Smart. Sharp. Funny. Fearless.
Saturday, February 23, 2019

The poll tax is looking pretty tempting in the rear-view mirror. It was $1.50 in 1964, when the 24th Amendment outlawed it as a requirement for voting in federal elections. Adjusted for inflation, the tax would be less than $12 today. That makes it a lot cheaper — and infinitely easier — than getting hold of exactly the right documentation to cast a ballot under some state laws.

The recent wave of rulings and opinions on voter ID laws makes for depressing, at times infuriating, reading. There is the parade of “practical obstacles” summarized by U.S. District Judge Lynn Adelman, writing on the Wisconsin law. Trying to learn what you need, collecting the documents, getting to and standing on line at one or more state offices that are open only during business hours, and perhaps having to deal with multiple other state and federal agencies to address discrepancies — just skimming the list will make your stomach clench and your head ache. It’s a major undertaking for a high-income, highly educated person with flexible work hours and access to public officials. It’s prohibitive in multiple ways for others.

There are the calculated choices majority Republicans made in Texas about what kinds of ID to accept and reject. They said yes to gun permits and military IDs and didn’t mess with absentee ballots — all ways to “broaden Anglo voting,” U.S. District Judge Nelva Gonzales Ramos wrote. They rejected student IDs, state government employee IDs and federal IDs, all “disproportionately held by African-Americans and Hispanics.”

There is the barrier of cost, addressed in an opinion on the Wisconsin law by Judge Richard Posner, a conservative named by Ronald Reagan to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals. He cited a Harvard Law School report that found the cost of documentation, travel and waiting time to get an ID to be $75 to $175. That’s 50 to 100 times more than that $1.50 poll tax, and all you’d have to do is pay at the polling station before voting.

The poll tax, in many cases applied selectively and used to discriminate, had no place in a democracy. Yet how different was it from the hurdles placed in the path of so many voters today?

These burdens, and possibly even the outcome of a close race or two, hang in the balance as the courts whipsaw back and forth in the weeks before the Nov. 4 election. Ramos blocked the Texas law last week, she was reversed by a three-judge appeals panel this week, and the next day the Supreme Court was asked to again block the law from taking effect. The Wisconsin law went through a similar judicial rollercoaster before the Supreme Court last week said it could not go forward this year.

Posner’s dissent in the Wisconsin case is memorable for personal asides that inject bracing reminders of the real world, and an overall scathing tone. His 11-page appendix, for instance, is called “Scrounging for your birth certificate in Wisconsin.” All 11 pages are required forms and instructions on how to fill them out.

“Scrounge” was the Seventh Circuit panel’s verb of choice in its short-lived ruling to let the law take effect. The panel referred disapprovingly to people “unwilling to invest the necessary time” to “scrounge up a birth certificate and stand in line at the office that issues driver’s licenses.” To which Posner responded that “the author of this dissenting opinion” — that would be him — “has never seen his birth certificate and does not know how he would go about ‘scrounging’ it up. Nor does he enjoy waiting in line at motor vehicle bureaus.”

Posner wrote that since voter-impersonation fraud is virtually non-existent, the only motivation for such requirements is “to discourage voting by persons likely to vote against the party responsible for imposing the burdens.” He uses charts to show that of the nine states with the strictest ID requirements, eight laws were passed by all-GOP legislatures and seven of the eight also had GOP governors.

The morality of all this is bad enough — we’re talking about voting, for Pete’s sake, the bedrock of the republic, a right people died to win. But the voter ID fad also reveals flawed political strategy. It courts backlash, in the form of higher minority turnout. And it will make it harder to repair relations with the affected groups when demographic reality takes hold and the GOP needs their votes.

If the Supreme Court decides to rule on the merits of voter ID laws, let’s hope it acts with more dispatch than it did on poll taxes. The taxes were declared constitutional in 1937. It was not until 1966, two years after the 24th Amendment banning them in federal elections, that the high court ruled them unconstitutional in all elections. We don’t need 29 years to know that voter suppression is wrong.

