Opinion Talk

By candide

January 12, 2006 06:11 AM | Link to this

Free ID cards remove all objections to the requirement for proof of identity. Those claiming discrimination are simply reverse racists, of which we have almost as many as normal racists.

I think we should have a literacy requirement for voting and have it enforced equally for blacks and whites, which was never done under Jim Crow. Most blacks and most rednecks should not be allowed to vote anyway.

By Randy

January 12, 2006 08:14 AM | Link to this

Free should make it fine. What are the Democrats and the minority rights groups afraid of? That someone with outstanding warrants might be caught…he should be. I think this whole issue is not about discriminating against people’s rights, it is about criminals and fraudulent voters hiding behind the law.

By Brian Curtis

January 12, 2006 09:23 AM | Link to this

Definitely. I’d certainly withdraw MY objections if there was no government-imposed cost associated with the right to vote (which is what a voter ID card would otherwise be). That’s what makes it a poll tax, explicitly unconstitutional.

If it were freely available to all citizens, then fine. Go ahead and spend the money for this oh-so-vital program to counteract a type of voter fraud that barely exists. Meanwhile, we’ll just ignore the much bigger election-fraud issues of voting machines with no paper trail.

By Van

January 12, 2006 09:31 AM | Link to this

Truth be told, it wasn’t objectionable to begin with, at least to a majority of Georgians.

The cards were free, if you said you could not afford it, and the few people that actually had problems getting a card, were few in number.

Apathy was the biggest problem. It was too much trouble to go to the bus when it came around.

The arguments against the voter ID are the same ones people have had about just getting an ID card from Georgia or a driver’s license. Not enough places to get them. Were they disenfranchised or had another right abridged?

As to absentee voting, make the eligibility a little harder and encourage early voting for the elderly.

By Mara

January 12, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this

Yes, it does. It makes it slightly less objectionable. I agreed that charging for the ID was so close to charging to vote that the difference was indistiguishable. But I still won’t support it until they figure out a way to make it available in all towns. My county doesn’t even have a licensing office, let alone the town I live in. In fact, I have to go across two counties to get to the nearest office. And while I do have the means and resources to do so, I’m sure that there are a good percentage of people who don’t. Make it free, make it accessible and most people will support it.

By Mara

January 12, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this

Hey Van. I’m not sure I agree with you on the “apathy” part. I know that I personally do not know when or where this bus goes. Has it come to my town? Where at? As I said, I don’t know. I do know that I have seen no advertising about its schedule. I’ve never heard or seen a single PSA advertising it’s schedule or even providing a location where a schedule can be found. Surely if it was supposed to actually help, that information would be widely available.

By Mike Parker

January 12, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this

The Senate treated Samuel Alito with kindness today, more kindness than he deserved.

In 1985, the then 35-year-old Alito peppered his resume with college club membership in CAP. Sometime around 1970, CAP, also known as Concerned Alumni of Princeton, was dedicated to preventing women and minorities from infiltrating higher education.

In kindness, the Senate did not call Alito a bigot or a racist today. Whether that is more kindness than he deserved is not yet known. In 1970, five years after the historic Voting Rights Act, young Alito, to paraphrase his own words, was not a founder of this CAP. He was not on the executive board. He was not an officer or even an active member.

So why in 1985 was the CAP membership relevant to Alito’s employment application for a job within the Reagan Administration?

That question was not asked today.

It needs to be answered, not by Alito, but by the people who hired him as a lawyer. What did this membership signify in 1985? What did it mean to see CAP on a resume or a job application?

While these questions remain hanging in the air, we should remember why the Voting Rights Act was passed in 1965. Even in 1965, almost a hundred years after passage of the Fifteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, southern states still refused full rights of citizenship based on race and gender. The right most often denied to blacks and women was the right to vote, the most basic of all democratic rights.

This right, the right to vote is being challenged again in a southern state, Georgia, by Georgia Republicans, through a poll tax. That poll tax, known best as an ID card, prevents people born American who are too poor, or too old, too beaten by their husbands, too taxed, or too under educated from voting.

Voting should not be discouraged by endless sets of government regulations, fees, taxes, and too few voting machines or too few locations.

