Proof of U.S. citizenship required for SS number, why not for Voter ID?

[jody]

Your Social Security Number And Card

QUOTE
To apply for a Social Security number and card:

Complete an Application For A Social Security Card (Form SS-5); and

Show us original documents or copies certified by the issuing agency proving:

U.S. citizenship or immigration status {including Department of Homeland Security (DHS) permission to work in the United States};
Age; and
Identity.

Then, take or mail your completed application and documents to your local Social Security office.

Citizenship or immigration status: We can accept only certain documents as proof of U.S. citizenship. These include a U.S. birth certificate, U.S. consular report of birth, U.S. passport, Certificate of Naturalization or Certificate of Citizenship. If you are not a U.S. citizen, Social Security will ask to see your current U.S. immigration documents. Acceptable documents include your:

Form I-551 (includes machine-readable immigrant visa with your unexpired foreign passport);

I-94 with your unexpired foreign passport; or

Work permit card from the Department of Homeland Security (I-766 or I-688B).
International students must present further documentation. For more information, see International Students And Social Security Numbers (Publication No. 05-10181).
UNQUOTE

[cornermouse]

1. proud2Blib has posted about having some problems with

this issue and how it adversely affects her mother. You might want to do a search.

[BeFree]

43. Fact is

The Democrats in the house voted against the bill. Nearly unanimously.

Seems anyone supporting the republican bill for a voter ID is in the wrong place? And supporting the wrong people?

[FogerRox]

68. cornermouse gets it

[thepurpose]

2. Are you saying you don't need proof of citizenship for a voter ID?

If that's so what's the point of a voter ID?

[jody]

12. I support voter ID but many who oppose complain that proof of citizenship

is required, e.g. requiring birth certificates.

[Name removed]

30. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[galloglas]

29. Give it up!

We have never had to prove citizenship to vote.

What non-citizens are you worrying about voting?

Why don't you ask your buddy "jody" to answer the questions she (he) left unanswered last when she scuttled, tail-between-its-legs.

That would answer your pre-programmed ping-pong questions!!

[WePurrsevere]

3. Link to Proud2BLib's post mentioned by CornerMouse.

There are still many alive and able to vote that were born at a time when birth certificates were not always issued. I personally know of three older women that didn't/don't have a driver's license and didn't have a birth cert. One of them didn't have a baptisimal cert either since there was a fire. She would not be able to vote even though she has a DMV issued photo id since it does not offer proof of citizenship.

This is just one reason why the Voter ID bill is not only foolish but unconstitutional.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=2197107

[silverojo]

7. There's no way a person can get through life without such ID

You can't get a Social Security number without a birth certificate.

You can't work without a SS #. Therefore, you can't work without a birth certificate.

If you can't work, then you're on welfare, Social Security, or disability. You can't get ANY of these without a SS # AND a birth certificate.

Even if you were married, and inherited your husband's/wife's money when he/she died, you needed a SS # (which, again, required a birth certificate) to identify yourself.

Just because a state didn't ISSUE birth certificates, they're kept on record. A law passed in 1931 required the time of birth be put on birth certificates, as well. If someone was too lazy to contact their state of birth to GET a copy of their birth certificate (which is not expensive), that's a problem of their own invention.

People alive today who don't GENUINELY have birth certificates are 100 years old or more. Not that many people aged 100+ exist, and of those who do, the majority have health problems that preclude them from voting, anyway (stroke, dementia, Alzheimer's, etc., which affect one's capacity for reasoning). So the people affected by this bill would be those over 100 years old who are of sound mind--a very small number, indeed.

In the past 50 years, there were ample opportunities for people to straighten up problems with birth certificates.

If we Democrats are truly concerned about voting fraud, then demanding ID to be shown at the polls is one very important step in the right direction.

That's not "unconstitutional". Voting fraud is unconstitutional.

[SheilaT]

10. My mother, did not GENUINELY

have a birth certificate and she was born at home in 1916. Were she still alive, she'd be only 90. Luckily for her, she did have a baptismal certificate, and that worked for here when she wanted a passport.

There are still people --elderly, yes, but still under 100 -- who were born at home and whose birth was never registered with the state.

And back when I got my social security card, we did not need proof of citizenship, only needed to fill out a form which gave the SSA our information and a few weeks later the social security card arrived. Which said on it, by the way, NOT TO BE USED FOR IDENTIFICATION PURPOSES.