Follow Jill Lawrence on Twitter @JillDLawrence. To find out more about Jill Lawrence and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate website at www.creators.com.

Photo: Joe Shlabotnik via Flickr

Want more political news and analysis? Sign up for our daily email newsletter!

  • Share this on Google+0
  • Share this on Linkedin0
  • Share this on Reddit0
  • Print this page
  • 716

96 responses to “Voter ID Laws Make The Poll Tax Look Good”

  1. Eleanore Whitaker says:

    Ah yes…the Great White Superior Class of Confederates….too good to get their grubby, syrupy mitts dirty or break a sweat..but they’ll stand in command at every voting booth while they deny taxpayers their Constitutional right to vote.

    The GOP can’t win elections honestly. So, they crawl on their bellies like snakes, hoping and praying the electorate will be too stupid to notice GOP dirty politics.

    • iowasteve says:

      They wanna know why they keep loosing elections? It’s because they lie, cheat, and don’t have a clue what the American people want. The last presidential election was what? A previous President for re-election that everyone knew what he was about and on the other side a liar and tax-cheat who wanted to kill off the middle class. Then when the middle class voted – the GOP started yelling about voter fraud AGAIN – and who was committing fraud? THE GOP!

    • Canistercook says:

      Taxpayers have I’D’s!

      • Eleanore Whitaker says:

        I so agree. Here’s the reality. Each time a dime of your income is taxed, it creates a footprint on the federal, state and municipal level. Don’t believe it? Just try NOT paying your required taxes on any of these levels and see how fast they find you.

        The minute you are born, you have a SS ID number. Formerly, that was never to be used for any reason other than as a taxpayer..between you and the IRS. Now, every Tom, Dick and Harry asks for your SS# as “proof.” Proof? Of what? That you pay your taxes to SS and that you are a US citizen with full entitlements under Constitutional law to vote without the requirement of a photo ID. That BS was started in red states. There’s a reason for these skanks to do that…Remember back during the Gingrichian reign of red state bulls? All that redistricting in TX and other red states that had to be investigated and later when House Speaker DeLay had to resign for playing his redistricting games?

        What red state white males love to do is prove how inferior minorities are to them. So, they try to pull the wool over taxpayers’ eyes by insisting a photo ID is necessary even when someone has vote in elections since Jim Crow shined a spotlight on bogus voting games in the Confederacy.

  2. mikki10 says:

    I have to laugh at this article because a picture ID was required to get into the democratic convention. Also, go watch how many people stand in line to buy lottery tickets and, you say, it is too much trouble to get an ID. Funny, funny, funny. And, by the way, I am not a republican. The voter fraud was on the side of the dems in the last election. What are the odds that a large city has 99.9% of the vote for one side? Little to none. Why would a voting place have more votes than the total population? Go figure…….

    • Taz202 says:

      There was no “voter fraud on the side of the Dems in the last election” or any other. You need to get your facts straight before making comments.

      • Canistercook says:

        If the Demos are not involved in voter fraud I wonder why they get so up tight about ID’s!

      • Taz202 says:

        Because the laws were intended to discourage voting – mainly by minorities and young people who traditionally vote Democratic. The GOP will do anything to win – they are controlled by big money. Their aim is to “buy” the US government.

    • FireBaron says:

      The only documented case of voter fraud in the last Presidential election was when Ann Coulter admitted she voted in more than one location. Of course, given it was Ms. Coulter, it could just be that she was off her meds.

      • Allan Richardson says:

        Or wanted to “prove it could be done.” So why is she not in jail for it? Right, because she is not a poor minority who votes for Democrats.

    • highpckts says:

      THERE WAS NO VOTER FRAUD IN THE LAST ELECTION with the exception of a Republican who was caught!!

