US House committee examines requiring ID or proof of citizenship to vote

Status
Not open for further replies.

Desertdog

Member
Joined
Dec 26, 2002
Messages
1,980
Location
Ridgecrest Ca
Guess who is squealing like pigs stuck under a gate.

US House committee examines requiring ID or proof of citizenship to vote
http://kvoa.com/Global/story.asp?S=5069694

WASHINGTON -- House lawmakers on Thursday considered legislation mirroring an Arizona law that would require voters in a federal election to prove they are U.S. citizens and present a photo ID.


The proposal sponsored by Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., would apply similar registration requirements as Arizona's Proposition 200, a voter-approved law that also denied some government benefits to illegal immigrants, to federal elections.

Supporters told the House Administration Committee in a hearing that legislation is needed to prevent fraud.

Opponents argued requiring citizenship papers and an ID to get a ballot would deter countless immigrant citizens and many others from voting.


"Over the past five decades, Congress has never seriously entertained legislation that would reduce participation," said Rep. James Langevin, D-R.I., a former secretary of state. "Regrettably, H.R. 4844 would have that effect and mark a dangerous departure from past efforts."

But supporters of the measure ticked off examples from several states in which non-citizens have voted in recent elections. The public has lost confidence in the election process as a result, they said.

Houston's voter registration officials, for example, have found evidence of illegal voting by Norwegian and Brazilian nationals.

In New Mexico, a host of lawsuits were filed in 2004 dealing with voter identification requirements and ballot access issues.

"Fraudulent registration and fraudulent voting is a problem," said Patrick Rogers, a New Mexico attorney who presented the committee with the voter ID card of a woman holding a green card, who claimed she was pressured to register while standing in line to receive government services.

"This is a simple common sense measure to protect the right of all honest citizens of whatever partisan or ethnic background to participate in our elections without having their vote canceled by a ballot cast by someone who is not legally entitled to vote," Rogers said.

Hyde's bill would require anyone registering to vote in a federal election to provide proof of U.S. citizenship. Voters would have to show a valid photo ID to receive a ballot.

Democrats on the committee vehemently opposed the measure and at points, the hearing grew testy.

Committee Chairman Vernon Ehlers, R-Mich., banged his gavel repeatedly as Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald, D-Calif., asked questions beyond her allotted time, wondering why a new law was necessary when it's already illegal for non-citizens to vote.

Arizona's Proposition 200 was approved in 2004. The ID rules were cleared by federal officials in October and were first used in local elections in March.
 
How about also requiring a panel of doctors from all political parties to certify that one does not, in fact, have one's head rammed ten feet up one's ass before said individual can serve in the US House of Representitives?
 
Here in Wisconsin, Governor Doyle has twice vetoed legislation that would require a photo ID to vote.

He knows he's going to need the votes of felons and illegal immigrants this fall.

The polls I've seen show over 80% support for a photo ID to vote, but certain politicians just don't get it.
 
Committee Chairman Vernon Ehlers, R-Mich., banged his gavel repeatedly as Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald, D-Calif., asked questions beyond her allotted time, wondering why a new law was necessary when it's already illegal for non-citizens to vote.

I'll be happy to explain it to her.
 
I find it amazing that no one questions showing a photo id for so many other things like check cashing, purchashing some items, admission into some places, but will pitch a fit when such a requirement is suggested for an activity that is so important. If we don't do something soon, we will (if not already happening) be having people determining our elections who have no business doing so.
 
Maybe I'm missing something, but I have always had to register first and then show a drivers license to vote :confused:
 
lamazza said:
Maybe I'm missing something, but I have always had to register first and then show a drivers license to vote
Maybe you weren't trying to vote four times in an urban area like STL.

Our governor just signed an ID bill. We haven't had too much of a hew and cry from our leftist newspaper yet. I suppose they will wait until after the next election to show us that "99 year old Minnie May Moppet was REFUSED her right to vote today..."

You can get a state picture ID by going to any Department of Revenue office, and I believe they are doing it for no charge. A few forms of ID probably are necessary.
 
