Chuck Schumer and Ron Wyden (sp?), both US Senators and both Democrats, don't want to force people to show a photo ID or drivers license to register to vote. Why not? They claimed that this would severely restrict those who vote my mail. Maybe so. Is there a bigger picture here, however? In my opinion, they don't want to limit the illegal alien vote, which heavily favors the Democrats. However, allowing these illegals to vote, is against the US Constitution. Now correct me if I am wrong, but don't US Senators swear an oath to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States? If you are worried about the mail in votes, just have the mail-in-voter include a photo copy of both their driver's license and their birth certificate. For "legal" immigrants, they could also send in a photo copy of their legal documents. Maybe I am way off base here, but this smells so bad my dog won't even go near it.
Leading Democrats Trying to Make it Easy for Illegal Aliens to Vote.
- Thread starter USAFNoDak
- Start date
Marko Kloos
New member
Moved to Legal & Political.
It is illegal for non-citizens to vote, whether they are legal or illegal immigrants. Showing proof of citizenship prior to casting your vote seems like a prudent idea.
It is illegal for non-citizens to vote, whether they are legal or illegal immigrants. Showing proof of citizenship prior to casting your vote seems like a prudent idea.
Rumor has it our President will push, again, for an amnesty for illegals late in March. All three branches of Government appear not to care a jot about the illegal alien issue or to view it as a problem. How this odd state of affairs plays out against a background of terrorist threat, both at home and abroad, remains to be seen.
My view is it will take a "September 11," linked to the illegal influx, to lift the veil on this topic and spur some serious action.
My view is it will take a "September 11," linked to the illegal influx, to lift the veil on this topic and spur some serious action.
WASHINGTON, Feb. 21 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Following is a statement
by U.S.ENGLISH Chairman and CEO Mauro E. Mujica:
Congress should reject any proposal from the Bush Administration that grants amnesty to millions of illegal Mexican immigrants. Such a move would evoke animosity among legal immigrants, and send the wrong message to those who wish to enter this country legally.
As an immigrant from Chile, who emigrated to the U.S. legally,I must ask why our leaders are so hard-pressed to make sure that illegal Mexican workers, versus people from other countries, earn
their green-card status even though they have broken the law.Might it be an attempt to get an early start on the next election by winning over the Hispanic vote?
The current Administration plan being pushed on Congress is irresponsible. If we, as a nation, are going to send the message that Mexican illegals can easily jump the line by breaking the law,
we should open up the invitation to all of the nine million illegal immigrants the Census Bureau reports are currently residing in the United States.
Instead of granting blanket amnesty, we must address the needs of our legal immigrants to help them assimilate and realize the American dream. Census data continue to show that their needs are
largely unmet. The high school dropout numbers for immigrants are devastating, and many adults are consigned to a low-wage ghetto because they have not learned elementary work-force survival
skills, such as the ability to speak our common language -- English.
We believe help should first be given to our fellow Americans who don't yet speak English so they can escape the 'linguistic welfare system' they have been barely surviving in, before blindly
throwing open our doors to a select group who have broken our laws to get here.
by U.S.ENGLISH Chairman and CEO Mauro E. Mujica:
Congress should reject any proposal from the Bush Administration that grants amnesty to millions of illegal Mexican immigrants. Such a move would evoke animosity among legal immigrants, and send the wrong message to those who wish to enter this country legally.
As an immigrant from Chile, who emigrated to the U.S. legally,I must ask why our leaders are so hard-pressed to make sure that illegal Mexican workers, versus people from other countries, earn
their green-card status even though they have broken the law.Might it be an attempt to get an early start on the next election by winning over the Hispanic vote?
The current Administration plan being pushed on Congress is irresponsible. If we, as a nation, are going to send the message that Mexican illegals can easily jump the line by breaking the law,
we should open up the invitation to all of the nine million illegal immigrants the Census Bureau reports are currently residing in the United States.
