but a lot of people won't know and therefore won't do it. They'll be turned away and their votes won't be cast. And of course, these laws are all designed to target likely democratic voters.

Why? Are you implying democratic voters are uninformed? dumb? lazy? and Republicans are not?

No, it's because the disenfranchised and student populations are more likely to vote democratic -- and, yes, they do tend to be more uninformed than the rest of the constituency -- speaking as a student, and with the knowledge that those who are disenfranchised tend to have significantly less access to factual knowledge outlets.

But a lot of elderly black voters don't even have legal birth certificates in South Carolina because a lot of them were born at home in a day where segregation ruled. Without everything matching here in South Carolina you can't get an ID

I think you'll find that -most- people agree with having to provide a photo ID at the polls. I'm only 30 and live in Illinois, but I'm about 99% sure I've -always- had to provide a photo ID. That's not the problem.

The problem is that these Republican legislatures are making it increasingly difficult for people to get photo (State) IDs, especially for free. For example, in Wisconsin, they are closing DMV offices across the state in the interest of "balancing the budget"; however, most of these closures are coming in minority-heavy neighborhoods. Other closings are happening in places where there is little to no public transit available, making it nearly impossible for the elderly or people who do not drive to get to an alternate DMV. These actions are deliberate, with the intention of keeping certain demographics (ie, minorities and the politically-astute poor) from voting in the first place. THAT is the problem.

Ditto, Kate. It also strikes me how oxymoronic it is to hear from some conservatives that they don't want to be "forced" into purchasing required single-payer health care coverage, and yet they have few problems asking someone of modest means to fork over the money for a state-approved ID.

What comes next? Barcodes on our foreheads would be extremely efficient.

We are passing laws that are not justified.

Maybe drug testing at the polls would be a good idea. If its required for welfare why not voting?

Laws should have a reason other than partisan advantage.

@Pat & righty - you discredit the argument by going to bar codes and microchips. That is not an apples to apples comparison. We are talking about a photo ID, which every single driver in the US should have. This is not about government control, and when you move the argument that far into crazy land, your credibility falters.

We are talking about a photo ID, which every single driver in the US should have.

so only drivers get to vote? no, that won't disenfranchise the poor, elderly, young, or hippie liberal types who bike or take public transportation; not at all. #sarcasm

righty, being new, with your name, and this being print, it would be helpful if you tagged your comments like that as satire or sarcasm. i got that it was (most likely) satirical, but not everybody will either due to age, culture (we don't know that Bolbis is American), or other factors so let's not lay it at the feet of all liberals.

What does a drivers license have to do with voting?

Voting is the fundamental right in this country. Voting is the foundation of Democracy. It is what gives the government its moral and legal authority.

Now a political party is trying to limit that right for nothing other than partisan advantage. They drum up a nonexistent problem to justify it.

This is not about government control

You are absolutely wrong. It is exactly about current people in the government controlling who gets to vote.

If you want to find the definition of 'UnAmerican' look no farther. You could not make up a more perfect example.

I don't drive, brcause i have suffered several strokes that have reduced my reflexes to the point I don't trust them behind the wheel. I no longer have a driver's license, but I've paid $10 for my aide to take me to the DMV to buy a State ID, also $10, just for the privilege of being able to vote.

I didn't need it to identify myself. My old State ID could do that just as well in most cases, but it expired last month, and you can't vote in my state without a current State ID.

I could afford the time and money to renew my ID, and a Secretary of State office happens to be in the closest town, so distance wasn't a factor. But, how about those people like me who don't have the money, or the time, or the access, or the foresight?

The State has made voting a privilege, but according to the Constitution, It's a right! You shouldn't have to jump through hoops to be able to exercise your rights as a citizen. How many cases of voter ID fraud have been brought to court? How many have been proven to cause any effect on election results?

Voter ID fraud is far less a danger to our Constitutional rights than voter suppression, which actually sways elections in a big way.

Do you know what scares me?

Together Election Systems & Software, Inc. and Diebold Election Systems, Inc. are responsible for tallying around 80% of votes cast in the United States. The software architecture common to both is a creation of Mr. Urosevich's company I-Mark. Some critics claim that this structure is easily compromised, in part due to its reliance on Microsoft Access databases. Britain J. Williams, responsible for certification of voting machines for the state of Georgia has provided a negative assessment based on her accounting of potential exploits.

