Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Mar 8, 2011 17:11:46 GMT -5
I found this article that I found interesting as a young person. news.yahoo.com/s/yblog_theticket/20110308/ts_yblog_theticket/ahead-of-the-2012-campaign-states-debate-voting-rights"If some GOP lawmakers get their way, it could be a whole lot tougher for people across the country to cast a ballot in the upcoming 2012 presidential election. Boosted by major electoral gains in state legislatures nationwide in the 2010 campaign, Republican lawmakers in 32 states are pushing measures that would require citizens to show a state identification or proof of citizenship to vote. Meanwhile, in New Hampshire, GOP lawmakers are proposing new limits on college students who vote in the state, potentially eliminating a key base of electoral support for Democrats in the state ahead of the upcoming presidential election. As the Washington Post's Peter Wallsten writes, the measures have set off a partisan battle over voting rights across the country, with Democrats accusing Republicans of trying to suppress voters, including young people and minorities, who would cast their ballots for President Obama and other Democratic candidates next year. In New Hampshire, Republicans are pushing to end rules that allow same-day voter registration in the state, which has often provided key swing votes for candidates from all parties in the state. State GOP lawmakers are also proposing new limits on students, including a bill that would allow them to vote in college towns only if they or their parents had established permanent residency in the state. Some GOP lawmakers in New Hampshire have billed the measures as an attempt to crack down on voter fraud in the state--but recent remarks from the newly elected GOP state House speaker have suggested otherwise. In a recent speech to a tea party group in the state, House Speaker William O'Brien described college voters as "foolish." "Voting as a liberal. That's what kids do," he said, in remarks that were videotaped by a state Democratic Party staffer and posted on YouTube. Students, he said, lack "life experience" and "just vote their feelings." GOP lawmakers in the state have distanced themselves from O'Brien's remarks. "It's a war on voting," Thomas Bates, vice president of Rock the Vote, a youth voter-registration group, told the Post. "We'd like to be advocating for a 21st-century voting system, but here we are fighting against efforts to turn it back to the 19th century." Meanwhile, Republicans have also revived measures that have been debated on and off over the last several election cycles that would require voters to provide state-issued IDs at the polls. In Wisconsin, GOP lawmakers are moving forward with legislation that would block students from using school-issued identification to verify their identity at the polls. Meanwhile, in North Carolina, Republicans are preparing to introduce a similar measure requiring state IDs--a plan that the North Carolina Board of Elections has said could be problematic for African-American voters, a key base of support for Obama in 2008."
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Mar 8, 2011 17:19:58 GMT -5
As a young person, I do find Mr. Obrien's sweeping comments and a generalizations irritating, but beyond that I don't see what the big deal is.
There are two issues here, having to present a state ID and making it so that college students can't vote in a town they aren't a resident of.
One the first issue, I don't see what the big deal is. Why is it so unreasonable that someone has to prove they are a U.S Citizen to vote? I have voted in the 2004 and 2008 elections as an absentee (more on that later), so I'm not sure what the proceedure is now, but do they just let anyone who looks like they're over 18 vote? What's to stop an illegal from voting now if they don't have to provide an ID, or at least a SS#? What's to stop someone from going to multiple polling places and voting as things stand now? Only problem I can see is not everyone has a driver's liscense, and how can you prove someone isn't a citizen unless they present a driver's liscense or a state ID. Currently it's not required to get a government ID, but that's a whole different can of worms.
I think calling this an "attack on student voters" is melodramatic. When I was in college, I voted as an absentee since I figured I couldn't vote in my college town, as I was registered in my parent's town. Maybe I'm wrong and you can vote in college towns where you're not a resident? I didn't think it was a big deal to send in an absentee ballot. In fact, I prefered it because I didn't have to take the time to wait in line.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Mar 8, 2011 17:21:31 GMT -5
Nice try, but that's bunk. Same-day registration is overwhelmingly used by Democrats and their operatives (like ACORN) to sign up massive numbers of people, some of whom are not otherwise eligible to vote due to criminal history or residency issues. If the law restricts felons from voting (and it does), how can that be accurately determined in a same-day registration, which often takes place 5 minutes before the person goes into the poll to vote? They do not conduct on the spot background checks during these same-day registrations, so they are basically taking the person's word that they are not a felon, illegal alien or resident of another state. That's not good enough. Kudos to this bill!