Instead of granting blanket amnesty, we must address the needs of our legal immigrants to help them assimilate and realize the American dream. Census data continue to show that their needs are
largely unmet. The high school dropout numbers for immigrants are devastating, and many adults are consigned to a low-wage ghetto because they have not learned elementary work-force survival
skills, such as the ability to speak our common language -- English.
We believe help should first be given to our fellow Americans who don't yet speak English so they can escape the 'linguistic welfare system' they have been barely surviving in, before blindly
throwing open our doors to a select group who have broken our laws to get here.
I think they have let them vote in the PRK since prop 187 passed in 96.That pissed off the illegal Mexicans and they seemed to have turned out in droves to elect an all Democrat Executive and Legislature in 98 and 2000. Guns rights have gone down the drain every year since.
Letting illegals in is a mistake. Letting them vote is worse but I think they do. Everywhere they land, the areas look like 3rd world countries (kind of like Mexico). Examples you say? Look at the central valley. Lamont, Shafter, etc.
Letting illegals in is a mistake. Letting them vote is worse but I think they do. Everywhere they land, the areas look like 3rd world countries (kind of like Mexico). Examples you say? Look at the central valley. Lamont, Shafter, etc.
Larry Wright
New member
WyldOne, IMVHO, I think illegals ARE voting in droves in Southern California. Couldn't prove it to save my children's lives, but I think in my mind and believe in my heart that that is the case. I was thinking just this morning (and haven't thought since) that we have more illegal aliens in this country than the populations of some of the countries that marched in the opening ceremony of the Winter Olympics. That bothers me, maybe it shouldn't. If all the illegals looked like the Swedish bikini team, would that bother me less? I do see the illegals as more underpinning for the Democrats and I see many Democrats that want to take our guns. Simple, narrow view? maybe! My gut tells me that I'm right.
That's the problem, people here (in CA) tend to assume that anyone with a hispanic appearance is:
1. Mexican
2. illegal
I was having a conversation with my friend Brenda a few months back, she gets upset when people automatically assume she is Mexican. (She's Salvadoran).
Not twenty minutes later, we were mentioning it to our coworker Tariq (Pakistani); he said "What, you're not Mexican?"
She was displeased.
OK, it's not a very good story. But it seems relevant. BTW they're both legal. (she's a citizen, he's a legal immigrant)
Oh, and are the people who want "those damn messicans" sent back to "wherever they came from" going to be picking artichokes for fifty cents an hour? I didn't think so.
DJ
Should we round up all of the illegals and ship them back? That may not be very pragmatic. And I will concede that you have a good point in that these people are doing jobs that Americans now consider beneath them. Plus, the cost to the employers is minimal as opposed to hiring Americans.
That being said, should they be allowed to vote? I don't think so. How do we ensure that they aren't voting? We need to check some form of ID. These people have no clue as to what America is all about. They only know that they can get jobs and handouts from the government in the US, which they cannot get in the other countries that they come from. They are not educated enough on our Constititution, government, law, etc to be able to vote. Sadly, I have to add, some real Americans probably are not much better educated in this regard. I don't want someone voting who is so easily swayed to vote for more government handouts because they benefit. What happens when we have too many people drawing more from the treasury than they are contributing? That is my major beef and why I brought this up in the first place. I never meant it to be an illegal alien bashing session.
That being said, should they be allowed to vote? I don't think so. How do we ensure that they aren't voting? We need to check some form of ID. These people have no clue as to what America is all about. They only know that they can get jobs and handouts from the government in the US, which they cannot get in the other countries that they come from. They are not educated enough on our Constititution, government, law, etc to be able to vote. Sadly, I have to add, some real Americans probably are not much better educated in this regard. I don't want someone voting who is so easily swayed to vote for more government handouts because they benefit. What happens when we have too many people drawing more from the treasury than they are contributing? That is my major beef and why I brought this up in the first place. I never meant it to be an illegal alien bashing session.
Twenty-five years from now those will look like the most expensive artichokes in history.
Meanwhile, you get cheaper produce at the cost of increasingly onerous taxes for public education, health, and welfare costs.
