Should photo IDs be required for voting? (This is why Conservatives hate Liberals)?

Question

The gist of today's NY Times editorial was that the Republicans are trying to rig the 2008 election by requiring photo IDs at voting places. The Times logic is that poor blacks and hispanics who can't afford an automobile are too stupid and lazy to obtain a non-driver photo ID (readily available at local DMVs with a proof of citizenship) by the year 2008. It's a big imposition to expect them to do this and the Republicans are trying to deny people the right to vote by placing unfair obstacles in their paths. The Times says this will result in more votes for Republicans from wealthy white voters who can afford cars. If people take their voting seriously, why can't they make the effort to obtain a non-driver photo ID? What's the big deal? I sure as hell don't want a bunch of "dead democrats" voting in the next election. This ID system seems to make the voting process fair for all. If you're not a US citizen, you shouldn't be voting anyway. If I were black, I'd be insulted.

Answer 1

A photo ID should definitely be required. I look at it as an act of good citizenship when people make the effort to vote. Also, with the political climate being the way it is, I'm sure provisions will be made to help those folks who can't afford the cost of an ID card (although it makes me wonder how they can afford cigarettes). It bugs me too how the Dems have such low expectations for their constituents. I saw that editorial in the Times too and I came away with the same feeling as you. I would be insulted if I was black or Hispanic or poor and people thought I was incapable of obtaining a photo ID. How insurmountable is that? I don't buy for a second that the Republicans are trying to willfully or surreptitiously disenfranchise anyone. But I don't think it's asking too much of our citizens to make a small effort to vote. There are plenty of community/church/school groups who will be more than happy to help the poor and the elderly get a valid photo ID and this is something I would volunteer to do in a heartbeat. The last thing I want to hear is eight years of "The Republicans stole the election" chants.

Answer 2

Well, I'm a Democrat and the last thing I want is a bunch of "dead Republicans" voting. I totally support the photo ID thing and I've always thought it was weird that you don't have to show ID (my polling place doesn't even ask for your voter registration card, just your name!) I do think that a state ID card shouldn't have a cost associated with it; in my state it's $15. For me, that's nothing but nobody should have to choose between feeding their kid and getting a photo ID so they can exercise their Constitutional rights. The editorial writer has a point there... not that poor minorities are stupid and lazy, but that poor people have rights, too and it may not be a matter of laziness that keeps someone from obtaining an ID.

Answer 3

While I don't like or agree with your slamming "liberals"and Democrats , yes, photo ID's should be required.

Look, you need an ID to buy a plane ticket, buy booze if you look young or even open up a bank account at a local bank branch.

Why not have an ID when you show up to vote, to make sure you are who you say you are? There's been a lot of fraud and deceit in the past two elections (dead Republicans I'm sure have voted too). For that matter too, we should also outlaw absentee ballots. You should show up in person to vote!

Other Democracies require a form of ID. Why not ours?

Answer 4

The answer to the question is a resounding YES.

Any reasonable person has to concede that the NY Times has a left wing bias (to put it mildly.) The reason the NY Times is against photo Id's is because it is a way to stop illegals from voting. With 11 million illegals in our country, with more coming in every hour, they are becoming very significant part of the power base for the left. Additionally, photo Id's could be used to stop illegals from collecting Social Security, or receiving free health care. It would stop individuals from voting more than once. The list goes on and on.

What the NY Times fails to mention is that most states have already said that they would go to the poorer neighborhoods, with vans, within their states and give out free of charge, the necessary Id's. If mandatory Id's become a reality I would expect all states would give out Id's free of charge.

Answer 5

You can't buy a carton if cigarettes or a six pack of beer without an id, so how is a photo id at the voting booth a problem. Who doesn't have some form of photo id. Of course, it's easier for dead people and non-citizens and fraudulent voters to vote if no photo id is required.

Answer 6

Voting used to be a right that didn't require an ID particularly to protect poor, stupid and lazy people, but apparently that is changing because Republicans are trying to get the REAL ID program started.

REAL ID will result in everyone, from the 7-Eleven store to the bank and airlines, demanding to see this new ID card. They're going to scan it in. They're going to have all the data on it from the front of the card. This law violates many freedoms and the ID is similar to what is used in Cuba and North Korea. It's going to be not just a national ID card but a national database.

Experts predict the federalized IDs will be a gold mine for government agencies and marketers. Also note that the Supreme Court ruled last year that police can demand to see ID from law-abiding U.S. citizens.

If the government successfully uses the excuse that they need a Federal ID at the polls, for the first time Big Brother will officially be watching.

Don't let the NY Times make you think that blacks and hispanics are the stupid and lazy ones. The white middle class are the ones being snowed by Republican propaganda, there will certainly be Senate approval for use in 2008.

Answer 7

I don't think that having a photo ID is such a large obstacle. They are even talking of setting up ID makers in neighborhoods to help with the issue. In St Louis there was a case of voter fraud and the ID system will help curb the problem.

Answer 8

Liberals have not got self belief the balloting technique ought to have pointless obstacles. the place's the information that voter fraud is adequate of a subject to justify requiring image identity's on the balloting sales area? i've got self belief this may well be a synthetic subject with the aid of conservatives as a manner to justify limitations on liberal balloting blocks. undesirable human beings, who maximum possibly vote liberal, are additionally maximum possibly to no longer pony up $20 for a state identity just to vote.

Answer 9

The Times knows that with picture IDs the chances for multiple voting is nil!

Answer 10

I agree that I.D. should be required. Those poor folks that the Democrats are so worried about, all needed I.D.s to get their government assistance, and they need I.D. to cash a check, or even buy a pack of cigarettes. Am I supposed to believe that people will lie to buy cigarettes, but they won't lie at the polls?

Since the Democrats control most of the major cities, it's certainly within their power to open more polling places. Let 'em put one on every block if they want to, (or at least one on every square mile), then everybody can walk.