    • Bill Thompson says:

      Here is a reality check for you, providing you have the ability to read an study this long.

      http://brennan.3cdn.net/92635ddafbc09e8d88_i3m6bjdeh.pdf

    • iowasteve says:

      You’re an idiot. As everyone else has said – no voter fraud other than republican related – AND – I have no problem with a photo ID – I have a problem with the other crap like which IDs will and won’t be accepted. I also believe that if you are going to be required to produce a certain type of ID, then by God, the government needs to supply it to you at no cost. There are laws against charging people to vote – of course, once again, the republicans are only supporting laws THEY believe in – and the rest are not valid to them – but everything is valid for the other side.

      • Allan Richardson says:

        At no cost AND with no requirement to travel; the registrars should come to a community, and in some cases to the bedside, of a voter. AND do it far enough in advance of an election to pass the obstacles which might arise, such as having to get a new copy of an out of state birth certificate, or dealing with the question of what if that state has no record because the voter’s birth was not recorded?

        • iowasteve says:

          Absolutely Allan – this is the proper way to handle this if we are going to do this ID crap. As I have said before – I have voted since I was 18 and I’m 60 now, and I have yet to be asked for an ID to vote – I’m registered and my name is in the logs – I have been asked once in a while for my registration card, and this is the way it should be done. To those who keep saying you need an ID for beer, cigarettes and other things. Those items are not protected by the all mighty constitution that the GOP seems to be so concerned about – but voting IS a guaranteed right with no obstacles allowed. So once again, I must say – either you are for the constitution or against it people – it cannot be picked apart and only part of it is valid for you. Otherwise, you are not a constitutionalist as you portray yourself to be in the public.

    • Allan Richardson says:

      Personally attending a convention for any party is not a right on the same level as voting. The delegates chosen by voters of their party knew ahead of time that photo ID was required, and their party organization certainly had the resources to help DELEGATES get the proper ID (and they probably accept several alternatives, while the new ID laws specify the particular types of cards which are hardest for poor and minority voters to obtain). In any case, the reason for convention security is that candidates — including candidates for President and Vice President and their families, who receive Secret Service protection — will be on stage and possibly walking the floor meeting delegates. It would be very unlikely for the President, Vice President, a candidate for those offices, or their protected family members, to show up at a polling place during voting hours, requiring other voters to show ID to verify they are not potential assassins.

      The fraud actually committed is committed by the people who COUNT the votes, and if fraud were contemplated by the party you seem to indict, busing thousands of minority group members who are not legally entitled to vote is the LEAST effective way to do it, when the vote counters could much more easily add phony votes to the totals after the fact, IF the other party’s poll watchers would allow it.

    • JPHALL says:

      Where do you idiots get this false information? The only voter fraud found in the last election was by Republican operatives either throwing away voter registration or refusing to register non Republican people. Get your info correct.

    • dtgraham says:

      There was no large city that had 99.9% of the vote recorded for one party. There was also no singular voting place that had more votes than the total population (total population of what?). That’s just made up.

    • BillP says:

      What large city was that, please don’t claim Philadelphia was it.
      Barack Obama won the overall vote in the Philadelphia area by an 85% to 14% margin over Mitt Romney. Before you make some wild unfounded claim why don’t you do some research.

    • acornwebworks says:

      The longest lottery ticket “line” I’ve ever seen was one person buying and a second person waiting. However, the line I was stuck in to get my driver’s license renewed took me 2 1/2 hours from entering the DMV door to getting the paper receipt. (My “great” red state has drastically cut the hours that DMV offices are open.)

  3. AlfredSonny says:

    I thought the Republicans promised NO more taxes????????????

  4. FireBaron says:

    This is amusing. The only two documents I could present that show my proof of name, birth and citizenship are my passport and my DD-214. I would be willing to bet that the majority of the Republican state legislators who approved these measures would have no idea what a DD-214 is, either!
    Why a DD-214? Because I do not have access to my original birth certificate. It was sealed when my parents adopted me almost 60 years ago. I had to use my “adoption” papers to identify my original birth name, and the legal name change that went with my adoption, along with my birth date, my natural parents’ names and my adoptive parents’ names in order to show proof of identity when I joined the Navy and to apply for my security clearances.After I got out of the Navy, I used the DD-214 to get the passport!
    If the states would not accept those two documents as proof of who I claim to be, could I be issued a voter ID card?