Voting should be encouraged and facilitated by all democratic governments. That includes the new government in Iraq, the 230-year-old government in the United States, and the post civil war government formed in Georgia.

As the U.S. Senate watches and questions Alito, it is time for true Southerners to ask themselves, should poll taxes, property ownership, and arbitrary state ID cards deny common access to democracy?

If elections can be controlled in war torn Iraq with a purple finger, why can’t the most civilized society in the world find a safe way for every free citizen to vote?

By Mike Parker

January 12, 2006 12:08 PM | Link to this

Andy,

I think all criminals should be caught. Remember the lady in Gwinnett arrested for overdue fines from the public library?

How about deadbeat dads that just walk away from their children and their wife without a divorce?

How about people with parking tickets? Speeding tickets? No car insurance?

How about people that are late on paying their phone bill? Light bill? Old student loan? Visa credit card over the limit?

The question isn’t a matter of catching criminals on Election Day. It’s really a matter of catching them everyday, including during sessions of Congress.

I find it very revealing that you think criminals register to vote.

Do you register to vote? Does that make you a criminal?

If there is an election with more than 17 ballots cast, I’m sure there is some fraud involved. Does that mean that only 16 people should be allowed to vote?

Try thinking about who works at the polls. Its local people from the precinct who know many of the people who come in to vote.

If the precincts were smaller, had more workers, all of them from the precinct, more voting machines…that would do as much to solve the alleged problem of false ID on election day.

Besides, how do you think all those ‘illegals’ get a fake ID … the same way a criminal would still be able to get a voter ID card with a fake name.

Voter ID cards can’t solve a non-existence problem or any existing problem.

By Mardi

January 12, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this

The phrasing of the question is objectionable, being blatently biased in the liberal presumption that any requirement of identity confirmation is verboten. Will the free card be “less objectionable” to Dems (forget about the opinions of the rest of us in the reading and voting audience), or “more appeasing”? Neutrality while on the job ought to be the most important qualification for becoming an AJC staffer.

By Lyrazel

January 12, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this

As it stands now the GA Voter ID law proposal is unconstitutional. By what right does any state demand its citizens pay to vote? This sorry piece of legislation will not help confirming thousands of absentee voters.

You cannot pass legislation if all citizens from the state cannot get to GA licensing offices because state-funding has closed down offices across the state. Voting laws apply to handicapped persons, persons who do not drive, citizens who are out of the country, persons who cannot leave nursing homes and all the others so conveniently tagged as riffraff who also are Georgia voters.

As for the bus, if you happened to see it broken down on the side of the road—you could get a free ID. It was seldom announced—IF it came through at all—there were hours scheduled were it still did not show up—and sometimes the inconvenience of where you had to get to the bus was 20 miles away and you had to climb stairs to get inside it. This was an affront to any handicapped or senior who cannot climb stairs. Equal access is a legal right as is the right to vote.

By Scott Lyle

January 12, 2006 01:05 PM | Link to this

“Wisely and slow; they stumble who run fast” Rom & Jul, Act ii, Sc.3

With amazing speed the Republican legislators are moving on their new Voter ID bill. One thing they can’t say is:

“And God befriend us, as our cause is just” Henry IV, Act v, Sc.1

Scott Lyle

By Brian Curtis

January 12, 2006 01:07 PM | Link to this

Van: And the reason so many people didn’t evacuate New Orleans was apathy, too. They didn’t feel like hoppiing into their SUVs and driving to a pricey motel for a week or so.

When are you going to figure out that a lot people in this state are POOR? They don’t have cars; they work two or more jobs and don’t have a lot of free time to make the journey to a state office by bus; and yet, they’re still citizens. And their votes count as much as anyone else’s.

It’s the duty of government to make voting fully accessible to ALL citizens, regardless of circumstances.

By CMaire

January 12, 2006 02:32 PM | Link to this

Everyone read Brian Curtis’ last sentence: “Meanwhile, we’ll just ignore the much bigger election-fraud issues of voting machines with no paper trail.” I salute you, Mr. Curtis, for pointing out the much larger issue here. My response to the forum question echoes yours. Yes, it makes the ID card less objectionable because of the poll tax issue. It still doesn’t address the difficulties many will have in the effort to acquire a card. Also, the claim of identity fraud at the polls is a joke.

