NC voter ID bill gets final House approval

[struggle4progress]

Source: Associated Press

By GARY D. ROBERTSON
Associated Press

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) - North Carolina House Republicans have completed their part in the push to get a voter identification bill passed in the Legislature, and it still appears they'd be a few votes short of overcoming any potential veto by Democratic Gov. Beverly Perdue.

The House debated for two hours Thursday a bill that mandates people show photo identification before casting ballots. Lawmakers approved it by a vote of 66-48. It now heads to the Senate ...

Read more: http://www.wect.com/Global/story.asp?S=14878174

[barbtries]

1. then i should write to her

and urge to veto it. those BASTARDS.

[SaveAmerica]

2. I believe she will but she definitely needs to know you want her to.

[barbtries]

4. i did.

told her to veto all the abortion legislation crap they've passed as well. gawd i despise republicans.

[George Wythe]

3. I don't understand. All it says that you have to have a photo ID to vote.

I suppose it would be a hassle if you left your ID at home or something, but you can still vote and verify the validity of the ballot later.

[barbtries]

5. this is another way

to stop poor people from being able to vote.

[George Wythe]

14. Are you suggesting that poor people are the only ones who are forgetful?

[barbtries]

23. what?

NO.

[George Wythe]

33. Well then, it settled.

Since it is also possible for rich people to forget their IDs, this requirement does not target poor people.

[An American in Paris]

48. The point is that IDs cost money

And the poor and the elderly are least likely to have photo IDs. We know this to be a fact. It has been demonstrated statistically.

In a number of states where photo IDs are required, the courts have ruled that if the ID is mandatory for voting, the public has to bear the burden of the cost.

All the photo ID bills now being passed across the country mean hundreds of millions of dollars in spending.

Check out this link to a PDF document written by Donna Brazile of the DNC Voting Rights Institute entitled "The Real Cost of Photo ID" -- http://assets.democrats.org/pdfs/RealCostofPhotoIDFinalDraft5172011.pdf

Meanwhile, there are states like Texas where a photo ID law has also been passed. Proponents say student IDs can be used, which is true. But the vast majority of student IDs issued in the state don't include the information required by the new law. So, to vote, Texas students will have to show up at the polls with their student ID and their birth certificates!

Is it making sense now??

[George Wythe]

51. Not really. Do you believe that you should have to state your name before voting?

[An American in Paris]

94. I don't understand

Not really? You mean IDs don't really cost money?

But I guess you're just asking rhetorical questions or trying to be funny.

[mwooldri]

118. Yes.

It's required, especially if you forget your voter registration card.

[lark]

112. Ding ding chicken dinner

That's the entire purpose of the law. They want to keep all the "unwashed masses" from voting, that's 100% the reasoning behind this. They are losing the demographics war, and are cheating - AS USUAL!

SICKENING BASTARDS!!!!

[barbtries]

6. no you can't.

"The House debated for two hours Thursday a bill that mandates people show photo identification before casting ballots."

[boppers]

7. What about people who don't have ID?

1. Should a citizen be required to carry identification (papers please)?
2. What if they can't afford to pay the fees for an ID, should the poor not be allowed to vote?
3. How about the blind people who cannot sign forms, should the blind not be allowed to vote?
4. What about homeless people, who cannot show proof of residence, should the homeless not be allowed to vote?
5. How about the elderly who haven't driven in years (so no driver's license), should the elderly not be allowed to vote?
(etc.)

This is about suppressing the vote of the needy, the disabled, everybody who *isn't* a generic, average, driver.

[bbinacan]

8. You can get an ID

even if you can't drive. Ask anyone that has had a suspended DL.

[boppers]

10. It's not about whether or not it's possible.

It's about *requiring* somebody to do it, which would make it unconstitutional.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poll_tax
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harper_v._Virginia_Board_of_Elections

[bbinacan]

11. It just seems to me that

to protect your own vote, you'd want some kind of verification.

[boppers]

15. So, if somebody votes as you with a fake ID, how does that protect your vote?

After all, you already voted. The ID proves it.

[bbinacan]

16. If they vote before me

I can't vote.

