Should a photo I.D. Be required to vote in local, state, and national elections?

Posted by: DavidMGold

  • Yes. If we need to carry photo I.D. To drive a car, buy a pack of cigarettes, or have an alcoholic drink at a restaurant, it makes even more sense that a photo I.D. Be presented for voting and electing lawmakers.

  • No. The integrity of elections or the identity of voters is an impediment to voting.

96% 26 votes
4% 1 votes
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Haroush says2015-08-07T22:06:36.6374306Z
SCOTUS is so great isn't it? This is why we need to abolish SCOTUS. It is politically motivated and doesn't stand for the constitution, but political parties.
TBR says2015-08-08T00:50:59.9224772Z
So... Because you love the constitution so much you want to abolish the Supreme Court. Your suggestion is completely unconstitutional. Wait, are trying to make a robot go into some stupidity loop?
Haroush says2015-08-08T02:31:54.6332892Z
Insults already.. Smh.
58539672 says2015-08-08T02:33:25.7066730Z
@Haroush He is right though. What you are suggesting is unconstitutional.
Haroush says2015-08-08T02:37:49.2703625Z
Well, I will wait until he can learn to discuss matters without insulting people..
Haroush says2015-08-08T02:39:58.0803882Z
And what I am suggesting is not unconstitutional. We never needed a supreme court in the first place.
58539672 says2015-08-08T02:42:11.1949592Z
The Supreme Court is SPECIFICALLY mentioned in the Constitution. Their fore, abolishing it IS unconstitutional. Their is no way around it.
Haroush says2015-08-08T02:52:40.6288763Z
James Madison “The powers properly belonging to one of the departments ought not to be directly and completely administered by either of the other departments. It is equally evident, that none of them ought to possess, directly or indirectly, an overruling influence over the others, in the administration of their respective powers. It will not be denied, that power is of an encroaching nature, and that it ought to be effectually restrained from passing the limits assigned to it. The accumulation of all powers, legislative, executive, and judiciary, in the same hands, whether of one, a few, or many, and whether hereditary, self-appointed, or elective, may justly be pronounced the very definition of tyranny.”
Haroush says2015-08-08T02:53:26.2747689Z
John Adams “A question arises whether all the powers of government, legislative, executive, and judicial, shall be left in this body? I think a people cannot be long free, nor ever happy, whose government is in one Assembly.”
Haroush says2015-08-08T02:54:05.8522226Z
Thomas Jefferson “[N]othing in the Constitution has given [the judiciary] a right to decide for the Executive, more than to the executive to decide for them. Both magistracies are equally independent in the sphere of action assigned to them… the opinion which gives to the judges the right to decide what laws are constitutional, and what are not, not only for themselves in their own sphere of action, but for the Legislature & Executive also, in their spheres, would make the judiciary a despotic branch.”
Haroush says2015-08-08T02:54:56.7241487Z
Alexander Hamilton “[A] limited Constitution … can be preserved in practice no other way than through the medium of courts of justice, whose duty it must be to declare all acts contrary to the manifest tenor of the Constitution void. Without this, all the reservations of particular rights or privileges would amount to nothing … To deny this would be to affirm … that men acting by virtue of powers may do not only what their powers do not authorize, but what they forbid.”
58539672 says2015-08-08T02:58:30.4143185Z
@Haroush No amount of quotes change the fact that the Supreme Court is SPECIFICALLY mentioned and established in the Constitution. Their fore, abolishing it IS unconstitutional. When I said their is no way around it, I meant their is literally NO WAY AROUND IT. Any removal of the court is a platen a violation of the document as the banning of firearms.
Haroush says2015-08-08T02:59:17.8230224Z
I know my constitution well and I know when it is being abused by certain branches of government. Considering how corrupt our government is SCOTUS should be abolished.
58539672 says2015-08-08T03:00:58.2241837Z
NO WAY AROUND IT. This is as rock solid an argument as your ever going to find. The SCOTUS can't be abolished constitutionally.
Haroush says2015-08-08T03:01:08.3809311Z
It is not unconstitutional. You can be as redundant as you wish but I know I am right and will not back down.
Wylted says2015-08-08T03:58:54.6763508Z
SCOTUS being abolished, would cause even more unconstitutional things to take place, not to mention, SCOTUS is directly mentioned in the constitution, so removing it would obviously be unconstitutional.