The notion that thousands of people are fraudulently registering to vote and then doing so is laughable. The far larger problem in this country is that people don't register in the first place, and then a large percentage of them who are registered don't vote. THAT'S a much larger problem. If you think voter turn-out is abysmally small now, let's see how it plummets with the stupid voter id requirements.

[HockeyMom]

23. Same here

I am 57 and got my first Social Security card when I first started working at age 18. As your said, it was just a form to be filled out and I never had to show my birth certificate.

Speaking of which, my original birth certificate, along with my Dad's and my Mom's, was lost back in the 1950s by the VA. When I went to get a passport decades ago, I had to get a copy of my BC. What they sent me contained only the barest of information: my name, date of birth, state, and city. NOTHING else. There was no record of my time of birth, my parents names, hospital, etc.

They refused to take this birth certificate when I applied for a passport. Yes, it did have the raised seal on it, but they had to confirm with my state bureau of vital statistics that my original BC had been lost and this was the only information available.

If I have to go through this now, I can foresee an even WORSE nightmare in my situation. Besides which, any married woman is going to have to show proof of her marriage and NAME change. How else can I prove that I am the person on that birth certificate? No ID I currently have is issued in my maiden name. Apparently, nobody has even thought of this aspect.

No wonder the states are screaming about all this. They will bear the logistics brunt of this.

[SheilaT]

63. Once again, what state were you born in?

What state issued you such a crap replacement birth certificate?

Every state, to the best of my knowledge, has a bureau of Vital Statistics and they probably all have websites that should tell you exactly what you need to know to get a replacement birth certificate.

I was in a conversation just a few days ago with a group of women our age (I'm 58)and one, who is from the Detroit area, airily said that she just carries her green card with her when she crosses the border. Green card? I asked. You're not a citizen?

Oh, yes I am, she replied, but the state of Michigan issues everyone a green card. What I finally got a look at, what she was calling a green card, was a little thing that says the named person's birth has been registered with the state of Michigan. It's not a real official document.

People from Pennsylvania have, or used to have, the same sort of thing issued to them when they left the hospital (people my age had it) and it served, within that state, as if it were a valid birth record, and many were quite shocked to learn, upon moving to some other state, that they now need a real birth certificate.

Oh, and my advice to women getting married has always been not to change your name. Even without the new b.s., it's always been a hassle. What I really don't understand are the women who marry, divorce, remarry, divorce, etc and keep on changing their name. Why?

[HockeyMom]

77. New York City

NYC has it's own Bureau of Vital Statistics. If you were born anywhere in the 5 boroughs, NYC issues your birth certificate, not the New York State. Anyway, when I was a kid, my Dad needed our birth certificates to be sent to the VA to verify his benefits. In ERROR, the NYC Bureau of Vital Statistics sent the VA the ORIGINAL copies. To make a long story short, the VA lost the original copies of our birth certificates. The only thing remaining, I was told, were the entries that were made in an index catalog file which did not contain all of the information listed on the original.

Since I have a raised seal on my copy, it is an official document. Well, that is about as good as it is ever going to get in my case. The US Passport Office did eventually take this copy back then.

I still have that passport from 30 years ago. My husband recently got his old passport renewed. Actually, if this stupid voter ID ever goes through, I might be better off just showing them my old passport rather than repeating the birth certificate fiasco. It was also issued in my married name. Kill two birds with one stone?

Papers, Citizen? I can foresee a whole lot of people just not bothering with all this bureaucracy just to vote. But isn't THAT the real reason behind this?

[SheilaT]

92. I was born in New York State

myself. Utica, to be exact.

The last time I had to get myself an official copy of my b.c. it came as a photo reproduction of some kind with the raised seal. They never actually send out the original original, but duplicate it as necessary and add the raised seal. Which is why and how multiple copies are obtained over time.

[HockeyMom]

103. Well, they screwed up (BOTH of them)

and send the ORIGINAL copies to the Veterans Association back in the 1950s. No, they weren't supposed to, but they DID. VA lost them.

In my case, there is nothing to photostat except an entry in a book. As I said, it is a special case of LOST originals.

I have done genealogy for over 25 years. I have gone and searched the Birth, Marriage, and Death Indexes for NYC myself. I know what these books look like. Besides the minimum information on the person, there is also a reference number for each person in the index to actually get the certificate indicated.