  5. EaglesGlen says:

    Suppose honest American citizens always carry their ID with them.
    Therefore any cry baby about ID to vote does not mean a damn thing.

    • Allan Richardson says:

      What about an unhealthy 85 year old black woman in a nursing home, who has been voting (absentee when necessary) for 50 years since the Civil Rights and Voting Rights Acts were passed, because in the 60s, election officials UNDERSTOOD that her birth was only recorded in the family Bible, RECOGNIZED that, with her accent and lack of big money, she could not reasonably be anything OTHER than a poor black American descended from slaves, and made REASONABLE allowances for the inability to show the preferable documentation, possibly allowing family members and friends to testify for her identity? But today she needs to get a new photo ID and cannot get a birth certificate. Does that sound like a “cry baby” or a legitimate objection? And isn’t it possible that the REAL reason for the ID laws is to prevent people like this lady from voting? The officials who push such laws have ADMITTED this to be their real motivation.

    • 503me says:

      You ever lose your ID?

      • Canistercook says:

        Yes but I had others!

        • 503me says:

          Well, not everyone does. Lost my birth certificate and last time to renew ID, it ended up costing 35 for BC and 60 for ID and since I can not drive due to health, that was 10 and waiting in line for an hour later, I had new id

        • ralphkr says:

          Ah Ha! You have multiple IDs, Canistercook, so that means you have the ability to vote multiple times with your illegal IDs.

    • JPHALL says:

      Many Americans do not carry ID.

    • Sand_Cat says:

      Yeah, it’s all really about those whose TESTICLES are as tiny as yours but don’t try to hide it by calling others “cry babies,” right? They’re not big masculine idiots like you, and don’t deserve it.

  6. charles king says:

    I am from the old school (born 1930) and the Republicans and the Democracts got along together WhY? are we the people not able to solve this voting problem. I think MONIES has put a loop in the process Now days it seems that the Republicans wants to get rid of Democracy and replace it with Plutocracy. My advise to the American Public is to find out What? Why? and How? come we are being ruled by Plutocracy instead of Democracy. I just found out in the last three years the State of Pennsylvania in which I have lived my (85yrs) is ruled by some people Not All like in Democracy, Of, For, and By All the People. I am a reasonable person and I have always believed in our Democracy and I see Now Where? Monies has change the Republican and they The (Republicans) are trying to destroy our Democracy. I Think they should be slapped on their Nuts. Thank You are the magic words in my book. I Love Ya All. Mr. C. E. KING

  7. 2ThinkN_Do2 says:

    Why is this so difficult? You need proof of birth, citizenship, address and money to purchase a State ID, DL License or get your Voter ID card (No Money). No Voter ID Card, NO Vote. Why is this Really an ISSUE, with any one who is upfront and HONEST? If you are a Citizen you should have some form of ID to prove who you are. It’s plain, simple logic. If you wee born here, you should have proof, if you immigrated here you should have proof in order to be here, simple common sense.

    • Allan Richardson says:

      Except that many elderly and poor people were born BEFORE their states began issuing birth certificates, or the birth records were lost in local courthouse fires before records were automated and kept in secure computer files or microfilms, so there is NO WAY they can get the NEW ID, even though they were certified as citizens through OTHER means many years ago and have been registered to vote ever since. Now it is too late for these people to go back in time and make sure their births were registered, but their states of residence have KNOWN THEY ARE CITIZENS for many years.

      The money required to get the documents is out of the question for many people who are poor and have no access to transportation to the offices which they would have to visit (some of which have been purposely MOVED from locations on public transit lines to locations a two mile walk from the nearest bus stop; are people who lack cars a “fraudulent” kind of people?), and many voters have health and disability issues which would require them not only to pay for the documents themselves, but also for the ambulance transportation and hourly wages for nurses or paramedics to WAIT WITH THEM to be seen. And the money ALONE, if it is required to get documents JUST FOR VOTIING, constitutes an unconstitutional POLL TAX.