[struggle4progress]

41. When somebody steals your identity, they want your money, not your voting rights

A person, who goes to the trouble and expense of getting a forged ID card in your name, is going to try take advantage of your credit: there's no payoff to offset the additional risk associated with wandering into your precinct to vote in your name

[boppers]

70. Given the Tubman avatar, that is hilarious.

You don't think that votes are worth cash, *especially* for those with crappy credit scores?

Huh.

[George Wythe]

13. So, do you think someone should be able to withdraw money from a bank without showing an ID.

(I'm not talking about ATM transactions--they are limited to small amounts)

[bbinacan]

17. Good point. n/t

[brentspeak]

19. Do people go to polling places to withdraw money from their bank accounts?

[George Wythe]

31. The real question is: Why do they require an ID to withdraw money from a bank?

:think:

[Tunkamerica]

36. yes that's the real question in a thread about voting. Id for withdrawals over $500

at a bank. Good luck with your fallacious arguments.

[brentspeak]

64. No, that's the wrong question -- but the right question if one wants to change the topic

Since you've posted elsewhere your support for voter ID, it only makes sense that you would also transparently attempt to deflect my rhetorical question.

[boppers]

20. Yes, because everybody is rich enough to have a bank account?

So rich they could withdraw more than an ATM could give them?

Besides, we aren't talking about banking, we're talking about voting.

[mwooldri]

116. I do it all the time.

They *know* me at the bank.

ID not required.

[saras]

44. You can. It costs money.

In some places a suspended DL is treated better, because that's a 'normal' driver who is temporarily not driving. Permanent ID is for marginal citizens. If you let your ID expire, you can't use it to get another one. So at that point you have to prove your existence again.

It's a poll tax. It costs time, trouble and money, which the rich can more easily afford than the poor.

[alarimer]

90. That's not the point

The point of all these laws is to make it more and more difficult for people to vote. Especially the poor, the elderly or minorities. These are disproportionately Democrats, so these bills are attractive to Republicans as a way to disenfranchise them.

There is no widespread voter fraud in this country. No massive attempts by illegal immigrants to vote, for example, or for people to vote in more than one district. It simply does not happen. But electoral fraud by Republicans does happen, and on a massive scale too.

[MikeW]

9. you can get an alternate photo ID

and sometimes if your buying something your required to show it so its not a big deal.

[bbinacan]

12. Good point

I've been asked to show a photo ID when I've made credit or debit card purchases.

[emilyg]

18. My step-dad never drove. He had ID.

[boppers]

22. Does that mean every non-driver has ID?

I doubt it.

[emilyg]

25. If you want to cash

a check etc - yes

[Zavulon]

40. Expecting proof of ID once every two years isn't a lot to ask.

The law doesn't require people to carry ID all the time, so the "papers please" thing is a bit overboard. There's nothing in the law saying voting is restricted to drivers, either.

If I'm blind and want to vote, I think I can make arrangements once every two years to have someone come with me.

As for the homeless, if we require no ID at all it'd just let people vote repeatedly. Maybe if we had voter ID in 2000, we wouldn't have had to put up with the first four years of the chimp and probably would have avoided all eight.

[boppers]

45. I'm in Oregon. We don't require ID to vote.

Heck, we don't even require people to show up somewhere (which is another insidious voter tax, requiring voters to take the time, and pay for the transportation, to vote).

One name, one ballot, via mail. Done.

We *do* require ID to register to vote, but you only have to do that once.

Of course, we still haven't closed the gap on the homeless, and occasionally somebody goes to jail for doing things like filling out identical ballots for all the residents living in senior care centers, but people aren't having to prove they exist every... single... freaking... time... they vote.

[Zavulon]

81. Once every two years? Not that big of an inconvenience.

A small price to pay to avoid eight years of whoever Chimp II might turn out to be.

[boppers]

82. ...For you.

Do you have to drive 50 miles to renew it?
Do you have to travel to multiple offices, or multiple states, for documentation?
If your house is gone, with all of your documentation, after a tornado/flood/earthquake, how much money should you spend on food, housing, etc. vs. documentation fees to vote?

[Zavulon]

99. In that case, if a few are being inconvenienced,

why not scrap any ID requirement entirely and let people vote wherever they want and as often as they want on Election Day?