If we need a bigger labor pool for a certain amount of jobs "nobody wants"--and how would we know that?--then we should go at the problem above-board, out in the open, with a rational program of guest workers entitled to earn citizenship down the road.
Everyone talks about how Gore won the popular vote. Subtract the illegal votes he got and Bush took that too. For those of you who believe that illegals aren't voting I direct you to the well-publicized Bob Dornan campaign in Orange County a few years back.
Meanwhile, you get cheaper produce at the cost of increasingly onerous taxes for public education, health, and welfare costs.
If we need a bigger labor pool for a certain amount of jobs "nobody wants"--and how would we know that?--then we should go at the problem above-board, out in the open, with a rational program of guest workers entitled to earn citizenship down the road.
Everyone talks about how Gore won the popular vote. Subtract the illegal votes he got and Bush took that too. For those of you who believe that illegals aren't voting I direct you to the well-publicized Bob Dornan campaign in Orange County a few years back.
at the risk of being utterly un-"pc"
let me offer the possibility that there is not nearly enough "bashing" of illegal aliens. Illegal is illegal. For all the "bashing" going on, the numbers keep growing and the bill to be paid gets larger and the illegals already here are steadily emboldened as they learn how to use the system to entrench themselves. Bashing? Fact is, this is a problem that no one in power wishes to touch and anyone who does is immediately branded a racist. It's not about Mexicans, it's about illegality and the cost in public benefits.
We fret about defending the "homeland" and national security but sit back as our nation is gradually Balkanized culturally. If that doesn't bother you, so be it.
let me offer the possibility that there is not nearly enough "bashing" of illegal aliens. Illegal is illegal. For all the "bashing" going on, the numbers keep growing and the bill to be paid gets larger and the illegals already here are steadily emboldened as they learn how to use the system to entrench themselves. Bashing? Fact is, this is a problem that no one in power wishes to touch and anyone who does is immediately branded a racist. It's not about Mexicans, it's about illegality and the cost in public benefits.
We fret about defending the "homeland" and national security but sit back as our nation is gradually Balkanized culturally. If that doesn't bother you, so be it.
Fred Hansen
New member
WyldOne,
The Real Vote Fraud Scandal
By Allan E. Wall
FrontPageMagazine.com | May 10, 2001
THE Y2K U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION provided the watching world with a surreal spectacle, as the showcase democracy of Planet Earth was transformed into a laughingstock. Things Americans look down upon in other countries were on full display in their own country. And election irregularities people thought didn't and couldn't happen in the U.S.A. were happening and coming into public view.
Make Comments
View Comments
Printable Article
Email Article
Imagine my embarrassment, as an American living in Mexico, a country which also held a presidential election in 2000. In contrast to ours, the Mexican election went quite smoothly. Decades of rigged elections, which had become a highly-developed art form, had been overcome by an effective new electoral registration system. The new Mexican registration system includes a universal registration card with the voter's signature, photograph and fingerprint. The presidential election passed with no major incidents nor disputes, and resulted in a peaceful change of regime after 71 years of one-party rule.
The American election, on the other hand, was a veritable circus, with its hanging chads, butterfly ballots, overvotes, undervotes and esoteric attempts to "discern the intent" of the voter. The entire ordeal provided plenty of food for thought, material for comedians and political analysts (by no means mutually exclusive categories!).
Ironically the real voter scandal was hardly touched upon - certainly not by the mainstream media and the political establishment. The real vote fraud scandal is that being a U.S. citizen is no longer a universal requirement for voting. There is convincing evidence that a growing number of non-citizens (including illegal aliens) are voting in U.S. elections. It should be treated as the major scandal that it is, but is publicly ignored by both political parties - though for different reasons. The Democratic leadership is quiet about it for the simple reason that most immigrants (including non-citizen voters) cast their ballots for the Democratic Party. The Republican Party leadership is quiet because they are seeking to win the Hispanic vote. They think that cracking down on non-citizen voting would be seen as "anti-immigrant" and would "lose" the Hispanic vote (which they don't have and aren't likely to get in this generation anyway!) During the entire hullabaloo of the 2000 post-election, while fighting for every single vote in Florida, neither Bush nor James Baker, nor any other prominent Republican brought up the fact that there was evidence of a large amount of non-citizens voting in Florida. As often results when both parties accord an important topic taboo status, the ordinary American voter is the real loser.
