开云体育

If you were serious about your right to vote you would make arrangements to get the ID. Your post assumes none of these people have a drivers licence or a birth certificate. We didn't cause the "single" mother so she should be able to be responsible for her and her child's life.After all it was her body and her decision.

--- In ibmpensionissues@..., Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@> wrote:

I don't expect it would only be??an inconvenience?? and manageable expense for people like us.?? Unfortunately not everyone is like us.?? If you are a single mother working two jobs to make ends meet and your employer is already upset about you not being at work because of taking care of a sick child, if you are handicapped and cannot drive, if you are elderly and confuse easily and can't drive, if you are a student away from home and no car and DMV not on a bus line, then you might find??getting that ID just too hard to deal with.
??
Here are the hours of our one DMV office in the county:
Sunday Closed
Monday 8:00am - 4:30pm
Tuesday 8:00am - 4:30pm
Wednesday 8:00am - 4:30pm
Thursday 8:00am - 4:30pm
Friday 8:00am - 4:30pm
Saturday Closed

From: "zimowski@" <zimowski@>
To: ibmpensionissues@...
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 3:08 PM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life

??
My perspective is a bit different than yours. Voter ID laws are not typically passed the day before an election. Those who wish to vote have plenty of time to get one, even if they think it's inconvenient to do so. I know that North Carolina requires a government issued photo id, but having to take off work in order to get one? Isn't the DMV or some other issuing entity open on Saturday? In California they are and you can even schedule an appointment in advance so there is no waiting when you get there. If it's too hard to obtain a government issued photo id in NC, then perhaps the laws or policies need to be changed to make it easier. I can remember instances in the past when I have been required to have multiple ids. I investigated what was required ahead of time and brought what was needed. Is being disorganized really a valid excuse for not being able to obtain an id? On to the homeless - I seriously doubt that the homeless vote. Without an address
they will nor be assigned a polling place, which means they probably need to go to some government office to vote, which I suspect few would do. As another member of this forum has pointed out, the homeless have more immediate basic survival issues to focus on.

People can come up with all sorts of excuses for not doing this that or the other thing. All of us have needed to provide ids to initially register to vote. We obtained an id if we didn't already have one and followed the process because we felt that it was important to be able to vote. People without the proper id have plenty of time to obtain one before one is required. They are inexpensive and in many cases free to those that cannot afford them. People who care about their elderly family members or friends will assist them through the process if they need help. People who claim that the requirement for having an id is so burdensome that it prohibits them from voting simply don't think that casting their vote is that important. It's just not a priority for them.

--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@> wrote:

NC just passed a new Voter ID law and it requires a copy of your photo ID to be sent with your absentee ballot.???? So if you don't have a scanner/printer at home it involves going out somewhere to get that copy and you still need to have that photo ID.???? Also they won't accept a college ID or your companies photo ID.???? It has to be a government issued ID.???? Also if your college student votes at their college area instead of coming home to vote or by absentee ballot, then the parents lose their tax deduction for the student on their NC taxes.???? My 90 year old arthritic mother will not be able to vote because her driver's license expired years ago as she can no longer drive.???? To be able to vote my brother will have to take off from work and take her to get an ID made.???? If you think that this doesn't discourage people from voting because it just isn't worth all the hassle, then you are not being realistic.???? Another problem is what is

required to get that

ID.???? The elderly TN woman who was denied ID even though she brought them her birth certificate because she didn't also have her marriage license is an example of the problems.???? The homeless who live under a bridge are suppose to constitutionally be able to vote, but how do you establish proof of residence????? They certainly don't have a bank statement or an electric bill to show.???? I would have little problem with requiring voter ID if there were actually a lot of people-impersonation type of fraud, but there isn't.???? ID will not stop the most prevalent problems and requiring it with these strict rules????can disenfranchise millions of people who should be able to vote.???? See
????

From: "zimowski@" <zimowski@>
To: mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, July 30, 2013 12:20 PM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life

????
It took some time to explore these links.

