Then they must still renew their voter registration every 5 years. How hard was that Steve?

For the elderly and the poor, who may not drive or have ready access to transportation, it can actually be quite difficult. (Which is kind of what you "Voter ID" cheerleaders are counting on, isn't it?)

"what you "Voter ID" cheerleaders are counting on, isn't it?)"

Sure, but only if you want to ascribe the worst possible motives to those who are calling for more secure voter rolls. But that is just not the case.

All states with approved Constitutional voter ID laws offer provisional ballots for those without the proper ID.
Courts are showing us that voter ID's are legal and constitutional and not a burden on minorities.

""The judges noted that about 95% of South Carolina registered voters possess the approved photo IDs. That includes 96% of whites and 92% to 94% of African-American voters." In SC.

DawnP, if those groups like the NAASCP want to HELP their people isntead of calling others racists, they would start a fund which YOU can contribute to, to PAY for any cost associated with getting the proper documentation and ID. They could run bus service to the places to get the ID's I would contribute myself.
They should HELP get people ID just as they do to get people REGISTERED!

Instead they want to cry racism which is all they are good for any longer.

DawnP, what the heck are you talking about, "voter ID cheerleaders", now that is a very ignorant statement. How the heck do you think that people get to cash their welfare checks, social security checks, personal checks, etc? I go to the bank and have been a customer for almost 30yrs there to make a transaction and I am still asked to show ID at times. You dawnp are voter ID ignorant.

Cashing checks at the bank isn't protected by the Constitution is it?

B.Allen
Banks frequently take a wide array of non photo ID's as well. When Voter ID laws are written and implemented properly no one has an issue or questions intent. When they are rushed within a year of the election and make getting a free ID a challenge than we question the intent and timing. No one cares about Georgia's law or Indiana's because it is well implemented.

If it costs anything, potentially including transportation costs, it is considered a poll tax and therefore unconstitutional.

"If it costs anything, potentially including transportation costs, it is considered a poll tax and therefore unconstitutional."

And that ruling came from WHAT court?

The 24th Amendment to the Constitution of The United States.
Pick a link:

http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Poll+Tax
http://home.lorettotel.net/~lcarchives/polltaxdefinition.htm
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/poll+tax
http://www.answers.com/topic/poll-tax

And that ruling came from WHAT court?

Homey don't play that game no more. Take it or leave it.

It costs and some people have no need for one!

LOL, Joe, just admit you're uneducated and move on with your life. Doesn't even know what the freakin Constitution is. Lovely.

Ahhh, jagoff is back. Well jagoff, if no court has ruled that idiotic statement then it is still up for debate ain't it?

No court has yet ruled that any cost for the ID is unconstitutional as a "poll tax".
That is just the racist meme the pigressives need to push since that is the basis of their opposition to voter ID. Without bringing in their racist accusations they have zero case against voter ID.

Joe the recent SOuth Carolina Ruling did. It was cited by the three Judge Panel that their two big reasons for allowing the law was that they left open a wide interpretation of reasons for not having one and signing an Afidavit instead as well as the issuance of Free Id's at any time and thye would even provide the ride to the MVA! The only issue they had was that there was not time to train poll workers for this election and hence the delay. Even the PA judge had a similar ruling the problem was the MVA was not ready to handle the volume of requests.

CB, the court in SC did not rule any costs as a "poll tax".

"The judges noted that about 95% of South Carolina registered voters possess the approved photo IDs. That includes 96% of whites and 92% to 94% of African-American voters.

Despite the disparity, the court found that state election officials had included a "sweeping reasonable impediment provision" that eliminates any disproportionate effect or material burden on voters.

The judges took note of the requirement in the Texas law, which has been blocked in court, requiring many citizens to get a birth certificate that costs $22. And in Texas, unlike South Carolina, many counties lack a place for voters to obtain qualifying photo identification cards.

The court found no comparable issues in the South Carolina law."

http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/10/us/south-carolina-voter-id-law/index.html

The court in the SC case had no issues of any "poll tax" in front of them.
Again, that meme is nothing more then racist language since there is no other defense of no voter ID.

