I say we play a game. For every story about a person having their vote "suppressed" let's find another story about people voting illegally.
You start.
Printable View
http://www.kiiitv.com/story/23761660...g-maiden-names
The best part: upon showing insufficient ID, all she had to do was promise promise promise she was allowed to vote, and they let her. Welcome to Obama's Texas!
What surprises me is that the folks on here who normally bitch endlessly about government spending are willing to institute laws that force governments to spend money on getting everyone a free ID to combat the handful of actual fraud cases out of the millions upon million of votes placed. Free IDs are the only way this will fly, otherwise it's a poll tax which are unconstitutional.
So... dig into those pockets, again out of largely unfounded fears. Whatever.
Perhaps you could explain why proof of identity would not be necessary. You vote - you prove who you are. It's so basic that I am having a major problem even UNDERSTANDING how there could be opposition. It makes no sense whatsoever. You vote - you prove who are are. Duh.
We could certainly have a discussion on what is acceptable proof - but it must exist.
I addressed this already. You are making an assumption that a state issued I.D. is the only possible way to do this. That's probably because you are so used to using your I.D. for everything from check cashing to buying sinus medicine. It is not the only way though and that's what our voting history shows us. We run super clean elections with the system for registration and identification that's been in place.