before casting their ballots. The state has defended the law as a way to combat voter fraud.

The state Democratic party and civil rights groups complained that the law unfairly targets poor and minority voters, without any evidence that in-person voter fraud exists in Indiana.

Another problem with requiring government issued photo ID is that local voter suppressors get creative — Donna Brazile wrote during the 2000 “recount” about her sister calling from Florida, having been sent home from the polls on Election Day because she couldn’t produce THREE forms of photo ID.

Voter fraud is another Rovian projection courtesy of the Federalist Society and its Voter Integrity Project. The only real vote fraud is voter suppression, voter purging, voter caging, and voter intimidation. For more on the latter, check out how Sainted William Rehnquist got his start in Arizona politics: racing from one polling place to another challenging non-white voters on election day. And when I say challenging, I mean getting in their face and yelling at them.

Turns out I know the mom of the Ted Stevens staffer to whom I just spoke. Nice kid - I’ll let her know.

I explained that Stevens should be careful because more stuff on Von Spakovsky’s likely to come out after the vote, and that if Stevens gets caught looking on this issue like he did on the bridge and the toobz, his likely GOP primary opponent, Gov. Sarah Palin, will cream him on this issue. I told him to be careful, and let the senator know that a lot of Stevens’s staff might not be fully informing Ted on issues like this because they already consider him a goner, and will keep him uninformed so they can sell his few remaining votes to others in return for future favors or staff positions…

I wish people wouldn’t call Liberty Lee a troll. He has as much right to voice his opinions as I do.

IrishJim @ 18

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Because it costs time and money to have an ID created. It dis-enfranchises the poor and less privileged. Duh.

It takes time and money to get to vote. An ID is scarcely that much more extra particularly since it is only done once every few years. And if you cannot afford it, maybe you shouldn’t be voting. That’s an invitation to stealing from the public trough…

Brisingamen @ 26

You know, if photo-ID is going to be mandatory, the doggone states or Federal government ought to provide every voting age citizen with one free of charge.

Not everyone drives (or is able to drive, e.g. the blind), so requiring a driver’s license to vote is right out.

Then there are those who don’t have the money for the photo-ID that some States will issue those who don’t/can’t drive.

Passports? Ah, try at least $100 each. If you can’t afford the State ID, the Federal passport is even more expensive.

Work-ID — not every employer issues such things, and if you’re unemployed, self-employed, or retired* that’s a non-starter as well.

*Most employers who issue work-IDs reclaim them when the employee retires.

Let’s take it up a notch…

Instead of photo ID’s that can easily be altered, why not retinal scans or electronic fingerprinting. That puts the cost on the gov’t when they register to vote. If they truly want fair elections, it’s a small price to pay. [not holding my breath]

Jane (nyc) @ 27

Just called Schumer’s office. They are very busy on the telephones but were quite responsive.

Keep up the good work Firepups.This is vintage Rove — and where does it stop?

My nephew was recently asked for two photo IDs in order to complete a transaction (and in his hometown of 15000 people).

I can understand one ID in some cases (like cashing a check), but I’ve never understood two. It seems to me that if you’re clever enough to get one high-quality fake ID, it shouldn’t be too much trouble to get two.

Lee — If it were only a photo ID question with him, that would be an easier answer — but it isn’t. He’s also had a hand in voter suppression efforts with targeted mailers, with voter roll purges, and any number of other items, including a law in Georgia which had been declared unconstitutional by federal courts, among other things, for taking Georgia’s voting rights legislation back to the Jim Crow days of poll taxes. (See here for more on some of the larger picture efforts — and that’s just a tiny sliver.) Voter fraud should be taken seriously — but so should every eligible American’s right to vote. That ought to be sacred, regardless of party affiliation — and to have it treated cavalierly as a political maneurvering tactic is appalling and very, very wrong.

Frank Probst @ 22

I generally don’t like to feed the trolls, but I have to say I can see both sides of this argument. That being said, I’d like to offer a simple solution that I don’t think either side has offered.

You have to register to vote, and that registration requires some proof of ID. Why can’t people who don’t have any sort of photo ID just mail in a Polaroid of themselves with their registration application, which could then be attached to their voter registration card? That way, their voter registration card could function as their photo ID on election day. The state should pay all of the processing charges for this, of course, since the state is the one making the requirement.

As an aside, does anyone know what happened to all of those libertarians who used to rail against ID cards? Didn’t this used to be a big issue among the privacy types?

So, instead of requiring poor people to pay for a government-issued ID, we’re going to make them buy a Polaroid camera, or go to Kinko’s and pay fifteen dollars for passport photos? This is still associating a cost with voting, otherwise known as a polltax.

Another objection to the photo ID was that the repubs weren’t even playing that straight. If you signed ‘John Doe’ but your ID said ‘John Q. Doe”, your vote would be voided.
Never do they play it straight.
It was just another ploy to suppress voting.

LibertyLee @ 20

perris @ 15

Umm, I grew up in de Mare’s City of Chicago. That there was and IS voter fraud is unquestionable. A photo ID is a small price to pay for democracy.

Speaking as the minority inspector of elections in my district:

Provisional ballots. If your name doesn’t appear on the official county Election Bureau list of registered voters, your ballot is cast out. If you are on the official list, then your ballot is included. Simple.

No need for ID.

why should any ID be necessary? You already have to be registered to vote, and every time I have voted the nice old ladies at the polling place check my name on their massive list.

What, exactly, is the incentive for “voter fraud” supposed to be? Unless we are talking about some highly motivated and organized squadrons of vote stealers, what does anyone have to gain by casting someone else’s ballot? Seems to me most felons, for example, have other things on their minds than tinkering with the electoral process.

Peterr @ 24

Perhaps the Texas Review of Law and Politics ought to require that those who submit articles must show a photo ID.

oooh, good one Rev.
“Publius.” Feh

LL @ 3
Try this on for size:
minimum-wage job
take bus both ways to work
ID-issuing agency is downtown (or on other side of town) and requires multiple trips to get ID, requiring time off from work, which may result in losing job.
This is not unusual.
Now take out the bus system and put in sharing rides to and from work, and then add having to pay for a cab to get to and from the ID-issuing agency.

Requiring photo IDs to vote is - well, it’s designed to make sure that a lot of potential voters can’t vote. Meanswhile, real problems, like voting machines with no paper trails and no verifiable software, get ignored.

TeddySanFran @ 37

Frank Probst @ 22

I generally don’t like to feed the trolls, but I have to say I can see both sides of this argument. That being said, I’d like to offer a simple solution that I don’t think either side has offered.

You have to register to vote, and that registration requires some proof of ID. Why can’t people who don’t have any sort of photo ID just mail in a Polaroid of themselves with their registration application, which could then be attached to their voter registration card? That way, their voter registration card could function as their photo ID on election day. The state should pay all of the processing charges for this, of course, since the state is the one making the requirement.

As an aside, does anyone know what happened to all of those libertarians who used to rail against ID cards? Didn’t this used to be a big issue among the privacy types?

So, instead of requiring poor people to pay for a government-issued ID, we’re going to make them buy a Polaroid camera, or go to Kinko’s and pay fifteen dollars for passport photos? This is still associating a cost with voting, otherwise known as a polltax.

No, we’re going to tell the government that they have to provide polaroid cameras on request at all voter registration drives. When I said the state should pay, I meant for all of it.

Just made my call to MY Senator Chuck Schumer asking if he had a position on the Hans’ confirmation. His aide said she doesn’t think that the Senator has made a statement on the subject.

She automatically assumed that I opposed it and said they’d been receiving lots of calls. Which I guess is a good thing.

I simply mentioned that it was a travesty that his position is still in doubt.

Damn I’m angry at the Lucy-crats.

oddmommy @ 40

why should any ID be necessary? You already have to be registered to vote, and every time I have voted the nice old ladies at the polling place check my name on their massive list.

What, exactly, is the incentive for “voter fraud” supposed to be? Unless we are talking about some highly motivated and organized squadrons of vote stealers, what does anyone have to gain by casting someone else’s ballot? Seems to me most felons, for example, have other things on their minds than tinkering with the electoral process.

We are talking about highly motivated, organized and financed vote stealers…Turdblossom and his squad of bandits, Van Spakovsky being one of the many.

US passport–costs $97
State ID–costs $17 (in MN)

Also in MN: if you have a voter registration card, then your name is already on the electoral list and you’re not even asked for any ID.

End of story.

I just checked with Elections Canada - they estimate that around 15% of eligible voters do not have driver’s licenses. Can’t be too much different in the US.

