Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 23

Thread: Arkansas governor vetoes voter photo ID bill

  1. #1
    Sage
    Somerville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    On an island. Not that one!
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:10 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,785

    Arkansas governor vetoes voter photo ID bill

    This is too funny.

    Arkansas governor vetoes voter photo ID bill | The Salt Lake Tribune

    Little Rock, Ark. • Arkansas Gov. Mike Beebe vetoed legislation Monday that would have required voters to show photo identification before casting a ballot, saying the measure was "an expensive solution in search of a problem" and would establish a requirement impairing the right to vote.
    <snip>
    "At a time when some argue for the reduction of unnecessary bureaucracy and for reduced government spending, I find it ironic to be presented with a bill that increases government bureaucracy and increases government expenditures, all to address a need that has not been demonstrated," Beebe wrote. "I cannot approve such an unnecessary measure that would negatively impact one of our most precious rights as citizens."
    my emphasis


    What is a good conservative to think? A Democratic Governor shooting down a bill because it would "increase government expenditures" -- funny that some on the right are all for spending "taxpayers' dollars" when it is for a cause they believe in but when they might be spent on something they oppose.
    “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
    ~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822

  2. #2
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    07-25-17 @ 12:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    5,878

    Re: Arkansas governor vetoes voter photo ID bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    What is a good conservative to think? ...
    They SHOULD think this is great! But the author framed the issue erroneously. First, the argument for the 'unnecessary bureaucracy and for reduced government spending' is aimed at the federal level as the VAST majority of the states have balanced budget amendments...second, this is a CLASSIC Conservative example of 'let the states decide'...

    I'm sure you support the Governor's decision but will you be just as supportive if the Legislature overrides his veto? As this will be the 'will of the people'...of Arkansas.
    "The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure" - 2006 Senator Obama...leadership failure indeed!

  3. #3
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    03-12-14 @ 04:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    143

    Re: Arkansas governor vetoes voter photo ID bill

    For the life of me I cannot understand why there is opposition to the idea that one has to show ID before they vote. I can't do a number of things without showing ID, check into a hotel, rent a car, buy OTC meds (for some medications). It is a big political football IMO.

  4. #4
    Professor

    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Ft.Wayne In
    Last Seen
    12-09-17 @ 03:12 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    1,305

    Re: Arkansas governor vetoes voter photo ID bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Somerville View Post
    This is too funny.

    my emphasis


    What is a good conservative to think? A Democratic Governor shooting down a bill because it would "increase government expenditures" -- funny that some on the right are all for spending "taxpayers' dollars" when it is for a cause they believe in but when they might be spent on something they oppose.
    I'm not sure how showing an id will cost govt money?

  5. #5
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,741

    Re: Arkansas governor vetoes voter photo ID bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Neosteve View Post
    For the life of me I cannot understand why there is opposition to the idea that one has to show ID before they vote. I can't do a number of things without showing ID, check into a hotel, rent a car, buy OTC meds (for some medications). It is a big political football IMO.
    Voting is the single fundamental right in a democracy. Comparing it to renting a car is silly and disingenuous.

    Any truly "small government" supporter should be immediately and powerfully skeptical about any effort to make voting more difficult. It's voting. It's the most important right we have. Efforts such as voter ID's deserve tremendous scrutiny. For example, if ID's are legally required to vote, and ID's cost money, voting ends up indirectly costing money. Poll taxes are unconstitutional. So you issue free IDs, costing the state money, but it doesn't stop there. When you start taking closer looks at the states trying to add voter ID laws, you'll find that poor, minority districts just happen to have far less access to DMV services. Fewer DMVs, fewer hours of operation. Sometimes DMVs only open a few days a month. All coincidentally in heavily "blue" districts in states controlled by a "red" legislature.

    And a believer in small government would also question the necessity. After all, we don't like it when government solves a problem that isn't a real problem, right? Especially when they do it wrong? So how prevalent is voter fraud, and how well would voter ID's address that? You'll find that most election fraud actually comes in the forms of voter suppression or voter registration fraud. Actual fraudulently-cast votes are quite rare, and most voter fraud occurs via absentee. Which voter ID laws would fail to prevent. So why aren't we cracking down on absentee voting instead? Is it because absentee votes happen to swing slightly red?

    Quote Originally Posted by penn1954 View Post
    I'm not sure how showing an id will cost govt money?
    You need to redo the electoral process to involve checking IDs, recording that information, etc. Plus, poll taxes are unconstitutional so that would require states to issue IDs for free. (court cases have overturned ID laws on those grounds)
    Last edited by Deuce; 03-26-13 at 11:27 AM.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Last Seen
    03-12-14 @ 04:28 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    143

    Re: Arkansas governor vetoes voter photo ID bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Voting is the single fundamental right in a democracy. Comparing it to renting a car is silly and disingenuous.

    Any truly "small government" supporter should be immediately and powerfully skeptical about any effort to make voting more difficult. It's voting. It's the most important right we have. Efforts such as voter ID's deserve tremendous scrutiny. For example, if ID's are legally required to vote, and ID's cost money, voting ends up indirectly costing money. Poll taxes are unconstitutional. So you issue free IDs, costing the state money, but it doesn't stop there. When you start taking closer looks at the states trying to add voter ID laws, you'll find that poor, minority districts just happen to have far less access to DMV services. Fewer DMVs, fewer hours of operation. Sometimes DMVs only open a few days a month. All coincidentally in heavily "blue" districts in states controlled by a "red" legislature.

