Posted on 01/09/2008 8:22:32 PM PST by My_Name_is_a_Number
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A conservative majority of the Supreme Court appeared ready Wednesday to support an Indiana law requiring voters to show photo identification, despite concerns that it could deprive thousands of people of their right to vote. The Supreme Court is reviewing an Indiana law that requires voters to show a photo ID. At issue is whether state laws designed to stem voter fraud would disenfranchise large numbers of Americans who might lack proper identification -- many of them elderly, poor or minority voters. In what has become a highly partisan legal and political fight, the justices wrestled with a balancing test of sorts to ensure both state and individual interests were addressed. Civil rights activists and the state Democratic Party complain Indiana's law is the most restrictive in the nation. "The real question is, does it disenfranchise anyone?"
(Excerpt) Read more at cnn.com ...
Has any politician ever brought up the fact that it is almost impossible to cash a check without a photo ID? Did anyone ever buy a car battery at Wal-Mart? You must have a photo ID then also. The list could go on and on.
This claim of any manner of discrimination is nothing more than the usual democrat ploy to allow dead or illegals to vote...usually multiple times.
How does she cash checks or use a credit card when they ask for ID?
We already are a banana republic if you recall the 2004 governors election in Washington State
I'm against Ginsburg.
Is a drivers license good enough? It only shows residency, not citizenship. Aren't permanent alien residents allowed to get a drivers license? If so, that still doesn't make them eligible to vote until they become a citizen. How do we show proof of that besides a US birth certificate or a US passport or citizenship documents?
-PJ
People who can’t afford to (or are physically unable to) drive a car can still get state IDs. This is ridiculous. Yes, you have to prove you are who you say you are to get one of those IDs, but if that requirement is too much of a burden, we’re doomed.
Note that those IDs (at least in any state I’ve ever known) are just as good as DLs in terms of identification. You can use them to get a passport, cash checks, etc. The only thing those people can’t do is drive. It seems like a simple and reasonable system to have those same IDs be used for voting. Sheesh.
no , .. not off base , I also remember that TIDBIT
{{ but that was before I had “FlashDrives” , .. hand-me-downs from my son , LOL! }}
How does she cash a check, for example?
She could have gone and got a plain old photo ID like I had to do when my drivers license expired (long story)
I like the opening line in the article: “A conservative majority...”
how about, a Majority!
The Eagle Forum of Arkansas supported Mike Huckabee for governor, and then after the election he basically pooped on all the conservatives who helped elect him. Thus most conservatives in Arkansas will never support his presidential run. The national Eagle Forum won’t have squat to do with the Huckster.
Having to drive a voting booth disenfranchises people without cars and the disabled...who are they kidding?
Well don’t ya think it’s about time ya took Grandma to the DMV and helped her get her state ID?
A lot of that was going on in the 2004 Election in Wisconsin. I was a poll watcher in a precinct in Kenosha and I can give you all kinds of examples of that happening.
If memory serves, Bush lost Wisconsin by 11,000 votes. If Bush had won Wisconsin, then he wouldn’t have needed Ohio.
I’ll just go on record as saying that I’m not for it. No flames, please.
It’s about damned time for this. Voter fraud has been rampant in this country for a long time.
Why are you not for it?
If logic ruled, Liberals would vanish, even if the logic is as Godless as Ayn Rand’s logic....
No bias there, eh?
SNORT.
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.