One thing that baffles me about US elections is how many of the rules are set by the state.

An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who intentionally posts controversial or contrary messages in an online community such as an online discussion forum, especially GameFAQs, or USENET, with the intention of baiting users into an argumentative response.[1]

wiki

I am a party to a lawsuit in NM against voter ID. Our lawyer (from the ACLU) was able to prevail against the law, which was passed at only the local level, as the State Legislature was able to keep the vote suppressors from enacting it statewide. (So far anyway.)

There have been NO documented cases of actual voter fraud of the type that is described by those who try this scheme to keep minority and poor voters from the polls.

This is part of the canard that was put forth by Heather Wilson and Pete Domenici in their “case” against Iglesias.

Feh.

TSF @ 37: Alternative solution: Any polling place that requires photo ID should also be equipped to provide on-the-spot photo ID cards, free of charge.

oddmommy @ 39

why should any ID be necessary? You already have to be registered to vote, and every time I have voted the nice old ladies at the polling place check my name on their massive list.

What, exactly, is the incentive for “voter fraud” supposed to be? Unless we are talking about some highly motivated and organized squadrons of vote stealers, what does anyone have to gain by casting someone else’s ballot? Seems to me most felons, for example, have other things on their minds than tinkering with the electoral process.

Voter fraud exists, certainly, but it has a very minor impact. The Republics just like to use it as a cover for the much more serious issue of electoral fraud, in which they are immersed to their eyeballs.

oddmommy @ 40

Unless we are talking about some highly motivated and organized squadrons of vote stealers, what does anyone have to gain by casting someone else’s ballot? Seems to me most felons, for example, have other things on their minds than tinkering with the electoral process.

I think the Reps fear large hordes of (unwashed, brown?) unregistered folks casting ballots which are then counted toward the total. Can’t happen, of course.

kdh22 @ 44

oddmommy @ 40

why should any ID be necessary? You already have to be registered to vote, and every time I have voted the nice old ladies at the polling place check my name on their massive list.

What, exactly, is the incentive for “voter fraud” supposed to be? Unless we are talking about some highly motivated and organized squadrons of vote stealers, what does anyone have to gain by casting someone else’s ballot? Seems to me most felons, for example, have other things on their minds than tinkering with the electoral process.

We are talking about highly motivated, organized and financed vote stealers…Turdblossom and his squad of bandits, Van Spakovsky being one of the many.

Bingo!

As one who also lived in Da Mare’s city of Chicago, let me say that requiring photo IDs would not have stopped the old Mayor Daley. Wouldn’t even have slowed him down.

It barely slows down HS kids who want to buy beer.

Hit the phones, folks. This is not the kind of person the FEC needs — not in the slightest.

What, nobody else is making the obvious joke here?

That it’s ironic for a “voter fraud” alarmist to engage in “law journal fraud” to *make* his point?

That’s who “they” *really* ought to check for IDs…

kdh22 @ 34

Brisingamen @ 26

You know, if photo-ID is going to be mandatory, the doggone states or Federal government ought to provide every voting age citizen with one free of charge.

Not everyone drives (or is able to drive, e.g. the blind), so requiring a driver’s license to vote is right out.

Then there are those who don’t have the money for the photo-ID that some States will issue those who don’t/can’t drive.

Passports? Ah, try at least $100 each. If you can’t afford the State ID, the Federal passport is even more expensive.

Work-ID — not every employer issues such things, and if you’re unemployed, self-employed, or retired* that’s a non-starter as well.

*Most employers who issue work-IDs reclaim them when the employee retires.

Let’s take it up a notch…

Instead of photo ID’s that can easily be altered, why not retinal scans or electronic fingerprinting. That puts the cost on the gov’t when they register to vote. If they truly want fair elections, it’s a small price to pay. [not holding my breath]

I can see the technology of DNA RFID tracking actually coming online in 20 years. But until then, a photo ID is a small price. Less data storage in currently available chips.

Solai @ 38

Another objection to the photo ID was that the repubs weren’t even playing that straight. If you signed ‘John Doe’ but your ID said ‘John Q. Doe”, your vote would be voided.
Never do they play it straight.
It was just another ploy to suppress voting.

BINGO! This is exactly what happened in NM. It was unreal. This is how Heather Wilson was re-elected in 2004 and how Kerry lost NM.

Chris @ 54

What, nobody else is making the obvious joke here?

That it’s ironic for a “voter fraud” alarmist to engage in “law journal fraud” to *make* his point?

That’s who “they” *really* ought to check for IDs…

Funny, isn’t it? I’ve never known a scholar who felt the need to publish anonymously….

“Photo ID” can be an item of rather nebulous definition. When I recently flew, my VA issued picture ID was just totally unacceptable to the TSA lady, despite being issued by the US Govt. While I searched for something else, I pulled out a Visa card and she was OK with that!

The Right is SO paranoid about this issue, it almost seems like something we could compromise on. Free photo ID with one’s voter registration, perhaps incorporated into the registration itself?

Well, I have a few minutes yet before I need to get going, so I’ll chime in as someone who lives in a state that implemented the voter ID law.

First of all, I think the first question anyone should ask when considering a new law is whether the law is even needed.

There is very little evidence of voter fraud in recent years, so why is this even being brought up now?

The only logical answer is that it is intended to intimidate and disenfranchise certain voters. It just so happens to be proposed by Republicans and the people most likely to be disaffected or intimidated by these laws tend to vote disproportionately Democratic.

It seems pretty clear-cut what the intention of the people who propose these laws is. So to me that should immediately throw up some red flags.

Now there is a LOT of evidence of election fraud in recent years, so I would rather see our legislative efforts go toward fixing that problem. Unfortunately this is a problem that benefits the powerful elites, so we are stuck with legislation to address a problem that doesn’t really exist and nothing to address a real and serious problem.

Sure, presenting a photo I.D. is no problem at all for me, but unlike our conservative friends, I don’t assume that everybody enjoys the exact same circumstances I do.

And I know here in Indiana, the legislation was written with so much specificity that people with photo I.D.’s who were clearly who they claimed to be were denied the right to vote because their I.D. didn’t meet the specific criteria. Again, I have to think that was intentional.

It’s a simple fact that when more people vote Democrats do better. When fewer people vote Republicans do better. So it’s clear who benefits from voter suppression of any kind, let alone something that is so carefully targeted.

nonplussed @ 57

“Photo ID” can be an item of rather nebulous definition. When I recently flew, my VA issued picture ID was just totally unacceptable to the TSA lady, despite being issued by the US Govt. While I searched for something else, I pulled out a Visa card and she was OK with that!

The Right is SO paranoid about this issue, it almost seems like something we could compromise on. Free photo ID with one’s voter registration, perhaps incorporated into the registration itself?

Never compromise with the right wing just because they “feel passionately” about something. That plays right into their hands.

PA_Lady @ 52

oddmommy @ 40

Unless we are talking about some highly motivated and organized squadrons of vote stealers, what does anyone have to gain by casting someone else’s ballot? Seems to me most felons, for example, have other things on their minds than tinkering with the electoral process.

I think the Reps fear large hordes of (unwashed, brown?) unregistered folks casting ballots which are then counted toward the total. Can’t happen, of course.

Not now, of course, because the unwashed brown people have seen the true “colors” of the Repugnants. Pun intended.

nonplussed @ 58

“Photo ID” can be an item of rather nebulous definition. When I recently flew, my VA issued picture ID was just totally unacceptable to the TSA lady, despite being issued by the US Govt. While I searched for something else, I pulled out a Visa card and she was OK with that!

The Right is SO paranoid about this issue, it almost seems like something we could compromise on. Free photo ID with one’s voter registration, perhaps incorporated into the registration itself?

This strikes me as a very practical solution. How are people required to identify themselves when registering to vote?

Hi, Christy. Your earlier post inspired me to call, and the fact that you so helpfully provide the phone numbers makes all the difference. (But try saying Hans von Spakovsky three times, fast. I wanted to laugh out loud every time I had to repeat his pompous-sounding name.)

I got to the Dems, will try the Repubs later. Only Durbin’s office doesn’t appear to have enough phone operators and asks you to “call back.” What’s up with that??

Anyway, this is one of those calls I only made because of your efforts. Kudos for dogging this and for making it so easy for us to follow up.

One problem with the Georgia photo ID law is that it requires a photo ID for voting in person, but removed any ID requirement for voting by absentee ballot. In GA, most absentee voters vote Republican and people without photo ID are most likely to vote Dem. This was by design.