I recently read a fascinating article about Oregon’s fabulous success with mail-in only voting. It is MUCH less expensive to the taxpayers, has very high voter turn-out, a flawless paper trail, and has excellent fraud protection. Georgia should look into this system for its citizens if it really wants to address these issues.

By Cheryl Hollingsworth

January 12, 2006 07:31 PM | Link to this

Can I ask exactly what the additional obstacle that the democrats are complaining about is? The law states that everyone regardless of income now can get a free ID card. Isn’t that what everyone wanted? When I say this I am not meaning to be rude, but do the people who oppose also want us to pick up the voters, carry them in, and push the buttons on the computers for them? This should be considered a compromise. Exactly what kind of information are people going to have to provide when getting the ID card? I mean do you just show up, tell them your name and you get a card? Maybe I haven’t read up enough on this to come up with an informed opinion, but it seems wrong. What kind of tax increase are we going to face to pay for all this equipment? I don’t necessarily disagree with giving people free ID cards, I would just like to know how much I am going to have to pay for this to work.

By David Henson

January 12, 2006 07:35 PM | Link to this

I don’t think that the new voter ID laws are off base at all. A simple task such as voting has become such an issue that something had to be done. The fact that you can basically walk into a voter’s office, show them anything with your name on, and vote is ludicrous to me. How do you know that that person is who they say they are? Who doesn’t have some sort of state issued ID anyway? And those who don’t have an ID don’t have to worry about it because the state isn’t charging a fee for it anyway. It’s a little extra work, but those who are serious about voting will find the time to make sure that everything is in order for them to vote. Those who are complaining about not having proper identification and having to go get it are lazy and probably won’t vote anyway. My only issue with this whole thing is the amount of time taking to pass this, not to mention the wasted tax dollars spent dragging it out in court.

By Novalis Gans

January 12, 2006 07:35 PM | Link to this

Mr. Campos Voting is a privilege and not rights as we all know in this beloved country of ours. Wherever we go, we need identification to prove we are who we say we are. For instance I could go the bank and show them school identification and not necessarily a drivers’ license because it would hold a familiar photo and the same name. I feel this bill is mandatory or necessary. Why do I need another form of identification issued by the government to determine who I am and whether or not I have the eligibility to vote. Well probably because I gas or light bill would not show my face. This is certainly a must in this world of scams and fraud and winning a presidential election based on the unfair play of your support should not happen. This bill is one of the best things to happen to politics and will definitely create stir and controversy in the upcoming years. Novalis Gans

By Jenni Bailey

January 12, 2006 07:36 PM | Link to this

I honestly do not think that this is a good idea. Our voting numbers in the United States are so low in this time. I think that it is not necessary to bring more complications into the voting system at this time. I do however; think that this is something we need to look at doing in the future once our voting numbers are well back into at least the 50-60 percentiles. I think at this time in our country that it would not be a good thing to add more complications to the voting procedure. I think we should focus on ways to bring more people to the voting polls rather than discourage them away. Why don’t we take the money that we would be spending on these cards, and use it to make more campaigns, advertisements, national broadcasted debates, and other ways to make more people engage into the subject that they would be voting on.

By Halley Stallins

January 12, 2006 07:38 PM | Link to this

Mr. Carlos Campos

The new Senate Bill 84 will create another obstacle towards being able to vote. Voting can already be time consuming for any ordinary citizen, but by adding another unnecessary step in order to vote could affect the number of people who will even want to bother voting. Many American citizens have hectic and busy lives therefore now voting will not only involve standing in a line, but also waiting to get your new voter ID to be made. I do believe that the bill has good intentions as far as reducing fraudulent voting; however,I feel that the time that citizens will spend on getting the new voter Id is unnecessary. Halley Stallins

By Anthony Simmond

January 12, 2006 07:38 PM | Link to this

I am in accord with the idea of people having to present a photo identification card in order to vote. This will decrease the likelihood of fraudulent votes. Being free of charge, the acquisition of such an id should be facilitated for even the economically distressed. I am highly disappointed to see my tax dollars squandered to bring such an issue to the Georgia Supreme Court. I am also quite surprised that such a law hasn’t yet been enforced. It should be required that adults carry with them a valid photo identification card, unless, of course, he or she has something to hide.