      In the criminal justice system, how many innocent persons would you permit the state to punish, just to make sure no guilty person is acquitted? And by analogy, how many legal voters who are financially or through circumstances unable to get your NEW form of ID should be denied the vote to stop one unqualified person from voting?

      • 2ThinkN_Do2 says:

        I didn’t realize there were so many excuses for not being able to have an ID. My father was born in 1916, he had one or more. I wonder how many people in the USA today, that vote were born before then. I wonder what % of people who do not have ID’s are those you speak of? Seems to me, I would have done all I could to get an ID, as they are needed for many purposes in this nation. We have public servants that Billions of $$ are provided by tax payers a year to serve the public. The True % of those who may not be able to get an ID without needing Magic, is likely not very high, but thanks for the interesting reply.

        • JPHALL says:

          It must be nice to have had a nice orderly life. Many Americans born before 1940 have had life incidents that cost them paperwork. Fires, moving, and name changes have occurred. The last time I got a copy of my birth certificate took several months.

          For many Americans, they did not need IDs to live their lives, especially in rural areas. My mother stopped driving in 1941 and did not need an ID until she got a job late in life. Like stated before some records were never digitized and like my military records got burned up over the years.

          • Canistercook says:

            Sounds like your family is one big failure!

          • ralphkr says:

            Well, Canister, I gather that you were looking in a mirror when you wrote the above to JPHall. By the way, the little card I carry stating I was Honorably Discharged is worthless for ID or proof of citizenship purposes.

          • JPHALL says:

            No, only real! Most people do not live in your “Polyannish” world. The rest of Americans have had things happen to or around them. Things like burglary, fires and othe natural disasters. During my 60+ years of life many things have happened both good and bad. Subject: Re: New comment posted on Voter ID Laws Make The Poll Tax Look Good

          • Sand_Cat says:

            Sounds like you’re a complete ass.

        • dtgraham says:

          You don’t need your birth certificate or proof of citizenship when asked for ID for anything else. It’s normally any one of a number of different pieces of various documentation with your name on it, that almost anyone has available.

          Not that there’s evidence for it but if this was really an honest attempt to prevent multiple voting or impersonation fraud, then any one of a number of ID’s should be acceptable. A list of these acceptable ID’s could be made public in numerous ways. There could be as many as 40 or more of them and they could include things as simple as a utility bill with your name on it. Homeless people might be issued notes from soup kitchens or shelters, etc..

          That’s not what this is about though. It’s an attempt to keep the total vote count down and specifically those demographics that tend not to vote Republican. That’s why a university ID card with your picture on it is not acceptable while a gun permit with your picture on it is. Sure, some concealed carry permit owners vote Democrat and some university students vote Republican but it’s more often the other way around. It’s just a numbers game.

        • Sand_Cat says:

          So, enough excuses, you’re going to punish those without access to a photo ID?

      • Canistercook says:

        You can count them on one hand – nonsense! Those ‘elderly’ get a letter from Social Security every year!

        • ralphkr says:

          Hey, Canister, a letter from Social Security or a Social Security Card are not considered IDs. For that matter, not all seniors get Social Security even though they worked. It took me over 2 years to educate my health providers (had to argue with them that I only had private insurance every time) that I did NOT have Medicare or SS (too many years spent on exempt jobs such as military, LEO, etc.)

    • ralphkr says:

      I got my voter ID card here without showing any ID of any sort when I registered to vote. In my state all elections are by mail which beats having to hunt down the right precinct voting place and having to stand in line for hours (and then be turned away because the officials want to go home early in the Republican state where I used to live)

  8. Todd Nelson says:

    There are more states that require photo ID than those who don’t. New York, Connecticut, Massachussetts, New Jersey and Florida are among those that have required photo ID for at least 40 years. The democrat national convention required photo ID to get in. The last NAACP march required photo Id to even join the march. You can’t but a beer without a photo ID. As to this being anything like a “poll tax”, this author obviously was not even alive when the poll tax was used to discriminate against blacks and republicans in the democrat controlled south. The poll workers, all democrats were able to decide who would pay the tax, blacks and republicans, and who wouldn’t, democrat whites. To equate voter ID with the poll tax is disgraceful and dishonest.