Next up is getting rid of all the dead people who always seem to vote Democrat...
|
|
workpublic
Junior Associate
Catch and release please
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 14:01:48 GMT -5
Posts: 5,551
Favorite Drink: Heineken
|
Post by workpublic on Mar 8, 2011 17:23:06 GMT -5
phenoix "It's a war on voting," Thomas Bates, vice president of Rock the Vote, a youth voter-registration group, told the Post. "We'd like to be advocating for a 21st-century voting system, but here we are fighting against efforts to turn it back to the 19th century." that kind of flaming rhetoric is unnecessary also
|
|
|
Post by marjar on Mar 8, 2011 17:28:37 GMT -5
Some college kids want to vote in the community where they attend college. One of the arguments is that local legislation can and does impact them and since they live there, the majority of the year, they should have a say. Also, some students reside in their college towns all year. Finding summer school and jobs that carry through the year. If they are paying taxes in that state and locality, they feel they should be able to vote there.
|
|
Angel!
Senior Associate
Politics Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 11:44:08 GMT -5
Posts: 10,722
|
Post by Angel! on Mar 8, 2011 17:37:17 GMT -5
This differs by state. Only 12 states actually bar felons from ever voting.
I don't mind them reviewing the rules, but I do find it offensive to state that college kids are foolish & therefore shouldn't be allowed to vote.
|
|
mmhmm
Administrator
It's a great pity the right of free speech isn't based on the obligation to say something sensible.
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:13:34 GMT -5
Posts: 31,770
Today's Mood: Saddened by Events
Location: Memory Lane
Favorite Drink: Water
|
Post by mmhmm on Mar 8, 2011 17:37:35 GMT -5
If they're legally of age to vote, and are resident in the state at the time of the vote, they have every right to vote. This is still the USA, isn't it?
|
|
ChiTownVenture
Familiar Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 10:39:06 GMT -5
Posts: 648
|
Post by ChiTownVenture on Mar 8, 2011 18:27:57 GMT -5
Some college kids want to vote in the community where they attend college. One of the arguments is that local legislation can and does impact them and since they live there, the majority of the year, they should have a say. Also, some students reside in their college towns all year. Finding summer school and jobs that carry through the year. If they are paying taxes in that state and locality, they feel they should be able to vote there. I think the real issue here is that colleges tend to have on campus voting booths making it very convenient and easy for college students to vote, and a large number of young people (college age) voted for Obama in the last presidential election. If they can make it at all difficult then maybe not as many college students will take the time to vote in the upcoming presidential elections.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 8, 2011 18:36:13 GMT -5
I found this telling...
Democrats are so heavily reliant on voter fraud that they consider it a "key base of electoral support"?
What the lawmakers are aiming for is pretty straightforward. Voters need to show ID-- opposition to this simple requirement is transparent desperation by a party that has become dependent on voter fraud-- the votes of illegals, dead people, people that vote more than once, and other scams-- that they are actually afraid of losing votes if people have to produce a government issue ID-- nothing more than would be required to get a drink at a bar, write a check, drive a car, or board a domestic flight.
This isn't some joke, and it really is damning evidence that an increasingly fringe left Democratic Party is committed to power and control at all costs-- and even willing to behave lawlessly, and promote, and protect lawless behavior.
It's got to make responsible, legal, law abiding voters sick to know their vote could be canceled out by an illegal alien, a felon, a party apparachic, or even a terrorist.
The Democratic Party is very close to a complete implosion. Continued disgraceful behavior like this is why Democrats have lost so much credibility over the last several decades.
