March 25, 2005
Georgia Democrats oppose photo IDs for voting; cry 'racism' in their defense
Protestors here in Georgia insist that a state house measure, championed by Republicans, to limit the types of identification accepted for voter ID is racist
The measure would only allow voters to present government or state-issued photo IDs, including drivers' licenses, state-issued identification cards, passports and state school IDs.
Backers of the bills call them a giant step forward in the battle against voter fraud, but opponents say they're a giant step backward after years of Civil Rights progress. They contend many of the poor and elderly would be blocked from voting because they do not have drivers licenses or any other photo identification.
"My mother's 96 years old. She no longer drives and she does not need photo identification. She would love to take her thumb and dip it in a little bottle of ink and vote," said Rep. Tyrone Brooks, D-Atlanta.
The whiners beg a basic question: "What do those without photo ID do for identification when they are banking?"
The measure will decrease voter fraud in the state, and would certainly help to streamline the present system, which allows one to use things as obscure as mail from the Social Security Administration.
A photo ID would guarantee that the person voting is the person named, plus it would ensure that the voter is voting in the proper place, and is properly registered to vote.
What's the problem? Could it be that the Democrats want to allow voter fraud to continue unchecked? And is race being used as a red herring to get people worked up?
Posted by: mhking at
| Comments (4)
| Add Comment
Post contains 281 words, total size 2 kb.
It's those dead voters, they never look like their photo...it must be the weight loss.
Posted by: BobG at March 26, 2005 05:24 AM (bLMew)
The Democrats are so desperate to win elections, they're willing to object to basic, common sense requirements. The argument that not everyone drives is specious, due to the fact, that all states issue official ID's at very minimal costs. In a post 9/11 world, why would anyone not have a picture ID? It takes a picture ID to board a plane, buy cigarettes and alcohol, write a check, etc. etc.
I worked at our local election board during the 2000 campaign. We had numerous instances of fraudulent voter registration cards, with the names of dead people and empty lots used as mailing addresses. We literally recieved thousands of registrations and I'm positive not all of the fraudulent ones were spotted. Without a photo ID, what will stop unscrupulous people from voting numerous times with a fake name? In this past election, all around the country, examples were given where the number of new registrations surpassed the number of people eligible to vote in those particular counties.
The Democrats are always talking about "fair elections" and "let every vote count." They claim this is the only way minorities can be assured of the integrity of the voting system. Isn't the integrity of the voting system equally compromised when uncertainty arises in the legal eligiblity of those voting?
Posted by: New Leadership at March 26, 2005 12:41 PM (ogBB4)
I think it would
be a good measure if they will vote with an identity card, so this way
we could to avoid any other misunderstanding. <a href="http://masini.deinchiriat.net"> masini de inchiriat
Posted by: gabri at September 01, 2011 01:59 PM (O9TZG)
Posted by: gabri at September 01, 2011 02:00 PM (O9TZG)
| Add Comment
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
15kb generated in CPU 0.04, elapsed 0.1984 seconds.
41 queries taking 0.1757 seconds, 98 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.