They need to keep a computerized (and instantly updated) record of who is eligible to vote and then make sure only those people vote and only vote once.

Ideas:
-some form of secure ID like national ID with chips and salsa and the whole 9 yards to make it nearly impossible to forge
-use NICS to weed out felons in felon-disenfranchisement states
-invalidate the cards when people die
-update records attached to the cards (in the central computer, not the card) when people lose voting rights


And those of you who feel threatened by national ID need to wake up and realize that your personal info isnt being stored on a chip- your personal info is already out there with easy access by anyone from the IRS to Al Queda to Russian spammers. The ID card simply lets the government verify that you are you and not Jose Gonzales- more importantly it lets the government detect Jose Gonzales when he claims to be you at the voting booth. I feel that overall this is a good thing.

If you dont want the government to track you, stop spending money on credit cards, dont get pulled over by the police and avoid having a job that deducts income. Live in a cabin in the woods like Ted Kazinski. It is possible, but it really involves withdrawing from soceity. Im one of the most devout libertarians and even I dont think National ID is such a bad thing.
 
The ID card simply lets the government verify that you are you and not Jose Gonzales- more importantly it lets the government detect Jose Gonzales when he claims to be you at the voting booth. I feel that overall this is a good thing.
I take issue with a national ID 'cause frankly I don't think our "Leaders" have the competency, much less the motivation, to use said national ID correctly. It will be passed off on the citizens as a "good thing to make you safer" and will quickly devolve into a "Paper's Please, QUICKLY!" situation for a once free people.

On using some form of voter verification, I don't have an issue. I do it here in Colorado with my state drivers license, which I've also shown when registering to vote.
 
purging all the registers and starting again would at least get the deceased off the roles. also,their was an illegal alien mass murderer a crime site says voted twice in St.Louis.
 
I am SO glad someone brought up the classic "Papieren bitte" strawman.

Ask yourself why the germans were asking for people's papers during WWII. Gee, could it have been because they were trying to control who was inside their country during a time of war? I wonder what relevance such a concept might have for America today?

Or maybe I'm wrong! Maybe trying to control who enters your country and votes in your elections is a sure sign that you are a nazi stormtrooper! How dare we try to prevent mexicans, muslim terrorists, drug smugglers or even the entire chinese army from voting in our elections! How tyrannical that africans and chinese and french people can't vote for the American president!

Maybe if we built a fricken wall and tried a few months of "papers please" (followed by chucking people over the wall who didnt have them) and the country might actually return to normal again. What a crazy idea!
 
I guess I was being less than clear beerslurpy, my apologies.

Simply put, I do NOT trust our .gov to use a form of National ID for the nations betterment and border integrity. Giving the .gov power and they will abuse that power, more often sooner rather than later.

I'm ALL FOR building a frelling wall or fences on the southern border, along with chipping the illegals when caught and removing the support mechanisms they rely on while here. Additionally, HEAVY penalties for employers who hire illegals, to the point of converting the employers business to ash on the wind. Heck, I think THIS is a great idea as well.
 
I dont trust the government either, but I trust it even less when Mexicans, dead people and felons are voting. If we can put a stop to that, we might actually make some headway on real issues like building a wall.
 
it's only been a couple hundred years. that's far too soon to dismiss the King's contention that The People are in fact incapable of ruling themselves. this voting thing may be over rated.
 
The proposed laws in Wisconsin would not have required a special state-issued ID card to vote. It would simply require some sort of photo ID that included the person's name and address.

We had a lot of problems with illegal voting here in 2004. In one case, a guy was allowed to vote, even though when he registered, he showed an ID that said FELON in big letters at the top. (Some sort of ID card for felons, I guess).
 
Another problem state is Maryland, its illegal (either a law or state supreme court decree) to require ID to vote, since that would discriminate against the poor who cant afford the $5 for a state-issued ID card.