In August 2003, Walden O'Dell, chief executive of Diebold, announced that he had been a top fund-raiser for President George W. Bush and had sent a get-out-the-funds letter to Ohio Republicans. When assailed by critics for the perceived conflict of interest, he pointed out that the company's election machines division is run out of Texas by a registered Democrat. Nonetheless, he vowed to lower his political profile lest his personal actions harm the company.

DES claims its systems provide strong immunity to ballot tampering and other vote rigging attempts. These claims have been challenged, notably by Bev Harris on her website, Blackboxvoting.com, and book by the same name.

According to critics, the I-Mark and Microsoft software each represent a single point of failure for the vote counting process, from which 80% of votes can be compromised via the exploit of a single line of code in either subsystem. Harris and C. D. Sludge, an Internet journalist, both claim there is also evidence that the Diebold systems have been exploited to tamper with American elections —a claim Harris expands in her book Black Box Voting.

Sludge further cites Votewatch for evidence that suggests a pattern of compromised voting machine exploits throughout the 1990s, and specifically involving the Diebold machines in the 2002 election.

Its voting machines, which are made by its subsidiary Diebold Election Systems (DES), have caused a public uproar among some opponents, some of which are engaged in "electronic civil disobedience" against legal attempts by Diebold to stop the release and publication of a number of internal memos.

In September 2003, a large number of internal Diebold memos, dating back to mid-2001, were posted to the Web by the website organizations Why War and the Swarthmore Coalition for the Digital Commons, a group of student activists at Swarthmore College. Diebold's critics believe that these memos reflect badly on Diebold's voting machines and business practices. Diebold has since reportedly sent cease and desist letters to sites hosting these documents demanding that they be removed in violation of the Online Copyright Infringement Liability Limitation Act provisions of the DMCA found in § 512 of the United States Copyright Act.

In December 2003, an internal Diebold memo was leaked to the press, sparking controversy in Maryland. Maryland officials requested that Diebold add the functionality of printing voting receipts. The leaked memo said, "As a business, I hope we're smart enough to charge them up the wazoo [for this feature]".

It would be, oh, so easy for the chief executive to insert a few lines of code, that would, say, transform every fifth vote entered as Democrat into a Republican vote. Make it work only under Election Day conditions, and it would be virtually undetectable in an audit test. As long as no paper trail exists, fraud couldn't be proven...

This is why I stopped posting on this blog for so long. I am just sick and tired of the right and left regurgitating whatever they are told to regurgitate. My example of a drivers license was not saying that you have to drive to vote, but simply pointing out that the vast majority of Americans already have a photo ID. I AM A LIBERAL, and proud of it - but I also have my own opinions based on my own experiences and analysis. Just because I don't think that you should have to prove who you are to vote, doesn't make me a Republican or a conservative or less of a liberal. People need to wake up and start focusing on the important issues, and not the sideshow that the media is creating.

@David - you bring up a great point about the voting machines and fraud -that is very scary. I feel for you that your situation makes it difficult to get an ID, but you reinforce my point by mentioning that it is $10 (one meal at a fast food joint now a days). I am all for making it subsidized for the poor and elderly, as voting is a right. I agree as well that voter fraud is a non-issue (other than the machines), but in order to take away another GOP talking point, we need to adapt as liberals. Instead of wasting all of our energy fighting this tooth and nail, we should be organizing to find out who needs help getting an ID and set up carpools and buses to get everyone a legal ID.

My suggestion would be this - instead of putting the burden on us as an individual to register to vote, it should be automatic when you get a drivers license, state ID, or whatever other form of ID can be used to vote (as it differs from state to state). In today's age of technology, it would be as simple as checking a box that says "register me as a voter" that would then allow one government agency to forward that info to another.

Bolbis...

One other note...

A student who attends college which is in a state he is not a resident of, has a right to vote in that state, but does not need a local state driver's license to drive. He is more likely to vote Democrat, but also less likely to think ahead to Election Day. What about him?

@David - to answer your question, he should have the ability to vote, period. Whether he is allowed to vote in the state his college is in, or his home state is typically dependent on what states we are referring to (as not all states have the same rules and regulations on student voting). I personally believe that the said student should have the choice of what state they want to vote in. As far as how does he get to vote, a school ID card should be allowed as a legal form of ID to vote with, or at least an ID that can qualify you to get a different ID that allows you to vote (such as a voter card). In the end, as long as said student is offered some way to vote, whether it be in the college state or through an absentee ballot in their home state, I don't feel requiring someone to prove they are who they say they are is a bad thing.

