Not requiring an ID just gives the democrat party the ability to gather a few thousand more votes from the welfare class. The requirement of an ID would just tip the balance back to the working class.
That is the reason progressives stand against it. It helps them win elections. That is why republicans are opposed, it has hurt their chances.
The electoral college can literally decide the election in a few counties in the toss up states. A few compensated bus loads of unqualified voters(felons, illegals) can make a difference.
IMHO, the law should require an ID. It is partisan to argue against a logical and proper requirement for something as critical as Federal elections.
The democrat party needs those questionable votes. Make it the law and reduce the fraud. It is sensible. ID's can be obtained easily. The government should provide them for free if there is a hardship, hell..they provide the poor with food, houses, medical care, and cell phones..why not an ID. They have to go somewhere to get those services. Why not get ID's there. The DEMS will hold onto this because it helps them hold power. Locke..you know I (and some others here) are right..you are just too pig headed to admit it.
And here i thought the only way to determine if someone is an American citizen is with a long form birth certificate.
http://www.cbssports.com/nfl/eye-on-...ons-unanswered"Ignorance is not an excuse" were the words Goodell used when describing why those involved in the Saints bounty scandal would not avoid punishment.
#freespesh. Because HIPAA
That says nothing of non-Americans. He is saying he doesn't want the welfare class voting. If he mentioned non-Americans I would have responded differently, but he didn't. How can you possibly defend someone who doesn't want a huge chunk of U.S. citizens voting?Not requiring an ID just gives the democrat party the ability to gather a few thousand more votes from the welfare class.
Besides, when has non-Americans voting been an issue? Still, there are less than 10 cases of voter fraud in the last 10 years, which would include non-citizens voting. You all are making up a problem that it isn't there, and the only reason it's being made up is because it just so happens to purge Democratic voters in the process...
Man, this is double edged subject. On the face it sounds like a good and logical idea. If the government were to do this then they need to supply the IDs for free at age 18 with them expiring every 6 years or so and a new one provided as replacement on the expiration date. If you lose the ID before the expiration date, you have to pay a small fee (perhaps $10 or so) to replace it.
Now that brings us to how to get the IDs. You have to prove you're a US citizen. Great, in order to do that you have to provide a birth certificate. Most low income minorities that don't already have driver liscenses probably don't have access to their birth certificate and I believe it costs money to get a copy from your state government. It would be mailed to you and to be quite honest, a housing project's mail is an easy target for theft. ID theft would increase.
For me, just lump this into the same basket as drug testing for welfare recipients. It's proably a good idea but it is logistically and monetarily impossible to implement. There would be no way to do it without it costing a fortune. This government already spends enough money. We don't need another program to spend money on.