I think the propublica site seems to very objectively report what others say or think. However, it doesn't really endorse or refute anyone's argument or position. Here's an example:

"How many voters might be turned away or dissuaded by the laws, and could they really affect the election?

Answer: It's not clear."

My conclusion: This site does not support or refute your claim that some will have trouble obtaining ids.

Regarding the timesleader reference, you state "Multiple voters who no longer have ID's (but did when they initially registered to vote) who would be disenfranchised are cited in this news story." Multiple, in this case, is a grand total of 3. They are are homebound seniors who need to rely on others to help then get ids, and I understand that this makes getting an id more of a challenge. However, you fail to mention that each of these voters could get around the photo id requirement in Pennsylvania simply by casting an absentee ballot.

Bottom line: Any of these folks can easily submit an absentee ballot. Wouldn't it, in fact, be more convenient for them to do so, given their frail health and dependencies on others to get around? Seems like a politically motivated law suit.

The policymic web site is a Harvard University discussion forum. The article you reference is clearly an opinion based on the author's political slant. His conclusion says it all: "This voter identification phenomonon is scary in a way, in that Americans are all too willing to accept another way of feeling "safe" that assumes one is guilty until he or she proves himself innocent. We endure airport searches, Type 1 and Type 2 identification checks, and increased scrutiniy of our credit history and social networking in the name of safety, whether it be for individuals or organizations. Should every state implement a photogrpahic voter ID law, we will have succeeded in creating a national identifcation system in fact if not in name. What could be next, DNA samples taken at birth or when granted legal status? RFID chip implanatation to establish our whereabouts at all times? The more we subscribe to this need to feel safe, to this culture of fear, the less
free we will be, and the upshot of it all is that these measures are invariably sponsored by those who think government is too big and must reduce its role in our lives."

My conclusion: Nothing very objective about this article. Clearly just an opinion. Not convincing in any way, unless you already agree with the author prior to reading the article.

The CNN article seems to be a rehash of the earlier links, and in general, CNN is to liberal Democrats what FOX is to conservative Republicans. Since you so vehemently dismiss anything reported by FOX, I choose to do the same for CNN, despite the fact that I do agree that FOX tends to be one-sided. CNN, likewise, tends to be one-sided.

Finally the unnamed law professor. Could it, by any chance, be Barack Obama? Just kidding, but it's hard to verify the objectivity of unnamed sources.

It's only the opinions in these articles, not the facts, that support your view.


--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sue Runyon <Slouise217@> wrote:

I swear, why do we KEEP having to spoonfeed you factual information? You should have learned by now that we don't write stuff we can't back up with multiple links.



According to a study from NYU's Brennan Center, 11 percent of voting-age citizens lack necessary photo ID while many people in rural areas have trouble accessing ID offices.

In Pennsylvania, nearly 760,000 registered voters, or 9.2 percent of the state's 8.2 million voter base, don't own state-issued ID cards, according to an analysis of state records by the Philadelphia Inquirer. State officials, on the other hand, place this number at between 80,000 and 90,000.
In Indiana and Georgia, states with the earliest versions of photo ID laws, about 1,300 provisional votes were discarded in the 2008 general election, later analysis has revealed.
As for the potential effect on the election, one analysis by Nate Silver at the New York Times' FiveThirtyEight blog estimates they could decrease voter turnout anywhere between 0.8 and 2.4 percent. It doesn't sound like a very wide margin, but it all depends on the electoral landscape.
"We don't know exactly how much these news laws will affect turnout or skew turnout in favor of Republicans," said Hasen, author of the recently released The Voting Wars: From Florida 2000 to the Next Election Meltdown. "But there's no question that in a very close election, they could be enough to make a difference in the outcome."



Multiple voters who no longer have ID's (but did when they initially registered to vote) who would be disenfranchised are cited in this news story.