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay poll tax or other tax.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

AMENDMENT XXIV

Would like to disagree that transportation costs are a tax. That from the Leahy Court of Special Appeals. Ever wonder how these folks who don't drive go buy groceries or go to the doctor? They manage somehow, don't they?

Yes Amy but as some have said....a tax is a fee! There is a fee to get an ID card. The only ones which have been found constitutional make provisions for this like Sout Carolina which accepts an affidavit to cast a regular ballott or Virginia and a handful of states which in many cases accept recent utility bills or bank statements! Or Finally offer a free ID 365

With you around Steve I feel like a special ed teacher having to correct my students all the time.

"Voter ID up in Pennsyltucky got shot down." FALSE!

BREAKING: Judge Upholds Pennsylvania Voter ID Law; Opponents To Appeal
http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/08/15/692521/pennsylvania-voter-id-upheld/?mobile=nc

From YOUR fav source Stevie.

"Judge blocks Pennsylvania voter ID law for November election"
""Notably, the court's ruling accepts the principle that the voter ID rules are legal. Unfortunately, the timing of the change meant that Pennsylvanians will have to wait one more election cycle before they can be sure their elections are fraud-free," Cooper said.

In his ruling, Simpson granted a preliminary injunction that temporarily halts enforcement of the law until after the November 6 election. He cited likely disqualification of eligible voters as the reason."
http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/02/politics/pennsylvania-voter-id/index.html

You get no Gold Star for your folder this week Stevie.

you libbies are fooling yourselves. People have ID's, even the poor and the elderly. You just hear what these left wing nutjob groups tell you and you carry their water. Even people on welfare have ID's to get their checks. A friend of ours is here illegally and she and her children have IDs to get a government check.

Steve not everyone has a state ID card. In states like Virginia no one complains about their ID law because they accept a wide array of documents and not all of them need to have a photo. It is the state ID only laws that draw the most consternation and the ones that put up obstacles to obtaining those ID's like you can only obtain one for free on the 5th Wednesday of the month before noon (yes one of the newer laws was written like that). Only 18 States do not require or request an ID.

BTW you are just as gulty as your illegal friend in my book. You enable her extended stay by not turning her in. As to the check are her children US Citizens?

Exactly.

Especially when the "fix" to a nonexistent problem will have the effect of disenfranchising voters.

DawnP, the courts are approving these laws BECAUSE no one is being disenfranchised!!!! What is hard to understand? You continue to push non existent BS that the courts are rejecting.

Just as below, the ruling was that voter ID is legal and not a burden but it was too close to the election to enforce this year. SC now has the same issue.
Even SCOTUS has ruled voter ID to be legal.

The TP story and the CNN story say the same thing. Legal for all but the next election due to timing.

Ahh - thanks for clarifying

If there were any actual EVIDENCE of widespread n-person voter fraud, this would make sense. But since there's no data indicating that it's actually happening, no such "tweaks" are necessary. How can you justify disenfranchising eligible voters to fight a type of "fraud" that is virtually nonexistent?

Steve - except when they might lose an election. Oh, yeah - or be able to monitor all pregnancies.

The funny thing is the only ones worried about losing and voter ID laws is the Democrats. Turn your favorite news channel on MSNBC and you can see the worry.

"Their" causes? I support same-sex marriage. I oppose the DREAM act. I'm neither Democrat nor Republican.

Generalizations are not indicative of critical thought.

Brook
"Their causes" can also be "your causes". These examples just happen to be championed by the majority of Democrats.

Unwarranted criticism is not indicative of competent reading comprehension skills.

If a "high turnout" favors same sex marriage and the Dream Act, doesn't that mean that a high number of citizens are in favor of those things? Shouldn't we have as high a turnout as possible in order to correctly assess the will of The People?

M. Sullivan - EXACTLY! The Democrats want to make sure they stay in power (with the congressional redistricting), get their revenue increase (with expanded gambling) and get more votes (with the same sex marriage and the instate tuition for illegal immigrants). This is one case of transparency which they fail to abide by in any other dealings with the public.

That would be logical. Logic is suspended on the right.

Absolutely.

Good point 1ke, but we may not want this 40 % voting. They don't care about issues, so therefore can't confidently vote on them. These are the same citizens that don't care about their job, home, or children. They are apathetic about their surrounds until the Ravens or Orioles are winning, at which time they come alive, but only for sports.Best leaving their voting excercises for the Fantasy Football League.