Well, I have a reference number, but there is no original copy because it doesn't exist anymore. However, the reference number in the index is proof enough that I WAS born here in the good old USA. I am sure your birth certificate also has a cross reference number. Both my daughters (in their 20s) have reference numbers on theirs.

As I said, there are bound to be a lot of mishaps and special cases with a city as large as NYC.

[FogerRox]

69. Sheila gets it

[proud2BlibKansan]

14. Read my thread

The link has been posted here.

My 81 year old mother does not have an ID. I suppose it's okay with you if she is disenfranchised??

You also need to put up some proof of voter fraud. Good luck. It's NOT a problem. ELECTION FRAUD IS THE PROBLEM.

[galloglas]

31. You can't work without a SS # ??

Oh, yeah!

Try telling that to the eleven million "illegals" you xenophobic SOBs areso worried will vote tombstones!

[galloglas]

32. No, Slivered-mojo,

you're wrong.

That's not "unconstitutional". Voting fraud is unconstitutional."

Voting fraud is a felony. Election Fraud is unconstitutional!

[Name removed]

33. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

46. wrong - GOP is concerned about VOTER fraud

We are concerned about voting machine fraud.

When someone raises the issue that they are concerned about
VOTER fraud, they are talking about what the GOP is worried about.

GOP wants to supress the vote,
DEMS want to get out the vote.

Proving you are a citizen is time consuming and costly.

Currently the only govt document that satisfies HR 4844 is a passport.

If you gave a flying leap about seniors and minorities and poor getting
to vote, you wouldn't ask them to leap through hoops that go beyond what is
normally required.

[FogerRox]

70. LOL, WillYourVoteBCounted gets it

[Captain Hilts]

4. MVA wouldn't accept my passport as i.d. for driver's license.

Weird.

[rzemanfl]

5. This is a poll tax. What part about that don't you understand?

Are you in favor of deporting old people with failing memories and no birth certificate? It seems to me that establishing that a person (and their parents before them) lived in this country for many years and was never deported should be sufficient proof of citizenship. This can be done in many ways that don't require spending a lot of money and chasing all over hell and gone.

[jody]

9. No, it's about making sure only authorized citizens vote. What part of

that don't you understand.

[proud2BlibKansan]

15. P O L L T A X

Maybe if we say it slowly??

If everyone needs an ID to vote, then birth certificates and drivers licenses and state IDs must be FREE.

Good luck with that plan.

[jody]

19. I assume if anyone wants to exercise their right to keep and bear arms

for defense of self and state then those arms must be free.

Thanks for being a member of:

[proud2BlibKansan]

21. Did you sleep through civics class?

Our constitution says NOTHING about free guns. However, poll taxes are quite illegal.

Nice strawman, BTW.

[jody]

24. Proof of citizenship is not a poll tax. Suggest you read 380 U.S. 528

that was the first case heard by SCOTUS under the 24th Amendment. It does not say that requiring a citizen to prove they are a U.S. citizen is itself a poll tax.

Sorry but the Constitution says Congress has the power "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia" and federal law says everyone between 17 and 45 years of age is either in the organized or unorganized militia with some exceptions.

[rzemanfl]

26. I just read that case, and to make sure I didn't miss anything, I

did a word search for "citizen." I defy you to post a quote from the court that says what you say the case says.

What law school did you attend? Was Alberto Gonzalez in your class?

[jody]

27. In post "15. P O L L T A X" above proud2Blib said, "If everyone needs an

ID to vote, then birth certificates and drivers licenses and state IDs must be FREE."

If you are correct, then you can provide a SCOTUS opinion supporting your assertion that requiring proof of citizenship to vote is a poll tax as proud2Blib asserted.

Without a SCOTUS decision you have merely stated your opinion. :shrug:

[Name removed]

37. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[rzemanfl]

47. No goddamnit! You cited a Supreme Court case and said it

stood for the proposition you asserted. Show me where it says that or STFU.

[jody]

48. I said 380 U.S. 528 "does not say that requiring a citizen to prove

they are a U.S. citizen is itself a poll tax."

I did not say as you said, "You {jody} cited a Supreme Court case and said it stood for the proposition you asserted."

You really should read more carefully.

[rzemanfl]

53. It doesn't say that we were invaded by space aliens either. You

can't cite a case for what it DOESN'T say.