So what's going on here? Who decreed that non-citizens could vote? As usual, the problem has been greatly exacerbated by the promotion of a "noble cause". In this case the "noble cause " was "voter accessibility". How vividly I recall viewing a 1992 presidential debate, in which Candidate Clinton earnestly declared that "we have to make the system more accessible". How was it "inaccessible" in 1992, one might ask. Neither registering to vote nor casting a ballot are or were difficult tasks. Those of us Americans who live outside U.S. territory and vote by absentee ballot face more difficulties and expenses in order to vote - but we do it because we want to vote! So what does an American citizen living in the U.S. have to complain about? No matter, the system had to become more "accessible". So the Democrats concocted the "Motor Voter" Act, a highly effective government program designed to increase Democratic voter registration. Such a dubious law, while not totally responsible for the problem, has greatly facilitated non-citizen voting.
Motor Voter is officially known as the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. It is additionally referred to (not inaccurately) as "Auto Fraudo". Motor Voter was passed by a slim margin and signed into law in 1993 and became effective in 1995. The congressional Republican leadership, in control of Congress since 1995, has been unable (or unwilling) to repeal Motor Voter in all that time.
Motor Voter is based on the proposition that no one should have to make a special trip to register to vote, that, after all would not be "accessible". Instead, people can register to vote when they go to apply for their driver's license or to collect their welfare benefits. (Tough Question: What political party do you suppose welfare recipients are likely to vote for?)
The Motor Voter Act requires no proof of citizenship in order to register to vote. In fact, state motor vehicle departments were instructed by the Clinton Administration NOT to be inquisitive about whether or not applicants were American citizens, nor even to advise them that non-citizens are legally not allowed to vote. In fact, Motor Voter includes a stern warning against anyone who would dare to "intimidate, threaten or coerce" any prospective applicant. Such "intimidation" would presumably include pesky questions about citizenship. Since a growing number of states don't exclude illegal aliens from having a driver's license, it is not very difficult for illegal aliens to register to vote. Now that's accessibility!
How common is non-citizen voting? Since the very registration system makes it difficult to find out, the exact quantity is unknown to mortal man. According to one estimate, nationwide, on average, about two to four percent of voters are not citizens. But in major cities with large immigrant populations (including Dade County, Florida), the figure could be closer to 10-15%. In a close race that percentage could hand victory on a silver platter to one of the candidates, which in most cases would be a Democrat. (The fact that most legal immigrants vote Democratic and are likely to for the foreseeable future does not bode well for the future viability of the Republican party - allowing non-citizens to vote makes it even worse!)
The basic question is, should non-citizens be allowed to vote in U.S. elections? Most Americans would say no. But the system allows it and no prominent policy-makers seem too concerned about the problem. On the practical level, the solution to the problem is quite simple. It is easy for an American citizen to prove his or her citizenship! When registering, a natural -born citizen need only present a birth certificate, while a naturalized citizen need only present a naturalization certificate. How hard can that be? Opponents of verification of prospective voters don't oppose it because verification is difficult, because it's not. They oppose verification because they want non-citizens to vote! What other possible explanation is there?
But who will speak up for ordinary American citizens? Their rights are being violated, their citizenship cheapened, their voice diluted. When will ordinary Americans wake up, speak up, and demand that citizenship be a requirement for those who register to vote? Shouldn't America's future be determined by her own citizens?
Allan E. Wall is an American citizen who has lived and worked in Mexico since 1991. Presently employed as an English instructor and administrator, Allan has legal permission from the Mexican government to live and work in Mexico under the rubric of an FM-2 migration document (No. 312448) for which he had to pay $1,816.00 pesos for renewal this past year. Allan would be glad to receive questions or comments (pro or con), at allan39@prodigy.net.mx.