When we get another Republican in office who manages to get two terms to fuck up our country, you can sit back and say "Whew, at least a very, very small percentage of people weren't inconvenienced. That's a relief." :eyes:

[boppers]

100. Finger ink.

One solution already exists, without taking the vote away from people.

[0rganism]

108. seems like a lot more than that: municipal elections, local bond measures...

Don't know about where you live, but in Oregon, we have something like 2-4 elections per year, typically.

[struggle4progress]

56. Not much to ask of many people, but much to ask of some, like nursing home residents

[awoke_in_2003]

88. i agree with all you say...

but point one is a reality. If a cop asks for your ID and you don't present one, you will get ticketed for failure to show ID. Years ago I got one while out on a walk, in a nice neighborhood, at midnight (best time to walk in the Texas heat)

[struggle4progress]

27. It's part of a larger Republican strategy to depress voter turnout in 2012

Obama beat McCain by less than 14000 votes here in NC in 2008, so the Republicans want to reduce D voting by something like 150 votes per county in 2012

To that end, they've got a whole bundle of tactics: they're trying to shorten the early voting period, make voter registration harder, and peel off some D voters by ID restrictions &c&c

The elderly, who might be concerned about R attacks on medicare (for example), may rely on others for grocery shopping and transit: at present, you can help an elderly neighbor vote by putting the neighbor in your car and driving to the polls, where the person can vote curbside. If a state ID is required (instead of merely some evidence that the person is who they say they are), it introduces an additional hurdle: you've got to get the person a state photo ID first

There's almost no history of fraud by voters in NC: there's not much incentive for it, and the current laws work

[George Wythe]

32. Should a person be able to get on a plane without showing an ID too?

[struggle4progress]

39. When I was younger, I often flew without showing government-issued ID

Most of the problems we've had with aircraft hijackings are unrelated to ID

[George Wythe]

49. You used to be able to legally drive without obtaining a driver's license as well.

That was then--this is now.

[struggle4progress]

55. That's uninformed history and sloppy thinking about policy. I never drove without a license:

mandatory driving tests and licenses go back about a century now, nearly to the beginning of the automotive era, and the imposition of these requirements was related to public safety concerns

NYT 1 August 1910
START TO ENFORCE AUTO LAW TO-DAY ... the new Callan automobile law .. ridding the State of immature and reckless chauffeurs will begin this morning ... no youth under 18 years shall operate an automobile ... Many drivers .. thought .. they did not need to be specific .. about the number of times they had been arrested ... http://select.nytimes.com/gst/abstract.html?res=F00A14FB395417738DDDA80894D0405B808DF1D3

[George Wythe]

58. I haven't been able to get a straight answer from anyone who opposes this.

Let's see if we can establish some sort of threshold for what you consider to be acceptable.

Do you think that a person should be required to state their name prior to casting a ballot?

[struggle4progress]

59. I've explained repeatedly here why the Rs are pushing this: it's part of a larger

strategy to depress voting. The particular legislation under discussion, for example, is likely to disenfranchise elderly voters who are largely house-bound or confined to nursing homes: that's relevant when one of the major parties is trying to eliminate Medicare

Here in NC, people are already required to state their names to obtain a ballot

NCGS § 163‑166.7 ... A person seeking to vote shall enter the voting enclosure through the appropriate entrance. A precinct official assigned to check registration shall at once ask the voter to state current name and residence address. The voter shall answer by stating current name and residence address ... http://www.ncga.state.nc.us/gascripts/statutes/StatutesTOC.pl?Chapter=0163

[George Wythe]

63. You still didn’t answer the question;

however, I will assume that you are okay with stating your name.

I commend you for levelheaded manner in which you support your viewpoint, but I believe that you are neglecting the importance of efficiently managing the electoral process for a nation of over 300 million people. I live in a rural area and when I vote the registrar greets me by name and hands me a ballot as I’m handing her my ID. It's nothing more than a formality because she knows me as she does many of the other voters. There are just not that many of us.