58539672 says2015-08-08T04:08:58.8682238Z
Im wonder how redundant I have to be for you to understand. Abolishing anything from the constitution (without going through the amendment process) is unconstitutional. I don't know what constitution you are reading, but the US Constitution CLEARLY states the establishment of the SCOTUS. So saying that the SCOTUS is unconstitutional is a level of deniability that I have not seen in a while.
58539672 says2015-08-08T04:48:15.9341331Z
Not liking something does not make it unconstitutional.
Haroush says2015-08-08T08:49:19.3473644Z
Smh... Nope it is not unconstitutional.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-08-08T13:52:28.6775928Z
@Haroush -- Why do you always troll?
Sarra says2015-08-08T15:04:47.5082398Z
Prior to this debate voting fraud happened approximately 2 times per year in North Carolina. Thousands of people cannot vote now with our restrictive voting laws. Thousands of people not being allowed to vote is an over reaction to 2 voting fraud cases. As to the main argument regarding photo i.D., licenses cost $32. This $32 fee is a poll tax and thus illegal. If you want people to show photo i.D.S when they vote, you need to be in favor of free licenses.
komododragon8 says2015-08-08T15:49:11.1568802Z
Sarra: I agree with you, while I think that people should have an ID to vote, I think that this ID should be completely free and should be easily accessible by everyone.
TBR says2015-08-08T16:06:03.1726016Z
@Haroush - Why persist on this. It is simple wrong. You cannot (and should not) disband the SCOTUS. As has been pointed at several times, it is plain as day IN the constitution, less ambiguous than the right to keep arms. If you so love the constitution, why are you so hostile to it, and the constitutional process?
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-08-08T16:18:10.7396313Z
Oh yes...More free stuff...That I have to pay for. Look, when I moved cross country at 19, I had $300 in my pocket and a bag of clothes in my hand. I caught a bus to the airport, bought a plane ticket for $235, flew away from EVERYONE and every safety net I had, spent all but $20 on a motel for the week, got a job at KFC making $7.00 an hour...Minimum wage, and started working...Oh wait no I didn't start working...Before they let me start working I had to go to the DMV and get a new ID with my new address on it then go to the state and buy an attempt at a test which I had to pass in order to get a license to work with food in the state. Point is: stop crying about everything and do what you have to do.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-08-08T16:21:23.5100670Z
I am so tired of everyone whining and crying every time they have to spend money. Look, the people crying about spending $10 to get an ID are the same people crying that they don't get enough money and handouts from the government and actual taxpayers anyway. Stop crying and get do it.
TBR says2015-08-08T16:23:06.4299609Z
@MakeSensePeopleDont - You don't have a constitutional right to work at KFC - you do have a right to vote.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-08-08T16:26:14.5767328Z
I'll tell you this much, if I were in charge you wouldn't like the way I dealt with things. Handouts and freebies would be gone real fast. Instead of just handing out money, food, and housing non-stop, it would be this simple: Process: 1) You have from 18-24 to get a job and live on your own or with your parents...Gotta give it a shot at least. Monetary assistance available if needed...Absolutely needed. 2) If you need assistance after that, you get 4 years of free college locally. During this time you have dormitory style housing provided to you, child care services if needed, free food, free...Well everything. 3) if you fail to complete school after 4 years...Good luck you're on your own. If you're homeless it's your own darn fault, hope you enjoy it cuz you just wasted half your life
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-08-08T16:28:49.6261267Z
@TBR -- so just because it's a right means you don't have to prove who you are? How do we prove you are even a legal citizen who is provided those constitutional rights?
DavidMGold says2015-08-08T17:15:45.3098100Z
@Sarra - NYC's Department of Investigations sent undercover agents to 63 polling places assuming the names of people who were deceased, no longer living there, or sitting in jail. They were allowed to cast votes in 61 polling places. As for North Carolina, I can point to 4 residents in Moore County indicted for voter fraud alone. As for your preposterous claim that a photo ID be presented at a polling place is a poll tax, that's as absurd as saying that requiring voters to wear shoes and shirts at the polling place is a poll tax. At the very least, we've found the one tax Democrats actually oppose.
58539672 says2015-08-08T17:33:18.9501299Z
@Haroush "Nope it is not unconstitutional". That... Is a double negative. So you agree with us then?