[jody]

56. I agree, neither of us can cite something that does exist. n/a

[rzemanfl]

71. I disagree with you and I disagree with the disingenous methods

you use to argue your point. Here's something the case actually says:

"For federal elections, the poll tax is abolished absolutely as a prerequisite to voting, and no equivalent or milder substitute may be imposed."

Requiring a voter ID that costs money to obtain to prove citizenship is a voter suppression mechanism and is a poll tax.

The case also says at footnote 17:

"One of the basic objections to the poll tax was that it exacted a price for the privilege of exercising the franchise. Congressional hearings and debates indicate a general repugnance to the disenfranchisement of the poor occasioned by failure to pay the tax."

Then of course there is the amendment itself, which says:

"The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax."

A tax, according to Webster, is "a charge usually of money imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes."

[OnTheOtherHand]

78. uh, for what it's worth

it's perfectly possible for HR 4844 to be unconstitutional without it being a poll tax. I agree with jody that it's not a "poll tax," and I see no way to read 380 U.S. 528 to the contrary. That regarded a law that actually included a poll tax (plus an alternative). But if it's burdensome and serves no rational purpose, it could be struck whether it is a poll tax under the 24th Amendment or not.

(There might be some other case law that supports calling it a poll tax -- I wouldn't know.)

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

80. but will Justice "Torture" Roberts overturn HR 4844?

it isn't likely.

Since the whole point of HR 4844 is to keep the GOP majority
in House and Senate, and possibly install Jeb in 08.

Otherwise, the GOP and Neo Cons will have to answer to their crimes for
the next several years.

HR 4844 would prevent the investigations etc that would follow with
a DEM majority.

Why would anyone here be against a DEM majority?

[OnTheOtherHand]

100. yeah, I think the SCOTUS outcome is uncertain

Without an explicit statement in the Constitution that voting is a protected right, the case isn't a constitutional slam dunk. I think it ought to be, as long as we have good reason to believe that the requirement would be discriminatory in effect -- and we certainly do.

I also think that 4844 is clever, because lots of folks (like jody) won't see anything wrong in principle with requiring proof of citizenship. But it isn't clever enough to force Democratic members to vote for it, because it imposes requirements that most people would recognize as a hassle to comply with (whether or not they think or care about the discriminatory impacts).

[rzemanfl]

82. Well, I take the position that a poll tax by any other name is still

a poll tax. The courts that have addressed the issue lately have seemed to agree.

[OnTheOtherHand]

99. literally, or figuratively?

If you muster the legal arguments more systematically, it will be easier to follow.

[rzemanfl]

101. I had a nice long response which got eaten when I tried to post

it. I am not going to do it over. It's just my opinion anyway.

[OnTheOtherHand]

102. ouch, that is frustrating

My current thinking is that it probably is unconstitutional (depending on the umpire, of course) but probably isn't a "poll tax." I won't lose too much sleep over that distinction at this point. Still, I'm sorry about the lost post.

[jody]

81. Then disagree. IMO SCOTUS will uphold a law that requires anyone who

wants to vote "to provide proof of United States citizenship as a condition for issuance"

The alternative is not requiring proof of United States citizenship and IMO that's your position.

Have a good evening. :hi:

[proud2BlibKansan]

89. And I will bet

John Ashcroft was the teacher!

[proud2BlibKansan]

59. Forcing citizens to PAY for documents needed for these IDs

is a POLL TAX. Birth certificates cost money. So requiring a birth certificate (that is not FREE) to obtain an ID to vote is a friggin poll tax.

This is the reason the judge in MO threw out the voter ID bill last week. I suggest YOU read his ruling.

Now if you think the govt should provide you with a gun, I suggest you do what we did and go to your local ACLU and ask them to file a lawsuit for you. And good luck with that. LOL

[jody]

85. Then forcing citizens to provide transportation to vote is a poll tax. n/a

[proud2BlibKansan]

88. Again, a choice

Voters can choose to drive or to walk or to ride the bus or to get to the polls in a hotair balloon. Whatever floats their boat. Or they can choose to not vote.

However, should voter ID become law, they cannot choose to not get that ID if they want to vote.

You really don't get it, do you?

[FogerRox]

61. Voter ID that costs $97 is a poll tax, re: the 3 state laws that were

struck down in the last month. YAWN

[jody]

84. The cases you cite were state cases. n/a

[FogerRox]

97. Ah very good, I see you read my post

IIRC those 3 decisions might have been based on Scotus Precedents......
Easy research to find more court decisions on POLL TAX. YOu have demonstrated that you can find stuff on the net, so go ahead..........