On the other hand, in densely populated areas, efficiency is a must. And in my view, requiring an ID facilitates the process. I know some people go ballistic when the subject of a national ID card is mentioned. But we already have national ID cards. The problem is that they are primitive little paper cards that haven't changed since the 1930s. Modern technology should have been introduced to the Social Security card a long time ago. I advocate embedding photo and a flash chip into the Social Security card. That way everyone would have a photo ID and the flash could serve many purposes. Your SS records could be stored on it…and if we really are going to have a nation health care system, the SS card could become a SS/Medicaid/Medicare card. Medical and dental records could be stored on it, etc.

Well, I am drifting away from the subject, but I am all about efficiency and accuracy and that is why don't have a problem with this.

[George Wythe]

62. .

[boppers]

65. No, I do not think a mute person should be required to state their name,

or be denied a vote.

Counter-question: How much money do you think is reasonable to charge people, directly, or indirectly, for voting?

The Supreme Court said zero, so any program that increases costs (say, paying for everybody to have a flash card with their ID on it) must be free (as in, additional costs come out of taxes).

Additional counter-question: How do you feel about inking fingers, so people cannot vote multiple times with multiple IDs? (Photo ID is forge-able).

[Dumak]

66. We need a true National ID

The solution is a National ID - required and free for every US citizen, and perhaps a modified version required for any visitor as well. There would be no point in voter registration at all. You present the ID, and then vote. If you are networked with a central database, then you can ensure voters with 2 residences can't vote in both places.


The Real ID proposal would tack the ID# onto everyone's state-issued ID, and thus require people to pay for it, which is a poll tax and is simply not acceptable (and which is why many Republicans prefer it to a true National ID)

[Whitey Joe Young]

68. National ID would breed complacency

The National ID is not a solution to much of anything. As soon as you create it, you create an underground network of forgers and fakers who WILL be able to produce counterfeits. The nation will have a very false sense of security thinking it has tightened things up; in fact, the complacency brought on by thinking this is somehow more "airtight" will cause HUGE lapses and gaps in security.

Others have said it much better than I can. Google it and read about it.

[Dumak]

80. I'm not so sure it will be easy to fake.

Remember, we are entering an era where everyone who needs to check your ID will have the ability to pull up a view of your digitized picture via wireless network, right off the card's internal memory chip, or if necessary downloaded in real time from central database. If the card contains a digitized picture with a checkword, and the checkword can be easily verified via computer network, how do you fake it? You can't just create a fake ID when everything is wired. Apart from security, which I don't believe is a big issue, what is wrong with National ID?

[Thor_MN]

109. You haven't asked many relevant questions.

Just a series of distractions. You have been told again and again that there is no evidence of large amounts of voter fraud, current laws are working, so what possible reason is there to waste time and money by creating new legislation? Since you really don't appear to be answering any questions, I'll provide a couple. It is a republican ploy to repress the voting of blocs of people that tend to vote for democratic candidates. It also provides a scape goat, those evil doer vote frauders, which are those people do not have photo ID, conveniently that same group that tends to vote for democrats...

[JackDragna]

57. Is there a guaranteed right to fly?

No? Nice false equivocation there.

[alarimer]

91. Massive Straw man argument.

no is suggesting the elimination of ID for other purposes. It is simply unnecessary for voting. There is NO voter fraud.

[pampango]

86. Exactly. The fact that it is always republican politicians who push this

should be a big clue that it is not the integrity of the ballot that is the issue behind this. Suppressing likely Democratic voters is the real reason that repubs push this.

As with other issues (taxes, immigration, unions, etc.) repubs hope that their wedge issues can split Democrats/liberals while unifying their anti-poor, anti-gay, anti-immigrant (anti-"other" in general) base. They are pretty good at picking and pushing wedge issues like this.

[paparush]

60. Lots of poor people, particularly urban poor, do not have a photo ID.

If you use public transportation, and don't own a car, you probably don't have a driver's license.

[mwooldri]

119. $2.6 million required for photo ID for a problem that really doesn't exist?

Take away both sides of the argument (voter fraud, disenfranchisement) - and this bill requires NC to spend $2.6 million it doesn't have right now.

[BlueIris]

21. Gross.

No wonder it feels like 1870 in my house today.

[askeptic]

24. Voter Registration cards don't have photos

...but should be sufficient for voting. The attempt here is to try to disenfranchise those who don't have driver's license i.e. poor who usually vote Dem.