    • JPHALL says:

      The problem is the timeline. Too little time allowed to things together. Have you tried to get a copy of your birth certificate lately?

      • Todd Nelson says:

        I had to produce a copy of my birth certificate to get my Captain’s license 30 years ago and my passport at the same time. Ever since, I have kept a copy with me at all times.

        • JPHALL says:

          Yeah, me too! But you still lose things in the course of life. Subject: Re: New comment posted on Voter ID Laws Make The Poll Tax Look Good

      • ralphkr says:

        No, JPH, I never been able to get a birth certificate since my state does not have birth certificates. They just have certificate of live birth which, according to birthers, is not legitimate proof. To show how accurate the Birth certificates can be i would point out that my father had two issued by the same office showing his birth dates as 4 years apart.

    • silas1898 says:

      I have lived in New Jersey for over 50 years, have voted in (almost) every election and have never needed any ID other than signing the book next to my name.

      I did not have a photo driver’s license until 2005.

      You do not know what you are talking about.

    • BillP says:

      Todd I believe you are wrong about NYS, I have voted for over 40 years and have never had to provide photo ID in NYS. In fact the NYS voter registration form require a DMV # or the last 4 digits of your SS#. If you don’t have either of these then you may use a valid photo ID, a current utility bill, bank statement, paycheck, government check or some other government document that shows your name and address. As for buying beer the only time I had to provide proof was over 40 years ago and my Selective Service (draft card) was good enough. This fallacy about being required to offer photo id to buy beer is ludicrous.

    • Roger87 says:

      Incorrect — Connecticut does not require photo ID at the polls. Source here: http://www.sots.ct.gov/sots/cwp/view.asp?a=3179&q=511132

      In fact, you can vote even if you don’t have any documentation at all if you sign a form attesting to your identity.

    • acornwebworks says:

      Actually, of the states you mentioned, only Florida requires a photo ID to vote. NONE of the others do. Also, *more* than half the states do NOT require photo ID.

  9. 503me says:

    We vote by mail in my state- works great and no stupidity concerning ID .

  10. Louis Allen says:

    Liberals who insist on no IDs to vote are naive at best, or dishonest at worst.
    They keep making up stupid excuses (older people don’t have IDs, there is no “proof” of voter fraud–of COURSE there isn’t, dummy!) while at the same time ignoring, willingly or because they are, again, dishonest, the fact that voters in Mexico are REQUIRED to have ID !!

    It is a ridiculous question but, …..Why can’t we (please) upgrade our system to meet MEXICAN standards??!!
    Answer this one! DUH !!

    • silas1898 says:

      The ID is matching the signature in the book. Registration gets you in the book. I never used an ID to vote.

      • Louis Allen says:

        silas: Hey, that would be acceptable, i.e. SOME method by which to prevent fraud by a non-citizen. If Mexicans (in Mexico, of course) can do it, why not us?

    • Peoples425 says:

      Lol @ Mexican standards, but hey if that’s how you would like to consider it then okay. No one is saying that ID is not an acceptable form across the board, but if you’re going to do it across the board then be even about it. Work, school or government ID’s should be acceptable, but since there is an overwhelmingly large number of Black and Brown people who have these ID’s, that poses a problem for those instituting these voter suppression tactics and therefore must limit which ID’s are valid.