[Name removed]

36. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[salin]

28. One of the issues is how easy/difficult it might be

to access the facilities to get the ID, and/or if one has lost documentation the facilities to get new documentation. I believe the issue in Ga included things like no official site to get an ID in Atlanta - and very difficult barriers for those without transportation (eg dependent on public transportation) to access - without taking significant time off work.

To me the issue is will this disproportionately block some folks from being able to vote - esp the poor who have little time to take off work - who may not have means (unreliable transportation, or no access to transportation) to apply for the ID? If so - then the regulation would disproportionately disenfranchise that part of our population. My cynical self believes that this is the whole point of the legislation.

[galloglas]

38. BINGO! That's it. You are 100% dead on! n/t

[Name removed]

35. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[proud2BlibKansan]

16. Ah we can just tatoo them all

If they refuse that tatoo, then deport them!

:sarcasm:

[baldguy]

6. The purpose of "Voter ID" isn't identify eligible voters..

It isn't meant to reduce voter fraud. These are excuses put forward by the GOP to ran this through. "Voter fraud as the GOP defines it doesn't exist.

The only purpose of "Voter ID" is to reduce voter turnout - particularly among those who may not have the resources to acquire & maintain multiple forms of identification. (Meaning minorities & the working poor.)

[silverojo]

8. Minorities and the working poor?

See my previous post in this thread. People can't work without a SS #, which you can't get without a birth certificate. Last time I checked, poor people of EVERY race were either working lousy jobs (and needed an SS #) or on public assistance (which DEFINITELY needs an SS #).

And...if you're a taxpayer, you've got a SS #. Period.

Virtually everybody without a birth certificate has passed away by now. To cite just one example, even my grandmother, born in poverty in 1904 on a farm outside a small town, had a birth certificate and a SS #. If she were alive right now, she'd be 102.

If you look up individual states' laws about birth certificates, you'll find that the vast majority of them began issuing these documents around 1909-11. So the only people you MIGHT have to worry about are over 95-97 years old!

If you have to show your ID to cash a check, it's only reasonable to expect to show your ID to do something as important as vote.

[proud2BlibKansan]

17. My mother passed away?

Damn my sisters didn't call me to let me know. Sure hope the funeral was nice.

[zalinda]

20. I'm sorry, but I've got a SS# and I NEVER

produced a birth certificate to get it. I got it in the late 60's, filled out a form, received it in the mail. AND right now, many illegals also have SS#'s, I have no idea how they got them, but they have them. Birth certificate's don't have pics on them, so why couldn't you just take your cousin's, and use that to get any ID you want?

This is a stupid law, and the ONLY way to make it fair to everyone, is if the government does all the work. They should go to everyone's house, check out who they are, take the pic and issue the card. They won't do it.

Unless I'm wrong, a SS card won't let you vote, it has to be a pic ID. Which means if you are disabled and it difficult to get around, you won't be able to vote. If you work 2 or 3 jobs and can't get away to stand in line at the DMV, you won't be able to vote. If you don't drive and the DMV is not located on the bus line, you won't be able to vote.

And, by the way, have you seen all the check cashing places in the inner cities? These are there because a lot of people who use them, don't have bank accounts. I can't tell you how many people I've seen at the Post Office who get money orders to pay their bills, because they are there EVERY time I go in there, and I go at least twice a week.

Oh, and btw, I never showed my birth certificate to get my driver's license either, or a passport that I got in the early 70's. I've live 58 years WITHOUT having to have my birth certificate in my possession. And because I haven't been poor all my life, I have all the ID I need. But, there are others who haven't been as lucky, and they will be shut out of the voting system.

I did recently get a copy of my birth certificate, cost me $30. I don't know a poor person alive who would spend that kind of money to TRY to vote, when their not even sure their vote counts.

zalinda

[proud2BlibKansan]

22. Yep I never needed my birth certificate either

Until about 15 years ago, when I was in my late 30s and went to Cananda for the first time. And they didn't even ask for it.

When I got my drivers license in the 1960s, my dad had to sign a paper swearing I was born on such and such a day. No birth certificate needed.

[baldguy]

25. We should be doing things to get MORE people to vote, not less.

Even today, many people don't have and never have had a birth certificate. Many people don't have bank accounts. Many people don't have a drivers' license.

And none of these things have ever been required for a person to be a citizen. Nor should they.

