Being housebound and largely immobile is "the big hassle" and one needn't be in their nineties to be in that condition. Make a proposal on how those people can be accommodated without hardship. Now address everyone else with a different hardship. Now tell us to what purpose is all this happening when this type of voter fraud is, at worst, extremely rare.
Okay, got it, Stokes, you'll be providing transportation and medical assistance to anyone in the United States who does not have the ability to get themselves through the hoops these politically derived proposals require. Or it's okay with you to restrict voting to the hale and hearty.
Requiring any monetary expense is the equivalent of a poll tax and is unlawful. Exactly how does "South Carolina make available IDs for the purposes of voting?" What are the mechanics of the process that accommodate all legal would-be voters without hardship? Have no idea why strike-through is happening here; please disregard.
I think there is a massive subset you are conveniently ignoring by pulling on the heartstrings with the transport and medical assistance red herring. _
Medical assistance is certainly not a red herring, it is something I believe you have been personally familiar with. Our society protects the weakest; when we find they can be accommodated we can deal with the whiners later. There are about 700,000 WWII veterans alive today with approximately 430 dying each day; few are in good health. Their non-veteran contemporaries are a larger number and are no better off healthwise. Millions of people die in nursing homes and hospice care annually, how many of them can meet the ID requirements being called for? How many people vote each year using false identities?
Your post is BS -- The left is very much portraying this as a lower socioeconomic hardship. And I am sorry if you want to believe their crap, but getting an ID is not hardship for anyone who wants to get one. If your Vet father gave up his license, then he would have been issued a non-driver ID in its place. My mother in law never drove in her life, when my wife and I bought my in-laws a trip to the Bahamas, she went to DMV to get a picture ID so she could fly (you could be a good son and take your Mom to get and ID if she is still alive). Not only would you not be able to fly, you wouldn't get more than 25 feet into the building in most airports without ID. I was with my wife when she was 35 and had to show ID for a lottery ticket. I show my ID every time I go to the bank and there are many more places like "Citifield" taking it out of the employees hands and making sure everyone is carded. My local grocery store makes you swipe your ID in a card reader to buy beer, doesn't matter how old you are. I am looking forward to having to show my ID to vote this time around for the first time as NC has passed a voter ID law.
Why do you repeat nonsense? Show me one airport that requires ID to enter the grounds or the buildings. My father let his license expire, no replacement given. My mother was not healthy enough in her end years for a field trip to the DMV. They lived over 1200 miles away from me, so I'll just let Stokes handle the transportation and assistance. Corporate ass-covering because they have poorly trained, poorly compensated and poorly educated employees is not an excuse for discrimination by government in a Constitutionally guaranteed right. Why would anyone encourage it to be so? I am looking forward to continuing to exercise the freedoms I have for decades, too bad people like you give up so easily in the face of no threat whatsoever.
A) how do we know that? B) just because something isn't a problem doesn't mean you shouldn't have measures in place to make sure it doesn't become one
I'm talking about the millions upon millions of lazy asses that can't be bothered to get up off the couch. _
if the government got into regulating everything that might become a problem we'd have a big government problem. there are some easy checks and balances that can be done to help prevent voter fraud without taking away people's right to vote. how about we make sure voter registration is synced up with death certificates for one?
I agree with you in theory. I'm specifically talking about voting which is something that the government certainly should be involved in regulating. Otherwise it's a free for all.
how is it a free for all? people have to register to vote and only registered voters can vote at there specified location. if the voter registration database is synced with the postal database and it's updated with death records there isn't a lot of room for a free for all, is there?
What a joke? Where the heck do you live that you get IDed so often? At 27 years old, I rarely get IDed anymore for alcohol and NEVER for tobacco or lottery tickets. And yet, you say this wouldn't affect those of a lower socioeconomic status, yet how many poor people are flying? How many need a drivers license since they can't afford a car? How many have bank accounts since they just cash their checks (at shady places that take advantage of the poor) and pay for everything in cash or food stamps? This whole post is the obvious problem that is those who think voter IDs are a good idea. The only people on this side literally have NO idea what those less fortunate than them have to go through and because it'd be so damn easy for you, you honest to God think it's that easy for everyone. When you are literally living paycheck to paycheck and have to walk or bum rides off people to get places, why the hell would you spend money on a driver's license you have NO use for when you have to buy food and pay for shelter? But clearly that hasn't crossed your mind. The whole voter ID requirement argument is just as dumb as demanding drug testing for welfare recipients. You harm innocent people and accomplish nothing but wasting my tax money on frivolous crusades.
Problem is they don't take is serious enough and because of that most is not investigated fully. When fraud is found, even fraud by poll workers, they release the convicted early and then that person is invited up on stage at a Democrats rally about voters rights. Guess they can't do 2 things at once? I don't see why low voter turnout is a reason to turn a blind eye to voter fraud. They get groceries, make it to doctor appointments and I am sure multiple other appointments but can't go get an ID. Got it. What you consider a hardship to me is people putting the slightest effort into getting an ID. You need an ID to vote, you go to get one and there is no charge. There happens to be a fee to get a replacement birth certificate, are you going to also argue that the bus fare to go get an ID is a poll tax?
It's nice for you that your life is so simple and easy that you can't even perceive how it is for those whose lives are much more difficult. And no, I don't need an ID to vote. I simply go to the polling place and sign in next to my signature on file from when I registered. It's been like this for me for decades. Why should it change now? There has been no problem with people voting as others and to make the changes you support would certainly be a hardship for many and an exclusion for others.
I guess I don't understand what scheme someone could realistically use to use this as a real advantage at the polls. Maybe you can explain.
No one has a right to free handouts. Welfare was intended to help people facing hardship to get back on their feet, which is a noble cause. Unfortunately it has become a lifestyle. If the hard working people whose tax dollars are funding the programs can be subjected to drug tests why shouldn't the people collecting be held to the same standard? In Utah they saved money by implementing this program. They didn't have many show up positive in tests but many more didn't bother to apply for the program when they found out a drug test was required. The few who failed were entered into treatment and still given welfare. It was a net gain for tax payers and hopefully truly helped get some people back on their feet which is the intention anyway. So no, not a frivolous crusade. You probably only hear the tiny numbers for the positive tests and not the number of people who didn't bother applying anymore which is where the tax dollar savings comes in. http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/welfare-drug-testing_n_3822750.html
I think this law is targeting millenials who don't have a license, or a car or the wherewithall to go get a job..........Good law.