Read this whole article, with many links, to see all the disenfranchisement that could happen. It's a solution looking for a problem.



Written by a law professor.

Now, can most people get ID's? Yes. Will a person who really wants to vote get whatever ID they can? Sure. But is it almost certain that a not-insignificant number of people will be dissuaded from voting because of these hurdles - and there's no justifiable reason to do so, as voter fraud is an insignificant problem.



-----Original Message-----
From: Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@>
To: ibmpensionissues <mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Mon, Jul 29, 2013 4:42 pm
Subject: Re: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life












From: "zimowski@" <zimowski@>
To: mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Monday, July 29, 2013 4:08 PM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life



What is the evidence that some people will have a problem getting IDs?

--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sue Runyon <Slouise217@> wrote:

1. There are some good arguments here, now lets add to them.

Please, please, add some good arguments... but sadly, you fail to do so below.

2. Why should a poor, disenfranchised person be required to have a fishing license which costs money they don't have and prevents them from providing food for their family?

The states have determined that to protect our environment, to protect and maintain our waterways and our fish, we'll take advantage of use-specific fees to help fund those protections. It IS a regressive tax that affects the poorest among us more than the wealthier among us. If you think that's so wrong, feel free to lobby your state legislature to provide some income-based exemptions to the fishing license requirement. Please, do it!!! Or simply be a insincere hypocrite. Our nation has all kinds of user-based fees. That way, only those people who actually use the services pay for them. However, that doesn't work for large-scale projects like roads, schools, government in general, etc, and that's why we have progressive rate taxes to cover those costs.

3. Why should that same individual be required to provide id to get on the medical exchange, are we assuming fraud again? To provide id even at the doctors office is an unmanageable burden for these people.

Again, people had to show ID to vote in the first place. No one is saying that people shouldn't have to show ID to prove their identity when they enroll in a program or first register to vote. The problem is the ongoing burden to provide ID every time they vote! And you're right, it's going to be a burden to those people to provide that ID in order to qualify for that exchange, but THAT'S BECAUSE there's plenty of evidence of fraud that happened with regard to health care provision. It makes sense to have that barrier there, because there's a known problem. With voting, there is NOT evidence of any kind of significant voter fraud that would be fixed with Voter ID requirements. Your argument falls on its face when you acknowledge that fact - yet you make that argument anyway, even though it's ludicrously laughable.

4. Somehow they managed to provide id to obtain utility assistance, food stamps and a host of other things.
Coming from a family where my father never made it to middle class and left overs were stretched to make the food budget every week, I never saw my parents or my grandmother without some form of id. They considered it a social responsibility to have an approved government issued form of id. Our birth certificates were kept and guarded jealously.

The fact that your family members never had any issues getting ID's is IRRELEVANT to the documented fact that millions of Americans will have a difficult time getting ID's. OF COURSE most people have ID's. Most people don't have difficult hurdles to surmount to get ID. No one claimed that it's a problem for everyone, so you can stop beating that strawman argument any time now. The ISSUE is that some people WILL have a problem getting ID's, and without evidence that there's a problem that needs a solution, there's no reason to put those hurdles in their path so that they have to get over them in order to vote! That's the issue - and, not strangely at all, it's the ISSUE I mentioned prominently in my post below!! Geesh.

5. Now I admit there could be some people who live homeless on the street, no id, nothing through no fault of their own but as far as medical they walk into a hospital and must be given care. They also have little taste for finding a voting booth since survival, food, shelter are their prime considerations. The decision of, do I stand in the soup kitchen line versus vote for the next president or congressman just doesn't even occur.

Your failure/unwillingness to acknowledge a documented problem is your shortcoming. It's not evidence that the documented problem doesn't exist. Nonpartisan people have documented that millions of Americans who are registered voters and who would otherwise vote will find it difficult to get and keep ID's so that they can continue to vote as they have been doing.

--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sue Runyon <Slouise217@> wrote:

People had to have ID's in the first place to GET a voter registration card.