[emilyg]

26. I don't mind. It will

keep both sides more honest. I'm tired of dead people voting.

[struggle4progress]

28. Dead people typically don't vote, even if the Rs claim they do

[emilyg]

34. Hi

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Dead_people_voting

[struggle4progress]

38. You've got a handful of incidents there, over many years, none from North Carolina

Current state laws are generally effective

I'm happy if people want to take steps to keep voter rolls up-to-date: here, people drop off the rolls if they stop voting

[Yupster]

54. Harry Carey - the old Cubs announcer

said when he died he wanted to be buried in Chicago so he'd still get to vote.

[supernova]

29. Can't believe I'm seeing

DUers say that "voter fraud" is a real issue.

This is a Repuke solution going in search of a problem that. doesn't. exist.

Wake up and smell the repression, people!

[George Wythe]

30. You should look a little harder for you seem to have missed it.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x4857065

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1257226

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1142700

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=185x2911

[SoapBox]

35. Looks like we have a troll on the premises...keep your eyes on this user.

[George Wythe]

50. People who are easily offended, or who are not accustomed to having their opinions

(including deeply personal convictions) challenged may not feel entirely comfortable here. A thick skin is necessary to participate on this or any other discussion forum.

[boppers]

52. It is against rules to note a poster's count.

Or their familiality with syntax.

[LanternWaste]

105. You appear to conflate "election" fraud and "voter" fraud...

You appear to conflate "election" fraud and "voter" fraud. There is a relevant and precise difference between the two.

[MikeW]

37. no its that

Most people in life dont make a major fking case out of everything.

Except some here on DU like showing photo id.

You have to show ID for LOTS OF THINGS IN LIFE unless you live in a fantasy world.

I mean why do people make a federal case out of everything. Fking relax.

[struggle4progress]

42. It's likely to affect a bunch of elderly voters

http://www.youtube.com/user/DemNCOrg#p/a/u/0/pnelRtYKkrQ

[supernova]

43. The funny thing is

you seem to think that you will always have the "right" ID.

The people who want voter ID want to make it an exclusive right. to as few individuals as possible, possibly even preventing you from voting in times to come. Can you think if a driver's license costing thousands of dollars? I can. So I wouldn't get to comfortable with the idea of voter ID if I were you.

[boppers]

46. Denying the vote to people without driver's licenses, for example.

Then maybe passports.

[emilyg]

47. Amen.

[supernova]

61. You won't have the right credentials either

none of us will.

[MaineDem]

53. Maine is about to do the same. n/t

[MaineDem]

111. Maine Senate voted this down! No Voter ID. n/t

[gort]

67. Any law requiring you to spend money to vote is A POLL TAX

Run with it democrats. Republicans want to TAX you before you can vote. A Poll Tax. Lot's of context there that should resonate with a lot of people. Especially for those who remember the old Jim Crow laws.

[The Croquist]

73. No it's not

Requiring someone to show proper ID is simply common sense.

We'll start with gort:

67. Any law requiring you to spend money to vote is A POLL TAX Run with it democrats. Republicans want to TAX you before you can vote. A Poll Tax. Lot's of context there that should resonate with a lot of people. Especially for those who remember the old Jim Crow laws.

The North Carolina law allows 8 forms of ID including a free one. That still isn't good enough for many people.

http://www.citizen-times.com/article/20110611/NEWS/306110019/NC-House-passes-voter-ID-bill-little-impact-seen?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFrontpage%7Cs

The bill would demand a voter provide one of eight forms of photo ID, including new voter cards that would be generated by county elections boards and offered for free. A person who doesn't have a photo ID could cast a provisional ballot.

Some of the other more hysterical posts:

boppers
45. I'm in Oregon. We don't require ID to vote.
Heck, we don't even require people to show up somewhere (which is another insidious voter tax, requiring voters to take the time, and pay for the transportation, to vote).

boppers
65. No, I do not think a mute person should be required to state their name, or be denied a vote.

supernova
43. The funny thing is you seem to think that you will always have the "right" ID.
The people who want voter ID want to make it an exclusive right. to as few individuals as possible, possibly even preventing you from voting in times to come. Can you think if a driver's license costing thousands of dollars? I can. So I wouldn't get to comfortable with the idea of voter ID if I were you.

boppers
46. Denying the vote to people without driver's licenses, for example. Then maybe passports.