I do not believe in restricting and making it more difficult to vote. I am opposed to all of the changes to same day voter registration, outlawing voter registrations drives, etc. I am merely trying to make the point that every voting citizen should have some form of ID (I don't even think that a photo is necessary) that allows them to vote. I don't see that as being too outlandish, but alas I live in Rhode Island (the most liberal state in the country). Here I am not subject to overreaching GOP legislators, so I can only speak from personal experience. I am sure that in rural Mississippi the situation is much different from me, and this might be a big burden.

I am sure you can continue playing the "what about this person or this state" game to point out hurdles and problems with the ID argument, but in the end I think it is an issue that gets blown out of proportion (once again, this is just my opinion). We, as progressives, should be focusing our energy on more tangible issues that would actually improve the state of our economy, such as reforming our tax code in a more judicious way.

I AM A LIBERAL, and proud of it - but I also have my own opinions based on my own experiences and analysis.

so am i and so do i, as many others here, and just because my (or our) opinions, experiences, and analyses may comport with the mainstream of liberaldom doesn't make it "regurgitation."

even so, one of the qualities of liberalism is empathy, so that while some may not be significantly or at all put off by attempts to skew the voter turn out, we can understand that it does others and do not like it. just because it doesn't affect me/us doesn't mean it's okay; liberals are more than self-interested egocentrics as conservatives tend to be. your dismissal of it as simply regurgitation says a lot more about your position and where you're coming from than it does any of us.

and if you were posting here before and stopped, it was some time ago indeed, because altho i don't have total recall with all the names here, i can't remember seeing you here before.

hmm, no it seems you only arrived in March of last year, and i have other things to be doing than further 'detectiving' of your claim.

BTW, T'Omm, I've been meaning to ask you,,,

Any relation to J'Onn J'Onzz? If so, I'd be absolutely GREEN with envy...

@T'omm - I did only arrive in March of last year, but I was actively posting for a while - commenting on a daily basis. (what does it matter when I started following this blog anyways?) I stopped more due to personal reasons than anything else, but I take no offense to the fact that you don't remember me.

As far as the "regurgitation" comment, that was aimed more at the blog starters than the commentators (in hind sight I could have been more clear). I was more referring to the fact that if you go to any said blog from right or left on any given day, you typically find the same topics and discussions being angled to a specific direction.

I agree with your thesis about conservatives versus liberals in the empathy department. I consider myself liberal simply because more of my core beliefs coincide with the liberal take on ideology than any other specific political group.

I will reiterate my main point one last time: this is not as big of an issue as it is being made out to be - the carrying ID to the polls part ONLY (not all the extra stuff that is being done to make registering to vote more difficult).

Well said. And they try to convince as many of the people on the outside as possible that they ARE in. That's the really sad part - seeing poor people fighting to keep the poor outside the door because they've been fooled into thinking they're already inside.

So, does everyone have a date for the Biennial Republican Gerrymander Dance?

How many states have a process in which to act?

Maine has a People's Veto process, and there's already a question on the ballot to overturn the repeal of same day registration.

I know that Ohio has a similar process to overturn legislation, but I don't think they use the same name for it as Maine does. From the news, we know that Wisconsin can only recall their officials. I have no idea what tools are available to people in these other states who are dealing with the same issues.

think it falls under the voting rights act. not sure myself.

Maybe some of that stuff does work with a federal level, but I meant more of what people can do on the ground themselves, for example, Maine's People's Veto process.

People on the ground have a much better chance to counter any of this than the federal government at the moment. I think it would also be a much more powerful message to the GOP if people take matters into their own hands.

Been sayin' for a long time now that the GOP knows perfectly well it loses every time it looks at the demographics of America's future. The ONLY way for the power to stay in the hands of old, rich, white men is to restrict who can vote; to make it so difficult, confusing and expensive to go through the process that fewer and fewer working people bother to do it.

The TeaParty-infused NC General Assembly passed a Voter ID law this year which was vetoed by Democratic Governor Perdue. In a fit of pique, the Assembly then passed a bill cutting a week off the early voting period. If they can't git 'er done one way, they try another. It is positively unAmerican!