By Anthony Simmons

January 12, 2006 07:38 PM | Link to this

I am in accord with the idea of people having to present a photo identification card in order to vote. This will decrease the likelihood of fraudulent votes. Being free of charge, the acquisition of such an id should be facilitated for even the economically distressed. I am highly disappointed to see my tax dollars squandered to bring such an issue to the Georgia Supreme Court. I am also quite surprised that such a law hasn’t yet been enforced. It should be required that adults carry with them a valid photo identification card, unless, of course, he or she has something to hide.

By Savanah Lo

January 12, 2006 07:40 PM | Link to this

Mr. Campos,

I am responding to your article in the Atlanta Journal Constitution about the changes to the Voter ID Bill. I, personally, agree with the Democrats that this will be another obstacle for the poor, minorities, and less educated to overcome in order to vote. Being a minority myself, I’ve grown up believing that voting was not necessary. My parents never registered to vote, my grandparents never registered to vote. Now that I’m older, I understand the importance of voting. To add changes or make new laws will only make them (poor, minority, less educated) turn away from voting altogether. It’s hard enough for them to take the time and funds to get to a poll booth and cast their votes. To demand a photo ID, which some people cannot get due to financial situations or lack of transportation, will only make the process more difficult for them. Savanah Lo

By Karla Murphy

January 12, 2006 07:40 PM | Link to this

Karla Murphy,

I think the new voter laws are a waste of time and a waste of tax payers money. Almost everybody in America has some kind of photo ID. If your going to pass a law pass one that doesn’t require issuing out new cards just using some form of picture ID that people already have. Even students in school are issued photo ID’s (they’re free!). Even debit cards now have pictures on them. Why not let us use those, instead of using tax payers money on useless things.

By Kim

January 12, 2006 07:41 PM | Link to this

Dear Mr. Campos,

I am responding to your article on the voter ID bill. There will always be people with opposing opinions. I am one that disagrees with one more thing we have to do to vote. I am a mother of three with a full time job along with going to college part-time. I feel I am one of those people who like to vote because it is one way to voice our opinions. In the past, it has been easy to go to your voting locations show them your registration card and vote. I think more people would be willing to vote with less hassle as possible. It would be easier to get voters to come out with their driver’s license or some sort of ID, so the government can get a count of how many voted. In all, I enjoyed reading your article and look forward to others in the future. Sincerely, Kim Hall

By Lauren Barbour

January 12, 2006 07:41 PM | Link to this

I have very mixed feelings about this article, but for the most part, I am opposed to the passing of the voter ID bill. In the past, people in the lower income bracket have used the excuse of not being able to go to a driver’s license station, or being able to afford a photo ID. If they can’t afford to go there and get an ID made, how do they expect to go somewhere within the county and get an ID made in the first place? These people know that they can use the tax payer’s money to get around paying for things that they should already have. Spending eight dollars on an ID is not going to make or break someone’s budget. It might cut into personal expenses that are not important, like drugs, alcohol, etc. If it was that important for these people to vote, they would be able to afford a photo ID. Obviously, some people in the state of Georgia don’t have their priorities in order.

By Tim Crawley

January 12, 2006 07:41 PM | Link to this

Mr. Campos,

My name is Tim Crawley and I have just finished reading your article it was an interesting read. It made me think how it would make me feel if I was in a state of indigence and had to sign a piece of paper to get an ID to vote stating I’m in poverty I would be ashamed. I don’t understand why there is a need for the signing of the paper telling everybody your in poverty, other than that I completely agree with the IDs for voters. This is this reader’s opinion on this subject.