    And a believer in small government would also question the necessity. After all, we don't like it when government solves a problem that isn't a real problem, right? Especially when they do it wrong? So how prevalent is voter fraud, and how well would voter ID's address that? You'll find that most election fraud actually comes in the forms of voter suppression or voter registration fraud. Actual fraudulently-cast votes are quite rare, and most voter fraud occurs via absentee. Which voter ID laws would fail to prevent. So why aren't we cracking down on absentee voting instead? Is it because absentee votes happen to swing slightly red?



    You need to redo the electoral process to involve checking IDs, recording that information, etc. Plus, poll taxes are unconstitutional so that would require states to issue IDs for free. (court cases have overturned ID laws on those grounds)
    So what would you have? Would you prefer that I walk into the voting place of my choice and cast a ballot at will? The political football is that people like you think that it is because the poor somehow will be disenfranchised by the showing of ID. The laws have to be written so a voter ID is free and easy to obtain, if that means we allocate some of our tax dollars to do this then so be it. There is so much waste in government that this cost could be offset without cutting the benefits to the poor stupid bastard that can't figure out how to get an ID. I would like to see some kind of competency test before some idiot gets to vote. Too many useful idiots in this country of ours.

  7. #7
    Sage
    Somerville's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    On an island. Not that one!
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:10 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    9,785

    Re: Arkansas governor vetoes voter photo ID bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Voting is the single fundamental right in a democracy. Comparing it to renting a car is silly and disingenuous.

    Any truly "small government" supporter should be immediately and powerfully skeptical about any effort to make voting more difficult. It's voting. It's the most important right we have. Efforts such as voter ID's deserve tremendous scrutiny. For example, if ID's are legally required to vote, and ID's cost money, voting ends up indirectly costing money. Poll taxes are unconstitutional. So you issue free IDs, costing the state money, but it doesn't stop there. When you start taking closer looks at the states trying to add voter ID laws, you'll find that poor, minority districts just happen to have far less access to DMV services. Fewer DMVs, fewer hours of operation. Sometimes DMVs only open a few days a month. All coincidentally in heavily "blue" districts in states controlled by a "red" legislature.

    And a believer in small government would also question the necessity. After all, we don't like it when government solves a problem that isn't a real problem, right? Especially when they do it wrong? So how prevalent is voter fraud, and how well would voter ID's address that? You'll find that most election fraud actually comes in the forms of voter suppression or voter registration fraud. Actual fraudulently-cast votes are quite rare, and most voter fraud occurs via absentee. Which voter ID laws would fail to prevent. So why aren't we cracking down on absentee voting instead? Is it because absentee votes happen to swing slightly red?

    Quote Originally Posted by penn1954 View Post
    I'm not sure how showing an id will cost govt money?
    You need to redo the electoral process to involve checking IDs, recording that information, etc. Plus, poll taxes are unconstitutional so that would require states to issue IDs for free. (court cases have overturned ID laws on those grounds)

    Then there are the various documents that are being demanded by those states before they will issue photo IDs, documents which cost money to obtain and therefore the state will have to pay for said documents for those incapable of paying. We also have states like Texas and Wisconsin either closing or reducing the hours of the offices which would issue the IDs in an "effort to save money" even though closing the offices imposes further problems for low income citizens. In Texas, there are counties where the only office open might entail a round trip of 50 or more miles for rural residents.
    “And I have no doubt that every new example will succeed, as every past one has done, in shewing that religion & Govt will both exist in greater purity, the less they are mixed together.”
    ~ James Madison, letter to Edward Livingston, July 10, 1822

  8. #8
    Dungeon Master
    Somewhere in Babylon
    Jetboogieman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Somewhere in Babylon...
    Last Seen
    @
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    24,273
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Arkansas governor vetoes voter photo ID bill

    Why are states allowed to make different laws that effect Federal Elections.

    There should be a unitary voting regulatory body for national elections and it should apply to every state equally.

  9. #9
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,336

    Re: Arkansas governor vetoes voter photo ID bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Jetboogieman View Post
    Why are states allowed to make different laws that effect Federal Elections.

    There should be a unitary voting regulatory body for national elections and it should apply to every state equally.
    That answer is easy. There are no federal elections. In the case of presidential elections, the people of the states go to the polls to elect the electors. In the last election, only 365 people actually voted for Obama.

  10. #10
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:57 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,741

    Re: Arkansas governor vetoes voter photo ID bill

    Quote Originally Posted by Neosteve View Post
    So what would you have? Would you prefer that I walk into the voting place of my choice and cast a ballot at will? The political football is that people like you think that it is because the poor somehow will be disenfranchised by the showing of ID. The laws have to be written so a voter ID is free and easy to obtain, if that means we allocate some of our tax dollars to do this then so be it. There is so much waste in government that this cost could be offset without cutting the benefits to the poor stupid bastard that can't figure out how to get an ID. I would like to see some kind of competency test before some idiot gets to vote. Too many useful idiots in this country of ours.
    You cannot currently just walk in to any place and cast a vote at will, so that's not worth discussing.
    I am not making any cost arguments. Merely explaining there is a cost.
    If you live in the "black belt" in Alabama, there isn't a single full-time DMV in several adjacent counties. Fix those kinds of discrepancies and you fix the problem of access to IDs for the poor. We're not talking about widespread disenfranchisement efforts, instead it's a attempt to make voting less convenient in a manner that has a slightly disproportionate effect on democrats.

    My compromise? Have stations to issue those IDs right at the voting location. Same requirements to get any other ID, no cost to the individual, nobody has to make extra trips to a DMV open 4 days a month during work hours.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •