Proposed Voter ID Act Pulls Rug Out From Seniors

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

Proposed Voter ID Act Pulls Rug Out From Seniors
Senior Citizen Abuse Alert!

Voting Seniors are fixin' to have the rug pulled straight out from under
them come election time.

This is an extremely serious threat, if this legislation passes,
we are heading over a steap cliff -

Congress is set to decide new requirements of citizens before
you can go cast your ballot.
These requirements could very well cost you money, time and a lot of effort.
Citizens will have to produce documents that many of us do not have on hand

HR 4844, the Voter ID Act, if it passes in the Senate -
will disenfranchise millions of senior citizen voters in our country.
Most seniors will not have the documentation needed to PROVE that they are citizens.

Tom Paine Magazine calls HR 4844 the Voter Fraud Fraud.
Lots of detail (at Tom Paine) about why this legislation is so bad.

The House passed the bill Wednesday afternoon. Now it moves to the Senate.
If the senate betrays seniors and passes it, it will go into effect in 2008.

But We have to stop it NOW.

NC Voter's diary :: ::
The American Association of Retired People has actively opposed voter identification
legislation in several states wrote in a letter submitted into the record to congress:

"On behalf of older Americans who have largely shaped the values of our democracy,
we urge great care to ensure that the basic right to vote is not trampled in an effort to
address unproven allegations of voting issues."

Sadly, many people believe that the National Voter ID Act would be a
good thing for our country , because they have not read the "fine print".

Once you find out what will be required of you in order for you to
have "permission" to vote, you will be stunned:
Read more here -
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/9/23/185739/496

[Bitwit1234]

1. Birth Certificate

To get a birth certificate that is not 100 years old you are also going to need two different types of identification. Now if you don't have a birth certificate where are you going to get ID> Can you use a utility bill. Heck anybody can produce one of those. How about a drivers license a lot of people don't drive. Or maybe a social security card. No picture...I worked for motor vehicles and I know the hassle some people have to go thru to produce acceptable identification for that. Suppose you are 85 and don't remember any of the information needed for the birth certificate, suppose you don't have utility bills. Yes it is really really ridiculous.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

2. you can't use drivers license or utility bill

you have to prove you are a citizen, and most of us don't have anything
in our wallets or files to do that with.

The only document that currently meets the requirements of the
new voter id bill is a passport.

Voters will HAVE to have a birth certificate or passport minimum,
in order to obtain the government issued ID.

Its all about proving citizenship, not just proving who you are.

[jody]

13. HR 4844 "Federal Election Integrity Act of 2006'" accepts some drivers

licenses.
HR4844
QUOTE
(3) SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS FOR IDENTIFICATIONS- For purposes of paragraphs (1) and (2)--

`(A) an identification is `government-issued' if it is issued by the Federal Government or by the government of a State; and

`(B) an identification is one for which an individual was required to provide proof of United States citizenship as a condition for issuance if the identification displays an official marking or other indication that the individual is a United States citizen.'.
UNQUOTE

[NYC]

3. Poll tax.

Plain and simple.

[Up2Late]

4. They keep ruling the same type of law Unconstitutional here in Georgia.

This is very bad stuff, don't fall for the lies they keep telling that it's to prevent voter fraud, which currently only occurs in VERY rarely among the people who this law would effect most.

The ReThuglicans who keep pushing this here in Georgia NEVER mention that only about 1/2 of the counties here have Government offices where you can get one of these, even after they finally agreed to make them free of charge.

Being free is fine, if you have a Car to get to these one of county offices, something many elderly and poor people don't have access to. :mad:

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

5. Justice John "Torture is Ok" Roberts won't overturn HR 4844

This is really a "George Bush Protection Act", so that everyone that
he is hurting can't vote his gang out.

Exect Robo Calls from GOP in November telling DEMS that the photo ID
is required in 2006, even though it would be 2008.
(bad enough, but the deception will work for them now.)

[jody]

8. What federal court has ruled it unconstitutional in Georgia? Congress

has complete authority under our Constitution to determine the Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives.

[Up2Late]

10. No Federal Courts, this is a State Law, so the Feds have no say...

...in this matter, or at least that's how it's supposed to work.

And I think you're wrong about Congress "...has complete authority under our Constitution to determine the Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives." I'm almost positive that this is a State responsibility under the U.S. Constitution.

This is part of the problems and reasons that we don't have a single voting machine throughout the entire U.S., this type of Voting law is (or was) reserved for the States. This Act, if it ever becomes a law, would definitely be ruled unConstitutional, but that's not really the goal.

The Goal is to spread doubt and confusions among poorly educated Americans, who haven't been well educated about the workings of the U.S. Governmental system (which includes most Americans).

[jody]

12. Article I, Section 4 of our Constitution says, "The Times, Places, and

Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators."

[Up2Late]

14. You could be right, but I still think they are pushing it...

...and knowing theses douchebags, they probably are going to have a few "poison pills" in this Act.

Personally, I don't think it'll make it out of the Senate before the break (or at all), or at least that's what I'm hoping for.

[jody]

21. I gave a link to HR 4844 at #13 above. The part I object to is:

QUOTE
`(B) IDENTIFICATIONS PROVIDED AT NO COST TO INDIGENT INDIVIDUALS- If a State charges an individual a fee for providing a photo identification under the program established under subparagraph (A)--

`(i) the fee charged may not exceed the reasonable cost to the State of providing the identification to the individual; and

`(ii) the State may not charge a fee to any individual who provides an attestation that the individual is unable to afford the fee.
UNQUOTE

If the attestation is signing a simple statement such as "I can not afford to pay the fee" and not contested in any way, then I'll accept that.

I'm afraid however that local officials will require voters to submit proof of inability to pay and that's something I will not accept.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

26. GOP will define indigent - it will still be too much for poor/not indigent

my next door neighbor won't have the spare cash to get her proof
of citizenship.

A drivers license isn't enough.

The poor, elderly, minorities won't have the luxury of spare cash
and spare time to go on a hunt for the needed papers.

And frankly, this is Orwellian - we are having to jump through too many
hoops for the Gov now.

[jody]

27. Suggest you listen to Carter's interview at post #25 below. n/a

[galloglas]

36. Wha' Fo' ??

So we can listen to Mr. Pastor's Dog and Pony Show?

The one where Mark S. "Thor" Hearne is the only "voting rights advocate" to be called for testimony?

The same "Thor" Hearne who pretends to be a "lifeling voting rights advocate" and representing AC4VR (Americans for Voting Reform) which was formed just four days prior to the Commission's hearings?

The same "Thor" Hearne who went with JAMES BAKER, and John Bolton, to Florida to stop the recount?

The same "Thor" Hearne who shared AC4VR's post office box with both "Guns" Gannon AND the Swift Boat Campaign?

The same "Thor" Hearne who wrote Missouri SR 1014? Who served as Matt Blumt's counsel when Blunt (as the SoS) declared himself the winner of the 2004 MO Governor's race, with Hearne's blessing (and no recount)?

The same "Thor" Hearne who will on 10-4-2006, stand in front of the Missouri Supreme Court and argue the position of the GOP legislators, and (faux) Governor Matt Blunt's, position in the attempt to disenfranchise 200,000 Missouri voters??

Pray tell why??

There is no need listening to BS when one can smell it!

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

66. Pelosi: Voter ID Bill Is an Attempt to Suppress the Votes of Millions

for the Democrats on this list, here is what House Democratic Leader Pelosi
says about HR 4844:

WASHINGTON, Sept. 20 /U.S. Newswire/ -- House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi spoke on the House floor this afternoon in opposition to H.R. 4844, the Republican voter suppression bill. Below are Pelosi's remarks..

"Today, however, we are undermining that right to vote, and the reauthorization of the VRA. And in doing so, we are undermining our democracy. Though the right to vote is the foundation of our democracy, the bill we debate today would in effect disenfranchise millions of American voters: the elderly, African Americans, Asian Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, people with disabilities; and the list goes on. As the NAACP has said, this bill 'would disenfranchise many of the very citizens that the VRA is designed to protect.' And the Republicans call that integrity. I don't think so...

"Supporters of this Republican voter suppression bill will claim this bill is about preventing non-citizens from voting. It's just the opposite. It's a bill designed to prevent citizens from voting. Non-citizens are strictly prohibited under law from voting and face tough penalties for breaking these laws, and that's right. No one condones fraud; there is little evidence anywhere in the country of a significant problem with non-citizen voters, as our distinguished Ranking Member pointed out. If you want to make a case, document it. Just don't claim it and then come through with a clear and transparent attempt to cut off the votes of those who don't share your political point of view. You didn't take an oath of office to do that.

[Up2Late]

29. "...an attestation..." will probably a legal document...

...that a person has to get from a Lawyer, thus proving that the person does have the money for the I.D., seeing how they just paid a Lawyer a few hundred Dollars for the "attestation."

This whole exercise is a bogus, political "issue" for the 2006/2008 political campaigns.

[jody]

30. I agree. That's my major concern. n/a

[galloglas]

35. Submit proof of inabilty to pay???????????

Excuuuuuuuuuuuse ME!


Darlin' how do you propose to prove that?


Can't the nasty old board of Election Commisiioner just keep askin'
"But how do I know you don't have stocks, or bonds, or gold buried in the back yard?"


What is your suggestion if the (citizen) pauper says,
"But I don't!!" and the BoE person says "Prove it!"


You are really great at sophistry, Honeybunch. So, how do YOU prove a negative?


Say, if I ask you,
"You know, you sound like a Karl Rove plant, training and all. Prove me wrong!"


Kinda tough to prove that, isn't it??


BTW, all those cute, but discriminatory, epithets are names to make you think about the 19th Amendment, and your quotation of Article I, Section 4 of our Constitution, above.

See, without that amendment, you couldn't vote could you, Sweetie? That is if you can prove you really ARE a woman.

[proud2BlibKansan]

39. A poll tax is a poll tax is a poll tax

It doesn't matter if the voters are not poor. It's still a friggin poll tax. Sheesh

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

73. GOP refuses to exempt military, elderly, disabled & Katrina victims

Republicans refuse to exempt the military, elderly, disabled and Katrina victims.

HR 4844 passed house strictly on party line vote, with GOP for the measure

9/24/2006 Roll Call | How your U.S. lawmaker voted
By Thomas Voting Reports

Voter ID requirement: By a vote of 228-196, the House on Wednesday sent the Senate a Republican bill (HR 4844) requiring that by 2008, voters in federal elections would have to show a photo ID. Starting in 2010, the photo document would have to also show proof of citizenship. The bill would require states to help poor people obtain IDs but authorizes no funds for that purpose.

Meanwhile, GOP refuse DEMS request to exempt the military & families, eldely,
disabled and Katrina victims.

Democrats' vote plan: By a vote of 196-225, the House on Wednesday defeated a Democratic bid to exempt from HR 4844 (above) military voters and their families at home and abroad, the elderly, the disabled and certain Hurricane Katrina victims
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2003272863_rollcall24.html

[proud2BlibKansan]

75. Do you really think that poor people will walk in to their state offices

and admit they are poor and need a free ID?

[galloglas]

32. Did you read what you wrote?

Quote: shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof

That pretty much says it.

Quote: but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing (sic) Senators. is important (as in, not meaning doodly) for 2 reasons.

1) We have amended the Constitution (like #13 & 14) to change the part you quoted.

2) Marbury vs. Madison, 1803, gives the US Supreme Court the right to take any law passed by Congress and declare if it is unconstitutional, or not.



So, it doesn't matter a tinker's dam whether HR 4844 tries to change the laws regulating the states ability to regulate their own manner of voting. Any law springing from that effort may well be unconstitutional.


But, perhaps, you are the Constitutionalist Party stripe?

Or a believer in the proposed Constitutional Restoration Act (SB 520 of 2006) which would gut Marbury vs. Madison, allow the Congress to alter our Constitutional rights by a 51% vote of both Houses, and allow the following,

Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, the Supreme Court shall not have jurisdiction to review, by appeal, writ of certiorari, or otherwise, any matter to the extent that relief is sought against an entity of Federal, State, or local government, or against an officer or agent of Federal, State, or local government (whether or not acting in official or personal capacity), concerning that entity's, officer's, or agent's acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.'.

which would permit me, if I were a city marshal, to hunt you down, pop you with a 9mm Glock, and not even go to court if I said, "God told me to do it!"

You know, it's all the rage to believe that now! The very best of the Dominionist Religious Right, and their Congressional toadies, are for it.

You, too, huh?

Or would you concede that HR 4844 might just be unconstitutional??

[jody]

33. Suggest you read the annotations to Section 4. Clause 1 at Findlaw below.

FEDERAL LEGISLATION PROTECTING ELECTORAL PROCESS
QUOTE
Not until 1842 did Congress undertake to exercise the power to regulate the ''times, places and manner of holding elections for Senators and Representatives.'' In that year, it passed a law requiring the election of Representatives by districts. 323 In subsequent years, Congress expanded on the requirements, successively adding contiguity, compactness, and substantial equality of population to the districting requirements. 324 However, no challenge to the seating of Members-elect selected in violation of these requirements was ever successful, 325 and Congress deleted the standards from the 1929 apportionment act. 326 More success attended a congressional resolution in 1866 of deadlocks in state legislatures over the election of Senators, often resulting in vacancies for months. The act required the two houses of each legislature to meet in joint session on a specified day and to meet every day thereafter until a Senator was selected. 327

The first comprehensive federal statute dealing with elections was adopted in 1870 as a means of enforcing the Fifteenth Amendment's guarantee against racial discrimination in granting suffrage rights. 328 Under the Enforcement Act of 1870, and subsequent laws, false registration, bribery, voting without legal right, making false returns of votes cast, interference in any manner with officers of election, and the neglect by any such officer of any duty required of him by state or federal law were made federal offenses. 329 Provision was made for the appointment by federal judges of persons to attend at places of registration and at elections with authority to challenge any person proposing to register or vote unlawfully, to witness the counting of votes, and to identify by their signatures the registration of voters and election talley sheets. 330 When the Democratic Party regained control of Congress, these pieces of Reconstruction legislation dealing specifically with elections were repealed, 331 but other statutes prohibiting interference with civil rights generally were retained and these were utilized in later years. More recently, Congress has enacted, in 1957, 1960, 1964, 1965, 1968, 1970, 1975, 1980, and 1982, legislation to protect the right to vote in all elections, federal, state, and local, through the assignment of federal registrars and poll watchers, suspension of literacy and other tests, and the broad proscription of intimidation and reprisal, whether with or without state action. 332

Another chapter was begun in 1907 when Congress passed the Tillman Act, prohibiting national banks and corporations from making contributions in federal elections. 333 The Corrupt Practices Act, first enacted in 1910 and replaced by another law in 1925, extended federal regulation of campaign contributions and expendi tures in federal elections 334 and other acts have similarly provided other regulations. 335

As we have noted above, although Sec. 2, cl. 1, of this Article vests in the States the responsibility, now limited, to establish voter qualifications for congressional elections, the Court has held that the right to vote for Members of Congress is derived from the Federal Constitution, 336 and that Congress therefore may legislate under this section of the Article to protect the integrity of this right. Congress may protect the right of suffrage against both official and private abridgment. 337 Where a primary election is an integral part of the procedure of choice, the right to vote in that primary election is subject to congressional protection. 338 The right embraces, of course, the opportunity to cast a ballot and to have it counted honestly. 339 Freedom from personal violence and intimidation may be secured. 340 The integrity of the process may be safeguarded against a failure to count ballots lawfully cast 341 or the dilution of their value by the stuffing of the ballot box with fraudulent ballots. 342 But the bribery of voters, although within reach of congressional power under other clauses of the Constitution, has been held not to be an interference with the rights guaranteed by this section to other qualified voters. 343

To accomplish the ends under this clause, Congress may adopt the statutes of the States and enforce them by its own sanctions. 344 It may punish a state election officer for violating his duty under a state law governing congressional elections. 345 It may, in short, utilize its power under this clause, combined with the nec essary-and-proper clause, to regulate the times, places, and manner of electing Members of Congress so as to fully safeguard the integrity of the process; it may not, however, under this clause, provide different qualifications for electors than those provided by the States. 346
UNQUOTE

[galloglas]

37. Yeah, nice quote

Now, after cutting and pasting it, let's have your interpretation! Specifics.

Then you can have your head ... ona platter.


BTW, your the "Top Gun", aren't you?

The GOP must REALLY be worried about the demise of HR 4844.

And Brad Friedman's shot at the LAVA Act!!

Sweatin' bullets are they?

Well send Rove a message. A Democrat will proudly stand (if Hastert will recognize a Democrat next week) and introduce LAVA next week!

[galloglas]

28. Sorry Sweetie, you're dead wrong!

The Constituiton delegates that authority to the states!

[jody]

34. No, you're wrong and I gave proof in post # 33 above. n/a

[galloglas]

38. Well, instead of cut'n'paste from Findlaw

Why don't you just tell us all in plain, simple English just how your cut'n'paste proves it.

Not everyone else reading these exchanges is a Constitutional Lawyer.

So indulge us, huh?

Or crawl back under the rock.

[FogerRox]

77. Voter ID law, in 3 states has been struck down in those states

by that states S. Court. PAY ATTENTION JODY. YOu are comin to a gun fight with a paper airplane.

[indepat]

6. What if they gave an election and no one came?

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

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

[jody]

9. I assume you oppose Voter IDs. If so then you disagree with the

Carter Baker Commission's report and that means you believe Jimmy Carter is either a (a) Rove operative, (b) covert racist, (c) ignorant, or (d) all three. Those who harbor such beliefs don't know very much about the peanut farmer from Plains, Georgia.

If you oppose Voter IDs, then you have a personal problem because some variant of Voter ID will become a requirement for voting for Senators and Representatives.

Voter IDs are constitutional because our Constitution says, "The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators."

Have a peaceful evening. :hi:

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

15. I do oppose racism, and so does Jimmy Carter

The racist recommendation of a poll tax came from Baker, not Carter.

[jody]

17. The Carter-Baker Commission's report is at the link below. Please tell me

what page in the report recommends a poll tax.

The only reference to a poll tax is a dissenting opinion by Tom Daschle, Spencer Overton. and Raul Yzaguirre, "The documents required by REAL ID to secure a driver’s license, and consequently a photo ID to vote under this recommendation, include a birth certificate, passport or naturalization papers, a photo identity document, and proof of Social Security number. Obtaining such documents can be difficult, even for those not displaced by the devastation of Hurricane Katrina. For some, the Commission’s ID proposal constitutes nothing short of a modern day poll tax."

Building Confidence in U.S. Elections

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

18. a poll tax means it cost money to get the documents needed

Sorry to see that you are glad that many elderly and poor won't be
allowed to vote in 2008 if this ill constructed law passes.

However, Rove is very happy with HR 4844, and hey, maybe he dreamed it up.
It certainly fits in with everything else done to prevent people from voting.

[jody]

23. Apparently the only thing you support is letting anyone vote without proof

of citizenship.

Do you know of any country who will let anyone vote without proof of citizenship?

There are other problems with voting including U.S. citizens with dual citizenships who can vote in the U.S. and another country. For example, some U.S. citizens are also Iraqi citizens and were eligible to vote both in the U.S. and Iraq.

[proud2BlibKansan]

40. Which part of poll tax do you not understand?

[galloglas]

46. No. I support Constitutional Rights of Americans

Do you know of any country who will let anyone vote without proof of citizenship?

Yep. The US of A.

In August, here in Mssouri.

And most any other country where the voter is known by the citizens at the polling place, where on must sign a poll book.

Usually, immediately before going to cast a hand marked paper ballot, to be hand counted at the site it was cast at. In front of the public, press, God and everyone. It's called transparency.

There are other problems with voting including U.S. citizens with dual citizenships who can vote in the U.S. and another country.

You got a problem with that?? Who loses there?

For example, some U.S. citizens are also Iraqi citizens and were eligible to vote both in the U.S. and Iraq.

Yep. Good on 'em!

That may be the single possibly good event to come from our pre-emptive agression against a sovereign nation.

You got a problem with that, Spike??

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

19. HR 4844 should be called the GOP Protection Act N/T

[jody]

22. Why? Some Democrats support Voter ID even though you don't.

Final House vote on HR 4844 was 224 Repug & 4 Dem Yeas vs. 192 Dem & 3 Repug Nays.

FINAL VOTE RESULTS FOR ROLL CALL 459

[proud2BlibKansan]

42. 4 Dems

4

You should say "a few Dems".

[galloglas]

47. That's a tremendous statistical analysis!

Final House vote on HR 4844 was 224 Repug & 4 Dem Yeas vs. 192 Dem & 3 Repug Nays.

Let's see: that is 1.3 % of the Republicans against #4844

and------------- 97.9 % of the Democrats against it


And the "Ayes":

Let' see: that is 97.8 % of the Republicans FOR #4844

and-------------- 2.04 % of the Democrats FOR #4844



OH!! Yeah! Now I see your point... but it's not on your pencil.

[galloglas]

41. Why don't you tell us what page

that they recommend the impossibly stringent requirements as proposed in Missouri?

Please see the page from the MO SoS included in my own cut'n'paste to another "Doubting Thomasina"

As for PA-DEM's suggestion that you, or I,

"Take your 80 year old aunt out for a valid state ID and a nice lunch, for crying out loud! Have her bring a couple utility bills and a social security card and you're good to go."

I have news for them.

Missouri is requiring photo IDs, alright; but a Driver's License, a Passport, or a Military Photo.

How many of our 80 year old aunts are still licensed drivers? Or with valid Passports? Or still active military?

Specifically excluded as IDs (from the MO SoS page) are:

1) Voter Identification Card
2) Utility Bill
3) Bank Statement
4) Paycheck Stub
5) University ID
6) Employer ID

So, if you don't have an ID, here's what the SoS asks you to do (on your lunch with the 80 year old aunt).

(Again, from the MO SoS page.)

"Here’s What You’ll Need To Do:"

1. Show Who You Are.
ONE of these will do:
* Social Security Card
* Medicare Card
* U.S. Passport
If your name on the card you show does not match your current name, you must show proof of name change on:
* Marriage License
* Divorce Decree
* Court Order
* Adoption Papers

2. Show You’re A U.S. Citizen.
ONE of these will do:
* Birth Certificate
* U.S. Passport, valid or expired
* Certificate of Citizenship
* Certificate of Naturalization
* Certificate of Birth Abroad

3. Show Where You Live.
ONE of these will do.
* Recent Utility Bill
* Voter Registration Card
* Government Check
* Pay Check
* Property Tax Receipt
* Rental Contract for Current Address
* Letter from Postmaster in Last 30 Days
* Government Document Showing Name and Address in Last 30 Days


Now, KEYSTONE, if you and auntie get that handled, here's where you go to get those Photo IDs.

(Again, from the Sos Official Page)

You can get a Missouri driver’s license or non-driver’s license at your local Department of Revenue office (average wait time 2 to three hours, without any extra people showing up for IDs). Non-driver’s licenses may be free of charge. To find the license office nearest you, call 866-443-4165 or go to www.dor.mo.gov/mvd/offloc. (There are an average of 1.3 offices per county, statewide! So, average trip would be about 70 miles, roundtrip)

Also, a Mobile Licensing Unit (there are only 4 of them) will travel the state to visit locations accessible to and frequented by elderly and disabled Missourians who cannot visit a motor vehicle license office. These units will provide an opportunity to sign up for photo IDs that will be mailed out later. (any chance of a slipup there?????) To check the schedule, call 866-443-4165 or go to: http://www.dor.mo.gov/mvdl/drivers/voterid.pdf

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

54. Drivers License NOT proof of Citizenship

folks - for the federal legislation, HR 4844 the
requirement goes beyond what some right winger state laws
require.

HR 4844 requires proof of citizenship.

Only a passport currently serves as such a document.

The govt issued id will require a birth certificate at least.

Your drivers license is worthless for this purpose.

[jody]

68. You assert that HR 4844 excludes drivers license but that remains

to be proven.

HR 4844 says:
QUOTE
(1) INDIVIDUALS VOTING IN PERSON-

`(A) REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE IDENTIFICATION- Notwithstanding any other provision of law and except as provided in subparagraph (B), the appropriate State or local election official may not provide a ballot for an election for Federal office to an individual who desires to vote in person unless the individual presents to the official--

`(i) a government-issued, current, and valid photo identification; or

`(ii) in the case of the regularly scheduled general election for Federal office held in November 2010 and each subsequent election for Federal office, a government-issued, current, and valid photo identification for which the individual was required to provide proof of United States citizenship as a condition for the issuance of the identification.
UNQUOTE

For example Florida law says:
QUOTE
United States Citizens

Florida law requires identification, proof of date of birth and social security number (if issued) from all customers before a driver license or identification card can be issued. Each U.S. citizen who applies for an original driver license or identification card must submit:

One of the following (3) documents:

1. Original or certified United States birth certificate, including territories and District of Columbia; or
2. Valid United States passport; or
3. Certificate of Naturalization
4. Effective April 10, 2002, United States Military ID cards with an officer rank will be accepted as proof of citizenship only; however, not as proof of primary identification.
5. NOTE: Proof of citizenship or legal presence may be required for renewal, duplicate or replacement licenses. Please come prepared to present one of the above identification documents as proof of citizenship or legal presence.

And a secondary document, which substantiates the primary document, is required. Document may include, but is not limited to, the original or certified copy of one of the following:

1. School record stating date of birth, which must contain the registrar’s signature.
2. Transcript of the birth record filed with a public officer charged with the duty of recording certificates.
3. Baptism certificate, which shows date of birth and the place of baptism.
4. An insurance policy on the customer’s life which has been in force for at least two years and has the month, day and year of birth.
5. United States military or military dependent identification card.
* Effective April 10, 2002, United States Military ID cards with an officer rank will be accepted as proof of citizenship only; however, not as proof of primary identification.
6. Florida or out-of-state driver license, valid or expired.
7. Florida license record or identification card record.
8. Selective Service Registration (Draft Card).
9. Florida Vehicle Registration certificate (HSMV 83399, owner’s copy) obtained from the tax collector’s office where the customer’s vehicle was registered, Florida, or out-of-state registration certificate, if name and date of birth are shown.
10. Florida and out-of-state non-driver identification cards (state issued).
11. Receipt copy of your last Florida driver license issuance.
12. Immigration form I-571.
13. Federal form DD-214 (military record).
14. Marriage certificate.
15. Court order, which includes legal name.
16. A Florida voter registration card, which was issued at least 3 months previously.
17. Personal identification by an examiner or by a person well known to the examiner.
18. Social Security Card.
19. Family bible record or birth announcement in baby book.
20. Parent consent form of minor.
21. Out-of-country driver license or identification card, government issued
UNQUOTE

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

70. A DRIVERS LICENSE IS NOT PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP

A DRIVERS LICENSE MIGHT BE PROOF OF CITIZENSHIP IN PRESIDENT
JEB BUSHES STATE, BUT IT ISN'T IN 47 OTHER STATES.

WHY BE SO IN LOVE WITH A PIECE OF LEGISLATION THAT IS INTENDED TO
KEEP DEMS FROM THE POLLS?

WHY WOULD ANYONE WANT TO BLOCK THE DEMOCRATIC VOTE?

ALL THE EXCUSES IN THE WORLD DON'T CHANGE THE FACT THAT THIS IS A
VOTER SUPRESSION ACT.

I WANT DEMS TO WIN, HENCE I DON'T SUPPORT A LAW THAT BLOCKS A HUGE NUMBER
OF DEMS FROM VOTING.

[jody]

72. Sorry, HR4844 is not yet a law and no one can say whether a driver's

license is acceptable under the bill's section I quoted.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

79. I am truly sickened to see someone posting in favor of HR 4844

it is the most sickening sight.

And that DU allows it sickens me too.

Anyway, a drivers license is NOT proof of citizenship,
and HR 4844 requires a photo id that proves citizenship.

Jody seems happy about this, so much so that it was worth
his/her time to start another thread.

But we need to keep the message up there for DEMS, where it can be seen -

HR 4844 DISENFRANCHISES SENIORS

[JimDandy]

24. In an NPR interview

James Baker stated that Jimmy Carter had agreed to the Voter ID issue in order to form the Baker/Carter Commission. It was a compromise, not a heart-felt agreement.

[jody]

25. I suggest you listen to the Carter interview at the link below. I accept

what Carter says rather than a rumor from Baker that you assert.

COMMISSION ON FEDERAL ELECTION REFORM

[Name removed]

48. Deleted message

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

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

71. Harry Reid: SENATE DEMOCRATS DECRY MODERN-DAY POLL TAX

Flawed legislation would require passport to vote

September 22, 2006

SENATE DEMOCRATS DECRY MODERN-DAY POLL TAX

Flawed legislation would require passport to vote


Washington, DC — Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid today joined Democratic Senators Edward Kennedy, Christopher Dodd, and Barack Obama to send the following letter to Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist, calling on the Republican Leader to put aside any plans to bring the House voter ID legislation to the Senate floor. In a year when the Congress finally passed a reauthorization of the Voting Rights Act, the Democrats urged Senator Frist not to attempt to pass legislation that has been likened to a modern-day poll tax and would disenfranchise thousands.


“Not long ago, Democrats and Republicans from the House and Senate proudly stood together to reauthorize the Voting Rights Act,” said Senator Reid. “It is a travesty that only months later the Republican Congress would now consider denying thousands of American citizens their most basic right to vote. I hope this Republican Congress, which has done so little for so long, will not do something so terribly wrong in its final days in session.”

“The Senate came together to pass the Voting Rights Act, but now Republicans want to undermine access to the ballot by imposing expensive and unrealistic new requirements that are cynically designed to keep eligible citizens from voting,” said Senator Kennedy. “By 2010, this bill would impose a twenty-first century poll tax of $97 because American citizens would need to buy a passport just to vote. Federal and state courts have stopped similar laws because of the unjustified burden they place on the right to vote. The hardest hit would be the elderly, minorities, persons with disabilities, and members of some religious faiths. We should be working together to encourage our citizens to exercise their right to vote, not devising new ways to keep people from the polls.”
http://democrats.senate.gov/newsroom/record.cfm?id=263646&

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

81. POLLWRKR Tried to TURN AWAY this VOTER W/PASSPORT

Posted at a message board for Seniors:

"Let me tell you something interesting here Legal. During the last election, I used a passport for an ID. Can you think of anything more government issued and an info checked government identification than this, better than a drivers license I would say. Well, I just about didn't get to vote because the poll worker thought the picture was "too fuzzy" her words, not mine. I told this poll worker that that passport had just gotten me through 5 foreign countries and back into the US with no "fuzzy "problems and that I'd been voting in the same place for 14 years without a problem. I was "allowed" to vote, but had I not been forceful I'm sure I would have been turned away. For the record, I'm a registered Independent. I reported this experience to the local authorities and to the local Democratic party. In the next election, I will be using the same passport as an ID and I can assure you I will be exercising my right to vote. "


http://community.aarp.org/n/pfx/forum.aspx?nav=messages&tsn=1&tid=37868&webtag=rp-issues

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

16. of course the GOP pays operatives to post on message boards

you can count on it.

This happens at Kos too.

Why wouldn't Rove infiltrate DU.

Imagine being paid to post anti democratic messages all day.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

20. I took action. HR 4844 is meant to block seniors and minorities

I reported to Skinner what appears to be an attempt to undermine Democrats.
You should notify the moderators on that thread, and also email the message and
link directly to Skinner, as well.

No democrat would support a law that is clearly intended to disenfranchise
democrats.

And you know the GOP lobby doesn't want elderly to vote, considering the
GOP is getting ready to kill Social Security.

We can't have anti Democrats hijacking DU

[proud2BlibKansan]

43. Good suggestion

I am about over this crap.

[JimDandy]

31. Posters on that thread seem to

be looking at the original post as a problem to be solved. I was doing it too, although I didn't post any of my solutions, because it would have detracted from the real reason for the post. People want to help and it's intriguing to figure out how to do something that no one has been able to do. (getting ID for her mom.) To put it simply, they were playing detective, instead of focusing on the ramifications of a large number of elderly or poor Americans not being able to vote due to lack of ID.

By the way, my first suggestion would have been to order a copy of the 1930 census (birth place and age at last birthday are listed for each individual in the family) and use that to obtain a delayed birth certificate. States have accepted such documentation in cases where there was no family left to verify a person's birth. And especially when presented with other documents such as a birth announcement in the local newspaper or elementary school records etc.

[proud2BlibKansan]

44. The state of MO won't accept census records

I believe we stated that fact about a jillion times in my thread.

[JimDandy]

51. I read your thread

when it had less than 100 posts. I just went back and searched that thread for the term "census" and saw that there are now several posters who have suggested using census records. But Ms. Toad's post, #297, was the first to suggest the same indirect route of using the census to get a delayed birth certificate (as opposed to presenting it as some kind of documentary ID for voting purposes.) As a professional genealogist some years back, I in fact helped two clients in another state do exactly that using census records in combination with other records. Sorry to hear the State of Missouri won't accept them for that purpose. It's disgusting that an 81 year-old is being put through the wringer, when she is simply trying to vote.

Your original post, and now the whole thread, is doing its job, though, of showing just how difficult, if not impossible, it will be for millions of voters like your mom to be able to continue to vote, if this bill becomes law. If you haven't done so already, the bill's sponsor's should hear her story -- and every story like it.

[proud2BlibKansan]

58. I am working on a letter to my congress critter

Do you know who sponsored this bill? I guess I could look it up. Great sugggestion. Thanks.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

67. Auto ACTION ALERT you can take

the bill was sponsored by Congressman Henry Hyde (R).

There is an action alert here:

House Plays Politics with the Right to Vote
Urge Senate to STOP the bill that threatens to disenfranchise hundreds of
thousands of American citizens!

September 22, 2006 -- In renewing and restoring the Voting Rights Act earlier this year, Congress and President Bush reaffirmed the nation’s commitment to providing access to the ballot box for all Americans. But late Wednesday, the House of Representatives voted nearly completely along party lines (228-196) to pass an ill-conceived voter ID bill that would cause hundreds of thousands of voters to be disenfranchised.

The House bill, H.R. 4844, requires all voters to obtain and show government-issued photo ID proving their citizenship before they can vote. But because in the vast majority of states, drivers’ licenses do not currently require proof of citizenship, this would mean that voters who do not bring to the polls a photo ID that verifies their citizenship – such as a passport – could not vote!

H.R. 4844 was considered alongside a series of enforcement-only immigration bills, in a move that Cecilia Munoz of the National Council of La Raza describes as “politically playing with fire.” This political maneuvering is an affront to the gains made in renewing the Voting Rights Act and an affront to the effort to pursue comprehensive immigration reform. The Senate must stop this bill in its tracks!

GO TO THIS LINK TO TAKE ACTION -
http://civilrightscoalition.org/campaign/stopthehardertovoteact

I prefer to emphasize the disenfranchisement of seniors, because
the GOP constituents won't like that, but they will approve of
disenfranchising minorities. There is still alot of bigotry on
that side.

My own brother is a GOPer, and it shocks me how backwards he is
when it comes to racial discrimination. Agh.

Too much Rush Limbaugh.

But the GOP doesn't want to admit that they are kicking the legs out
from under seniors, but you know they MUST stop seniors from voting.

(so they can cut social security and medicare.).

[proud2BlibKansan]

74. Thank you!!

Great info.

[galloglas]

49. That's Dandy, Jim. Freakin' Just Dandy!

You read all 300 plus posts in that attack and come up with that lame ass shit??

You not getting to move into Jody's paycheck. You're toast. Those GOP bastards will cut and run on you like the Iraqi Police Force!! As Boosh would say,

"You're hipsory. Uh,... herstory. I'm mean... Uh,.. He's Story"

and, turning Bush says, "You're doin' a great job there, Brow.. er, Jimmy. Here's your Presidential Medal of Freedom!"

and (in an aside to security) "Get this bastard out of my sight!"

[JimDandy]

52. No. Read less than 100.

I'd give a better response to your post, if I knew what the heck you were saying. :shrug:

[galloglas]

56. Just this, Jim

When I read all the attacks on Proud last night, I knew some might be from ignorance, but not all of them.

Maybe I'm trained to see the undercurrent quicker than some, maybe it is my "tinfoil hat". But, like the Ohio elections, there was no possible way that all of that could be unintentional. So I asked a question of my friends in ERD. It is post # 7.

I ran an errand, came back 90 minutes later, and this thread was aflame, just like Proud's was. And the rats were cornered. Not only that, but "Jody" was doing her job disinfo better and faster than any human should be able to. A dead giveaway.

And a dead giveaway as to what the GOP, Rove, and the remaining disruptors and Trolls at DU are afraid of. The absolutely irrefutable argument that 4844 meant to disenfranchise voters, not keep "macacas" from voting gravestones:sarcasm:, en masse.

But, and I said as much in post #7, if anyone could read those 300 posts and not know we were being spun, trolled, and infiltrated, then they were too damned dumb to vote anyway.

It's like all the idiots in the country who still think Saddam Hussein flew the planes into the Twin Towers. People who still believe that should not be let off their leases after dark.

[roseBudd]

59. Jody attacked my posts on a much shorter Voter ID thread also...

The poor lead disorganized chaotic lives. I don't blame them for it nor do I think they should have to get their shit together before they can have their voices heard. If you have a valid social and a matching birth date you are who say you are. Using identity theft to cast 1 vote in person is impractical, risky and not worth it. This is not how elections are stolen.

NO ONE IS TOO DUMB TOO VOTE. IF THEY WISH TO VOTE THEY CAN.

Do you realize in poor neighborhoods how many people will have no proof of where they live because they are unemployed and they stay with someone such as a sister, grandpa, girl friend etc? If you are selling bootleg DVDs on a street corner for a living and you live with your aunt, you will be disenfranchised.

[Gormy Cuss]

62. A nice description of how this is just as bad as the old poll taxes.

People who have never lived in low income communities are often shocked when I point out similar things. I knew throwaway kids who had no idea where they had been born, never mind having a copy of their own birth certificate. I knew many people who had no driver's licenses because they couldn' afford to take the test -- the biggest stumbling block being finding a car to use.

Of course, there are some people who would suggest that the bootleg DVD seller or the person sleeping on grannie's couch doesn't deserve the right to vote.

[roseBudd]

63. I did walk lists in low income and the person who answered the door was

often a "stay with" rather than a "live at". A large chunk of the homeless population are people who stay with aquaintances or relatives and they often grab their large garbage bags of clothes and move on to the next "stay with". Do we really expect them to have a birth certificate in that bag? When they are evicted do we really think that birth certificate will be one of the items that doesn't end in a heap on the curb?

The GOP is panincing because of increased participation in voting by low income and young voters and this is not their demographic. It is exactly what it looks like. Suppression.

It is also cover for dismantling social security.

[BeFree]

11. Bunch of thieves!

They will do anything to steal or obstruct voters!

Yes, it could be constitutional for federal elections, but that doesn't mean this particular law would be. I would say that this law wouldn't be constitutional, and should not even be passed.

I had a voter ID and it was given to me when I registered. It didn't make too much difference because once registered one could have the pollworkers look you up in the poll book if you didn't have the ID.

Any attempt to legislate a voter ID via CONgress should be fought all the way.

[bleever]

45. "You think you can vote? Prove it!"

Yeah, that's American democracy alright.

Gentle shifts of the burden of proof, at all levels, to keep popular sentiment from interfering with the consolidation of power.

[galloglas]

50. Wowsers!!

Nice work, y'all!

Will, Proud, Bleever, BeFree, everybody!!:woohoo:

Shine some light on these Roaches and watch them scuttle!!

Feels good to win a few rounds!:toast:

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

53. HR 4844 to prevent Seniors from voting against Social Security Raiders

The GOP are scared shitless that everyone they have screwed over
will vote the suckers out.

The GOP want to completely dismantle social security, and they
need to stop seniors from voting.

The paid GOP hacks who are posting here at DU think we give a shit what
ever excuses there are for making it to f'in hard for seniors to vote.

My next door neighbor is on a limited income, and still will vote for
that idiot Bush, because she thinks he is annointed by God.

But - she won't have the money to pay for documents to PROVE she is
a citizen of the US. She doesn't have a car, and she depends on her alcoholic
nephew to take care of her yard. Sometimes they don't have the money
to buy gas for her lawnmower, and I give them some.

ALthough we live in a nice neighborhood (modest but nice), and my
neighbor owns her home (she's a widow), she has to go to a local
church a couple of times a month to get free bread and some vegatables.

This is the kind of bullshit that the GOP likes.

But, even GOP seniors are waking up, and they aren't going to vote for
monsters who will cut their legs out from under them.

Ask any senior citizen neighbors of yours if they have their birth certificate
or a passport handy. Folks will get caught short and come up late with what they
need - and too late to vote.

[galloglas]

57. Hope we dodge a bullet on this

Of course you're right about everything. But perhaps we all, working together, can alter that course.

Brad Friedman has the legislative text for his proposed LAVA act. I made sure it was in my Congressman's hands by Thursday. Had breakfast with him this morning.