And chiiln has a doctorate in demographic psychology? Sounds like it's all figured out. Since they all have that attitude, why shouldn't we just prevent them from voting in the first place - Wait, that's what they're trying to do, right? (and I do mean RIGHT)

Chillin--do you really believe that 40% of citizens don't care about the issues, their job, homes or children? Or is it that they obviously don't understand the issues or care about anything if they are planning on voting for the other party?

You never have to prove your address to get a liscence. It is harder to get your kid in school with your real address than lie about your liscence one!

JustABill, where on earth do you get all your "facts" you always post????

"It is the LAW in Maryland for anyone 18 or over to posses a state issued ID at all times."

This is BLATANTLY and unequivocally INCORRECT.

"By the way 46 other states require everyone 18 or over to posses a state issued ID card"

This is BLATANTLY and unequivocally INCORRECT.

Ummm jag ... You Sir are BLATANTLY and UNEQUIVOCALLY WRONG! ... I have confirmed that this is in FACT a Law in Maryland by several current members of the General Assembly from both parties and also confirmed it is a current law in 46 other states, although some have set different age requirements ranging from ages 16 to 21.

Please cite which COMAR regulation this falls under. I could not find it.

As I thought......you can't!

Oh jesus, JustABill. You already found someone stupid enough to believe you instead of actually, you know, checking the facts.

I have to take a moment to accept the reality of FIFA and I actually in agreement on something. Yes the electronic voting machines should include a printed paper trail in the form of an individual receipt for the voter to view and then give to the election judge to keep if there is a contested vote count from that polling place. This should also be backed up with an internal journal receipt printed with all the votes cast on each machine in a given day for the same purpose.

Only why use the metaphor of the elephant in the room. What if it is a donkey in the room? Is that supposed to be OK? Why not just say while someone cheats the system and leave it at that.

However, voter fraud does exist regardless of how much you wish to deny it does. We have living proof if it in the form of a now former Democrat candidate for congress and as I said even just one fraudulently cast vote is equally as unacceptable as one disenfranchised vote so why not fix both ends of the system in one simple piece of legislation. They could call it the Fair Voting For All Act.

A few things. No one said voter fraud does not exist. The debate is the extent of it. Wendy Rosen would not have been caught requiring an ID. Second of the 869 convictions for voter fraud since 2000. Yes in 12 years that is all the voter fraud convictions in the whole nation. Only 7 of them involved in person fraud. The other 862 ALL involved fraudulent casting of absentee ballotts for registered voters. More common than voter fraud is vote buying which occurs in Appalcia on a much grander scale and also takes place via absentee ballot!

I imagine his use of the elephant metaphor has nothing to do with party and everything to do with the established and long existing metaphor in the english language. It would not matter if it was a Koala Bear in the room!

JustABill - thank you for agreeing with me. The metaphor "elephant in the room" is a commonly used metaphor and is not a political statement. You may use whatever large object you like, I have used that statement for over 30 years largely in an auditing concept. Don't chase little things while the big "thing" is the important one is what was meant by the statement. New "political correctness" I guess.

CB9678 is correct, voter "fraud" does exist, it is just not meaningful as his facts point out. Voter ID fraud rarely occurs and in the case of the dumb Democrat would not have prevented multiple voting.

LOL It doesn't just happen in Appalachia. The Florida Republicans just got busted in South Florida for ballot/voter fraud.

http://www.miaminewtimes.com/2012-10-11/news/florida-republicans-ballot-fraud-2012/

no was talking about vote buying.

Even in conversation or on a blog, we should be striving for accuracy. The lies and misleading statements coming out of this campaign, on both sides, is not only making the elective process a joke, it is making all of us less educated about issues. We should be compulsively checking for the accuracy of all political statements--and yes, we should be letting the "Fact Checkers" dictate the statements coming out of political campaigns. Making up a statistic or a "fact" is lying.

It is easier just to spread misinformation without checking for accuracy, but your grades will reflect that when you get into high school. (I assume from the tenor of your remarks that you are currently in 7th or 8th grade? It was the "get a life" comment that gave it away.) But as I used to tell my children, it is not nice to call people "stupid."