I have not shown a voter registration card for the last 30+ years. I just walk in, show my DL, they open the book, I sign it, I vote. The idea that “some” people can’t get a picture ID is bullshit.
Here’s a quick way to eliminate the hassle. Don’t require a picture ID. Instead, when you go to sign the book or whatever, you put your thumbprint down as well.
I would absolutely favor the thumbprint.
WAG: because one of the largest, if not the largest, groups that tend to use absentee ballots is “people in the military”. And people in the military generally vote Republican. For one reason, Republican candidates and administrations spend a lot of money on the military. Also, military people tend to respect other people who have served, which also largely means Republicans.
My wife’s name doesn’t match her birth certificate, because she took my last name when we got married. My brother’s wife didn’t get any kind of ID until she was in her 30s, because she was the youngest of nine kids and always had someone to take her where she wanted to go. She finally got her driver’s license after she had kids, just in case of emergencies.
So, people should get an ID with the name on their birth certificate, even if it’s a name they don’t use? We should have a population walking around with government-issued IDs that don’t reflect who they actually are? Sounds like a recipe for fraud…
My own daughter, by the way, doesn’t have a birth certificate, because she was born in China and left at an orphanage. We have a Certificate of Citizenship and a Social Security card for her, and we’ve almost completed the process to get a US birth certificate for her, but it cost close to $300 and required filing some court documents, which would have cost more if I’d had to hire an attorney. Getting a birth certificate isn’t a fast an easy process for everyone.
Actually, a lot of them do early voting, say, in the evening at the supermarket. Of course, Republicans are working to reduce early voting as well.
As for election day voting, I remember back when I lived in New Mexico that my parents each got two hours off work on election day to go vote, which I believe was state law at the time, not sure if it still is. Still, it was at least something. But employers aren’t required to give you time off to get an ID, and poorer people just can’t afford to take unpaid leave.
So, what, you’re going to go back after every election and compare the fingerprints to make sure no two of them match?
Meh, let’s just use election ink. Low tech and cheap.
The election ink is a good solution to preventing double voting. The thumbprint provides a great way to provide evidence that a particular person was the person who voted; two different issues.
Using election ink to take the thumbprint solves both issues in one step, would cost the voter nothing, and would provide the electoral integrity that ID proponents say they are looking for. Seems like a winning proposal to me.
You mean her birth certificate doesn’t match her ID?
Did they get paid for those two hours?
This seems like you are enabling the massive amounts of couch-surfing fraud that are occurring!
Both are true, actually. She now has my last name, which is on her ID, and of course that name is not the same name that is on her birth certificate.
I believe they did, yes. Being that I was twelve, and they didn’t come to me for financial advice much, I can’t be certain.
Of course, now that I look for it, here’s a cite:
I don’t know that I’ve ever taken anyone in that was on assistance, it was always a short term thing to help them get back on their feet. It’s possible that some were receiving some kind of benefit, but I didn’t ask, and I am not sure I would have known if they were.
Sorry, I guess I should have used the smiley tag. I meant people who actually weren’t your friends were just using your friends’ bills to get a free spot on your couch. Or something. I retract 
(nothing to do with anything serious like assistance fraud or anything, that’s for sure)
So we’d need everyone’s fingerprints on file? Maybe we could have the black helicopters watching over the polling stations too.
Why would you need everyone’s fingerprints on file? They aren’t comparing them at the polling place.
But Cyros was suggesting it as a form of identification.
He/she said this:
It would be used for after-the-fact evidence in the case of voter fraud.
Thanks manson1972. The fingerprint would be for comparison in the event that someone was suspected of voting fraudulently. To paraphrase one of Bricker’s refrains, it creates a record that more easily allows for conviction and, IMHO, does a better job than showing ID as it intimately connects the act of voter fraud to the voter.
And it’s free to the voter, so there is no disenfranchisement of poor and minority voters.
For prescriptions I usually only have to supply my birth date. In fact, my son can pick up my meds by using my birth date. Some listed medications require showing ID, but most don’t.
I see no objection to the thumbprint issue except for people that don’t have them, but maybe they can do a toe-print.
I doubt there’s a single elected Republican who would support that solution instead of Voter ID, however.
True, but maybe people could offer the fingerprint idea as a rebuttal to photo ID to see what the reactions are as a way to expose true motives?
Can I say that I’m a little creeped out by the idea of a massive government collection of fingerprint data? I mean, yes, they already have my name, age, birthdate, SSN, driver’s license #, and the serial number stamped on the underside of my soul, but can’t I keep a little tiny bit of private data to myself? Just a teeny tiny bit?
Also, I think that the fingerprint thing is also a solution looking for a problem. election ink alone should be enough to solve the fictional problem of widespread in-person voter fraud.