By Kim

January 12, 2006 07:44 PM | Link to this

1/12/06

Dear Mr. Campos,

I am responding to your article on the voter ID bill. There will always be people with opposing opinions. I am one that disagrees with one more thing we have to do to vote. I am a mother of three with a full time job along with going to college part-time. I feel I am one of those people who like to vote because it is one way to voice our opinions. In the past, it has been easy to go to your voting locations show them your registration card and vote. I think more people would be willing to vote with less hassle as possible. It would be easier to get voters to come out with their driver’s license or some sort of ID, so the government can get a count of how many voted. In all, I enjoyed reading your article and look forward to others in the future. Sincerely, Kim Hall

By Claudia Moulder

January 12, 2006 07:44 PM | Link to this

Having an ID shouldn’t matter if you should vote or not, if you feel strongly about you duty to vote, then get an ID, and besides this new bill makes it free and it only takes a few minutes of your day. Let’s stop making excuses, on why we need or don’t need and ID. Your going to need and ID eventually why not get one now

By james bratcher

January 12, 2006 07:45 PM | Link to this

Sir Carlos Campos:

I am writing in response to your article in the “Capital Ideas� section of the Atlanta paper. In my opinion the Bill 84 should pass right through although others may argue. The bill states that an I.D. card will be issued free of charge to those trying to vote, who may not have one. There are so many Georgians today with no picture I.D. If it helps the voting process, What is the problem? How many horror stories have we heard of terrible lines and long waits at the voter’s box. I’m sure there are other reasons but if one way of speeding up the process is to bring a state wide solution, I feel that this is one possible answer.We can spend a lot of wasteful energy breaking down the bill into all of it’s pro’s and con’s but I feel that’s all it would be. If this bill’s purpose is to take the positive steps to help Georgians in acquiring identification and getting them to and thru the voting lines just , SEND THE BILL THRU! Interested reader, James Bratcher Jr.

By Julie

January 12, 2006 07:46 PM | Link to this

Mr. Campos,

I feel that the voter ID bill is a great idea. I don’t believe that this bill is set up to discriminate against anybody. I do believe that if the changes need to be made for the bill to be passed is also a good idea, but feel like it is a waste of time and money. The state is offering the ID for free so I don’t see the problem. To do pretty much anything in Georgia you have to have an ID for. I believe that this will clear up any arguments in the future about vote being misrepresented. I believe that it will save the state a lot of money and time in the future. I look at it as an investment.

Thanks for your time Julie Tuminello

By Barbara Stewart

January 12, 2006 07:47 PM | Link to this

Mr. Campos,

I am starting to think that our democratic system is a joke. Politicians are spending too much time debating over silly issues. In today’s society everyone has to have a picture ID for one reason or another. The elderly must have an ID in order to cash their Social Security checks; the poor must have an ID to cash a welfare check. If a person is receiving any kind of check as part of an income or otherwise must have a valid ID in order to cash that check. The people who do not have IDs would likely be people who are not suppose to be here, i.e. illegal aliens, who are unable to vote anyways. I will even go so far on a limb as to say that the few people who do not have IDs are very likely not to vote. Politicians are spending time and money over issues that are not even issues. I can think of several different ways in which that tax money could be used for something with a little more substance and usefulness, like Medicaid and Social Security reform, new computers for a public school, extra curricular funding for public schools, the list is endless for better ways this tax money could be spent. I for one am applaud that our government has come to be this way, not only in this issue but with seemingly every issue that comes about.

By Tyrah Cnalmers

January 12, 2006 07:47 PM | Link to this

Mr. Campos, I think that one of our most important rights and responsibilities as Americans is voting. However, many people take this for granted, which is why there are so few people at the polls. So to ensure that the votes are made by legitimate citizens I agree that the list of approved identification documents should be limited. Now a day, a person cannot do anything without a government issued photo I.D. One has to have a photo I.D. to get money at the bank, to purchase anything at a store, or to open an account of any kind. I definitely agree that, every potential voter; no matter race, age, sex, physical capability, or financial status should have easy and free access to getting a government issued photo I.D. This fact has already been established by our various law makers, so now they are just wasting our tax money by arguing back and forth. Our tax money would be better served purchasing the necessary equipment to make these photo identification cards. Thank You, Tyrah Chalmers

By Jessica Sampson

January 12, 2006 07:51 PM | Link to this

To: Carlos Campos From: Jessica Sampson Subject: Opinion about Voter ID bill re-written to clear legal challenges

Good evening Mr. Campos, My opinion just change about the Bill that the Senate might pass, about trying to enforce a voter ID for Georgians that want to vote at the poll. First, I thought, “I wouldn’t want my picture ID to be shown, or used. I do want to vote for what I believe. I would not want to be discriminated, because the way I would look on the Voters ID, or because of who I am. Am Hispanic, and am proud to be Hispanic. I think there is already a lot of discrimination going on for immigrants. People everywhere gets discriminated, at school, work, shopping places, you name it. At first, I didn’t like the idea, but then I thought “Yes, I think it’s a great idea for a voter ID, I want the government to know and see that, us Immigrant do vote, we do give out our opinion, we do pay taxes, and we bring up this economy� .