In the last election the Democratic Party gave back ALL the Clinton era gains in independent voter support-- in some states a 40 point swing from 20% in favor of Democrats to 20% supporting the GOP.
This kind of open, unabashed support and protection by Democrats for criminal activity that undermines our democratic elections is not the behavior of a mainstream party in the United States.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 8, 2011 18:37:52 GMT -5
College students that do not go through the proper channels to change residency must vote absentee (or in person) in their legal precinct of residence. Why is this hard? It's VERY clear that Democrats are dependent on a system that makes voter fraud easy.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 8, 2011 18:44:29 GMT -5
And THIS....
...is racist, or just plain stupid.
I mean, if North Carolina can't get it together to issue state ID's to black voters in that state, then I think the Justice Department needs to get involved. Why can't black people get ID?
The 2012 election is far enough away now that any voter that wants to vote can follow the procedure to legally vote under this law.
Any suggestion to the contrary is simply supporting a system that makes voter fraud easy, by a Democratic Party that has lost much of its legitimate support.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,587
|
Post by chiver78 on Mar 8, 2011 19:04:21 GMT -5
Some GOP lawmakers in New Hampshire have billed the measures as an attempt to crack down on voter fraud in the state--but recent remarks from the newly elected GOP state House speaker have suggested otherwise. In a recent speech to a tea party group in the state, House Speaker William O'Brien described college voters as "foolish." "Voting as a liberal. That's what kids do," he said, in remarks that were videotaped by a state Democratic Party staffer and posted on YouTube. Students, he said, lack "life experience" and "just vote their feelings." GOP lawmakers in the state have distanced themselves from O'Brien's remarks. I'm going to pluck a different quote from the OP. last I checked, if you survived to age 18 as an American citizen, you earned yourself the right to vote any which way you chose. whether it's voting their feelings, or voting how they feel is right...that's no different than anyone else voting their opinions. I hope the appropriate authority is looking into voter issues in NH, if this idiot is saying stuff like this in public I wonder what else he's trying to shove in under the radar.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 8, 2011 19:06:24 GMT -5
There's no rational reason to oppose a requirement that voters properly identify themselves at the polling place except to make it easy to commit voter fraud.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Mar 8, 2011 19:07:59 GMT -5
LOL! Wait until they find out people will only be able to vote once, and dead people won't be able to vote at all!
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,587
|
Post by chiver78 on Mar 8, 2011 19:12:38 GMT -5
I don't have an issue with requiring people to prove they are who they say they are, and that they are properly registered to vote. what I have an issue with is when politicians mess with laws to limit people that they don't want voting a certain way.
for example, those college students that I mentioned in my post - if I went to a state school somewhere else, and changed my residency to that state in order to reap the benefit of in-state tuition, I might not necessarily get a new state ID card if my old one hadn't expired. (or better yet, this article doesn't say that a US passport is an acceptable form of identification either, yet as a legal federally-issued form of ID it contains all the appropriate citizenship information as well. ) why should this limit me from voting in the place where I've declared my residency?
|
|
|
Post by Savoir Faire-Demogague in NJ on Mar 8, 2011 19:13:46 GMT -5
Boosted by major electoral gains in state legislatures nationwide in the 2010 campaign, Republican lawmakers in 32 states are pushing measures that would require citizens to show a state identification or proof of citizenship to vote. Meanwhile, in New Hampshire, GOP lawmakers are proposing new limits on college students who vote in the state, potentially eliminating a key base of electoral support for Democrats in the state ahead of the upcoming presidential election.
I live and vote in New Jersey. I must show a state issued ID. I my case my drivers license. Non-issue.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Mar 8, 2011 19:15:02 GMT -5
That's generally not allowed, and is in fact illegal unless the student is financially independent (no parents back home paying the bills) and lived in the state they go to school in for a certain period of time prior to enrollment...