So what we've learned here is that:
Showing ID is a "poll tax".
Requiring people to take time to go to polls is a "poll tax".
Requiring people to go to polls at their own expense is a "poll tax".
That mute people should be exempt from stating their name and that there is a conspiracy that will not allow mute people to vote.
That the next step will be increasing the cost of a drivers license to "thousands of dollars"
That first they will demand drivers license only and then passports only
That anything that costs you money to vote is a "poll tax".

So what's next?
Not getting paid time off to vote is a "pole tax"?
That self employed, retired people and people who don't work that are not paid to vote is a "pole tax"?
That not providing milk and cookies is a "pole tax"?
Free lottery tickets to voters?
Free clothes to wear to the polls? After all, if you walk naked to the polls you will be arrested.
Free gasoline if you vote?


Here in Georgia we have a similar law. After it was ruled unconstitutional, they amended it to provide free IDs to the poor. That still isn't good enough for many people.

The Arizona law allows tribal IDs and many other forms of ID. That still isn't good enough for many people.

[gort]

75. Keep it simple

It's a poll tax. That resonates. People hate taxes. They will hate this

[The Croquist]

76. I guess it's more important to "Keep it simple" then to tell the truth

It's not a poll tax. People can get free IDs to comply with the law. If it's free, how can it be a poll tax?

[mwooldri]

114. Nothing is free. There is a cost to getting that "free id".

Apparently from the same newspaper article you're quoting from, it's going to cost $2.6 million to implement this. That's $2.6 million that is coming from where now??? Who is footing that bill?

A $2.6 million bill that has to be footed by everyone in NC - those without *and* with ID.

Since there isn't the election fraud that the Repukes say is going on and this wouldn't disenfranchise a whole lot of voters - it's a $2.6 million waste of funds.

I hope Governor Perdue vetoes this bill - not because of the issue of the bill itself but that this $2.6 million of extra money could be better spent elsewhere.

Plus the DMV have enough to do. Stood in a DMV line lately? Either that or we'll have to have a whole load of people who for religious reasons refuse to be photographed.

[Whitey Joe Young]

69. Where's the research on voter fraud?

Wondering if anyone has good source material regarding the incidence of voter fraud? This law must be targeted towards that "problem." How much of an actual problem is it?

[Warrior Dash]

71. Everyone has a photo ID...

What's the problem?

[MaineDem]

72. My mother doesn't

Many people don't.

[The Croquist]

74. Your mother doesn't have ID?

Tell me about her.
Does she live alone or with someone? Did she ever drive? Does she ever have to cash a check? Does she fly?
Does she live in Maine? If so, can she afford the $5.00 fee to get an official Maine ID card? It's good for 6 years. That's less then a dollar a year.

[struggle4progress]

77. "As many as 10% of eligible voters do not have, and will not get, the documents"

Policy Brief on Voter Identification
Analysis
http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/policy_brief_on_voter_identification

[struggle4progress]

78. AARP expresses concerns over voter ID impact

http://pulse.ncpolicywatch.org/2011/01/28/aarp-expresses-concerns-over-voter-id-impact/

[struggle4progress]

79. 1M registered NC voters don't have photo ID

http://www.wral.com/news/local/politics/story/9059843/

Voter Registration as of 06/11/2011 ... 6,114,302
http://www.sboe.state.nc.us/

[boppers]

83. Wow. That's.... a lot.

No words.

[Warrior Dash]

84. They are probably all GOPer...

So what's the big deal?

[struggle4progress]

87. I don't know who they are, but if one in North Carolinian voters doesn't have a state photo id,

then an effort to require state photo id to vote could affect a lot of people

[mwooldri]

115. ...including those with IDs.

Sure the bill proposes a free photo ID but it will still have to be issued by the DMV. Most likely one without ID would need to go to the DMV, wait in line for what seems an awful long time - and that's just to vote? Plus there's the regular person who has their photo id (i.e. drivers license), trying to get it renewed - and now has to wait longer as the DMV with their existing staffing levels have to now process voter ID cards.

