• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Expand Voting Right ACT Say A.Young!

The Bush administration spent millions investigating voter fraud and...

After a five-year hunt for voter fraud, the Bush administration's Justice Department came up with little widespread fraud, finding mostly cases of people mistakenly filling out voter registration forms or voting when they didn't know they were ineligible, The New York Times reported in 2007. But none of the cases involved a person voting as someone else.

link...
if you have an ID requirement, it's pretty tough to commit voter fraud.... if there is no ID requirement, it's just an honor system that stops you from committing it..... and prosecuting it in the unlikely event it is found out?.. pffft... near impossible... no witnesses, no ID on the suspect, the crime is over and done with quickly... yeah, finding out is tough, prosecuting is really really tough.

in any event, I find the claim of widespread voter fraud to be suspect .. and i find the claims that an ID requirement in an undue burden to be just as suspect.
i'm firmly in the " I don't give a **** either way" category....i'll vote, even if i have to bear the extraordinary burden of showing an ID.
 
Fishstyx said:
Well, there are layers of safeguards to prevent electoral fraud, we just take the word of the voter to prevent voter fraud. God forbid someone has to identify themselves to show they're eligible to vote.
Thrilla said:
if you have an ID requirement, it's pretty tough to commit voter fraud.... if there is no ID requirement, it's just an honor system that stops you from committing it.....

Why do people keep insisting that if you don't have a photo ID you don't have to show ANY ID?

I just voted in a special election yesterday. Showed my voter registration card and signed by my name on the voter roll. My registration card was my ID, my signature was my legal affirmation that I was indeed who I represented myself to be. To get a voter registration card, you have to prove who you are and be vetted by the county registrar.


From the HELP AMERICA VOTE ACT OF 2002

(i) in the case of an individual who votes in person--

(I) presents to the appropriate State or local election official a current and valid photo identification;

or

(II) presents to the appropriate State or local election official a copy of a current utility bill,
bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name
and address of the voter
 
You can buy a single I.D. and it last you for years if not decades. You don't have to buy one specifically for the election therefore it is not a poll tax.

It's required to vote, it costs money, therefore voting costs money, therefore it is a poll tax, therefore it is unconstitutional.
No photo ID lasts "decades."
 
It's required to vote, it costs money, therefore voting costs money, therefore it is a poll tax, therefore it is unconstitutional.
No photo ID lasts "decades."

You need an I.D. to do practically everything else in the world, why on earth would you not need it to vote.
 
“If anything, the incidents of the last election and the voter suppression all across the country to me mean we really need to expand Section 5’s jurisdiction to include Ohio and some of the other states that were left out,’’ Young said.

Ohio? Excuse me?




That woman was able to fill out and submit 5 absentee ballots and voted at the polls and this guy thinks Ohio needs to be part of the Voting Rights Act? :roll:
 
Everyone 18 years or older has the right to vote, if they present proper photographic identification, like school Id, state Id, or a drivers license.

Because those who are not a citizen of this country shouldn't have a vote on the representatives and laws of it's government.

I'd be absolutely fine with this if the statement was any citizen and require they have a valid state issued picture ID. And I'd be fine with spending the necessary funds to have the DMV's of each state be able to issue a free "Identification Card" to anyone with a valid social security number. Thus there would be a no cost option for every citizen to be able to have at least one form of picture ID.

I'm also entirely fine with having some general federal guidelines when it comes to elections for federal positions. However, I oppose the ever continuing attempt to make elections go earlier and earlier. My personal opinion is you allow people to have an absantee ballot if they qualify for conditions showing they live away from their home district most of the year (Military, those in school, etc) OR if they have a qualifying condition physically restraining them from venturing out to vote (some form of handicap). You also open the polls for one week, opening on the last Tuesday of October and closing on the first Tuesday of November.
 
I'm 100% ok with ID being required IF the ID is free to the voter. I would be ok with paying extra on taxes to ensure that voters that don't have ID get one. There, problem solved. The problem is getting the right to go along with that.
 
In florida they recently stopped sunday voting because that is when most of the non whites vote.So yes the voting rights act needs expanded to ptevent the republican party from making laws to supress democratic voters.

Understand?

I'll be darned. I wasn't aware that the republicans were the only one engaged in voter fraud.
 
I'm 100% ok with ID being required IF the ID is free to the voter. I would be ok with paying extra on taxes to ensure that voters that don't have ID get one. There, problem solved. The problem is getting the right to go along with that.

I'm sold. Heck, with the ID, you can go full electronic with the records as well, from an audit perspective.
 
If we required a voter to pass a 3rd-grade civics/math/English/history exam, the GOP would win every election by 40 points.

What we allow to vote makes forums like these pointless.
 
If we required a voter to pass a 3rd-grade civics/math/English/history exam, the GOP would win every election by 40 points.

What we allow to vote makes forums like these pointless.

Prove it by supplying some verification. Or, are you just dreaming?
 
Prove it by supplying some verification. Or, are you just dreaming?

All you have to do is look at California's 43rd Congressional District and look at who they keep sending back to Congress every two years, Maxine Waters.

Is that enough evidence for you ?
 
Prove it by supplying some verification. Or, are you just dreaming?

Jesse Jackson Jr. got re-elected in the middle of accusations of stealing campaign funds and disappearing for days on end into seclusion. Marion Berry, Maxine Waters, Chuck Schumer, Barney Frank, Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer......

It's not exactly a research assignment.
 
In florida they recently stopped sunday voting because that is when most of the non whites vote.So yes the voting rights act needs expanded to ptevent the republican party from making laws to supress democratic voters.

Understand?

You didn't seriously just post that. Right? You post this crap, then want to sxteam racism at every turn? Tell us that was sarcasm.
 
Breaking from Newsmax.com

Andrew Young: Expand Voting Rights Act

The Voting Rights Act has not outlived its usefulness and in fact should be expanded, says former Ambassador Andrew Young, who helped draft it in 1965.

“You'd think we wouldn’t be having this discussion 50 years later,’’ Young told Steve Malzberg on Newsmax TV’s “The Steve Malzberg Show.’’ “People are making efforts to make it more difficult for citizens to vote at a time when we need more citizens voting.’’

At issue is a case in front of Supreme Court involving Alabama’s Shelby County, which questions the validity of Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act. That section requires states with a history of racial discrimination to have any changes to their voting laws pre-approved by the Justice Department or federal court.

The suit claims the section — which now only affects a handful of states — has outlived its usefulness, and there are suggestions the Supreme Court may agree. Young does not.

“If anything, the incidents of the last election and the voter suppression all across the country to me mean we really need to expand Section 5’s jurisdiction to include Ohio and some of the other states that were left out,’’ Young said.

Great idea! Make all 50 states have to get preclearance for voting laws. For once, something I can agree with.
 
All you have to do is look at California's 43rd Congressional District and look at who they keep sending back to Congress every two years, Maxine Waters.

Is that enough evidence for you ?

One district? No.
 
Jesse Jackson Jr. got re-elected in the middle of accusations of stealing campaign funds and disappearing for days on end into seclusion. Marion Berry, Maxine Waters, Chuck Schumer, Barney Frank, Ted Kennedy, Barbara Boxer......

It's not exactly a research assignment.

There are a lot of congress people who keep getting elected year after year because they are popular.

I still see no proof other than they were re elected. So what?
 
They are very church orientated and a lot of them go to church on sunday.

So you are saying that the democrats are the true religious zealots in this country?
 
Five pages into this thread and no one has attacked the source of the article in the OP....strange
 
Back
Top Bottom