In regard to speculation or conjecture of illegal immigrant votes helping Demorats, no minority group in America votes with any regularity for the Republicans. Even the hispanics, who are by most measures conservative, tend to vote Demorat. Happily, there have been some changes within that trend, but they are few and unpredictable.
I wish it were not so, I wish that all immigrants and minorities would block out the siren song of :
You're to stupid to make it on your own, so here is your Gummint program. Custom built to your Race, Ethnicity, Religion, Creed, Disability, Sexual preference/Gender identity, and of course taking into consideration that you didn't have a pony, your very own Jesse Jackson Poverty Pimp get off the hook/outta jail free card. Please accept this free coupon to the Jesse Jackson Baby Daddy Paternity Testing Clinic. We are currently working on a way to convince the bleeding hearts of the world pay for that too.
:barf: :barf: :barf:
The Real Vote Fraud Scandal
By Allan E. Wall
FrontPageMagazine.com | May 10, 2001
THE Y2K U.S. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION provided the watching world with a surreal spectacle, as the showcase democracy of Planet Earth was transformed into a laughingstock. Things Americans look down upon in other countries were on full display in their own country. And election irregularities people thought didn't and couldn't happen in the U.S.A. were happening and coming into public view.
Make Comments
View Comments
Printable Article
Email Article
Imagine my embarrassment, as an American living in Mexico, a country which also held a presidential election in 2000. In contrast to ours, the Mexican election went quite smoothly. Decades of rigged elections, which had become a highly-developed art form, had been overcome by an effective new electoral registration system. The new Mexican registration system includes a universal registration card with the voter's signature, photograph and fingerprint. The presidential election passed with no major incidents nor disputes, and resulted in a peaceful change of regime after 71 years of one-party rule.
The American election, on the other hand, was a veritable circus, with its hanging chads, butterfly ballots, overvotes, undervotes and esoteric attempts to "discern the intent" of the voter. The entire ordeal provided plenty of food for thought, material for comedians and political analysts (by no means mutually exclusive categories!).
Ironically the real voter scandal was hardly touched upon - certainly not by the mainstream media and the political establishment. The real vote fraud scandal is that being a U.S. citizen is no longer a universal requirement for voting. There is convincing evidence that a growing number of non-citizens (including illegal aliens) are voting in U.S. elections. It should be treated as the major scandal that it is, but is publicly ignored by both political parties - though for different reasons. The Democratic leadership is quiet about it for the simple reason that most immigrants (including non-citizen voters) cast their ballots for the Democratic Party. The Republican Party leadership is quiet because they are seeking to win the Hispanic vote. They think that cracking down on non-citizen voting would be seen as "anti-immigrant" and would "lose" the Hispanic vote (which they don't have and aren't likely to get in this generation anyway!) During the entire hullabaloo of the 2000 post-election, while fighting for every single vote in Florida, neither Bush nor James Baker, nor any other prominent Republican brought up the fact that there was evidence of a large amount of non-citizens voting in Florida. As often results when both parties accord an important topic taboo status, the ordinary American voter is the real loser.
So what's going on here? Who decreed that non-citizens could vote? As usual, the problem has been greatly exacerbated by the promotion of a "noble cause". In this case the "noble cause " was "voter accessibility". How vividly I recall viewing a 1992 presidential debate, in which Candidate Clinton earnestly declared that "we have to make the system more accessible". How was it "inaccessible" in 1992, one might ask. Neither registering to vote nor casting a ballot are or were difficult tasks. Those of us Americans who live outside U.S. territory and vote by absentee ballot face more difficulties and expenses in order to vote - but we do it because we want to vote! So what does an American citizen living in the U.S. have to complain about? No matter, the system had to become more "accessible". So the Democrats concocted the "Motor Voter" Act, a highly effective government program designed to increase Democratic voter registration. Such a dubious law, while not totally responsible for the problem, has greatly facilitated non-citizen voting.