I agree with Oddmommy @ 40, there is generally no motivation for voter fraud. Voter suppression on the other hand…

CityGirl @ 64

Hi, Christy. Your earlier post inspired me to call, and the fact that you so helpfully provide the phone numbers makes all the difference. (But try saying Hans von Spakovsky three times, fast. I wanted to laugh out loud every time I had to repeat his pompous-sounding name.)

I got to the Dems, will try the Repubs later. Only Durbin’s office doesn’t appear to have enough phone operators and asks you to “call back.” What’s up with that??

Anyway, this is one of those calls I only made because of your efforts. Kudos for dogging this and for making it so easy for us to follow up.

It is a lot easier to say “Publius, Publius, Publius.”

It takes time and money to get to vote. An ID is scarcely that much more extra particularly since it is only done once every few years. And if you cannot afford it, maybe you shouldn’t be voting. That’s an invitation to stealing from the public trough…

Oh, cr*p. That’s BS, all the way through. Nonvoters pay for elections through taxes too. Are you going to refund that money to them? Elections are required by our laws and our Constitution, and there’s nothing in the Constitution anymore that says that the poor and minorities shouldn’t have a vote. In some states, you have to produce both a birth certificate (or passport) and proof of insurance for a license; I’m assuming the photo ID you’re so fond of saying isn’t a burden would also require the birth cert or passport. I’m sure someone who’s poor can afford to pay for one of those in addition to the ID, and that’s another agency involved and more of BushCheney’s ’security’ requirements. Or hadn’t you noticed that it’s become much more difficult to get those, too?

Fern @ 63

nonplussed @ 58

“Photo ID” can be an item of rather nebulous definition. When I recently flew, my VA issued picture ID was just totally unacceptable to the TSA lady, despite being issued by the US Govt. While I searched for something else, I pulled out a Visa card and she was OK with that!

The Right is SO paranoid about this issue, it almost seems like something we could compromise on. Free photo ID with one’s voter registration, perhaps incorporated into the registration itself?

This strikes me as a very practical solution. How are people required to identify themselves when registering to vote?

In GA, you used to be able to show a utility bill with your name and address.

added to the burden of obtaining an ID, keep in mind that many folks do not feel motivated to vote in the first place and have to be encouraged, cajoled, pleaded with to do so.

Fer gawd’s sake, the freakin’ weather impacts voter turnout.

We need to make voting EASIER, not harder.

This is a bullshit debate, and it absolutely is about squelching the votes of those who might use them against the interests of the scheming, lying bastards that have trashed this country.

Fern @ 9

Sewmouse @ 8

Actually, I have to add my confusion to that already stated. Why is showing a photo to prove that you are who say you are voter oppression?

You need a photo id to get a job, to fly, to drive… what exactly is wrong with showing ID to prove who you are before being handed a ballot? Otherwise, anyone could go in and claim they were me and steal my vote!

I’d have no problem at all with walking in and showing my Driver’s License, or State ID card to prove my identity before being handed my ballot. I have a voter registration card (no photo), but I’ve NEVER been asked to show it.

Why is this an issue?

How about because there are more people than you might think who don’t drive, don’t fly, and don’t have jobs and who might still like to vote.

Exactly. Lots of poor people DO NOT HAVE a drivers license or a non-drivers photo ID. If you are poor and get robbed or lose your non-drivers ID, sometimes you do not have $$$ to get a new one. However if you are just released from jail/prison here, you get one for free. Not all Americans use banks, either, or write checks, or drive, or alot of other things that middle class Americans take for granted.

As for photo ID…

Walks like a poll-tax, talks like a poll-tax. It’s a poll tax.
The key elements are these, I think. If there are people without ID, they are likely to be poor…and, in Georgia, largely black. That’s a great demo to cause trouble with if you are Rove. At the level of an individual, it might not even be discernible, but in the aggregate is where the damage is done.

I am personally acquainted with one voting age person that I know does not have valid photoID (I’m sure there are others of whom I am not aware): anyone (say Liberty Lee??) care to guess his demo?

P J Evans @ 66

It takes time and money to get to vote. An ID is scarcely that much more extra particularly since it is only done once every few years. And if you cannot afford it, maybe you shouldn’t be voting. That’s an invitation to stealing from the public trough…

Oh, cr*p. That’s BS, all the way through. Nonvoters pay for elections through taxes too. Are you going to refund that money to them? Elections are required by our laws and our Constitution, and there’s nothing in the Constitution anymore that says that the poor and minorities shouldn’t have a vote. In some states, you have to produce both a birth certificate (or passport) and proof of insurance for a license; I’m assuming the photo ID you’re so fond of saying isn’t a burden would also require the birth cert or passport. I’m sure someone who’s poor can afford to pay for one of those in addition to the ID, and that’s another agency involved and more of BushCheney’s ’security’ requirements. Or hadn’t you noticed that it’s become much more difficult to get those, too?

Nice that the wingnuts can be up front about their motives, though, isn’t it? Keep the poor (especially poor minorities) away from the polls. Like the hokey pokey, that’s what it’s all about.

Fern @ 47

One thing that baffles me about US elections is how many of the rules are set by the state.

The rules are set by the States because the State (or County) pays for the voting machines. Each State has a Board of Elections, and the members of that board are State employees, whose salaries come from State funds.

The polls are staffed by volunteers, but each State trains those volunteers, and the trainers are State employees.

At no point in these procedings does the Federal Government pay any of the costs associated with general elections or primaries.

Photo ID = National Identity Card = “Show us your papers” = “We don’t have to tell you where we got the “evidence” against you.” = Enemy of the State = … well, you get the picture.

Brisingamen @ 74

Fern @ 47

One thing that baffles me about US elections is how many of the rules are set by the state.

The rules are set by the States because the State (or County) pays for the voting machines. Each State has a Board of Elections, and the members of that board are State employees, whose salaries come from State funds.

The polls are staffed by volunteers, but each State trains those volunteers, and the trainers are State employees.

At no point in these procedings does the Federal Government pay any of the costs associated with general elections or primaries.

The federal gov’t pays the cost of stealing elections however.

Thanks Christy,

I sent both Senators Lincoln and Pryor a letter urging them to vote NO on S.A. 3017 Kyle Liebernam Amendment (war with Iran).

Also Sent a letter to Pryor about Von Spakovsky and followed up with a phone call just to make sure…

I love an FDL call to action!

when i registered to vote…an its been awhile - i had to show proper id….after that when voting no one has asked me or my kids for proof b/c we are registered….now one must show all types of id to vote in some places?? is this a recent thing or what?

dalloway @ 75

Photo ID = National Identity Card = “Show us your papers” = “We don’t have to tell you where we got the “evidence” against you.” = Enemy of the State = … well, you get the picture.

Freedom, meet Slippery Slope.

Only voter fraud I know about it is rich people who have homes in different states voting twice.

As I see it , the point of this post is to shed some sunlight on a known vote suppression operative of the GOP slated to be in the FEC.

P J Evans @ 67

It takes time and money to get to vote. An ID is scarcely that much more extra particularly since it is only done once every few years. And if you cannot afford it, maybe you shouldn’t be voting. That’s an invitation to stealing from the public trough…

Oh, cr*p. That’s BS, all the way through. Nonvoters pay for elections through taxes too. Are you going to refund that money to them? Elections are required by our laws and our Constitution, and there’s nothing in the Constitution anymore that says that the poor and minorities shouldn’t have a vote. In some states, you have to produce both a birth certificate (or passport) and proof of insurance for a license; I’m assuming the photo ID you’re so fond of saying isn’t a burden would also require the birth cert or passport. I’m sure someone who’s poor can afford to pay for one of those in addition to the ID, and that’s another agency involved and more of BushCheney’s ’security’ requirements. Or hadn’t you noticed that it’s become much more difficult to get those, too?

I am simply saying that I work with computers. There’s input and output. I hear the complaints on this side about Diebold and the “output” side–even though a young man in Ohio recently proved that with a clever use of FOIA voter logs and the so-called “paper trail” everyone wants you can actually defeat the secret ballot; I am concerned about the input side of the equation–that the voters who are voting are not voting twice or three times (or more) and that they are who they say are: citizens of the place in which they live as required by the voting laws. The only way I know you accomplish the latter successfully is a voter ID. If you are going to require states to spend the money to “fix” the voting apparatuses, it is not too much to require the voter to prove who he/she is…

Pentimenti @ 78

Only voter fraud I know about it is rich people who have homes in different states voting twice.

Or Ann Coulter, who wants us to believe she doesn’t know what district she lives in. And guess who SHE votes for….