      • Louis Allen says:

        Peoples: You, better than many, actually PROVE my point to the effect that liberals who insist on no IDs to vote are naive at best, or dishonest at worst. You conveniently give my previous statement a little (oh, so subtle) “twist” by stating that “no one is saying that ID is not an acceptable form across the board …” But OF COURSE no one is saying that ID is not an acceptable form !!
        The problem with you liberals is that your pure, unadulterated dishonesty carries you to the point of accepting ANY kind of ID (read “that can be obtained even if you are not a citizen”).
        Your pure, unadulterated dishonesty also makes you ignore the fact that these are NOT “voter suppression tactics” but “protection against fraud measures”.
        … But, then again, what can be expected from the people who claim that the Conservatives have “a war against women”, that the federal minimum wage is a matter of “fairness” (oh brother !!) and soooo many other empty slogans, devoid of all logic, that are pure, unadulterated CRAP.

        • Peoples425 says:

          I will restrain myself from responding as hostile as this perception would make me normally…
          Your statement of “you liberals” is a common misconception among many as you clearly illustrate the presumption to lump all together without so much as a 2nd look.
          Anyway…
          I haven’t proven your point by any means and if you were educated enough to understand then it might make a difference, however I feel that may be a far reach. The ID’s with which I have spoken of including government work ID’s and student ID’s require some form of citizenship and given that fact alone, there should be no reason to disallow these ID’s.
          Now… onto your claim of perpetual unadulterated crap, given that you give no examples with which to backup or refute the claims given, it would appear that the unadulterated crap is coming from another source.

          • Louis Allen says:

            Peoples:
            1) To quote you: “The ID’s with which I have spoken (what ? learn proper English composition/syntax, Peoples !) require SOME FORM OF CITIZENSHIP …” (emphasis mine). WHATTT ??!!! “SOME FORM” of citizenship??!! Are you out of your mind? There is only ONE KIND !! That is like saying that a woman has “some form” of pregnancy, for crying out loud !
            2) You say I don’t give “examples” of “empty slogans, devoid of all logic, that are pure, unadulterated CRAP”? Can’t you READ? Go back and TRY to read, Peoples !!
            3) With your inane retorts to my points, instead of trying to prove me wrong, you very plainly and evidently point to YOURSELF as the source and direction where “the unadulterated crap is coming from” ….
            Oh brother.

          • Peoples425 says:

            Alright, let me try and clarify this since I need to spell things out for you:

            1) If the contextual grammar of my English is your number 1 on the list of gripes about this “discussion” then that leads me to believe your focus is obviously in the wrong area. I was typing fairly fast and wasn’t focused on the grammatical syntax as it was the point that was being made that should have been focal to the discussion.

            When talking about citizenship or “types”, the reference was to naturalized citizenship, birthright citizenship, as well as those here on visas (while not able to vote, they are able to work and study here).

            In regards to the pregnancy comment (given conservatives need to be vocal about a woman’s right to her own body should know this stuff by now, but then again, maybe not), there are different types of pregnancy as well including Ectopic Pregnancy. If you need reference material :
            http://www.babymed.com/tubal-pregnancy/different-types-pregnancies

            2) Since you are big on quotes, this is exactly what I said “…you give no examples with which to backup or refute the claims given.” This means that your examples of slogans does nothing to refute the evidence presented in this article, let alone the mountain of statistical evidence that can be provided to dismember each and every argument you can provide or imagine in regards to this petty bias and even the “empty slogans” you are so fond of referencing.

            3) Your consistent reiteration of bias against liberals has clearly not allowed you to see through your own ignorance. I resist most types of insulting conversation, however in your case, I’ve made an exception for a couple reason none of which are important to list, but I’ll tell you one thing, if you have any more brain cells, I’d tell them to save themselves from that sinking ship.

          • Louis Allen says:

            people: You are funny ! Obtuse, but funny nonetheless (different “kinds” of citizenship, not being focused on the “grammatical syntax”, different “kinds” of pregnancy).
            Oh brother.

    • ralphkr says:

      You are sadly mistaken, Louis Allen, when you state that there is no proof of voter fraud as it has often been proven that there is election fraud. 99% of all election fraud is committed by election officials. Individual fraudulent voters were caught in the last presidential election (Republicans attempting to vote more than once and they claimed they were doing it to prove voter fraud. That is like claiming the reason you were doing 105 through the school zone is to prove that people do it). Meanwhile, election officials in various precincts were busy stuffing boxes with thousands of phony ballots. It was reported that a precinct with less than 3K voters turned in over 5K votes for a T-party candidate. No THAT is how voter fraud is done.

