Hm. I agree with this, seeing as how some of my friends still don't have an ID. (However the overlap between the ones who don't have an ID and the ones who don't vote anyway is rather large.) Also, I read pretty much all of your posts so you should go read mine. :P This latest one applies to you and your argument buddies. lol. *blatant self-plug.*
former Florida republican chair person Jim Greer testified under oath that during a closed door meeting of Florida republicans it was decided they had to do something to keep blacks and Hispanics from voting so Obama would not be able to win Florida again. this meeting launched their so called "voter fraud" laws which are really voter suppression laws. here's one link that contains two additional links:
a couple of weeks ago Pennsylvania state House Republican leader Mike Turzai slipped up when he told others at the State's Republican Committee Meeting the new Pennsylvania voter I.D. law will assure Romney will win the State. his words wound up all over the news and on youtube. here's one link:
this rash of voter fraud laws put forth only by republicans in red and swing States is nothing more than a coordinated effort to keep as many likely democratic voters from voting. it's about the most un-American, no...anti American thing one could do and republicans are doing it.
And in Ohio the scam is that you can vote on more days and more hours if you live in a Republican leaning county than if you live in a Democrat leaning county. The counties get to set their individual voting hours, i.e. whether nights and weekends are open. Rachel Maddow covered this:
Number three is the main objection I've always had to the concept. It seems to me that, at the absolute least, if government is going to require an ID to vote, then it assumes an obligation to issue IDs for free.
@Mugo60 - Any evidence behind "Election fraud is rampant"? From what I can see, the only fraud is done by the politicians (Bush v Gore, all the voter ID laws being passed, registration restrictions, etc).
@TheTheologiansCafe - Look at the stats in the post. It's poor people and minorities that don't have IDs. And by forcing people to buy a government ID before they can vote, it's very much like a poll tax. Unless the government starts making driver's licenses, passports and other forms of ID absolutely free, this is just voter suppression.
@GodlessLiberal - It's simply another way to enforce laws already on the books. Many states already have laws that you are to carry a state issued ID even if you don't drive. But I guess it's ok to folks like you and your commenters that my wife wasn't allowed to vote in the last election because "she already had."
@GodlessLiberal - Because no ID is required to vote, one can go in, and claim a name and/or address and vote. Someone did that, using our address, then claimed to be my wife. When we went to vote, my wife was not allowed to vote because someone else already voted using our address and her name (in NJ you give address first, then name. But once you give address, you can see the name in the book in front of the worker) When my wife pulled out her ID's to prove she was who she said she was, they didn't care. There was nothing they could do.
By arguing against having to show ID to vote, you're saying that it was perfectly fine that someone saw the book, pretended to be my wife, and her vote was never counted, even possibly went the other way.
One needs an ID to do almost anything anymore. Bank transactions, marriage permit, job application, SS application, etc. So the argument that these folks dont' have an ID is pretty weak, because if they're that poor, they need an ID to apply for the benefits they recieve.
What's really telling is that the majority of voter fraud cases over the last 20 years have been through the absentee ballot system, but Republicans don't want to reform that because the poor, elderly, and minorities (who strongly vote democrat) don't use that system as much. It's predominantly used by higher income people who are more predisposed to voting Republican. They clearly only want to pass voter ID laws because it would make it more difficult for the poor, elderly, and minorities to vote, which would help Romney get elected come November.
Like many political efforts by Republicans, there is a clear discriminatory motivation behind these initiatives, and they're pretty ugly and likely unconstitutional regardless of how it is written (voting is expressive conduct, the law is likely unconstitutional if it's facially discriminatory against race or both has both a discriminatory intent and discriminatory impact). Unfortunately, the legal process is slow. It's no coincidence that the Republicans are frantically trying to push all these laws through right before the election. They are hoping that there won't be enough time to challenge these laws right before the election.