Brisingamen @ 74

Fern @ 47

One thing that baffles me about US elections is how many of the rules are set by the state.

The rules are set by the States because the State (or County) pays for the voting machines. Each State has a Board of Elections, and the members of that board are State employees, whose salaries come from State funds.

The polls are staffed by volunteers, but each State trains those volunteers, and the trainers are State employees.

At no point in these procedings does the Federal Government pay any of the costs associated with general elections or primaries.

Hmm. This does strike me as truly weird. I am used to a system where election rules and standards for federal elections are set, administered, funded and enforced on a national level. Makes for some consistency, ensures that all practices are constitutional, etc. And makes situations like this electoral college scam being set up in California completely impossible.

EvilDrPuma @58 — nice point. (well, John Lott aside)

Of course, it’s not like *we*’re necessarily using our real names here, but this ain’t exactly publishing…

Though I do like the idea of watching a senator ask, “So, Evil Doctor Puma, it’s your view of the law that…”

Bustednuckles @ 79

As I see it , the point of this post is to shed some sunlight on a known vote suppression operative of the GOP slated to be in the FEC.

Yup.

kdh22 @ 76

Brisingamen @ 74

The rules are set by the States because the State (or County) pays for the voting machines. Each State has a Board of Elections, and the members of that board are State employees, whose salaries come from State funds.

The polls are staffed by volunteers, but each State trains those volunteers, and the trainers are State employees.

At no point in these procedings does the Federal Government pay any of the costs associated with general elections or primaries.

The federal gov’t pays the cost of stealing elections however.

Ha!

Chris @ 84

EvilDrPuma @58 — nice point. (well, John Lott aside)

Of course, it’s not like *we*’re necessarily using our real names here, but this ain’t exactly publishing…

Though I do like the idea of watching a senator ask, “So, Evil Doctor Puma, it’s your view of the law that…”

Damn it, Jim, I’m an archaeologist, not a lawyer!

EvilDrPuma @ 82

Pentimenti @ 78

Only voter fraud I know about it is rich people who have homes in different states voting twice.

Or Ann Coulter, who wants us to believe she doesn’t know what district she lives in. And guess who SHE votes for….

I wonder why she even votes. Seems like the machines are already set to tilt in the direction she prefers.

Oddmommy has a good point! Turnout is so lousy that I know all of the poll workers. They recognize all of the regular voters. The same people thanking them election after election, they get to know you…

Of course, on second thought, and given the level of corruption in washington, it may be just as well the feds are not involved in running elections.

So, anyone watching cspan? Anything going on?

Somewhat off topic, but figured people here would like to see it. “How George Bush became the new Saddam” from McLeans.CA http://www.macleans.ca/article.....amp;page=1

[Mod: Edited to remove parentheses so the link would work]

Some amusing quotes:

It seemed to be typical of the recent over-hyped success of the Anbar Awakening that you would have to fly from Baghdad to Damascus, and then drive six hours back across the desert, to get only 40 minutes outside Baghdad in order to see it for yourself (you could go with the U.S. Army as well, but you learn mostly about Americans if you are with Americans and end up sounding like a visiting columnist for the New York Times).

Sadly, these stories are true, while so much that is said about Iraq is myth and delusion. As the famous American war correspondent Martha Gellhorn wrote about armed conflict, there is “the real war and the propaganda war.” During the congressional hearings about the surge, I kept thinking of Tattoo on Fantasy Island, half expecting Ambassador Crocker to tug on Gen. Petraeus’s sleeve and say, “Look, boss, da plane.” Smiles, everyone, smiles! Sometimes I think Iraq doesn’t exist at all. It’s just a series of preconceptions, a country invented to keep the West’s intelligentsia busy arguing and pontificating, fighting over facts about a place that is so clearly a work of fiction. Frankly, I wish it didn’t exist, at least for the sake of Iraqis. First Saddam, now this.

CDNGrit — The author of that McLean’s piece is going to be on here for a live chat this evening for Late Nite (I think it is tonight — check with TRex.)

Solai@90

SJC Hearings on FISA just ended on C-span 3, they have went to the British Labour Party Convention.

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Because most inner city residents don’t have a drivers liscense. They don’t own cars. They pay cash. Most inner city residents do not have photo IDs.

Moreover, as someone who has served as an elections officer, I can tell you that photo ID would have zero impact on electoral fraud.

Solai @ 92

So, anyone watching cspan? Anything going on?

Feingold just ended the FISA hearing for the day. The last four witnesses were fairly interesting, especially the female, who was once Spectors’s aide. She got an assignment and so did another witness. Pretty good questions for these witnesses.

The House is busy condemning the UN Human Rights Council because it condemned Israel.

EvilDrPuma @ 73

P J Evans @ 66

Oh, cr*p. That’s BS, all the way through. Nonvoters pay for elections through taxes too. Are you going to refund that money to them? Elections are required by our laws and our Constitution, and there’s nothing in the Constitution anymore that says that the poor and minorities shouldn’t have a vote. In some states, you have to produce both a birth certificate (or passport) and proof of insurance for a license; I’m assuming the photo ID you’re so fond of saying isn’t a burden would also require the birth cert or passport. I’m sure someone who’s poor can afford to pay for one of those in addition to the ID, and that’s another agency involved and more of BushCheney’s ’security’ requirements. Or hadn’t you noticed that it’s become much more difficult to get those, too?

Nice that the wingnuts can be up front about their motives, though, isn’t it? Keep the poor (especially poor minorities) away from the polls. Like the hokey pokey, that’s what it’s all about.

No, not minorities. But I do personally (not the position of the GOP) believe that anyone who is incarcerated,a felon, or who is collecting government assistance of any kind should not be eligible to vote while collecting such benefits. Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.

nonplussed @ 97

The House is busy condemning the UN Human Rights Council because it condemned Israel.

Priorities, you know.

LibertyLee @ 81

I am simply saying that I work with computers. There’s input and output. I hear the complaints on this side about Diebold and the “output” side–even though a young man in Ohio recently proved that with a clever use of FOIA voter logs and the so-called “paper trail” everyone wants you can actually defeat the secret ballot; I am concerned about the input side of the equation–that the voters who are voting are not voting twice or three times (or more) and that they are who they say are: citizens of the place in which they live as required by the voting laws. The only way I know you accomplish the latter successfully is a voter ID. If you are going to require states to spend the money to “fix” the voting apparatuses, it is not too much to require the voter to prove who he/she is…

Oh, it would be darned easy to figure out who voters cast their ballots for. We keep numbered listed of voters (by name and party) in the order they vote. Grab the machine logs and start figuring… It would be tougher in large precincts where 8-10 voters could be casting their ballots at once, but very easy in small ones like mine.

As to voters casting their ballot more than once… How? Your name MUST be in the book. You sign the book directly UNDER your name.

If you use another name, you’re not in the book and would then have to cast a provisional ballot. Even if you did that two or more times, when those provisionals were checked at the Election Bureau, those ballots would be cast out.

*edited to add* And provisionals are counted last, after verification - usually the next day. That’s why election tallies always come up as 99% reporting.

dalloway @ 75

Photo ID = National Identity Card = “Show us your papers” = “We don’t have to tell you where we got the “evidence” against you.” = Enemy of the State = … well, you get the picture.

preach it dalloway

I would bet a lot of money that this fellow will come out of the closet one day soon, or be outed.

juslin @ 78

when i registered to vote…an its been awhile - i had to show proper id….after that when voting no one has asked me or my kids for proof b/c we are registered….now one must show all types of id to vote in some places?? is this a recent thing or what?

yes, it is a new thing
the latest in GOP voter-suppression-under-the-guise-of-election-security

The simple fact remains that if everyone who is eligible voted, Republicans would never get elected. It is the best interest of the R party to supress voter turnout. There is much evidence on record. Road Blocks and vehicle inspections on election day, for one.

Why do Republicans want to steal 20 electoral votes from California? Because they need them to win.

The electoral college is a scam that should be eliminated. Cheating aside, Dubya would have lost both elections without it.

OT for ET, hint, it’s about Ted “the Toobz”.
http://downwithtyranny.blogspo.....ud-so.html

Biggus Diggus @ 103

I would bet a lot of money that this fellow will come out of the closet one day soon, or be outed.

…to a public outcry of “Keep your fucking Hans off!”

JF @ 64

One problem with the Georgia photo ID law is that it requires a photo ID for voting in person, but removed any ID requirement for voting by absentee ballot. In GA, most absentee voters vote Republican and people without photo ID are most likely to vote Dem. This was by design.