  11. Canistercook says:

    Never read such drivil in my life! How do they collect welfare, disability, health care, student loans and cash a check if they don’t have an ID.??????

    • ralphkr says:

      Well, Canister, I don’t know how “them” do it but I am able to walk into 5 different banks and cash a check without showing any form of ID. Oh, there was one bank that I used to deal with (notice that I said. “used to”) that would demand ID to accept a deposit to my account, whether in the form of cash or check. Their reasoning was to protect me from someone illegally depositing money in my account. If they are giving me money then who cares who they are.

      • Louis Allen says:

        ralphkr: You, sir, are the epitome of the psychotic LIAR !!
        “…I am able to walk into 5 different banks and cash a check without showing any form of ID.” WHAT a WHOPPER !!!
        I am sure most of your fellow liberal retards believed that one.
        Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, haa, haa, haa, haa, haa, haa, haaaaaa!!!!
        What a MORON !!

        • ralphkr says:

          An you, Louis Allen, have proven that you are a true Conservative: ignorant and unable to recognize the truth when it bites you.

          • Louis Allen says:

            ralph: How can you possibly talk about recognizing “the truth” when you just gave us the biggest WHOPPER of the last 6 months (and in this NM forum, THAT’S saying a lot !!)
            You are just ashamed (or SHOULD be) that I pointed out your outright, crude, and moronic LIE about cashing a check at 5 different banks without any form of ID.
            You, sir, are the biggest LIAR since your President, The Great Prevaricator (look it up, ralphy !), told us that we could “keep our doctors”.
            Oh brother, nothing like exposing a MORON !

          • ralphkr says:

            Yes, Louis, you have done an excellent job of proving to the world that you are a crude conservative moron unable to recognize anything as true other than conservative lies. I repeat that over the last few years I have never shown ID to cash a check at the five banks(2 National, 2 regional, 1 local) where I do business (it would be pretty silly for them to ask for my ID after they have greeted me by name, wouldn’t it?). The only exception has been that they have to enter my DL # when I cash a Treasury Bond.

            Oh, by the way, dummy, the president was telling the truth when he said I could keep MY doctor (also my insurance and hospital). Admittedly, I have lost 2 doctors over the last 12 years when they left private practice and became hospitalists and I can certainly understand their reasoning for changing: excellent income and no longer having the worries of running a business.

    • Peoples425 says:

      Well, if this is what you call drivil, I’d be worried what you’d call actual good writing and/or opinion…. Faux News?
      In any case, ID’s are not needed for student loans, nor check cashing. Regardless of the matter, let’s just play this game….
      Student ID’s… sometimes a federal ID is needed to get it, but yet and still federal ID is not accepted by Voter ID laws… interesting. As referenced by the article, majority of the ID’s that are predominantly held by “minorities” are the ones that are not being accepted even though they are accepted predominantly everywhere else, but the ID’s that are associated with WASP’s, even though no real universal use in their application are accepted as verifiable forms of identification. That’s a little peculiar. If you can’t, won’t or don’t see it then there’s a problem with your perception.

    • shawnthesheep says:

      Well, your first racist, bigoted assumption is that all minorities are on government assistance. But, with your reply, it seems even you are aware that this law is intended to disproportionately effect minority voters. For all the bluster about patriotism on the Right, none of you defenders of freedom have any problem with GOP legislators passing laws intended to deny your fellow citizens the right to vote. It’s as disgusting as it is hypocritical.

  12. Richard Holmes says:

    The N M is a trashy rag run by idiot liberal meth heads. It is funny (in a sickening way) how many sheeple believe this CRAP publication is legitimate

  13. Edward Harvey says:

    This is a low information voter webb site. The article makes me believe libtards are so deceptive.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.