|
liberal cries about needing IDs to vote
 As Supreme Court Justice Stanley Matthews wrote in a landmark case in 1886, the right to vote is fundamental because it is "preservative of all rights." Requiring a photo ID to vote, as the Carter-Baker commission recommends, would have a chilling effect on voter participation. It would block some Americans from the political process.Yes, all the dead ones that keep voting. The Carter-Baker recommendations are so restrictive that even a valid U.S. passport or photo ID issued by the U.S. military isn't good enough. Voters must have a driver's license that meets the requirements of the controversial Real ID Act, which set strict standards for obtaining state-issued licenses. Good Such a requirement would disproportionately impact poor people, the disabled, the elderly and people of color, who are all statistically less likely to have driver's licenses. The commission recommended an alternative photo ID be available for non-drivers, but no infrastructure is in place to make those available, particularly for the elderly. In addition, there was no cost assessment in the report. Bullshit. My state of Colorado has ID cards issued by the state at drivers licenses stations. They are just as good ID and you don't need to take a driver's test. You can pick one up at the kiosk at most malls for $15. According to a 2001 election-reform report, 6% to 10% of voting-age Americans don't have driver's licenses, and requiring them would be a "burden that would fall disproportionately on people who are poorer and urban." Instead of poorer and country? This burden will increase as states are forced to cover the costs of the Real ID Act, estimated at up to $13 billion, in part by increasing the price of a new license. Bullshit again. Most states have an ID program already and charge to help cover costs. By adopting the restrictive standards of the Real ID Act, the Carter-Baker proposal also takes us one step closer to a national ID. National guidelines for standardized IDs, and a proposed database for states to share voter-identification information, are the beginning of a "show us your papers" society. While a national ID makes me nervous, there is an upside to some of it. Watch the sippery slope argument lady. Didn't you ever take a logic class? This proposal is nothing new. The Carter-Ford commission rejected a less restrictive photo ID proposal in 2001. If this commission had used a more democratic process, such as giving the public the opportunity to comment, members may have come to a similar conclusion this year as well. A more democratic process for a committee. That is the dumbest fucking thing I have ever heard. The democratic process comes when it is presented to congress, you buttnugget! If we are truly committed to improving the U.S. electoral system, there are much bigger â and more common â voting problems to address, such as inaccurate voter registration rolls, malfunctioning voting machines Evil Republicans make them! and untrained poll workers. Lawmakers should address isolated incidences of You need an ID to rent a movie, but not to vote. If someone can't get their ass to the mall to get an ID, sorry, you ain't gonna make it to the voting booth so I am not that sympothetic. What kind of idiot writes this shit anyway? Caroline Fredrickson is director of the American Civil Liberties Union's Washington Office. Ah, ACLU. Figures. Remember, they can't cheat if it ain't close! Posted by: mmurray821 2005-09-27 |
| http://www.rantburg.com/poparticle.php?ID=130703 |