Guess what? His 83 year old dad can't ever pass the citizenship test. No documents! Well, I've got his promise to introduce, or co-sponsor, the bill!

The Senate has a week to work. They have to choose to either pass the "Fair Torture Act" for Boss Bush, OR, they have to quickly muster up a JR to go with 4844 and pass it.

Tough choice for them.

I hope they will protect Bush's Butt, then the wheels fly off the Diebold Cheat-o-Matic train, and the Dems actually win the seats they win. Take both Houses and Impeach the bastard (both of 'em... No, ALL of 'em).

That done, let's send them to the Hague for War Crimes, where I hope they hang.

In a week's time they hafta move fast. Moving fast makes them shaky, and they become transparent (like "jody" did tonight).

Maybe they will screw it up so bad everyone will see it. I hope so. The Emperor with no clothes, the Court Jester telling fart jokes!


But, as for me, I think all of us should vent as loud and as hard as we can, stop cutting corners, stop playing cute with words, and hammer these GOP SOBs. Continually. Until we, all Americans, make them take responsibility for what they have done.

If they screw us again this November, we must take the streets, IMHO.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

64. 9/23 AP News - "Dems: GOP Again Targets Social Security"

Dems: GOP Again Targets Social Security

By JENNIFER TALHELM
The Associated Press
Saturday, September 23, 2006; 11:43 AM

WASHINGTON -- Republicans will revive their effort to overhaul Social Security after the November elections, a "dangerous" plan that would cut benefits to senior citizens, the Democratic candidate for a Denver-area House seat said Saturday.

"We can and must stop them _ right now, before it's too late," Ed Perlmutter said in the Democrats' weekly radio address. "Just last year, Democrats stood up to President Bush and the Republicans in Congress, and fought back against this dangerous proposal and defeated it."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/23/AR2006092300295.html

The GOP must stop as many seniors from voting as possible.
MUST BLOCK VOTES.

If only the rich and privileged can vote, then privatizing social security will
be a breeze.

[kster]

55. The same congress that REMAINS SILENT about the SECRET VOTE COUNTING

MACHINES is now going to fix the Seniors problem, PLEASE, are theY going to do it silently? :rofl:

[galloglas]

61. Yeah, silently for the deaf!

Isn't that a bunch of BS.

The GOP spends a gajillion dollars to RAM HAVA down our throats!

And about 3 billion gets past the outstretched paws of Ney, Abramoff, De Lay, and (under the table) I'm sure, Bush and Cheney themselves!

They go spend waaaaaay too much for machines to help the blind vote, then they refuse them IDs under HR 4844 because they don't have driver's licenses!:shrug:

For those in wheelchairs, they will yell "Stand up! Stand Up! Walk into that booth for Jeeeezus!! Y'all don't need Diebolds!!


We should teleport our whole voting age population to Capitol Hill and let those deaf bastards in Congress hear us vote the Old Way!


"To one and all, a motion has been made to rescind the tenure of these arrogant, theiving, landed bastards in Congress.

"All in favor say 'Aye'!"

Then, to chorus of "Aye!!"s, a Roar Heard Round The World, we march up the steps of the Capitol, into to the chambers, grab the rapscallions by the scruff off their necks, and throw the bastards out!!

I've always like Town Meetings. Why not have one in DC!

Anyone up for that??

[kster]

78. Count me in !! Them little bastards, have been getting

away with this sh^t for so long, that they think they can just walk all over us, all I have to say to them is WATCH US WORK M----- ----ER's.

Their game is up, its been exposed and the Politicians can take their pieces of sh^t cable reporters and stick them up their -sses.

A note to the Politicians, CAN YOU HEAR US NOW, because soon we will be coming in LOUD AND CLEAR!!

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

65. GOP can't control all votes, so must stop VOTERS

KPete, I agree the machines are a problem.

However, Voter Supression is an extremely important part of
the GOP plan, and the desperate way they are going at it tells
me that the GOP HAS to block seniors.

The GOP can't take any chances.

We have to address this issue two.

We already have voting machines. My state had paperless electronic voting for 20 years,
and we had paperless lever machines (far safer I admit, far safer) in most of the country for about 40 years. The general public is only now figuring all of this out, but the are being
misled by people like Jody that VOTER FRAUD is what is threatening our democracy.

Help me out, KPete.

We have to stop HR 4844 NOW.

[kster]

76. As things stand, Suppression is a smoke screen

that covers the fact that the votes are being counted IN SECRET and the Politician's and the Media remain silent about that little fact.

They would Love us to chase the big "SUPPRESSION" story, when it really doesn't matter if they are COUNTING THE VOTES IN SECRET.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

82. I don't think we can turn our backs on either story

remember Ohio.

If I were Rove, I would use every method I could to block the vote.
Machines, change the rules on registering voters, block voters,
and now especially they have to block the disabled, elderly and the poor.

Or there will be lots of GOP criminals being prosecuted.

Never turn your back on Rove.

[WillYourVoteBCounted]

80. yep, show your PAPERS so that you can vote on paperless machines

exactly right.

We are losing more and more of our rights every day.

[roseBudd]

60. Just the logistics of getting people with no drivers license IDed is

astronomocal. That is time and money not spent on other issues like GOTV.

[roseBudd]

69. There is absolutely no evidence of voter impersonation fraud....

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/20/us/20georgia.html?pagewanted=print

Opponents say the law is a partisan effort to disenfranchise the poor, the elderly and minorities, all of which have historically been more likely to vote Democratic.

“This is really a vote-suppression measure,” said Daniel Tokaji, an assistant professor at Ohio State University and an expert on election law.

“There’s very little evidence for the proposition that people are going to the polling place and pretending to be someone else.” Mr. Tokaji said.

Kathy A. Rogers, director of elections in the Georgia secretary of state’s office, said her office had never investigated any cases of a person trying to pose as someone else at the polls. Judge Bedford noted that he had heard from one witness who testified she had personal knowledge of only one case of voter fraud in her 26 years as an employee for the Fulton County Board of Elections.