Motor Voter is officially known as the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. It is additionally referred to (not inaccurately) as "Auto Fraudo". Motor Voter was passed by a slim margin and signed into law in 1993 and became effective in 1995. The congressional Republican leadership, in control of Congress since 1995, has been unable (or unwilling) to repeal Motor Voter in all that time.
Motor Voter is based on the proposition that no one should have to make a special trip to register to vote, that, after all would not be "accessible". Instead, people can register to vote when they go to apply for their driver's license or to collect their welfare benefits. (Tough Question: What political party do you suppose welfare recipients are likely to vote for?)
The Motor Voter Act requires no proof of citizenship in order to register to vote. In fact, state motor vehicle departments were instructed by the Clinton Administration NOT to be inquisitive about whether or not applicants were American citizens, nor even to advise them that non-citizens are legally not allowed to vote. In fact, Motor Voter includes a stern warning against anyone who would dare to "intimidate, threaten or coerce" any prospective applicant. Such "intimidation" would presumably include pesky questions about citizenship. Since a growing number of states don't exclude illegal aliens from having a driver's license, it is not very difficult for illegal aliens to register to vote. Now that's accessibility!
How common is non-citizen voting? Since the very registration system makes it difficult to find out, the exact quantity is unknown to mortal man. According to one estimate, nationwide, on average, about two to four percent of voters are not citizens. But in major cities with large immigrant populations (including Dade County, Florida), the figure could be closer to 10-15%. In a close race that percentage could hand victory on a silver platter to one of the candidates, which in most cases would be a Democrat. (The fact that most legal immigrants vote Democratic and are likely to for the foreseeable future does not bode well for the future viability of the Republican party - allowing non-citizens to vote makes it even worse!)
The basic question is, should non-citizens be allowed to vote in U.S. elections? Most Americans would say no. But the system allows it and no prominent policy-makers seem too concerned about the problem. On the practical level, the solution to the problem is quite simple. It is easy for an American citizen to prove his or her citizenship! When registering, a natural -born citizen need only present a birth certificate, while a naturalized citizen need only present a naturalization certificate. How hard can that be? Opponents of verification of prospective voters don't oppose it because verification is difficult, because it's not. They oppose verification because they want non-citizens to vote! What other possible explanation is there?
But who will speak up for ordinary American citizens? Their rights are being violated, their citizenship cheapened, their voice diluted. When will ordinary Americans wake up, speak up, and demand that citizenship be a requirement for those who register to vote? Shouldn't America's future be determined by her own citizens?
Allan E. Wall is an American citizen who has lived and worked in Mexico since 1991. Presently employed as an English instructor and administrator, Allan has legal permission from the Mexican government to live and work in Mexico under the rubric of an FM-2 migration document (No. 312448) for which he had to pay $1,816.00 pesos for renewal this past year. Allan would be glad to receive questions or comments (pro or con), at allan39@prodigy.net.mx.
In regard to speculation or conjecture of illegal immigrant votes helping Demorats, no minority group in America votes with any regularity for the Republicans. Even the hispanics, who are by most measures conservative, tend to vote Demorat. Happily, there have been some changes within that trend, but they are few and unpredictable.
I wish it were not so, I wish that all immigrants and minorities would block out the siren song of :
You're to stupid to make it on your own, so here is your Gummint program. Custom built to your Race, Ethnicity, Religion, Creed, Disability, Sexual preference/Gender identity, and of course taking into consideration that you didn't have a pony, your very own Jesse Jackson Poverty Pimp get off the hook/outta jail free card. Please accept this free coupon to the Jesse Jackson Baby Daddy Paternity Testing Clinic. We are currently working on a way to convince the bleeding hearts of the world pay for that too.
:barf: :barf: :barf:
WyldOne,
Pretty well known fact out in the PRK if you pay attention to it. The Dornan thing pretty well nailed it but nobody cared enough to do anything about it. The Speaker was Gingrich at the time and I think he had enough bad press as it was so it didn't get pursued as it should have.