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,587
|
Post by chiver78 on Mar 8, 2011 19:17:55 GMT -5
That's generally not allowed, and is in fact illegal unless the student is financially independent (no parents back home paying the bills) and lived in the state they go to school in for a certain period of time prior to enrollment... if I live in the state year-round, I can declare my residency in that state. by my junior year, most states will recognize the residency and grant in-state tuition.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Mar 8, 2011 19:26:49 GMT -5
I'm with paul on this one. If we require ID to buy alcohol, board a plane, drive a car, or conduct a financial transaction, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect someone to simply show an ID. It's not like election dates are a secret, most people who want to vote could probably procure a state ID and register to vote by a reasonable deadline......
In Ohio I wasn't able to vote in the 2010 election because I missed the deadline to register. I forget the exact date but I think it was like 30 days or something. I think it's fine to have a deadline in advance, and registering only takes a few minutes.
I still find this rhetoric about young voters upsetting. We can go die for our country but we have politicians who slam our ability to vote.
Granted I know this is one guy, but one would expect better from a duely elected house speaker (I assume he's a state congressmen), especially a republican.
I don't usually agree with liberals, but if you live to be 18 and are an American citizen, you have the right to vote. Even if you vote foolishly you still should have that right.
|
|
|
Post by ed1066 on Mar 8, 2011 19:30:23 GMT -5
Sure after two years of residency you could be considered in-state. The issue in the OP has nothing to do with that. If you're a legal resident of the state and over 18, you can vote in that state, no one is trying to change that...
|
|
dancinmama
Senior Associate
LIVIN' THE DREAM!!
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 20:49:45 GMT -5
Posts: 10,659
|
Post by dancinmama on Mar 8, 2011 19:39:39 GMT -5
Some college kids want to vote in the community where they attend college. One of the arguments is that local legislation can and does impact them and since they live there, the majority of the year, they should have a say. Also, some students reside in their college towns all year. Finding summer school and jobs that carry through the year. If they are paying taxes in that state and locality, they feel they should be able to vote there. Which is EXACTLY why they should NOT vote where they go to college. For the most part college students are in a college community for a short period of time, yet their votes could cause passage of propositions and other legislation that will effect the local community long after the students have moved on. Yes, the student may never move back "home", but until they establish independent residency (i.e. not living in the dorms or anywhere else on mom and dad's dime) they should vote absentee where they came from.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 8, 2011 19:49:03 GMT -5
Correct. Each eligible to vote person gets to vote in the precinct where they are a legal resident.
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 8, 2011 20:06:20 GMT -5
I want those that think that a requirement to show ID at the polling place is an infringement on voting rights to explain some things:
1. Why do you favor registration of guns / gun owners? 2. Why do you feel a person has a "right" to walk in and vote without verifying, through the use of common government issued identification? 3. Should a driver be required to produce their license when asked by law enforcement? 4. Should a cashier be prohibited from asking for ID from a customer writing a check? 5. Do patrons have to produce ID to purchase cigarettes or alcoholic beverages?
|
|
fairlycrazy23
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 27, 2010 23:55:19 GMT -5
Posts: 3,306
|
Post by fairlycrazy23 on Mar 8, 2011 20:10:10 GMT -5
It is ridiculous to think requiring an id is some kind of burden to vote.
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,587
|
Post by chiver78 on Mar 8, 2011 20:16:25 GMT -5
Sure after two years of residency you could be considered in-state. The issue in the OP has nothing to do with that. If you're a legal resident of the state and over 18, you can vote in that state, no one is trying to change that... you must not have read the whole post before attempting to pick it apart. you've done that before, I shouldn't be surprised. let me reiterate - I have no issue with any legal resident who is registered to vote, voting, nor do I have a problem with requiring a photo ID. your comment about being considered in-state for tuition after two years has nothing to do with the residency requirements of voter registration. some states may require permanent residency established, but others only require 30 days prior to registration. getting back on topic, if anyone is trying to change the rules of how people are allowed to vote with an underlying reason being they want to limit the votes they don't like, that's not right. that's how I read the quoted words of the NH state politician. if anyone can show me where he says otherwise, I'll be happy to read it.