Sincerely, Jessica Sampson

By Mike Parker

January 12, 2006 08:18 PM | Link to this

Does everyone remember that the 9/11 hijackers all had legit drivers licenses?

By Lola Fleck

January 12, 2006 09:19 PM | Link to this

I agree that ensuring fair and accurate elections is vitally important.

What i find perplexing is the notion that there are enough individuals getting through our existing screening system to make any real dent.

If you’re really serious about preventing voting fraud, you have to consider securing the machines we use for voting. It has recently been PROVEN (in multiple tests in FLA & CA), that the same Diebold machines we use in GA can be easily hacked and tens of thousands of votes changed in a matter of minutes.

If every quickie mart is equipped to give you a receipt for that giganto slurpee, why on earth is it such a huge deal to have a paper back-up on these voting machines?

Voter ID? please! we don’t need no steenkin voter ids!

By Van

January 12, 2006 09:40 PM | Link to this

Brian Curtis, the bus I was talking about was the bus the state sent around the state to issue the new id cards.

By The Grinch

January 13, 2006 08:21 AM | Link to this

Geeez people, you have the get the ID only once!! Most of you are acting like this will have to done each voting year. If you can’t take the time to get and ID, you shouldn’t be voting anyway.

By Dan

January 13, 2006 09:02 AM | Link to this

2000 election “poor people are being disenfranchised because they don’t have electronic voting” translation they are too stupid to punch a hole in a card. 2004 election the electronic voting is to confusing for people with no computer experience and there is no paper trail.

After all this nonsense, and that’s all it is, keep in mind it is local officals who control what how where and when the vote is counted. So if you are in a democratic county and you don’t like how the voting is done, look to your elected officials they are the ones who control it.

As far as ID’s I have yet to hear 1 rational argument against it.

By Bill D.

January 13, 2006 04:56 PM | Link to this

I still don’t understand the objection to a free photo ID for voting, as long as the handicapped and bed-ridden have someone to come to their home to take their picture. You can send in a vote. Can you send in your photo? If not, then we haven’t provided everyone the ability to vote, and that would be unconstitutional. Backers swear that it’s no longer unconstitutional, so I assume this new bill provides for roving photographers who will come to the homes of handicapped Americans.

I think the whole thing is funny. Ten years ago, the people pushing it today were the same people who claimed mandated photo ID was the first step to a Soviet state. Of course, back then they weren’t in control of the state.

By Fisher

January 14, 2006 08:58 AM | Link to this

A poster wrote that our system of democracy has become a joke … has been for years…

All of this Voter ID crap PALES in comparison to the issues of EQUAL BALLOT ACCESS in EVERY state, and the REFORM or ABOLITION of the Commission on Pres. Debates which VIOLATES EVERY voter’s CIVIL RIGHTS by denying equal access to America’s most important political forum…Jimmy Carter, an advisor to the CPD, refuses to acknowledge this inequity in our system, yet he purports to ‘monitor free elections’ across the world. If ALL you demopublicans want to accomplish REAL change, these are the way…

By Morrigan

January 14, 2006 11:25 PM | Link to this

Tim, the reason a signature is required declaring one’s poverty is so that the applicant must agree, in writing, to tell the truth. As someone else said, too many people have figured out how to make the taxpayers pay their way. I do believe the cards should be free for those who can’t pay; but I also know a woman who makes $18.50/hour, full-time, cash under the table, and is married to a railroad employee. She just can’t wait to get one of the “affordable” housing units being built soon in Atlanta, and habitually lies about being too poor to afford pay her health care and other bills. Now we’re going to not only pay her share of income taxes, we’re going to subsidize her housing. A little shame doesn’t matter to some people.