Posted on 04/27/2005 1:56:11 AM PDT by Cincinatus' Wife
More Americans are living at a time when they need to prove who they are. Whether it's getting on a plane or getting a speeding ticket, a government-issued photo ID is required. Equally important is a need for states to require that would-be voters show such an ID before being allowed to vote.
Last week, Georgia legislators passed a measure that reduces the number of acceptable forms of voter ID from 17 to six that are government-issued. They rightly excluded some previously acceptable non-picture forms of ID, such as a utility bill, that made it too easy to cheat.
The shift remains controversial. Democrats argue that the measure would keep many elderly, poor, and minority citizens who don't have a picture ID away from the polls. One study showed 6 to 10 percent of Georgia's electorate lack any state-issued ID.
But that simply indicates a need to get the word out aggressively about the change, if it's approved by the US Department of Justice; the department must ensure the measure complies with the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
Some 20 states now require some form of ID at polling places. Five states already require picture IDs, and 21 more are moving in Georgia's direction. In those states, Democrats and Republicans should also add ID drives to their voter registration efforts. And states can work to help citizens without a driver's license get a free state photo ID card.
Given the problems created by recent close elections, requiring a picture ID is a common-sense move that should help create greater public confidence in elections. It's not too much to ask that a valid, secure form of picture ID be presented when exercising democracy's fundamental right.
Photo ID, and dip a finger in indellible ink to stop double voting, and we'd have vote fraud mostly under control.
I know. It's just a lot of hysteria to avoid getting caught cheating.
Interestingly enough this could go a long way to showing just how widespread vote fraud is. While I have no doubt the MSM will claim any decrease in voting numbers will be due to intimidation, the more likely causation would be fraudulent votes not cast due to the (slightly) more secure system.
I don't know about flying or buying smokes, but as long as we do it at the same time, the lack of a picture I.D. does not seem to prevent us out here in New Mexico from buying alcohol and driving. And who needs insurance? I pay for these dolts' insurance with my own "uninsured motorists." Ah but that's a different topic.
I suspect that New Mexicans could also vote without an I.D. even if there was a law requiring one. Remember, we have Billy Richardson and Billy the Kid.
Muleteam1
The shift remains controversial. Democrats argue that the measure would keep many elderly, poor, and minority citizens who don't have a picture ID --
The BS radar is up! How can they cash the welfar(c)e checks & use food coupons (to buy beer) without proper photo ID??
Remove Democraps from Election Board seats...that would curb most of the vote fraud.
I don't know how one survives without a picture ID, but this sure has Jesse Jackson and others of his race-baiting brothers marching all around the GA capitol. According to him, it's all about keeping people of color from voting.
Picture id's necessary? You bet they are. It's only a matter of time before the felons, derelicts and thieves figure out how to get enough dead people to the polls. And God help us when that happens.
I volunteered this last election (here in GA) and had several hundred people go through my line.
Only one person provided anything other than a driver's license.
...and what political party is it that has manufactured, media wise the right of every living or dead, tom, dick, harry, dog, cat, or pig to vote in US elections. Why none other than the anti-US party, who if they get their way will see to the final destruction of this Republic having also constructed through the media, the use of the word democracy to describe what is truly a republic, and there is a world of difference between the two. Sort of like the difference between the two parties, at the moment, despite their nearness on some issues.
The issue of making it easy to vote is an issue I firmly disagree with. It ought to be made so difficult as to eliminate all but the most honest and patriotic among us. That said, I don't have a personal plan, but have always stood by the first ten amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America. In many cases, the next amendments have done much to inujure what the first ten were trying to protect. The first ten amendments could be construed to eliminate over half of the adult US population from this manufactured right to vote.
I consider the Democrat party, and most of its membership to be so far off the reservation, that they are a physical danger to the rest of us attempting to save the Republic, and it is therefor impossible to comprehend that their membership continues to match that of the other major party, despite the tactics, desires, and stance on the various issues effecting the direction this nation should go. The only democrat I have agreed with on any principle, in the last 20 years, has been Zell Miller who I would guess is the closest thing to the old southern democrat of yesteryear.
If they want the privledge of voting they can darn well get an ID. Many are acceptable.
Hillary is upset about asking voters to produce IDs and she also wants felons to vote.
I live right across the street from the lady that checks ID's at the poll. I have known her for 45 yrs. She still asks for my drivers license.
That's the way it should be.
Picture ID is a daily thing for the military and civilian employees of the military. It's a way of life. I don't feel overly scrutinized by it and it has a good purpose.
Once a fingerprint ID goes onto a voter registration card, it cannot be duplicated with anther name. The person could not hold several cards with the same fingerprint. I realize that people feel that the government having fingerprints on everyone is an invasion of privacy, but name a job these days that doesn't require some kind of vetting? With thousands (millions) of ex-felons out there, I think it is one way to verify who the legit voters are, and possibly to prevent pedophiles and other violent offenders from getting even janitorial jobs at schools, public places...like malls, etc.
Just my opinion. Wished we lived in better days, but we've all been somewhat asleep at the wheel and now we're having to react to a society that was changing, but we didn't take seriously in time to change or halt it.
You need to understand that 45 years simply isn't enough time to really get to know and recognize your neighbor! ;-P
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.