|
|
ChiTownVenture
Familiar Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 10:39:06 GMT -5
Posts: 648
|
Post by ChiTownVenture on Mar 9, 2011 8:00:49 GMT -5
There's no rational reason to oppose a requirement that voters properly identify themselves at the polling place except to make it easy to commit voter fraud. Voting should be free, by forcing a person to hold a state ID to vote you are essentially forcing people to pay to vote. If the states want to give people some sort of identification free of charge to vote then that's what they should do. Oh but wait isn't that what a voter registration card is for?
|
|
ChiTownVenture
Familiar Member
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 10:39:06 GMT -5
Posts: 648
|
Post by ChiTownVenture on Mar 9, 2011 8:09:36 GMT -5
Correct. Each eligible to vote person gets to vote in the precinct where they are a legal resident. Different precincts have different requirements to vote. Most only require that you are 18 and have been in the state for 30 days. www.declareyourself.com/voting_faq/voting_faq_449.htmlColleges also tend to have people on campus more then happy to help you register to vote, and to encourage students to vote. People should vote in the state where they live in the majority of the time through out the year, it does not matter where the support for them to live is coming from. It is ridiculous to make that requirement to students unless you are going to make that same requirement for everyone. Some parents support their children long after college, children support their parents when their parents become elderly and can't support themselves. Should all these people only vote where the money is? Should voters be required to show where they receive financial support before voting?? Really??
|
|
chiver78
Administrator
Current Events Admin
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:04:45 GMT -5
Posts: 38,587
|
Post by chiver78 on Mar 9, 2011 9:33:05 GMT -5
Correct. Each eligible to vote person gets to vote in the precinct where they are a legal resident. Different precincts have different requirements to vote. Most only require that you are 18 and have been in the state for 30 days. www.declareyourself.com/voting_faq/voting_faq_449.htmlColleges also tend to have people on campus more then happy to help you register to vote, and to encourage students to vote. People should vote in the state where they live in the majority of the time through out the year, it does not matter where the support for them to live is coming from. It is ridiculous to make that requirement to students unless you are going to make that same requirement for everyone. Some parents support their children long after college, children support their parents when their parents become elderly and can't support themselves. Should all these people only vote where the money is? Should voters be required to show where they receive financial support before voting?? Really?? absolutely!
|
|
AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 11:59:07 GMT -5
Posts: 31,709
Favorite Drink: Sweetwater 420
|
Post by AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP on Mar 9, 2011 9:54:41 GMT -5
There's no rational reason to oppose a requirement that voters properly identify themselves at the polling place except to make it easy to commit voter fraud. Voting should be free, by forcing a person to hold a state ID to vote you are essentially forcing people to pay to vote. If the states want to give people some sort of identification free of charge to vote then that's what they should do. Oh but wait isn't that what a voter registration card is for? Fine. Means test it, but make sure every person is entitled to obtain ID whether they can afford it or not. I agree we should not change the law to require ID to vote and then make it unnecessarily burdensome to obtain an ID. Of course, I don't know a single person that doesn't at the very least have a state ID. I'm not sure how a person functions in life if they don't have an ID, but I'm with you-- make it easy, even free for a legal resident to obtain ID. That being said, if a person doesn't have it together enough to document they are here legally- the don't have a Social Security Card, they don't have a birth certificate, AND to top it off they don't have a few bucks for an ID at their state's Secretary of State's Office-- well, then that's exactly the kind of person that should be prevented from voting because they could be anybody. Voting is a right, but it's also a responsibility. If a person doesn't take their right to vote and the responsibilities that go along with it seriously enough to document their own identity, then too bad, so sad.
|
|
swamp
Community Leader
Don't be a fool. Call me!
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 16:03:22 GMT -5
Posts: 45,335
|
Post by swamp on Mar 9, 2011 9:59:27 GMT -5
I really don't see the problem with being required to show ID at a voting booth..................
|
|