Lots of poor people, elderly people, and minorities (esp. those who are all three) don't have the kind of paper records you need for that, and in fact may never have had them.

If someone has to take time off from work, pay for transportation, additional child care, pay for the additional docunents required to obtain the official ID (even if it's free) that's the modern day Poll Tax.

So you want people to get an ID that can be used for voting, but
- it should not cost people time they could spend on some other activity
- getting it should not require going to a place

Look closer at what you're advocating. The whole premise behind these Republican engineered voter-identification laws voter ID laws is to prevent large demographic groups who traditionally vote for Democrats from casting their ballots. Despite their own admissions that voter suppression is their goal, Republicans are still trying to cover up their motives by claiming that official voter IDs are to prevent voter fraud, despite the fact that voter fraud is almost nonexistent.

Whether it's at a local, state or national level, Republicans won't stop passing voter suppression laws to block Democratic leaning voters, but Democrats should not be promoting their agenda and helping them reach their goal. Look at what's happening right now in Alabama, a state that requires an official photo ID to vote. This week they announced that the state would stop issuing driver’s licenses in 10 predominantly black counties where 75 percent of registered voters are black.

If Alabama wants to close licensing centers, let them; but counter their act of voter suppression by letting the citizens of Alabama get federal photo ID's at the local post office.

Just about every small town in America has a local post office. In many states, driver licensing centers are not local; their days and hours of operation are not convenient; and, most importantly, they are controlled by the state.

In states trying to suppress voters by requiring photo ID, remove the difficulty.

It's either that or amend the Voting Rights Act to state that no photo ID is required to vote.

and privatize it. Do you really want either the Republican Party or their corporate overlords to manage a national ID system and control everyone's only access to voting?

I live in a rural area. There is no PO here, and actually most rural areas don't have that convenience. I would have to travel almost 20 miles to the closest PO, and for friends who live farther out, it's almost 150 miles round trip. Even so, obtaining all the supporting documents from various counties or state agencies to prove my identity would be a hardship, time consuming and costly. Women especially, might change their surnames names several times during their lives. They would need to acquire a paper trail of legal name changes for any marriages, divorces, deaths, and that too, is expensive.

You might want to check, but the Voting Rights Act does not require a photo ID to vote; here in California, as well as states, no ID is needed to vote.

do people register to vote in Alabama? Is it easily accessed?

One poster talked about needing documents that many do not have. What documents do they need to register? That should be the same as to vote. So the question is how do we fix that?

What about the issue of lack of voting machines in certain districts? This is all about voter obstruction.

I do not think the problem here is only the ID. I suspect that it is just as hard to get to the place where people register to vote. All of these problems are the issue.

I like the idea of a federal law settling this issue but I think it has to be more comprehensive than just photos. We need the Voter Rights Act of 1965 back with solutions for all of these issues and more.

The problem is that the US is somehow incapable of providing its citizens with legal documents that would make voter-suppression more difficult.

The US-government COULD launch a program to get every voter a national ID. But then you guys would protest how it infringes on your freedom to be a nobody with an unverifiable identity.

For example: Me
I'm a german citizen.
- I have a birth-certificate.
- My birth-certificate plus a form filled out by my parents got me a national ID when I was a teenager.
- When getting my national ID, I was automatically added to the voter-rolls.
- Getting my first job got me a file with name, address and everything at the social-security administration and at the finance-ministry.
- When moving to another town, you have to go to the municipal administration and tell them that you now have residence here. They will automatically update your ID, the local phone-book, the voter-rolls here and back in your old town, your file at the social-security administration and your file at the finance-ministry.

The government has everything covered. The system is so air-tight that I DON'T EVEN NEED TO SHOW MY PHOTO-ID WHEN VOTING. Every voter gets an election-notification by mail, one month in advance. It tells you what election it is, and when and where you are supposed to vote. Owning this notification also serves as the election-ID. There is no need for me to show anything else but this letter when I go to cast my vote.

Maybe it's individualism, cultural or societal attitudes, or the prevail conspiracy theories about the One World Order, but I don't think most people would agree to all that... remember, some Americans still oppose Medicare and SS.

I don't know about other states, but the election notification you describe sounds identical to California's system. The only difference would be that you still wouldn't have to even show that paperwork to vote. I know because I once forgot to bring mine and although I could have voted anyway, I needed the practice ballot to remember all my choices, so I drove back home to get it.

I've had to register to vote each time that I've moved and once was only allowed to vote by provisional ballot because the registration was too close to the polling day and my name wasn't on the roster but I have never had to show an ID. I state my name and my address and as long as it's on the roster I sign the roster then vote. It's not that hard in states where voter suppression isn't a priority.

It was never a requirement in PA, either; but, a few years ago, the Republican legislature passed a law requiring photo ID. Several people fought the law and won.

Oh, yeah, the one that calls itself the greatest country in the world and is too incompetent to provide its citizens with basic legal documentation.

The one where you bring a bill with your home-address to the election-office because you have no other way of proving who you are and where you live.





And just so you know: The term "banana-republic" is correct.

where there was in-person fraud.

Seems like an awful lot of money, time, and resources being spent on something that is not an actual issue. To me that would be a solution looking for a problem.

years ago i used to listen to fundy radio a bit and they were quite concerned about this sort of thing

they will go nuts