Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Many constitutional rights require a photo I'D. Buying a gun, running for office, passport, etc...
No Democrat sincerely believes that constitutional rights shouldn't ever need a photo ID.
Oh, I wasn't addressing that. I see nothing wrong with ID for voting.
It was the insinuation that driving isn't a right. Yes, it's not explicitly covered in the constitution as a "right", but neither are most things.
with that said, I think it's highly nonsensical to believe that an ID infringes on our rights. It really doesn't.
I didn't ask. I am guessing that wasn't an issue back in the 60's when her husband was a Vietnam vet. She and her husband both ended up working for the VA.
I didn't get a certified copy of my birth certificate until I was 51. I thought that the hospital certificate was my birth certificate (the one with the footprints). That was good enough in Tx in the 70's to get my SS card and driver's license. Was never asked to show any other proof of ID to vote or get employment. It is not easy for some people to get ID. Especially older people that were born at home. Times have changed. They need to make it easier and free to get a simple ID to vote with. The lines at the DMV to get my drivers license changed from TX to NM were huge. It took me 3 hrs.
I didn't ask. I am guessing that wasn't an issue back in the 60's when her husband was a Vietnam vet. She and her husband both ended up working for the VA.
I didn't get a certified copy of my birth certificate until I was 51. I thought that the hospital certificate was my birth certificate (the one with the footprints). That was good enough in Tx in the 70's to get my SS card and driver's license. Was never asked to show any other proof of ID to vote or get employment. It is not easy for some people to get ID. Especially older people that were born at home. Times have changed. They need to make it easier and free to get a simple ID to vote with. The lines at the DMV to get my drivers license changed from TX to NM were huge. It took me 3 hrs.
My dad was drafted in WWII, he was also born at home. The military created a birth certificate for him as well as a middle name because he didnt have an official one. The military is pretty anal about that stuff, even in 1960.
My mother was also born at home in 1930 as were most people in the rural south. She obtained a bc because she needed one to get a SS# to work as did most of the folks born at home during that time. I realize it takes a bit of effort but very few people get to 70 without a BC or SS#.
How old am I???? I just don't understand all the controversy about having to provide ID in order to vote. I always was expected to show picture ID and my voter registration card or I would not be allowed in to vote. What is the big deal? Those folks who seem to be complaining about providing or 'not being able to afford' ID are more than likely here illegally, right?
Koale
I wouldn't really call voter ID a controversy, unless we are granting that every issue that someone decides to spin for political gain is controversial.
Examples:
Gender identity is not controversial. Males are males and females are females.
Its been spun for sociopolitical gain.
That borders are logical is not controversial. They are logical in historical, economic, and every other categorical sense.
Its been spun for sociopolitical gain.
Voter ID is not controversial. ID is insurance for the continued political effectiveness of our hard won right to vote, via voter fraud protection, and the integrity of our democratic institution in terms of both the public trust and its political practicality (illegal voting makes the institution politically impractical).
The issue has been spun for sociopoliical gain, because those who would gain would do so from illegal voting.
A voter ID card isn't going to be able to cost anyone anything.
Correct. Poll taxes are unconstitutional.
A concerted, government-funded effort to make sure that each and every eligible citizen was issued a robust voter ID at no cost in time and funds on their part - that would be something to applaud. But that's not what we're seeing, is it?
The issue has been spun for sociopoliical gain, because those who would gain would do so from illegal voting.
Nonsense. Republican politicians have already admitted that they're pushing for higher voter ID requirements (and other changes towards making voting less convenient and easy) because doing so favors their core constituents.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Geez...
