Posted on 01/12/2022 5:09:52 AM PST by Kaslin
A young man who looks like a teenager walks into a liquor store and pulls a bottle of cheap whiskey off a shelf.
He puts it down at the checkout counter and pulls out his wallet.
The clerk at the counter looks at him skeptically. "Can I see your ID?" he asks.
"Yes," says the young man, who instantly takes his driver's license out of his wallet and hands it to the clerk.
The driver's license indicates to the clerk that the customer in front of him had turned 21 two months ago. He sells him the cheap whiskey.
Then another young man walks into the store. He grabs a bottle of very expensive champagne and puts it on the counter.
Once again, the clerk asks the young man if he has an ID.
"No," says the young man.
"Then I can't sell you this champagne," says the clerk.
"You have got to be kidding me," says the young man. "I am 22 years old."
"Then prove it," says the clerk.
"I left my driver's license at home," says the young man.
"Then go get it," says the clerk.
"No, I'll go buy my champagne somewhere else," says the young man, who leaves the store in disgust.
This second hypothetical young man, however, was only 19, which made him old enough to vote but not old enough to buy champagne.
If it were up to the Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives, neither of these young men -- or anyone else -- would need to show an ID to vote.
Last March, 220 of the 221 Democrats in the House -- but not one Republican -- voted to pass the "For the People Act."
The introduction to the bill claimed it had the following purpose: "To expand Americans' access to the ballot box, reduce the influence of big money in politics, strengthen ethics rules for public servants, and implement other anti-corruption measures for the purpose of fortifying our democracy, and for other purposes."
"Congress also finds that States and localities have eroded access to the right to vote through restrictions on the right to vote including excessively onerous voter identification requirements," said the bill.
One section of the bill carried this title: "Permitting use of sworn written statement to meet identification requirements for voting."
"Except as provided in subsection (c)," it says, "if a State has in effect a requirement that an individual present identification as a condition of receiving and casting a ballot in an election for Federal office, the State shall permit the individual to meet the requirement -- (A) in the case of an individual who desires to vote in person, by presenting the appropriate State or local election official with a sworn written statement, signed by the individual under penalty of perjury, attesting to the individual's identity and attesting that the individual is eligible to vote in the election; or (B) in the case of an individual who desires to vote by mail, by submitting with the ballot the statement described in subparagraph (A)."
"The Commission," the bill said, "shall develop a pre-printed version of the statement described in paragraph (1)(A) which includes a blank space for an individual to provide a name and signature for use by election officials in States which are subject to paragraph (1)."
So, if this bill were to become law, a person could simply sign a pre-printed government form and drop a ballot in a mailbox without presenting anyone with an identification.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minnesota) has offered a slightly stricter bill in the Senate. It is called the "Freedom to Vote Act."
One part of this bill is headlined: "Voter Identification and Allowable Alternatives." It says in part: "If a State or local jurisdiction has a voter identification requirement, the State or local jurisdiction -- (A) shall treat any applicable identifying document as meeting such voter identification requirement."
"The term 'applicable identifying document' means, with respect to any individual, any document issued to such individual containing the individual's name," it says.
It then stipulates that this document can only have expired within the past four years. "The term 'applicable identifying documents,'" says the bill, "shall include any of the following (so long as that document has not expired or, if expired, expired no earlier than four years before the date of presentation)."
Some of the "applicable identifying documents" then listed in the bill are completely reasonable: "A driver's license or an identification card issued by a State, the Federal Government, or a State or federally recognized Tribal government."
Some are more dubious: "A bank card or debit card."
So, if this bill became law, a debit card that expired in 2021 would be valid identification for someone voting in 2024.
It is not unreasonable in the 21st century to require people who want to vote to demonstrate that they are legally eligible to do so by presenting a valid form of identification.
Yeah, but they’re all like. CONvid IDs yes. Voter IDs NO! WTAF? Wake up people!
You do know the long game for the left is to require proof of covid shots to vote right?
The DEMOCRAT CHAMPAGNE LIAR buyer would just Take it!!!
Make no mistake, anyone who is against voter ID requirements has absolutely no serious interest in voter integrity.
Maybe, but in “communities of color”, requiring proof of getting “jabbed” might not be the best way to “get out the vote”.
Hey, I know! Just present your vaccine card! Shirley everyone has one of those, right?... RIGHT??
The democrats, through decades of manipulation, has created the most fraudulent voting system in the entire world. The gop has put up very little resistance
How’s this for election reform.
1. In person voting only unless you’re an invalid
2. Finger dipped in blue ink to get your ballet
3. Valid state issued ID to get your ballet
4. Ballots serialized and watermarked
5. Ballots must be hand counted at the poling place, witnessed by representatives by both parties
6. Ballots stored and archived for at least 60 years
7. Minimum 10 year sentence for election fraud
8. Must be registered to vote at least 60 days before election day
9. Must re-register if you haven’t voted in two consecutive elections
I agree with most of your points except the dipping of the finger in ink.
I'd say that if you get caught trying to cheat or did cheat and voted, you'd have your hand dipped in sulfuric acid {you pick the hand}.
He stopped voting about 5-6 years ago, because I had to go with him to se voting booth and tell him for whom to vote, and that is not good.
The blue ink is to prevent double voting. I remember seeing pics of Iraqi women proudly holding up their blue fingers after voting for the first time and thinking they really need that in Chicago.
Didn’t bother to read it, don’t need to.
“Voter ID Requirements Make Sense”
THAT is a stupid statement, like water is wet and bears poop in the woods and ducks pee in the pond.
OF COURSE Voter ID Requirements Make Sense!
This idea that Voter ID Requirements are racist or discriminatory must have been an early use of “Mass Formation Psychosis”.
Being anti-voter ID is absurd, bizarre, Bizarro, crazy, curious, foolish, insane, implausible, inconceivable, incredible, kooky, laughable, ludicrous, non-comprehensible, nonsensical, odd, outlandish, peculiar, preposterous, ridiculous, screwy, strange, surreal, unbelievable, unimaginable, unreal, unthinkable, wacky, weird, wild.
NOTHING about voter ID is negative. So WHY are the left so vehemently opposed?
“Mass Formation Psychosis”.
Or have a legitimate, provable reason for being unable to do so and submit proof in a timely manner. A signature and fingerprint required for verification of the ballot.
Actually, your legitimate vote can be canceled by ONE fake ballot.
It will be reversed by two fake ballots.
I’ll add two to your excellent list.
10) Repeal RCV wherever it’s in use.
11) Go back to dumb voting machines.
Why do folks think those RCV provisions are snuck into so many pieces of legislation?
Because with RCV and RCV-enabled voting machines, even if every voter is a legal voter, Deep State can STILL steal elections.
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.