If you buy into the idea that voter fraud is a pressing issue, and that voters therefor need to identify themselves by more than their signature - you've bought into GOP propaganda.

[galloglas]

42. And see MY previous ANSWER!!

Let's try this again"

People can't work without a SS #, which you can't get without a birth certificate.


Oh, yeah?

Try telling that to the eleven million "illegals" you xenophobic SOBs are so worried will vote tombstones!

[galloglas]

44. If you have to show your ID to cash a check ??

If you have to show your ID to cash a check,
Well, you may have a problem with it. I don't! (suggestion: don't bounce checks)

it's only reasonable to expect to show your ID to do something as important as vote.

Hey, we aren't talking reasonable. We're talking Constitutional!

What is it about this that you can't seem to grasp??

[FogerRox]

64. silverojo, I just my 1st Birth Cert, last yr @ age 47.

This was because of a Hospital fire where I was born. I could not get the copy BC, my Mom had to do it for me. What are the odds, with 92k members at DU that one member would posting in this thread............. who at 47 got thier first BC.


At this point I think the Democrats that joined DU, consider you to be a Neo Con shill posting here, I know I do. its very likely that you have earned this Moniker. You might consider applying for the Stenographers position available at the White House or with the RNC.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

75. oh thank you Foger

AGH, it is amazing that some folks are in favor of
blocking the vote.

This always hurts the Dems, and I really don't want to see
Jeb Bush as our next president.

AGH.

[Ms. Toad]

94. I have a SS#

But I never produced a birth certificate to get it. I first obtained my birth certificate when I was in my 30s about 20 years after I had a SS#. Your statement that you can't get a SS# without a birth certificate is just nonsense. The only reason I have a copy of my birth certificate (and know for a fact that my birth was properly recorded) was because I needed it to obtain a passport. Had I not traveled outside of the country I would not currently have a copy of my birth certificate in my possession (and for all I know, it might not have been properly recorded).

A fair portion of the population in the 50-100+ age range may well have been never had a copy of their birth certificates - it just wasn't routinely needed for folks in that age range except for those wealthy enough to travel outside of the country, who needed a copy to obtain a passport. A larger portion of that population was also born at home, and many of those births were never properly recorded. They may well be finding out now that their births were never properly recorded, at a time when their parents and older siblings may well be dead or incompetent to attest to their date and location of birth. This is not an imagined problem, and it doesn't just impact 95-97 year olds (who, by the way, are still entitled to vote even if they do have any of the various voting impediments you mentioned in another post such as a stroke or alzheimer's).

[FogerRox]

62. baldguy gets it.

[razors edge]

11. we have come a long way from white

male landowners only voting, I think a state issued ID should be given free, not drivers licenses, to any who need one. end of problem.

[jody]

13. I agree, free voter ID. n/a

[galloglas]

41. But you won't agree to stop # 4844

which disenfranchises 13 million, though.

So what difference does it make if its free, when you deny them the right to exercise that vote!!

Go back and answer all those questions you've skated by. We're all holding our breathe!

[proud2BlibKansan]

18. Good luck

I see friends and family plan written all over this everyone needs an official ID suggestion. The governor of MO already set this up. He can teach the rest of the evil repukes how to do it!!

[galloglas]

40. Amen! n/t

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

49. the problem isn't the ID, its the time, transp, proof and $ to get it

Yes, the GOP donors want us all to have to pay for a state id,
this is money in their pockets just like HAVA is.

IT costs money to get a birth certificate.
It takes time and transportation to go get a GOVERNMENT issued ID.

Read the fine print, the devil is in the details.

WHy would HR 4844 pass in the house strictly on party lines
with complete Dem opposition? Because the purpose of this HR 4844
is to disenfranchise voters and also further entrench us into
a national id and government tracking of all citizens (who are potential
enemy combatents in some politicians minds.)

[razors edge]

79. It takes time and transportation to vote.

I wish we could do it from home, all of us on computer, but I wouldn't trust that any more than you would.

Potential? the simple fact we pay someone to pass more and more laws against our actions is a reflection on us as a people. once all the rape, murder, theft etc. laws are established whee do lawmakers have to go but after the very protections we claim?

If the state can afford a file on each and everyone of us, (not to mention visiting foreigners like john lennon) then they can afford a free id card to allow voters to exercise their rights in a way that even the right wing deniers can't bitch about.