Can you "prove" that your MA Senator Kennedy shouldn't have done 15 years for manslaughter? Now days, it would be 25 to life for 2nd degree murder but I guess they couldn't prove he was drunk since he left the accident scene.
Pretty well known fact out in the PRK if you pay attention to it. The Dornan thing pretty well nailed it but nobody cared enough to do anything about it. The Speaker was Gingrich at the time and I think he had enough bad press as it was so it didn't get pursued as it should have.
Can you "prove" that your MA Senator Kennedy shouldn't have done 15 years for manslaughter? Now days, it would be 25 to life for 2nd degree murder but I guess they couldn't prove he was drunk since he left the accident scene.
Ok I don't like the idea of illegals voting anymore than any of you do. In fact the very notion gives rise to murderous thoughts of anger...
however!!!
It is very possable for some to be a CITIZEN and not have a PHOTO ID! Also, I for one cannot think of any photo ID that you don't PAY for!
I think I remember this, you might have seen it when it was called a POLL TAX!
If I remember correctly, there's an ammendment about that somewhere...
Now if your were to provide a birth cirtificate to register to vote, or the proper papers for LEGAL immagrants, I would remove my objections.
In addition, I wouldn't put it abouve the Gumm't to get around this by providing a free national photo ID, which would be a NATIONAL ID!! Does anyone here want to see that?
however!!!
It is very possable for some to be a CITIZEN and not have a PHOTO ID! Also, I for one cannot think of any photo ID that you don't PAY for!
I think I remember this, you might have seen it when it was called a POLL TAX!
If I remember correctly, there's an ammendment about that somewhere...
Now if your were to provide a birth cirtificate to register to vote, or the proper papers for LEGAL immagrants, I would remove my objections.
In addition, I wouldn't put it abouve the Gumm't to get around this by providing a free national photo ID, which would be a NATIONAL ID!! Does anyone here want to see that?
When I had to get a copy of my birth certificate a few years ago, it cost like $25 and a fair amount of time and effort - not all the state governments make getting your b.c. cheap or convenient. Especially for those who no longer live near the state of their birth.
Chuck Schumer and Ron Wyden (sp?), both US Senators and both Democrats, don't want to force people to show a photo ID or drivers license to register to vote. Why not? They claimed that this would severely restrict those who vote my mail.
Gasp! You mean Ron Wyden - of Oregon, the state with the highest proportion of vote-by-mailers in the country - wants to defend vote by mail?
Boy, that's really implausible. He must have a hidden motive!
According to one estimate, nationwide, on average, about two to four percent of voters are not citizens. But in major cities with large immigrant populations (including Dade County, Florida), the figure could be closer to 10-15%.
"According to one estimate?" Which estimate, what scholar or organization conducted it, was it peer reviewed, and are those results typical of what other studies have found or much higher?
And where did that "10-15%" number come from? The writer doesn't even say if it came from the same "estimate," or if he just made it up.
Skeptically,
Ampersand
Chuck Schumer and Ron Wyden (sp?), both US Senators and both Democrats, don't want to force people to show a photo ID or drivers license to register to vote. Why not? They claimed that this would severely restrict those who vote my mail.
Gasp! You mean Ron Wyden - of Oregon, the state with the highest proportion of vote-by-mailers in the country - wants to defend vote by mail?
Boy, that's really implausible. He must have a hidden motive!
According to one estimate, nationwide, on average, about two to four percent of voters are not citizens. But in major cities with large immigrant populations (including Dade County, Florida), the figure could be closer to 10-15%.
"According to one estimate?" Which estimate, what scholar or organization conducted it, was it peer reviewed, and are those results typical of what other studies have found or much higher?
And where did that "10-15%" number come from? The writer doesn't even say if it came from the same "estimate," or if he just made it up.
Skeptically,
Ampersand
Here in CA, I don't need to show picture ID to vote.