OFT60 says2015-08-08T23:57:06.4360503Z
Look people the Regressive Left does not want anyone to have to show ID but it would be very entertaining to film a Regressive when they were asked by the police to show proof of who they were.
TBR says2015-08-09T00:00:34.6349849Z
@MakeSensePeopleDont - No... However, you can not make people pay for what is a right.
TBR says2015-08-09T00:02:24.7872910Z
Put it this way... This is really a pseudo problem. Voter fraud is tiny (virtual non-existent), and the proposed solution to the non-problem is disenfranchising. So....
DavidMGold says2015-08-09T00:03:11.0900022Z
@TBR - so I take it we can start demanding government pay for our firearms?
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-08-09T00:10:20.9663578Z
@David... -- Nice one, I like that response.
Sarra says2015-08-09T02:32:37.1694767Z
@DavidMGold North Carolina has a lot of new, really dumb laws (thanks to Republicans having complete control of our state government) - like trying to register high school kids to vote is illegal. The four people in Moore County violated the new, dumb law regarding registering new voters. After researching the number for a bit, I have to admit that approximately 5 people commit voting fraud in NC each year, not 2. What I specifically mean by voting fraud is someone voting twice (or more) or the dead voting. Ps. Democrats hate taxes too
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-08-09T02:44:05.9918922Z
@Sara -- 1) The high school voters deal is not dumb, it's to protect students. See, college professors have started this trend recently where they sit around bashing one political party and talking about the other as if they are demi gods then they give "Extra Credit" to go register to vote or even vote...How do you think they will vote? This has started trickling down to high school. In order to protect students from authority figures taking advantage of them, this has been made illegal. 2) Democrats don't hate taxes. Their core belief is based on bigger government and more Washington control. This means higher taxes are required to subsidize the larger government.
Sarra says2015-08-09T03:23:56.7680032Z
@MakeSensePeopleDont Another way of protecting students from bias college professors is for my state to follow Oregon’s example - having everyone in their state becoming automatically registered they turn 18. This protected students from authority figures taking advantage of them in Oregon. In my local government, republicans raised taxes last year and democrats are trying to lower them. The federal party does not represent either republicans or democrats; they represent the multimillionaires and billionaires who fund their political campaigns.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-08-09T03:26:12.2408860Z
@Sara -- 1) Well now you're just taking away my right NOT to register to vote. 2) Money running politics....Welcome to government circa 2015
Haroush says2015-08-09T12:21:59.5668949Z
I don't troll @ MSPD I don't agree SCOTUS is constitutional. Furthermore, it needs to be abolished because of it's political corruption. @ 58539672 Why do I persist? Because the Supreme Court has become a beacon of tyranny in our government passing laws because of political motivation. @ TBR It doesn't matter who gets into presidency, never can they keep their hands out of the Supreme Court. This being said, our judicial branch of our government has become the beacon of tyranny.
TBR says2015-08-09T14:08:14.9126249Z
@DavidMGold - No. The device is not the same as the right. That would be like insisting that you are required to bribe "buy" your representative to have your issues addressed. Haroush, I saw on another poll you are warrantless surveillance. So far, I have not seen you stand for the constitution ones. You have used this as a bumper sticker position. The constitution is tough stuff, you're free to reject the concepts, but don't for a second think you are standing for it, or America just by being "conservative" - our country demands more.
MakeSensePeopleDont says2015-08-09T15:17:08.4711219Z
@TBR -- . "No. The device is not the same as the right. That would be like insisting that you are required to bribe "buy" your representative to have your issues addressed." Buy your reps...You mean like campaign donors already do? Also, the device is inherently the right so in order to exercise your right to keep and bear arms you need the device even if you are not able to purchase it; just as in order to exercise your right to vote you require the means to travel to the polling place, mail in your ballot, and as is being suggested purchase your photo ID...Even if you are not able to purchase it...Look how many devices you need for that :)
Haroush says2015-08-09T16:12:24.9202704Z
@TBR, Again, instead of personal attacks, why not tackle the topic at hand?
DavidMGold says2015-08-09T18:38:03.4722864Z
@TBR - I beg to differ. The First Amendment affords us freedom of speech (free speech), but that doesn't mean the Government pays for my book, for my magazine, for my newspaper, etc. You implied, rather falsely, that because it is a right, it must come at no monetary cost.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.