[Bill McBlueState]

89. Even having photo ID isn't enough

It has to be a photo ID with a current address (at least this is what they're pushing in Ohio) -- this disenfranchises many college students.

[robcon]

85. Voter ID is right and I hope it extends to all 50 states.

Asking for proof that you are who you say you are is simple, just and smart.

[Bill McBlueState]

92. I think laws should be passed to solve actual problems,

not to satisfy someone's vague feelings about how things should be done.

[An American in Paris]

95. Hear hear!

Actual voter fraud is an extremely limited phenomenon.

The League of Women Voters is calling this wave of voting related laws sponsored by the GOP an "assault on voting rights."

And they're right!

[supernova]

93. How much of a poll tax can YOU afford?

How much are you willing to pay to keep the riff raff from voting?

[The Croquist]

96. In North Carolina a state ID is free

It's the same in Georgia so I guess the answer is there is no pole tax in this bill.

Facts. Sometimes they can get in the way of a good argument.

[supernova]

97. No, state IDs are $10 in NC

they are not free.

http://www.ncdot.org/dmv/fees/default.html?s=LF

Facts. Sometimes they are the argument.

[The Croquist]

98. My bad. The "Poll Tax" law will make them free

http://www.citizen-times.com/article/20110611/NEWS/306110019/NC-House-passes-voter-ID-bill-little-impact-seen?odyssey=mod%7Cnewswell%7Ctext%7CFrontpage%7Cs

The bill would demand a voter provide one of eight forms of photo ID, including new voter cards that would be generated by county elections boards and offered for free. A person who doesn't have a photo ID could cast a provisional ballot.

Facts. They are important.

[PavePusher]

102. Anything paid for by taxes is NOT "free". n/t

[The Croquist]

113. Anything paid for by taxes is NOT "free".

What an brilliant post!

I guess by that logic holding an election at all is a poll tax.

Ballots (or sample ballots) have to be printed.
The space has to be rented.
Insurance has to be paid.
The ballot counters have to be paid.
The results distributed.

By your logic(?) the only way to avoid a poll tax is to forbid elections.

PS: Don't quit your day job.

[mwooldri]

117. Poll tax, Scmoll Tax. It's just a waste of good money.

We don't need to be spending $2.6 million we haven't got to implement voter photo ID when the present system is working just fine.

True, nothing is free, and taxes do pay for the running of the elections.

How much has NC wasted on voting machines? We had DRE machines in Guilford County. Fortunately the law has been changed to require paper verification so it's now optical scan. But still... waste of money.

[LanternWaste]

106. You appear to conflate "proof" and "evidence".

You appear to conflate "proof" and "evidence". Both the Voter registration card and your Voter ID would merely be evidence rather than a proof.

As my voter's registration cars "says I am who I say I am", it seems that the job of your ID is rendered redundant at best.

Unless of course you believe that a card with a picture on it is indeed a Proof, and cannot be tampered with. If so, one would have to deny the existence of fake drivers licenses.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

110. That's a very rational hope.

It'll benefit your folks greatly.

[PavePusher]

101. I'll bet $5 that the majority of the people here against a voter I.D.....

are practically hysterical about pushing for requirements to have multiple I.D. to buy, own and carry firearms.

But I guess it's O.K. for some Civil Rights and not for others....

[LanternWaste]

107. I imagine we often pretend we know what other people think

I imagine we often pretend we know what other people think if it helps us validate our pre-conceived beliefs better...

[lynne]

103. GOOD! I have no problem with it and think every state should do the same -

- You need a picture ID to get a job, to buy a gun , to open a bank account, to cash a check. It's almost impossible to exist in this day and age without one. It is a GOOD THING to insure that our voting system is honest and accurate.

I've yet to see any compelling documented data identifying the number of registered voters that do not have picture ID's to make me think that this is not a good idea. And certainly the state could provide discounted or free picture ID's via the DMV for those who cannot afford to buy one.

[KamaAina]

104. Democrats want more people to vote. Republicans want fewer people to vote.

'Nuf ced.

[Warrior Dash]

120. Hopefully, everyone wants "real" people to vote.

[ej510]

121. There are republicans posting on this thread.