Forcing them to have to provide that ID every time that they vote thereafter is the burden that concerns us.

There's so little vote fraud that it's a solution in search of a problem. What it does do is put a large burden on people of limited means to get and maintain a photo ID. They may not have access to their birth certificate anymore. They may have let their DL's lapse and therefore they'd have to pay to get a birth certificate, if they even can, so they can get the "free" State ID, if they can easily get to a place where the state would provide that free ID.

If vote fraud were any kind of a significant problem, I'd be in favor of finding a solution for it, and that might entail forcing people to show ID's every time they vote. But since it's not any kind of a significant problem, and forcing people to show ID whenever they vote will disenfranchise millions of people across the USA, I don't support it.

No caring, well-informed person should support forcing a solution that will deny a ton of people the right to vote while solving a problem that doesn't exist in any sort of significant way.


-----Original Message-----
From: Kevin W <nowwicked@>
To: ibmpensionissues <mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Jul 28, 2013 10:48 am
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Re: Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life






This is going to be more of a sarcasm comment than anything else, most likely not worthy of a reply, but here it is.
I find it interesting that we need to setup exchanges to verify peoples identify and status through a government funded database when we keep saying that doing the same thing to validate voters is bad, biased, racial etc. Wouldn't people have the same issue whether it be for health care or voting and wouldn't it be the same negatives?

I need an id to fish, I need an id to drive, I need and id to open a bank acoount, have health care but not one to vote the people who create all these other things.
And of course the idea of stopping fraud doesn't hold water either since the general statement around voting without id is that we have no basis for assuming or proving fraud. With no id we would have no basis for fraud on our healthcare, we should simply trust everyone.

--- In mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com, Sheila Beaudry <sbbeaudry@> wrote:

Okay, they are hiring people to help citizens sign up for health insurance through the Exchanges - a good thing.???'??'???赌?'???'??????????????赌????…?? They are verifying the person's information through other government database information to reduce the chances of fraud - another good thing.???'??'???赌?'???'??????????????赌????…?? I see no difference in hiring people to help people sign up for ACA than for social security or any other government program.???'??'???赌?'???'??????????????赌????…?? I certainly needed help figuring all that out.???'??'???赌?'???'??????????????赌????…?? The data will be no less secure than the data the social security database.???'??'???赌?'???'??????????????赌????…??
???'??'???赌?'???'??????????????赌????…??
I don't know whether you all have figured it out yet, but the Republicans have begun another campaign to make people fear the Affordable Care Act.???'??'???赌?'???'??????????????赌????…?? They are doing everything they can to confuse people and make them worried so they won't sign up for it because they lost in the election and in the Supreme Court, and can't repeal it.???'??'???赌?'???'??????????????赌????…?? The next step is they will try to defund it.???'??'???赌?'???'??????????????赌????…?? Check out information you receive through independent fact checking sites.???'??'???赌?'???'??????????????赌????…?? Both parties spin things their way, but I have to say the anti-Obama anything folks have brought it to a new level.

From: buckwildbeemer <mailto:no_reply%40yahoogroups.com>
To: mailto:ibmpensionissues%40yahoogroups.com
Sent: Saturday, July 27, 2013 4:40 PM
Subject: [ibmpensionissues] Interesting Podcast to Listen To: ObamaCare Invades Your Personal Life

???'??'???赌?'???'??????????????赌????…??
If you think the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is nosy, wait til you see how ObamaCare will know everything about you. John Merline of Investors.com joins Andrew Malcolm and Melissa Clouthier on the Malcolm & Melissa podcast to share his findings. Guaranteed to scare you!
===============
Listen here: (more fun that reading here!)

===============
It really only applies to those going into the Exchanges. I sure hope the databases, data hubs are hacker-proofed, especially regarding identity theft, etc.

In case any readers are job hunting, Navigators of the above are being hired:


I *hope* Navigators have a high school diploma and a background check.