I think they ask for it if I show up at the polling place (been absentee for a while, so I don't remember) but it is definitely NOT required at any step along the way for absentee voting (vote-by-mail).
Fill out voter registration form, mail it in. Get sample ballot in mail, tear off the back page absentee ballot request, mail that in. Get absentee ballot, vote, send that in before the deadline.
DJ
I think they ask for it if I show up at the polling place (been absentee for a while, so I don't remember) but it is definitely NOT required at any step along the way for absentee voting (vote-by-mail).
Fill out voter registration form, mail it in. Get sample ballot in mail, tear off the back page absentee ballot request, mail that in. Get absentee ballot, vote, send that in before the deadline.
DJ
Fred Hansen
New member
http://www.thepoliticaledge.com/news/2001,06,15,0353/
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/news/121701_sn_voter.html
Dog Registers to Vote, Demonstrates Flaw in Motor Voter
Friday, June 15, 2001 03:53 p.m. EST
Mabel Mackall Briscoe doesn't like the National Voter Registration Act, better known as the Motor Voter law.
Former President Bill Clinton signed the National Voter Registration Act into law in 1993. The bill was an effort to help ease the voter registration process by expanding the number of locations and opportunities for people to register to vote.
As a critic of Motor Voter, Mabel Briscoe claimed that it would allow criminals, non-citizens, and those under 18 to register to vote. In an act of public service, she registered her dog, Holly, as an Independent while renewing her license in 1999.
In April, Holly received a notice requiring her to report for jury duty. Mabel, satisfied that she was proven correct, contacted the Maryland elections board to correct the record. Unfortunately for her, government bureaucrats do not have a sense of humor and charged her with false registration for "willfully and knowingly violat[ing] the voter registration law by falsifying a name and misrepresenting facts on a registration." If found guilty, the 82-year-old could face up to five years in prison and/or a $1,000 fine.
Maryland State Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller, Jr., a Democrat, is representing Briscoe pro bono. "I’ve known and admired Mrs. Briscoe for years," Miller said. "She’s a very gentile, elderly lady who believes she was performing a public service." Miller has instructed Briscoe not to speak to the press.
"You need criminal intent in order to be prosecuted," Miller said. "She did not intend to break the law."
One thing is certain; Motor Voter has serious flaws that need to be addressed. Just in case you are wondering, Holly never voted.
- Excerpts taken from FoxNews.com
http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/news/121701_sn_voter.html
Dog Registers to Vote, Demonstrates Flaw in Motor Voter
Friday, June 15, 2001 03:53 p.m. EST
Mabel Mackall Briscoe doesn't like the National Voter Registration Act, better known as the Motor Voter law.
Former President Bill Clinton signed the National Voter Registration Act into law in 1993. The bill was an effort to help ease the voter registration process by expanding the number of locations and opportunities for people to register to vote.
As a critic of Motor Voter, Mabel Briscoe claimed that it would allow criminals, non-citizens, and those under 18 to register to vote. In an act of public service, she registered her dog, Holly, as an Independent while renewing her license in 1999.
In April, Holly received a notice requiring her to report for jury duty. Mabel, satisfied that she was proven correct, contacted the Maryland elections board to correct the record. Unfortunately for her, government bureaucrats do not have a sense of humor and charged her with false registration for "willfully and knowingly violat[ing] the voter registration law by falsifying a name and misrepresenting facts on a registration." If found guilty, the 82-year-old could face up to five years in prison and/or a $1,000 fine.
Maryland State Senate President Thomas V. Mike Miller, Jr., a Democrat, is representing Briscoe pro bono. "I’ve known and admired Mrs. Briscoe for years," Miller said. "She’s a very gentile, elderly lady who believes she was performing a public service." Miller has instructed Briscoe not to speak to the press.
"You need criminal intent in order to be prosecuted," Miller said. "She did not intend to break the law."
One thing is certain; Motor Voter has serious flaws that need to be addressed. Just in case you are wondering, Holly never voted.
- Excerpts taken from FoxNews.com