Yep. Another one of the issues and why Republicans win. They use absentee ballots more than we do.

It irks me that we have to fight this guy, Reid and Schumer should have shot this one down

I am concerned about the input side of the equation–that the voters who are voting are not voting twice or three times (or more) and that they are who they say are: citizens of the place in which they live as required by the voting laws.

Cr*p!!
That’s what the voter registration rolls are for, or why else do we have to register and sign off every time we vote? (And I do mean every time, even to school elections where the turnout is such that the pollworkers outnumber the voters.)
‘Well, if this can happen, then that might happen’ is not a good argument.
If the computers are that much of a problem, then requiring photo IDs isn’t going to improve the situation, because the computers never see the IDs.
AFAIK, the only cases of multiple voting are dead people in Chicago. [/snark]

LibertyLee @ 99

EvilDrPuma @ 73

Nice that the wingnuts can be up front about their motives, though, isn’t it? Keep the poor (especially poor minorities) away from the polls. Like the hokey pokey, that’s what it’s all about.

No, not minorities. But I do personally (not the position of the GOP) believe that anyone who is incarcerated,a felon, or who is collecting government assistance of any kind should not be eligible to vote while collecting such benefits. Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.

Does that include social security?

Sewmouse @ 8

Actually, I have to add my confusion to that already stated. Why is showing a photo to prove that you are who say you are voter oppression?

You need a photo id to get a job, to fly, to drive… what exactly is wrong with showing ID to prove who you are before being handed a ballot? Otherwise, anyone could go in and claim they were me and steal my vote!

I’d have no problem at all with walking in and showing my Driver’s License, or State ID card to prove my identity before being handed my ballot. I have a voter registration card (no photo), but I’ve NEVER been asked to show it.

Why is this an issue?

The issue is mail-in voting. This is the Achilles heel of the rethug attempt to suppress minority and other voters. You can’t manage a mail-in system of the kind that Oregon and (increasingly) Washington State has with photo id. I think this is the long-term agenda. Get it to the Supremes, who will then declare that mail voting is unconstitutional.

As to photo id at the polls, if we had a national health service like Canada, it would take care of itself. Everyone would have one.

PA_Lady @ 101

LibertyLee @ 81

I am simply saying that I work with computers. There’s input and output. I hear the complaints on this side about Diebold and the “output” side–even though a young man in Ohio recently proved that with a clever use of FOIA voter logs and the so-called “paper trail” everyone wants you can actually defeat the secret ballot; I am concerned about the input side of the equation–that the voters who are voting are not voting twice or three times (or more) and that they are who they say are: citizens of the place in which they live as required by the voting laws. The only way I know you accomplish the latter successfully is a voter ID. If you are going to require states to spend the money to “fix” the voting apparatuses, it is not too much to require the voter to prove who he/she is…

Oh, it would be darned easy to figure out who voters cast their ballots for. We keep numbered listed of voters (by name and party) in the order they vote. Grab the machine logs and start figuring… It would be tougher in large precincts where 8-10 voters could be casting their ballots at once, but very easy in small ones like mine.

As to voters casting their ballot more than once… How? Your name MUST be in the book. You sign the book directly UNDER your name.

If you use another name, you’re not in the book and would then have to cast a provisional ballot. Even if you did that two or more times, when those provisionals were checked at the Election Bureau, those ballots would be cast out.

*edited to add* And provisionals are counted last, after verification - usually the next day. That’s why election tallies always come up as 99% reporting.

I’ve been a poll worker too. A lot of folks don’t vote. It’s not hard for someone to have multiple IDs and sign under different names in the precinct. Sure, you have to do it in a larger precinct where there are enough judges that they can’t remember, but do it enough and it will stick. I myself have successfuly challenged voters voting two and three times in different precincts using the names of folks on those precincts. It’s easy to do…A photo ID does makes that a LOT harder.

LibertyLee @ 99

EvilDrPuma @ 73

Nice that the wingnuts can be up front about their motives, though, isn’t it? Keep the poor (especially poor minorities) away from the polls. Like the hokey pokey, that’s what it’s all about.

No, not minorities. But I do personally (not the position of the GOP) believe that anyone who is incarcerated,a felon, or who is collecting government assistance of any kind should not be eligible to vote while collecting such benefits. Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.

Collecting gov’t assistance? Why shouldn’t these people be allowed to vote? Your lack of depth is shining through Lee!

I have a voter ID card issued by the county, as does every other registered voter. The cards are not pictured. However, for those of us who do not drive, the state does provide a regular ID card that looks like and serves the same function of identification that a driver’s license does. Everyone in the state is entitled to apply for an ID card (which they use for check cashing, etc.) The problems don’t really come in unless you’re asked for two forms of voter ID, which generally doesn’t happen.

Helen, we’re on the same wavelength again today!

Calling progress as of 1:03 pm EDT

Durbin still not answering. Reid press 1 to get a staffer and you get cut off. All other Dems say they are aware and are receiving calls.

this may be totally obvious, but just in case:

the most time-saving way to do it is call an 800 number and then keep hitting redial as you mow down the list of congresscritters.

Hiya khd22 - looks like you and I are on the same page

Helen @ 111

LibertyLee @ 99

No, not minorities. But I do personally (not the position of the GOP) believe that anyone who is incarcerated,a felon, or who is collecting government assistance of any kind should not be eligible to vote while collecting such benefits. Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.

Does that include social security?

No, that’s insurance that everyone gets. I’m talking about welfare, food stamps, etc…so called “needs entitlements”…

My rant about Feingold’s treatment as a pariah

Did you notice the air go out of the room as McConnell(Alias the Weasel)left center stage? Feingold,Whitehouse, and Sphincter, intelligent panel, worthy suggestions, NOBODY(MSM or Senators)There.

He must feel like a leper or a crazed lefty even tho 70% agree with them. We are the silent majority?

If Vans is so damn worried about voter fraud, why not attack it where it is the most corrupt? At the receiptless voting machines.

Booyah

LibertyLee @ 99

EvilDrPuma @ 73

Nice that the wingnuts can be up front about their motives, though, isn’t it? Keep the poor (especially poor minorities) away from the polls. Like the hokey pokey, that’s what it’s all about.

No, not minorities. But I do personally (not the position of the GOP) believe that anyone who is incarcerated,a felon, or who is collecting government assistance of any kind should not be eligible to vote while collecting such benefits. Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.

So you’ve just disenfranchised all retired and disabled veterans, social security recipients and anyone receiving medicare/medicaid or unemployment compensation. Beautiful. /s

Do you refer to lay-abouts such as disabled Veterans like me? How about people on Social Security Disability? We should disenfranchise sick and disabled people?

ccmask @ 119

If Vans is so damn worried about voter fraud, why not attack it where it is the most corrupt? At the receiptless voting machines.

Booyah

That’s electoral fraud, not voter fraud.

LibertyLee @ 99

Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.

In other words, don’t let the poorest and weakest vote?!

Yeah, that’s democracy! /snark

Lunchtime for me, kids. Could somebody wipe that drool off Lee’s chin? There’s a good boy.

Voter turn out is a problem in the US. It defies logic that there are large numbers of people who are voting more than once, that these people are risking going to prison for doing so, if they are caught. Really.

I am a voter registrar. We do not require an ID, but the person is asked for their SSN. That can be checked. Frankly, I don’t know anyone who could just make up a SSN and fill out the form, that info is cross checked with their birth date, which is also on the form.

This voter ID BS is exactly that. BS, designed to deter certain types of voters.

LibertyLee @ 98

EvilDrPuma @ 73

Nice that the wingnuts can be up front about their motives, though, isn’t it? Keep the poor (especially poor minorities) away from the polls. Like the hokey pokey, that’s what it’s all about.

No, not minorities. But I do personally (not the position of the GOP) believe that anyone who is incarcerated,a felon, or who is collecting government assistance of any kind should not be eligible to vote while collecting such benefits. Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.

Scuse me - but everyone benefits from govt. benefits. Driven on a government-built street lately? Sorry, no can vote. You would just want to perpetuate this shameful grab of government resources.

And this will be the last time I respond to LL.

PA_Lady @ 124

LibertyLee @ 99

Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.

In other words, don’t let the poorest and weakest vote?!

Yeah, that’s democracy! /snark

Are we back to that old crap of a communist under every bed? Lib Lee, you haven’t progressed very far. You are making the assumption that there are great hordes of people out there just waiting to take YOUR rights away. Get a life.