Some states require a "certain" type of ID.

I don't know of any changes in OR. We have voted by mail for years.

Heck you need ID to buy a six pack of beer.

are you registered with the liquor or grocery store? do you sign for it? i doubt anyone who 'looks his age' needs ID to buy a six-pack; i have wine out at restaurants without being carded (damn them).

I can't believe it, but I am going to defend a conservative. I agree with the point that righty is making here: that you already need an ID to function in life. Buying a six-pack of beer, buying cigarettes, depositing a check at the bank, renting a pool table (my local billiards hall makes you leave a license as collateral for the balls), and countless other instances. I value my vote, and I always found it a little funny that all I had to do was go to the right building, tell them my name and address and I was given a ballot.

Instead of fighting the premise of needing an ID, as liberals we need to ensure that everyone is educated and given access to procuring an ID. Instead of us crying foul that this is an attack on Democratic registration (which in some instances it might be), we need to adapt and get people ID cards. In the process of doing so, we can explain to those who get upset about having to take time to secure an ID to vote that the reason this is needed is because Republicans think there is a big problem of voter fraud. Nothing gets more people to the polls than anger.

I have not hear of any thing here in Oregon.

maybe the rest of the states could do the mail in ballot! vote right there in your living room or on your dinning set table.

I live in Oregon too and have not heard of anything. We have a system with one of the largets voting participation and at the same time one with one of the lowest problems with complaints of fraud.

If you click on the link to the report you can read what each state is trying to change. Just because there is a Democratic governor and legislature doesn't mean that someone is not trying to change something to restrict voting. I am in Maryland. We are a blue state, but every year we have a handful of legislators introduce some far-right legislation that isn't heard from again in the session. They know there is no chance of their legislation ever getting passed, but it still shows up as a purposed bill for that year. So it is quite possible that crazy legislators in blue states all around the country are doing the same thing. All of the things discussed in the report are changes that make it more difficult to vote.

The other issue is that all of this is just way to widespread to not cause people to be skeptical of some of it. I have no idea what the make up of the legislatures in some of those states that only had proposals is, but if GOP members are proposing these things in states with Democratic majorities, it only further proves that the GOP has a nationwide agenda. That's what everyone needs to be paying attention to, and work to counteract the changes their trying to bring.

I'll use Maine as an example. The GOP passed a law that ended same day registration which is a nearly 40 year old law, ironically passed the last time the GOP had a majority in Maine. They high ranking members of the GOP, especially Charlie Webster, were all screaming voter fraud, and low and behold, there was no fraud to be found, at least with respect to same day registration. Charlie Summers' report did find some other issues, but those were with clerical errors, and not with anyone trying to fraud the system which is an entirely different issue, and has nothing to do with what they were trying to sell.

Also, they had a voter ID law on the table, but I think that one got held over until next year.

Proposing legislation means nothing. As previously stated, many pieces of the legislation will not make it into law. It is more accurate to show states that have passed legislation that restricts voting and states where it is proposed. Those states where it is proposed should accurately reflect the probability of passage. That makes more sense than just a map showing where laws have been proposed/passed. Then we would have a meaningful map of what is going on.

Now that is way above and beyond what should be required. That is not what is happening out here in Rhode Island, so I can understand your anger.

I actually had a discussion with a gentlemen the other night who said that democracy is a tool that is used by Democrats in order to implement socialism and subvert the constitution. Not joking or exaggerating. I am not sure if he was just off his rocker or if this is a broader belief on the fringe of the right wing. I can tell you, however, that I wouldn't classify all Republicans like this, but the fringe wing for sure. The problem isn't necessarily Republicans; the problem is that the extremist elements of the Republican Party have taken over and are implementing changes that are radical, confederate, or theocratic in nature. This doesn't represent the entirety of the party- hell I don't even believe it represents a majority of the Republican Party- but it does represent the portion of the party that is loudest. And as long as they continue to be given voice they will continue to control the agenda. Le sighs.

CAS....

I know it's a nit-picking note. but so many people make this mistake, I have to point it out....

conscious = awake and aware, as opposed to 'unconscious' or 'subconscious'

conscience = sense of right and wrong, a la "Jiminy Cricket", as opposed to Republicans