READERS WRITE

Voter fraud

Responses to “Liberal group’s fraud shows voter ID need,” @issue, Oct. 8

IDs had no role in ACORN case

Terry Garlock’s shaky defense of voter ID laws fails to explain how the ACORN fraud case is relevant to Georgia’s requirement for a picture ID to vote. The ACORN fraud in Seattle was discovered by election officials noticing that many signatures on registration applications were written by the same person, not by turning away voters lacking a picture ID. To quote the prosecuting attorney in the case, the defendants faked cards as an easy way to get paid, not as an attempt to influence the outcome of elections. None of the phony registrations led to illegal voting.

The defendants were canvassers paid $8 an hour by ACORN to register voters, and they were obviously poorly chosen. But the Washington state ACORN president said he will institute measures to prevent fraud in the future.

Compare this to the Florida 2000 election where Republican agitators were sent to disrupt recounts or the Ohio 2004 election where Republican officials denied adequate voting machines to Democratic precincts. Can Garlock muster equal outrage at these greater violations of honest elections?

TOM WALKER

Roswell

Watchdogs failing to perform job

As usual, Terry Garlock states the obvious when it comes to common sense. Providing minimal proof of one’s identification when voting should be considered a responsibility, not a burden.

But perhaps Garlock’s most enlightening statement was in the last paragraph, when he stated that “if there are any real journalists left” that maybe they could check out the facts behind voter fraud.

Garlock has figured out what many of us have: This is the year that journalism, already sickened and weakened by leftist bias, has finally died.

LEN CAYCE

Suwanee

Identification a nonissue in reality

Was Terry Garlock trying to illuminate AJC readers on voting fraud or was his column just a partisan screed? Experience as a poll worker in recent elections showed that —- at least in my precinct —- the only real cause for concern was the appallingly low voter turnout. ID was largely a nonissue, as virtually all voters had a photo driver’s license or other accepted form.

If actual voting fraud were to occur, it might happen after polls are closed and all the voting equipment is turned in to the precinct office. The extremist group cited by Garlock or that of any stripe can sign up all the bogus registrants they can muster —- because none of them show up at the polls on Election Day.

MARC MARTON

Roswell

Use school taxes for classroom

Jim Wooten: Great column on Amendment No. 2 (“Amendment No. 2 not good for future,” @issue, Oct. 7). It is so obvious. Use our school tax dollars for schools. Don’t use school tax dollars for real estate development.Georgia’s schools are just about the worst in the nation. If our schools ever improve (maybe the schools should aspire just to be average?) and a school system finds it has “too much money,” then return the money to the taxpayers. But don’t tax us for one purpose and use the money for something else!

DOUG ABRAMSON, Atlanta

Pulpit is wrong place for politics

In her column, Cynthia Tucker has pointed out the hypocrisy of churches and pastors who defy the Constitution by entering into political rallying (“Preachers need to read Bill of Rights,” @issue, Oct. 8). Why should any organization that is acting as a political agency not be taxed? I’m sure many will cry foul, but if they were truly patriotic they would realize that these actions undermine our Constitution. Such activity could lead us toward religious intolerance that the founders fought so hard to avoid when they created their vision for our country. Additionally, people who contribute to churches that act politically should not benefit from a tax deduction on their individual returns. These tithes in fact become political contributions.

Churches should remain true to their faith and spiritual vision and keep political pandering out of the pulpit.

TOM McMANUS

Roswell

Tax not tool to ease pay disparity

A letter writer sums up the opinion and feelings of many when she writes, “We are working harder and longer for less and less, if we are lucky enough to still have jobs, while CEOs’ and executive pay has skyrocketed. It is time we stopped voting against our own best interest and leveled the playing field so that those who actually do the real work in this society have a chance to succeed” (“Plans show candidates’ differences,” @issue, Oct. 8).

Where she and most others go awry is thinking that taxation is the best way to level the playing field. Thirty years ago executive pay was 30 to 40 times more than the average worker. Today executive pay is 344 times more than the average worker. Can anyone honestly claim that executive value has skyrocketed while average-worker value has remained stagnant, even as worker productivity has skyrocketed?

Executives have not shared the value coming from worker productivity gains with the workers. Increasing taxes on the rich may make us feel better, but it won’t solve the problem of pay disparity resulting in average Americans losing economic ground. What would solve the problem is a change in corporate governance that pegs executive pay to the salary of the average worker. In this way all boats rise together with the economic tide instead of only the yachts.

STEVEN DRABO

Avondale Estates