LibertyLee @ 99

EvilDrPuma @ 73

Nice that the wingnuts can be up front about their motives, though, isn’t it? Keep the poor (especially poor minorities) away from the polls. Like the hokey pokey, that’s what it’s all about.

No, not minorities. But I do personally (not the position of the GOP) believe that anyone who is incarcerated,a felon, or who is collecting government assistance of any kind should not be eligible to vote while collecting such benefits. Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.

Oh please. Don’t reveal your intelligence. It was better not knowing.

LibertyLee @ 98

No, not minorities. But I do personally (not the position of the GOP) believe that anyone who is incarcerated,a felon, or who is collecting government assistance of any kind should not be eligible to vote while collecting such benefits. Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.

So everyone on Social Security shouldn’t be able to vote? How about people who receive “government assistance” in the form of a tax cut or subsidy, I guess it’s OK for them to vote, right?

EvilDrPuma @ 125

Lunchtime for me, kids. Could somebody wipe that drool off Lee’s chin? There’s a good boy.

[spew]

who is collecting government assistance of any kind should not be eligible to vote while collecting such benefits

LL, you are full of it today, aren’t you?
Do you seriously believe that someone collecting disability or Social Security shouldn’t be allowed to vote? How about WIC or food stamp recipients? Those are government assistance programs too.
Do you think there should be an minimum income requirement for voters?
How about a maximum income requirement?
How about saying that you have to vote from your primary residence, no more ‘domiciles’ that you can vote from even though you don’t spend more than two or three months a year there?

PA_Lady @ 122

LibertyLee @ 99

Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.

In other words, don’t let the poorest and weakest vote?!

Yeah, that’s democracy! /snark

Yep - according to him, only employed (or at least totally self-supporting) or the rich have the right to vote. Sort of reminds me of the whole “only property-owners have the right to vote” thing.
If you are a citizen of the United States, you have the right to vote. Period.

Jukebox: Who shot Liberty Valance

LibertyLee @ 111

I’ve been a poll worker too. A lot of folks don’t vote. It’s not hard for someone to have multiple IDs and sign under different names in the precinct. Sure, you have to do it in a larger precinct where there are enough judges that they can’t remember, but do it enough and it will stick. I myself have successfuly challenged voters voting two and three times in different precincts using the names of folks on those precincts. It’s easy to do…A photo ID does makes that a LOT harder.

Ahhh, but you’d have to guess which voters weren’t going to show! ESP as a voter fraud tool!

Or else you’d have to bribe someone in the election office to get you a list of voters in danger of being cast off the rolls. Then you’d have to go get the IDs made. Then you’d have to make sure you always got a different pollworker. Probably wear disguises too!

*sigh* Voter suppression - very likely. Voter fraud - not so much.

Helen @ 110

LibertyLee @ 99

No, not minorities. But I do personally (not the position of the GOP) believe that anyone who is incarcerated,a felon, or who is collecting government assistance of any kind should not be eligible to vote while collecting such benefits. Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.

Does that include social security?

Liberty Lee, there are many reasons American citizens end up needing assistance to survive. How on earth do you make a connection that needing assistance is “stealing” and that their voting rights should be taken away? That is simply astounding. We need some compassion here coupled with upholding the rights of an American citizen to vote. I’m busy shoveling my jaw off the ground in an attempt to digest such a thought. Have a heart.

Twain @ 129

Are we back to that old crap of a communist under every bed?

Yep. Commies abound and Freddie Fizzle is the real Reagan II.

I think really what Liberty Lee is saying is that if it’s an entitlement (and rest assured; social security is an entitlement) that he’s entitled to, then the rules are different.

not feeding the trolls IS the best policy.
We learn that the hard way.

wait a minute….people receiving any public assistance should NOT be allowede to vote?! WTF!!!! ohhhhhhh democracy has tanked if this a rule…. the mind boggles at this statement…

dakine01 @ 121

LibertyLee @ 99

No, not minorities. But I do personally (not the position of the GOP) believe that anyone who is incarcerated,a felon, or who is collecting government assistance of any kind should not be eligible to vote while collecting such benefits. Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.

So you’ve just disenfranchised all retired and disabled veterans, social security recipients and anyone receiving medicare/medicaid or unemployment compensation. Beautiful. /s

Boy, Dakin01, am I with you on this! The SOB just equated me with a felon because I’m disabled! And took voting rights away from people because they’re poor. Funny thing. People with this type of attitude are very often the very ones that walk out on illegitimate children and leave their mother’s to take care of them as best they can. Could there be a fatherless or even a motherless child in LL’s background?

oddmommy @ 138

not feeding the trolls IS the best policy.
We learn that the hard way.

Uh-huh. A polite troll is still a troll.

ccmask @ 134

Jukebox: Who shot Liberty Valance

Only complaint I ever have about the movie is it doesn’t include the song! Thanks.

JF @ 69

Fern @ 63

This strikes me as a very practical solution. How are people required to identify themselves when registering to vote?

In GA, you used to be able to show a utility bill with your name and address.

In Indiana, you have to show a utility bill along with other ID to even GET a drivers’ license.

Fern @ 141

oddmommy @ 138

not feeding the trolls IS the best policy.
We learn that the hard way.

Uh-huh. A polite troll is still a troll.

Yeah, and we realy rose to the bait, didn’t we? (Myself included, of course.)

Do you think the crack is bigger in Liberty’s bell or his noggin?

MayDaze @ 144

Fern @ 141

Uh-huh. A polite troll is still a troll.

Yeah, and we realy rose to the bait, didn’t we? (Myself included, of course.)

We usually do.

Toby Wollin @ 133

PA_Lady @ 122

In other words, don’t let the poorest and weakest vote?!

Yeah, that’s democracy! /snark

Yep - according to him, only employed (or at least totally self-supporting) or the rich have the right to vote. Sort of reminds me of the whole “only property-owners have the right to vote” thing.
If you are a citizen of the United States, you have the right to vote. Period.

And only males, because they’re the ones that are truly self-sufficient. Women shouldn’t even be allowed to own property. Right, Liberty?

LL must be making this s*it up just to get a rise out of everyone. If that is not the case, LL needs to go sit down somewhere for about a year and look inside itself. That kind of disregard for people in need is a projection of a person in need — emotionally.

kdh22 @ 114

LibertyLee @ 99

No, not minorities. But I do personally (not the position of the GOP) believe that anyone who is incarcerated,a felon, or who is collecting government assistance of any kind should not be eligible to vote while collecting such benefits. Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.

Collecting gov’t assistance? Why shouldn’t these people be allowed to vote? Your lack of depth is shining through Lee!

What is the lack of depth? Is it unreasonable to believe that those who receive assistance will vote for folks automatically who will make it easier to get more benefits and to get their relatives more easily to qualify? I’ve seen it happen. Why should I fund that sort of thing?

LibertyLee @ 82

I am simply saying that I work with computers. There’s input and output. I hear the complaints on this side about Diebold and the “output” side–even though a young man in Ohio recently proved that with a clever use of FOIA voter logs and the so-called “paper trail” everyone wants you can actually defeat the secret ballot; I am concerned about the input side of the equation–that the voters who are voting are not voting twice or three times (or more) and that they are who they say are: citizens of the place in which they live as required by the voting laws. The only way I know you accomplish the latter successfully is a voter ID. If you are going to require states to spend the money to “fix” the voting apparatuses, it is not too much to require the voter to prove who he/she is…

I work with computers, too. Perhaps you’re familiar with the principle “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”? Government mandates may be appropriate if there is actually evidence of a problem. Despite extreme partisan efforts by Republican appointees, there is no evidence of voter fraud. (Sorry, your “I know it happens” isn’t evidence either.) There is copious evidence of various voter suppression efforts. Therefore, any proposed “solution” to the nonexistent problem of voter fraud that may have voter suppression effects should be viewed with extreme suspicion.

The efforts on the voting machines are necessary because with many of the current systems there is no way of knowing if there is a problem. In my work with computers, if I proposed a critical system with no way of monitoring or verifying the results beyond “we ran some test data and it looks fine,” I’d be fired.

MayDaze @ 144

Fern @ 141

Uh-huh. A polite troll is still a troll.

Yeah, and we realy rose to the bait, didn’t we? (Myself included, of course.)

I’m not ashamed. I hope we made his day a little better. It must be miserable being Liberty Lee. Hopefully, we gave the needed fix.

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Those other things are privileges. Voting is a right.

LS @ 150

LL must be making this s*it up just to get a rise out of everyone. If that is not the case, LL needs to go sit down somewhere for about a year and look inside itself. That kind of disregard for people in need is a projection of a person in need — emotionally.

