Head Scratcher #(n+1)

How is requiring voters to present a state issued identification card in order to vote preventing minorities from voting?

Because it is a poll tax. Ask yourself, is that state issued ID card free?

Also ask: is there a small percentage that can drive, but do not, for whatever reason.
Or, have you ever lost some of the supporting documents required to that card?

Guy, in addition to Sarge's explanation, you need to consider the response from some of your libertarian buddies to the imposition of questions from the 'blue hats'. Some of those folks might also run afoul of state election identification requirements.

Actually, it's a hypothesis. So, I'm waiting to see if someone can suggest a reason why my idea about cutbacks makes sense, or if someone can support it.

OK -- the two conditions that need to be met (in my view) are

1) Is the ID card available for free (you've answered that)

2) Are the requirements for meeting that card free and readily met by all citizens?



[/quote]

yes, it's free.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_ID_laws
[/quote]

Not sure why -- might well have been one of those ploys by the Democrats as well.

That being said, did you note the vote in the House on the modified Simpson/Boles plan this past week. Even with LESS revenue increases than the original plan (in an attempt to gain TeaPublican support), this bill went down to defeat by something like 390 to 35 (with more Democrats voting for this than TeaPublicans).

The thing is, Simpson/Boles is the only serious proposal (although weakened by the reduced revenue increases) out there. The Ryan budget envisions major increases in the deficit, and revenue cuts (tax cuts without any definite cuts in tax entitlements (deductions) ). That dog won't hunt either.

Head scratcher #(n+1)

Why did the US Senate vote 97-0 against Obama's 2012 budget *and*
why did the US House vote 414-0 against Obama's 2013 budget?

Guy, then if item 2 isn't readily met, the requirement can be in effect, a poll tax. The issue there is that allow the requirements to slowly move up over time and the legislation can filter out an increasing segment of the population.

So far some states (particularly in the south) have seemed to want to use this requirement to move toward the exclusionary poll tax approach that was tossed in the 50's. When they avoid this, there is no problem.

As to multiple voting -- doesn't work that way, if you vote at the polls, there is a check off -- and handled by both parties by the way -- to reduce duplicate voting at the polls. At least that is the way it works here in Arizona, (not a particularly liberal state). The thing is, for me, I vote by mail -- quite simple. My wife votes at the polls and since our neighbor across the street is the Republican monitor, she (my wife) doesn't need to show any ID (we've lived here for over 30 years).

I don't want voter fraud either, though I'd note, vote *error* is significantly larger than voter fraud as an issue.

OK -- the two conditions that need to be met (in my view) are

1) Is the ID card available for free (you've answered that)

2) Are the requirements for meeting that card free and readily met by all citizens?

yes, it's free.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_ID_laws

probably not. However, if you can't prove who you are in today's society, that prevents you from doing a boat load of other things also. And if you want to vote (or take out a mortgage, or work in any position of responsibility at any level of government and/or major business, or get a concealed handgun license, or work as a teacher at a public school, or etc ...) then you want to figure out how to prove who you are and do what it takes to prove who you.

If you just want to be able to vote as many times as you want to increase your public benefits, then I'm against that.

Head Scratcher #(n+1)

How is requiring voters to present a state issued identification card in order to vote preventing minorities from voting?

Because it is a poll tax. Ask yourself, is that state issued ID card free?

yes, it's free.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_ID_laws

Several state governments...

Several is not ALL.

---

texas and the other states that are bullying the poor are looking at having the laws repealed.

I really don't see any use for voter cards. Most states require a photo ID of one form or another on your person at all times. Why even bother with the voter card. Just use the ID/Drivers license. No added cost to the card and you already have it in your pocket.

---

In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/washington-secrets/2012/04/coke-caves-face-democratic-boycott-threat/444346

Ah! The attempt to make voters flash an ID card has now been linked to the Trayvon Martin shooting case. This proves beyond all reasonable doubt that we have a bunch of folks (like me) trying to institutionalize racism here in the United States.

Ok, how about a compromise? How about dipping your finger in purple ink each time you vote?

or a tattooed number?

Sorry should butt in on an American thread, but couldn't hold my tounge.

texas and the other states that are bullying the poor are looking at having the laws repealed.

I really don't see any use for voter cards. Most states require a photo ID of one form or another on your person at all times. Why even bother with the voter card. Just use the ID/Drivers license. No added cost to the card and you already have it in your pocket.

Driver's licenses and non-driver ID cards are generally not free, and to my knowledge, not required to be held by all individuals of voting age.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...

... in the current news.

#1:
---
Rick Santorum just advocated emplyers getting away from offering their employees health insurance. Just another way for them to invest less in us, yet still expect us to do a good job for them. Sha, as if. Sure, go with that, Rick. Watch more of America in turn be less willing to invest themselves in their jobs for their employers.

In the US employer paid health insurance, not health care as only the US military does that, began during WWII because of wage and price controls. As wages were frozen health insurance was an uncontrolled incentive to hire on to companies that offered it. Insurance not care lead to a significant variability in coverage as changes in coverage could be made faster than the price control board could freeze the price. If health care had been offered then it would run into price freezes on doctors' fees. With insurance the contractual obligation to cover medical costs trumped price controls.

---

Unvarnished
Haaretz
Jerusalem Post
The origin of the Yahweh Cult

http://washingtonexaminer.com/politics/washington-secrets/2012/04/coke-caves-face-democratic-boycott-threat/444346

Ah! The attempt to make voters flash an ID card has now been linked to the Trayvon Martin shooting case. This proves beyond all reasonable doubt that we have a bunch of folks (like me) trying to institutionalize racism here in the United States.

Ok, how about a compromise? How about dipping your finger in purple ink each time you vote?

or a tattooed number?

Sorry should butt in on an American thread, but couldn't hold my tounge.

American thread?

34 years ago 30% of our oil consumption was foreign imports. Today 70% of ouroil consumption is foreign imports.

I suspect your data may be old:

Wall Street Journal wrote:

When OPEC was at its peak in the 1990s, the U.S. imported about two-thirds of its oil. Now we import less than half of it, and about 40% of what we do import comes from Mexico and Canada.

---

I think you'll find it's a bit more complicated than that ...