[proud2BlibKansan]

90. We have Advanced Voting here

We can vote by mail. So we have no transportation expense.

[roseBudd]

39. PHOTO ID'S ARE SOLUTION TO PROBLEM THAT DOESN'T EXIST

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ucas/20060924/cm_ucas/photoidsaresolutiontoproblemthatdoesntexist;_ylt=ApV_YQ_BwKdLQ.FHUuKOsib9wxIF;_ylu=X3oDMTA0cDJlYmhvBHNlYwM-

CLICK THROUGH AND VOTE IT UP IT ONLY HAS 16 VOTES

Now, you can be forgiven if you've never heard of a single case in which an illegal immigrant successfully used a fake ID to vote. Neither Burton nor Perdue presented evidence of any such cases.

"People who look carefully at this thing, there's very little 'there' there -- very little fraud," said Thomas Patterson, an expert on elections at Harvard's Shorenstein Center. "If you are an illegal immigrant, the last thing you want to do is show up at a polling place. ... We have enough trouble getting people to vote when they're eligible. The idea that people are going to stick their necks out and get (a) penalty stretches the imagination."

Patterson notes that the voting and registration rules that apply in much of this country are already more stringent than those in most Western European democracies. In much of Western Europe, for example, the postal service simply notifies voter registration officials when a citizen moves, and his voting precinct is automatically changed. "Here, the onus is on the citizen. You kind of sense that the ballot box belongs to registration officials instead of the citizens," he said.

snip

Yet, the lack of a problem has made Republicans no less insistent on a solution. It makes you wonder whether they are up to something other than ferreting out voter fraud. Even if there is a legitimate need for a single, government-sponsored identification card in an age of terrorism, it would take years -- and a well-organized, government-funded effort -- to place those IDs in the hands of every elderly and rural American in out-of-the-way hamlets and every American of color in down-at-the-heels urban neighborhoods.

I DON'T HATE LOW INCOME PEOPLE OR BLAME THEM FOR NOT HAVING THEIR SHIT TOGETHER. NOT DO I DISPARAGE THEIR INTELLIGENCE OR THEIR SEEMING LACK OF EFFORT IN OBTAINING PHOTO IDENTIFICATION OR BANK ACCOUNTS.

[FogerRox]

65. Rosebud gets it.

[galloglas]

45. In toto, F'k Awf !! n/t

[jody]

50. If you oppose Voter ID because it requires proof of citizenship,

e.g. birth certificate, then do you oppose New York State’s driver license requirement that a birth certificate is needed to prove identity and date of birth?

New York State, Proofs of Identity and Date of Birth Required to Apply for a Driver License, a Learner Permit or a Non-driver Photo ID Card

Acceptable documents for Proof of Identity and Proof of Date of Birth

A US passport

A Certificate of Citizenship (N-560, N-561, or N-645).

A Certificate of Naturalization (N-550, N-570 or N-578).

A US Military Photo ID Card (issued to military personnel only).

A birth certificate issued by the US State Department or by a Board of Health or a Bureau of Vital Statistics in the US or a US Territory. US Territories are: American Samoa, Guam, Marianna Islands, Marshall Islands, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands and Wake Island.

A Certificate of Birth Registration issued by the Department of Health of NYS or NYC. The certificate must be an original certificate and must have the stamp or the embossed seal of the agency that issued the certificate. The certificate cannot contain any changes. The certificate cannot contain any errors in the name or date of birth of the applicant.

[freedomfries]

51. Is a SS card an inalienable right of citizenship in a democracy ?

It seems that you are mixing up apples and oranges, jody.
Non US citizen have an SS card to pay their taxes, and a driver's license to drive to work. Neither documents have anything in common with the right to vote, which is an inalienable right of citizenship in any country that calls itself a democracy.

Check the ruling by Cole County Judge Richard Callahan that struck down the MO voter ID law as unconstitutional (09/14/06):
"While a license to drive may just be that: a license and not a right. The right to vote is also just that: a right and not a license."
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x449642

See also the court injunction by Judge T. Jackson Bedford striking down the GA voter ID law as unconstitutional (09/19/06):

"The right to vote is a fundamental right of citizenship. It, like the integrity of the voting process itself, goes to the very core of our democracy. Without the right to vote, there is no democracy."
(Judge T. Jackson Bedford in his court injunction striking down the GA voter ID law)
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=203x450632

[jody]

52. Mea culpa, for not making my point more clear. Some who oppose Voter ID

assert that it's a burden on the poor and elderly to require them to provide a birth certificate as part of the application for a Voter ID.