Perhaps LL should be viewed as a satirist.

I am just sitting here shaking my head at this fucking ignorance.
Maybe walk a mile in another’s shoes.
Incredible arrogance does not impress me much.

LibertyLee @ 149

kdh22 @ 114

Collecting gov’t assistance? Why shouldn’t these people be allowed to vote? Your lack of depth is shining through Lee!

What is the lack of depth? Is it unreasonable to believe that those who receive assistance will vote for folks automatically who will make it easier to get more benefits and to get their relatives more easily to qualify? I’ve seen it happen. Why should I fund that sort of thing?

Intellectual depth. Have you seen the study about liberal brains vs. conservative brains?

No man is an island. That is why you should fund ‘that sort of thing’.

LibertyLee @ 151

kdh22 @ 114

Collecting gov’t assistance? Why shouldn’t these people be allowed to vote? Your lack of depth is shining through Lee!

What is the lack of depth? Is it unreasonable to believe that those who receive assistance will vote for folks automatically who will make it easier to get more benefits and to get their relatives more easily to qualify? I’ve seen it happen. Why should I fund that sort of thing?

Okay. Then let’s also stop the Gop warmongers voting Gop warmongers in?

kdh22 @ 151

MayDaze @ 144

Yeah, and we realy rose to the bait, didn’t we? (Myself included, of course.)

I’m not ashamed. I hope we made his day a little better. It must be miserable being Liberty Lee. Hopefully, we gave the needed fix.

Oh no, not ashamed here either. Sometimes it’s good to respond to something really heinous, gets the old blood moving!

Liberty @182: wrt this comment of yours “….I hear the complaints on this side about Diebold…..snip”

Which side is that?

Just a reminder folks, please don’t insult other commenters. Thanks.

LibertyLee @ 151

kdh22 @ 114

Collecting gov’t assistance? Why shouldn’t these people be allowed to vote? Your lack of depth is shining through Lee!

What is the lack of depth? Is it unreasonable to believe that those who receive assistance will vote for folks automatically who will make it easier to get more benefits and to get their relatives more easily to qualify? I’ve seen it happen. Why should I fund that sort of thing?

Because American Democracy is supposed to be inclusive.

msmolly @ 145

JF @ 69

In GA, you used to be able to show a utility bill with your name and address.

In Indiana, you have to show a utility bill along with other ID to even GET a drivers’ license.

Yeah, all over it is a real PITA to get a id and bank acct if your street bound even if you have a SS card.

Redshift @ 151

LibertyLee @ 82

I am simply saying that I work with computers. There’s input and output. I hear the complaints on this side about Diebold and the “output” side–even though a young man in Ohio recently proved that with a clever use of FOIA voter logs and the so-called “paper trail” everyone wants you can actually defeat the secret ballot; I am concerned about the input side of the equation–that the voters who are voting are not voting twice or three times (or more) and that they are who they say are: citizens of the place in which they live as required by the voting laws. The only way I know you accomplish the latter successfully is a voter ID. If you are going to require states to spend the money to “fix” the voting apparatuses, it is not too much to require the voter to prove who he/she is…

I work with computers, too. Perhaps you’re familiar with the principle “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it”? Government mandates may be appropriate if there is actually evidence of a problem. Despite extreme partisan efforts by Republican appointees, there is no evidence of voter fraud. (Sorry, your “I know it happens” isn’t evidence either.) There is copious evidence of various voter suppression efforts. Therefore, any proposed “solution” to the nonexistent problem of voter fraud that may have voter suppression effects should be viewed with extreme suspicion.

The efforts on the voting machines are necessary because with many of the current systems there is no way of knowing if there is a problem. In my work with computers, if I proposed a critical system with no way of monitoring or verifying the results beyond “we ran some test data and it looks fine,” I’d be fired.

I work in software quality and like to use St Ronnie’s words, “Trust but verify”

Either:

Do not insult.

Or:

Don’t comment.

poor folks - and I was one for a long long time - often don’t have the money or time off from work to obtain an ID that will meet all the criteria that voter suppression laws require.

I have a friend with grand mal epilepsy. She has never driven, and never had the money to pay for a passport or other expensive ID. Last year, before the Georgia ID law was struck down, I gave her the money she needed so she could get the ID required under the law. She had to get a copy of her birth certificate from another state - cost about $35. She had to get a local cab service to drive her to a town 40 miles away to the nearest ID center because her friends that get her to the grocery store etc all work during the day - that cost about $80. The ID center was closed, although she had called to check hours - so she ended up having to take that ride twice.

How many good people, broke and exhausted from hard jobs that pay little, beat down by disease or poverty are lucky enough to have a friend like me? How many will persist in fighting the red tape and obstructionism of these repressive laws?

My grandmother was born at home - no hospital birth certificate - and in one of the floods that hits the upper Ohio every generation or so the courthouse records were destroyed. She went thru quite a lot of hassle trying to get some sort of documentation when she tried to get her first passport back in the early 50’s. Here in New Mexico and elsewhere countless thousands of our native american and african-american elders were born at home as well, do not drive or haven’t driven in decades and they have little or no independent way of verifying their identity. The amount of paperwork and jumping thru hoops required can be daunting to a person with little money, time or knowledge on how to deal with the new laws.

these new ‘voter ID’ laws are the modern poll tax, the modern ‘literacy test’ of the 21st C. It stunk in the last century, and they stink now.

(Once again, Bingaman’s office had no freakin’ clue what I was calling about).

bg @ 127

Voter turn out is a problem in the US. It defies logic that there are large numbers of people who are voting more than once, that these people are risking going to prison for doing so, if they are caught. Really.

I am a voter registrar. We do not require an ID, but the person is asked for their SSN. That can be checked. Frankly, I don’t know anyone who could just make up a SSN and fill out the form, that info is cross checked with their birth date, which is also on the form.

This voter ID BS is exactly that. BS, designed to deter certain types of voters.

OT for bg: Just curious about NM’s overall support for Richardson for Prez…is it Booyah! all around, or is it mixed? or do locals have big concerns the way New Yorker’s do about America’s Mayor? Just curious and apologies again for the OT…

Does anyone know the real reason why Republicans want voting ID cards used at the polls?

From Scientifc American:

Brain scans show that liberals and conservatives may be neurologically wired to lean politically left or right.

ccmask @ 168

Does anyone know the real reason why Republicans want voting ID cards used at the polls?

I am not an R (duh!) but all indications are that it truly is voter suppression and a 21st century version of the poll tax/literacy test as was just mentioned. The folks most in need of these IDs and least likely to have them are also more likely to vote D

Thanks dakine01

Christy has a new thread up.

new thread above

Biodun @ 169

From Scientifc American:

Brain scans show that liberals and conservatives may be neurologically wired to lean politically left or right.

Thanks.

I do apologize if I have offended anyone’s genteel sensibilities here. I just care deeply about election fraud. It is the genesis of all future crimes.

Redshift @ 154

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Those other things are privileges. Voting is a
right.

so everyone should be issued a voter I.D. as soon as they turn 18

kdh22 @ 175

I do apologize if I have offended anyone’s genteel sensibilities here. I just care deeply about election fraud. It is the genesis of all future crimes.

Hi KDH, duly noted! ;)

And I love dakine’s reminder to “trust but verify”.

I would like to know more about what the GOP wants to scare us with now. That is, show me hard evidence of the problem, GOP, you claim we have. I want hard evidence that voter fraud is going on, specifically who what where when etc. And while I am asking I would like hard evidence about Iran’s interference in Iraq…Oh, I trust you but I want to verify. OK? OK.

do-si-do @ 177

kdh22 @ 175

I do apologize if I have offended anyone’s genteel sensibilities here. I just care deeply about election fraud. It is the genesis of all future crimes.

Hi KDH, duly noted! ;)

And I love dakine’s reminder to “trust but verify”.

I would like to know more about what the GOP wants to scare us with now. That is, show me hard evidence of the problem, GOP, you claim we have. I want hard evidence that voter fraud is going on, specifically who what where when etc. And while I am asking I would like hard evidence about Iran’s interference in Iraq…Oh, I trust you but I want to verify. OK? OK.

BAWHAWAHAHAHAHAHA!

Seems simple to me. Everyone Everyone should be sent or be able to access a voter I.D. card with a picture on it. Nothing to do with driving.