The least they could do is dip fingers in ink. :banghead:

Kharn
 
If the government does not protect aganist illegal voting it is infringing on my vote. My vote as a legal citizen should be protected.
 
since that would discriminate against the poor who cant afford the $5 for a state-issued ID card.
Since the states and Federal Gov give "the poor" so much now, such as medical, dental, food stamps, welfare checks and other things, MAYBE they will let them qualify for state paid ID cards.
 
In Georgia, the state made a free ID option available when they mandated ID to vote in order to quell the legal pressures that the ACLU was applying. The ACLU was still applying pressure to the staqte since the people would need to travel to get an ID.

In Connecticut, they always check the DL when you go to vote in person, and they then check you off the list. They also check ID (1 or 2 forms, I forget) when you bring your application to the registrar of voters. However Absentee voting is more lax. Anybody can get as many ballot request forms as they desire (just sign for them). Fill it out, and if your info matches a registered individual, they send it to the registered address, or another one if you so need or desire. Then, just mail in the ballot. At the polling place, the record sheet indicates that you have an absentee ballot. In theory it is good, but I believe it would be very simple under the current system for anybody to rig a local or state election and definetely influence a federal election, if they got a hold of the lisdt of registered voters (public info), and applied for the absentee ballots. I believe there needs to be some tougher standards on absentee ballots.

However,k it is good to require citizenship and proof thereof to vote in a federal election. Several locales have been promissing these illegals the ability to vote, but this should help curb the effects of that.

I should mention that no system is air tight. There was just a scandal where DMV remployees are now facing felony charges for providing DL's (including commercial with HAZMAT endorsement) and State ID's to illegal immigrants. 100% real looking because they were made at the DMV office, and the numbers were even entered into the computer system.

We had a lot of problems with illegal voting here in 2004. In one case, a guy was allowed to vote, even though when he registered, he showed an ID that said FELON in big letters at the top. (Some sort of ID card for felons, I guess).

Isn't it possible for a disenfranchised convicted felon to get his voting rights back upon copmpletion of his sentence (jail time, paraole, probation, fines, community service, whatever else the judge thinks of....)?
 
I believe there needs to be some tougher standards on absentee ballots.
I fequently vote absentee ballot and the only protection I see is the fact they have to mail it to a legal address.

I would hope they will someday check the voter rolls and see how many people are receiving their absentee ballots at one address and if there appears to be an unreasonable amount of ballots, send an inspector out to check IDs.

Unreasonable, to me, would probably be about 5 at one address. 10 or more would really arouse my suspicions A quick phone call to an address would determine if it was a retirement home, nursing home, jail or other place where people do not have a personal address.
 
I don't believe that I should be forced to show a National ID in order to vote. I have voted for almost 40 years without being required to prove to the 'authorities in power' who I am.

Neither do I have a photo on my driver's license. The less photos the government has of me, the better.

I have worked in countries where the military police set up checkpoints and people were required to present their papers. I don't like having some paratroopers shove a SMG in my ribs while I reach for my 'Nacionale ID.'
 
The least they could do is dip fingers in ink.

Works in Iraq, dip your finger in ink that won't come off for a week. Not only do you get to show off that you voted, it is also protection against double voting. I have to show ID when I vote, but they just use that to check my name off of the big list they have of all the voters. Plus we use optically scanned ballots in ND. Instant count, the machine error checks the ballots, and there is a paper trail should someone cry foul.

As a bonus compared to Diebold machines, you only need one of these machines at each polling place and they do not have to be connected to a central computer. Program them at a central location, seal them up, move them to the polling place, run an error check, and open it to the public. If someone FUBARs the programing they just take all the paper ballots and run them through the machine with the correct settings.
 
WT, you may not like the ID requirement. However, without it, someone else may be cancelling out your vote.

Or, worse, you may find yourself turned away at the polls because somebody already voted under your name. That also happened here many times in 2004.

Voter fraud is a big problem now, and it's only going to get worse.

BTW, how do you manage to buy guns without a photo ID? None of the stores around here will sell a gun to someone unless he/she shows a photo ID.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top