I pointed out in the OP that today, U.S. citizens must provide a birth certificate to obtain a Social Security number.

I also pointed out in post #50 that New York; and I'll add California, Florida, Texas; requires U.S. citizens to provide a birth certificate or suitable substitute in order to obtain a drivers license.

IMO it's inconsistent to oppose requiring citizens to provide a birth certificate to obtain a Voter ID but accept requiring citizens to provide a birth certificate to obtain Social Security cards and driver licenses.

Either one opposes requiring citizens to provide a birth certificate for all government cards OR one accepts requiring citizens to provide a birth certificate for all government cards.

IMO we should take the birth certificate problem out of the discussion about Voter ID simply because we already accept requiring birth certificates on other government cards.

WAG: More U.S. citizens will be affected by a requirement for birth certificates to apply for drivers licenses than will be affected by a requirement for birth certificates to apply for Voter IDs.

That's all! :shrug:

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

54. say hello to President Jeb Bush in 2008

HR 4844 = President Jeb Bush 2008

in the perfect world, where all of us are wealthy
and where we all have reliable transportation
and where we all are free to come and go from our jobs (if we work)
and where even the elderly have enough to live on
and where everyone already has a birth certificate
and where no one would have to go to any trouble to obtain the Govt permission
and where everyone stayed in the same place for all their lives
and where everyone had all of their documents organized
and where democrats were not the party of the elderly, minority and poor

then wouldn't this voter permission bill be just handy dandy?

How about if it disenfranchised the GOP disproportionately, wouldn't that be
grand.

But Uh Oh - it disenfranchises millions of Dems who don't live in the
perfect world, but the real one.

Any DEM that doesn't want to see a President Jeb Bush in 2008 better be scared.

[jody]

55. I agree completely re Jeb Bush. n/a

[zalinda]

57. AND what you DON'T understand

is many people go through life without a need for ID. For instance, a woman who doesn't work, but stays home and takes care of her family. Many people in cities never drive. And, some people just work for cash.

These are not exceptions, but millions of people.

And, if you've had only a SS# all your life, it will NOT allow you to vote, because you need a picture ID. It's a no win situation for any poor person.

zalinda

[jody]

58. I never said an SS# would allow you to vote. Suggest you read my posts

more carefully.

[Name removed]

86. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[proud2BlibKansan]

72. 13 million voters

Our congressman said 13 million voters will be disenfranchised if national voter ID becomes law.

That is more than the entire population of New York City.

[jody]

83. And * said Iraq had WMD. Something is not true just because an elected

official says it.

[proud2BlibKansan]

87. But this congressman can be trusted

He's a Dem, he was the mayor here, he is a Methodist minister, I have known him for 25 years and he isn't a liar.

el pretzeldente, however, has a history of being dishonest.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

95. So we have an OP in Favor of Disenfranchising DEMS

Would a real Democrat celebrate disenfranchising a large number
of democrats?

[proud2BlibKansan]

96. No

[FogerRox]

66. Jody, Jody, Jody, SS is not voting

Citezenship is not SS.

Voting is not Driving a car.

[proud2BlibKansan]

73. LOL

:popcorn:

[FogerRox]

74. Proud@Blib, do you smell what I am cookin ?

LOL

[proud2BlibKansan]

76. You're making me hungry

LOL

[proud2BlibKansan]

60. A driver's license is a choice

Many people don't drive. They freely choose not to get a license. No big deal.

But putting up roadblocks that make it harder to vote IS a problem. Are you a Democrat? Is it really okay with you that other Democrats will now have a harder tiime registering and voting? How many republican voters do you suppose will be disenfranchised by this bill?

In other words, who benefits here? Not Democrats. Yet you think it is perfectly okay to disenfranchise them.

[FogerRox]

67. Proud2Blib gets it.

[zalinda]

91. Most of us get it.................. n/t

[FogerRox]

98. LOL, most DEMS do.. yes

[kster]

93. Secret vote counting WILL eliminate voters with Drivers License

we can't let these people take our eye off the prize, this story is a smoke screen, Yes, Suppression and voter ID'S will take out a hand full of votes, but that compared to the the number votes eliminated by the SECRET VOTE COUNTING MACHINES is not even close!

We need to keep our eye on the prize!! :-)