The dude abides.
My apologies for letting something get under my skin.

my point …..either you believe in democracy or you dont…

liberty lee at 99-”No, not minorities. But I do personally (not the position of the GOP) believe that anyone who is incarcerated,a felon, or who is collecting government assistance of any kind should not be eligible to vote while collecting such benefits. Doing so is simply an invitation to giving a robber a legal gun and have them keep voting to increase their benefits. That’s a way toward Communist dictatorship.”

so anyone involved with profits in corporations shouldn’t be able to vote either? or anyone who owns stock? or anyone who would profit from lesser taxes on the rich? or agri companies who profit?

or anyone who would profite from one party controlling the government agencys in a fox in the henhouse way???? like now?
so, republicans can’t vote…..ok…..

you’re slippin’ liberty…

LS @ 137

Helen @ 110

Does that include social security?

Liberty Lee, there are many reasons American citizens end up needing assistance to survive. How on earth do you make a connection that needing assistance is “stealing” and that their voting rights should be taken away? That is simply astounding. We need some compassion here coupled with upholding the rights of an American citizen to vote. I’m busy shoveling my jaw off the ground in an attempt to digest such a thought. Have a heart.

I’m sure I’m far into EPU territory at this point, but this whole “give a robber a gun/Communist dictatorship” spiel strikes me as the sort of comic delusion that only occurs at the intersection of bad acid and Ayn Rand. Besides, it all boils down to the same thing: “Liberty” Lee thinks poor people shouldn’t vote. He just keeps trying to dress it up as something else and fails miserably every time.

EvilDrPuma @ 183

LS @ 137

Liberty Lee, there are many reasons American citizens end up needing assistance to survive. How on earth do you make a connection that needing assistance is “stealing” and that their voting rights should be taken away? That is simply astounding. We need some compassion here coupled with upholding the rights of an American citizen to vote. I’m busy shoveling my jaw off the ground in an attempt to digest such a thought. Have a heart.

I’m sure I’m far into EPU territory at this point, but this whole “give a robber a gun/Communist dictatorship” spiel strikes me as the sort of comic delusion that only occurs at the intersection of bad acid and Ayn Rand. Besides, it all boils down to the same thing: “Liberty” Lee thinks poor people shouldn’t vote. He just keeps trying to dress it up as something else and fails miserably every time.

EDP gets epu’d…lol :)
You are, of course, correct in your analysis.

evil dr at 183-”I’m sure I’m far into EPU territory at this point, but this whole “give a robber a gun/Communist dictatorship” spiel strikes me as the sort of comic delusion that only occurs at the intersection of bad acid and Ayn Rand. Besides, it all boils down to the same thing: “Liberty” Lee thinks poor people shouldn’t vote. He just keeps trying to dress it up as something else and fails miserably every time.”

which kinda lends support to the theory that republicans are actively working to suppress the vote, eh?

Ann in AZ @ 115

Everyone in the state is entitled to apply for an ID card (which they use for check cashing, etc.) The problems don’t really come in unless you’re asked for two forms of voter ID, which generally doesn’t happen.

OK — but is that ID card free? Is it easy to obtain, or would someone have to make a special trip to acquire it?

If you have to pay for it, that discriminates against those who don’t have the money to get one, and that creates a barrier to voting which flies in the face of the Voting Rights amendment.

do-si-do @167

I’m not an average New Mexican in many ways, we brought our own jobs here and have a fairly small circle of local friends, most of whom are also creative types who are artists or writers or musicians.

Among our crowd, the political spread ranges from moderate centrists to lefties like myself, with many gradations between.

That being said, my personal experience and that of a lot of the local blogs seem to think that Bill has no chance to really expect anything higher than maybe a VP nomination - and even that is in doubt due to the debacle of the Wen Ho Lee case when he was Energy Sec.. There’s tape out there of him being dressed down by Senators, including Byrd saying ‘I would never vote to confirm you again’ after the problems at the Energy Dept., and I have no doubt it would be used in the typical ominous music with black and white photos and chopped quotes ads the Republicans are masters of if Richardson made it to the national ballot.

Except for his ‘no residual troops in Iraq’ stance, there’s a couple of other candidates I prefer to Richardson. He’s very much a centrist DLC type.

He’s done a lot of good here in the state, since he had a working majority at the Roundhouse. Most of my friends wish he would drop his Presidential campaign and announce he’s running for Pete Domenici’s seat next year. There’s a local progressive - Wiviott who’s already running - but if Bill announced, Wiviott would be crushed in the primary.

Brisingamen @ 186

Ann in AZ @ 115

Everyone in the state is entitled to apply for an ID card (which they use for check cashing, etc.) The problems don’t really come in unless you’re asked for two forms of voter ID, which generally doesn’t happen.

OK — but is that ID card free? Is it easy to obtain, or would someone have to make a special trip to acquire it?

If you have to pay for it, that discriminates against those who don’t have the money to get one, and that creates a barrier to voting which flies in the face of the Voting Rights amendment.

Jumping right in - That is part of the problem–generally one does have to pay for it–that makes it equivalent to a polltax. Voting is a RIGHT, not a privilege like driving or cashing checks.
Second - many, many elderly and poor folks from rural backgrounds cannot get a license or i.d. because they cannot get a birth certificate. They were delivered by midwives and the birth never registered - you’d be surprised how many of those still exist.
Even if you can get a birth certificate, those aren’t free, and many states are raising the price of a certified copy as state budgets tighten.
ANYTHING that costs money is a barrier to voting. And it was already found unconstitutional in the poll tax cases 50 years ago or more.
BTW - that poster lib…l.. is a well-known troll at liberal sites. ignore him/her.

Ok, HEAVEN FORBID that I should disagree with someone here - or ASK A LEGITIMATE QUESTION - since that makes me a “TROLL”.

IF I were going to continue this conversation, which I WON”T because I’d NEVER want to crash into your little yes-man party here that only welcomes opinions with which they agree - Kind of like the BUSH ADMINISTRATION in that - but IF I were going to continue, I’d note that a State ID card in Illinois costs $20 and is good for FIVE years - which is an annual cost of $4

Anyone who cannot afford $4 per year - less than the cost of a pack of cigarettes - really needs to be sorting out their priorities… IF I were going to comment on it - which I dare not, as being a TROLL would be a terrible thing in this little Rove-fest of total agreement.

Isn’t it obvious by now what will happen? Since bloggers are making a big deal about this guy, explaining what a terrible idea it would be for Democrats to let him in… it should be clear what will happen: the Democrats will let him in without a fight.

Is that cynicism? Not really. So far, every time we demand the Democrats stand up for what’s right, they cave and move on, tails between their legs. I hate to say it, but what on Earth makes you think this time will be any different?

All I was and am required to do is provide a signature in the State of Washington. I am not required to show a photo id. I am required to recite my address and give my signature. That is so if there are irregularities they can compare the signatures on the rolls to the signatures they have on file. Everyone can “make their mark” no photo required.

If ever there was a suppression of minority vote before the primaries, I believe it would benefit HRC over BO. HRC may an edge with low information minority voters now, but when they go to the polls the possibility of them switching over to BO is likely. It would be in BO’s interest to vote against this man.

Sewmouse @ 8

Actually, I have to add my confusion to that already stated. Why is showing a photo to prove that you are who say you are voter oppression?

You need a photo id to get a job, to fly, to drive… what exactly is wrong with showing ID to prove who you are before being handed a ballot? Otherwise, anyone could go in and claim they were me and steal my vote!

I’d have no problem at all with walking in and showing my Driver’s License, or State ID card to prove my identity before being handed my ballot. I have a voter registration card (no photo), but I’ve NEVER been asked to show it.

Why is this an issue?

Because you don’t have to show a photo ID to get a job, first of all, you can show plenty of other stuff, like a social security card or a birth certificate. And it’s a burden on the poor unless it’s absolutely free, and they will come to you to give you the card. Simple as that.

Fern @ 84

Brisingamen @ 74

The rules are set by the States because the State (or County) pays for the voting machines. Each State has a Board of Elections, and the members of that board are State employees, whose salaries come from State funds.

The polls are staffed by volunteers, but each State trains those volunteers, and the trainers are State employees.

At no point in these procedings does the Federal Government pay any of the costs associated with general elections or primaries.

Hmm. This does strike me as truly weird. I am used to a system where election rules and standards for federal elections are set, administered, funded and enforced on a national level. Makes for some consistency, ensures that all practices are constitutional, etc. And makes situations like this electoral college scam being set up in California completely impossible.

This is the states’ rights principle in the United States. You really have two standards, standards for federal elections and standards for local elections. Check out blackboxvoting.org if you want to become aquainted with the ins and outs of the mechanics of voting and fake (physically present) voter fraud versus real (retail)election fraud.