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.
Identifying voters is fundamental to ensuring free and fair elections under the premise of 1 person = 1 vote.
Also constitutional rights frequently require a picture ID to exercise. Do you have to show a valid ID when buying a gun? When obtaining a passport (the USSC says you have a constitutional right of traveling outside the country)? When registering to run for office? Yes to all 3.
What California is doing is placing restrictions on candidates beyond that of the Constitution and essentially disenfranchising voters of options.
Would Democrats be fine with requiring neutral medical examinations and handing them over to red state attorney generals to release at his/her will in full or in part?
What about grades and tests scores handed over to a red state attorney to release at his/her will in full or in part?
Because Democrats win the least educated group (and most educated group too to be fair), Democrats said it would be disenfranchising their low-educated voters if Republicans took off party-identification from the ballot so that voters couldn't just vote by party. If Democrats consider it disenfranchising to remove the party affiliation from a ballot - how is it not disenfranchising to remove politicians completely from the ballot based on partisan rancor?
We already have a government agency whose job it is to ensure they are paying their taxes honestly.
Should wevalso make it law we tap their phones and publish their calls?
Why? For all the reasons open and honest presidents have done it in the past.
To disclose any potential conflicts of interest, for one, very big thing.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
California's governor signed into law that you can't appear on the California ballot for president unless you hand over the past 5 years of tax returns to the California Attorney General.
Actually, it is to appear on the primary ballot AFAIK.
I think having an informed electorate is a good thing. Doesn't everyone?
Why? For all the reasons open and honest presidents have done it in the past.
To disclose any potential conflicts of interest, for one, very big thing.
Shouldn't we have recording devices in government official homes and offices so we can make sure they are honest and not making behind the scene deals that conflict with their office?
Let's take the meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch. If there were microphones recording what was being said, there would be no question as to what happened.
Don't tell me you don't want to keep public officials honest and accountable by just recording all their conversations.
Why? For all the reasons open and honest presidents have done it in the past.
To disclose any potential conflicts of interest, for one, very big thing.
Actually the mandatory financial disclosure is much better for disclosing potential conflicts of interest. What it doesn't do so well, which is the current point, is allow Democrats to pick out line items, like charitable contributions, and get the vapors.
I had to fill out a Maryland disclosure for a couple decades. I guarantee you would have learned much more from that (mortgage holder, original mortgage amount, interest rate, from whom the property was bought, adult children's income, any inheritances, etc.) than my 1040.
Shouldn't we have recording devices in government official homes and offices so we can make sure they are honest and not making behind the scene deals that conflict with their office?
Let's take the meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch. If there were microphones recording what was being said, there would be no question as to what happened.
Don't tell me you don't want to keep public officials honest and accountable by just recording all their conversations.
I am quite content with the precedent of tax disclosure. Documentation is required by law for WH meetings, unfortunately Trump tears up all the papers. Poor staff have to sit there and tape them back together.
__________________ ____________________________________________
My posts as a Mod will always be in red.
Be sure to review Terms of Service: TOS
And check this out: FAQ
Moderator: Relationships Forum / Hawaii Forum / Dogs / Pets / Current Events
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.
