"Hi, this is former Gov. Tim Caine calling on behalf of team for Virginia, with an important reminder about the upcoming election on November 6. Soon you'll receive a new voter registration card in the mail from the State Board of elections. This card is sufficient ID if you take it to the polls on November 6. So please save it, keep it in the safe place and take it with you when you go to vote. But it's only one of the many forms of ID, you can bring to the polls, other acceptable forms of ID included driver's license, a current utility bill or bank statement. A student ID along with a number of other options. If you don't receive your new registration card in the mail by October 5 or if you had any questions about voting, please call the State Board of elections it's a toll free call at 1-800-552-9745. Thanks and please remember to vote on November 6"
... more. Please listen to your voicemail for the remainder of this message.
1)Would you get this message if you don't have a phone or voicemail?
2)What if the State Board of Elections missed your name or address?
3)What if you have moved?
4)If you don't have a phone, and didn't get the message, how would you know to call the 800 # with questions?
5)What if you don't drive and have no driver's license? What other picture ID could you use?
LOTS of people don't have the wherewithal to have all these things-------we got our notices in the mail last week because we registered to vote here at the DMV when we moved.
I am among those who think this is a ruse to keep poor people from voting---------and I don't like it.
Carol
ReplyDeleteCarol this appears to be a last gasp argument. The condemned man stands on the gallows and asks if the rope will hurt the skin on his neck. Just how many forms of ID does it take? There is a list of at least four in addition to the new card, just one appears necessary from my understanding of your post.
Of course there is an easy alternative and that is to introduce compulsory voting as applies here.
I do feel however that the average American is intelligent enough to find a legitimate way to vote if he wishes to do so. I would further ask why he would not exercise his “right” when he is determined to exercise his right of free speech, even to the detriment of his nation.
Cheers from Aussie
Any adult who isn't mental disabled has the ability and the responsibility to comply with the rules. It's not up to the government to do everything for another person. That's why Russia's economy was so poor while it was a communist country. Everyone expected to the Government to take care of everything. Move to a new apartment? not your responsibility to get your electricity changed over. Move to a new voting district? Not your job to inform the authorities yadda yadda
ReplyDeleteLS
ReplyDeleteThank you for the contribution. I question whether this is a case of responsibility or desire on the part of the citizen to be part of the democratic process.
I would press for the necessity of compulsorily voting if the citizen does not comply out of patriotic loyalty to the country; surely not too much to ask. You have not addressed Carol’s points and I am not well enough informed to be helpful. I will however stick my neck on the block by suggesting that Carol has not prosecuted her argument well enough for me to agree with her.
The issue, Kingston, is that there is a very fishy feel about these new laws. First and foremost, what been passed seems to be a solution in search of a problem. Very few cases of actual voter fraud have been found, and if you think about, it's not a real smart thing to do. If you misrepresent yourself, you could be in trouble. And in the big picture, the amount of people needed to be willing to commit such fraud would have to be a very large number to actually sway an election.
DeleteBeyond that, some very targeted changes have been made that appear to make it more difficult for people to vote in what are areas considered to be favorable to Democrats. When an elected official publicly states that the new laws will help Romney win, how much more information do we need?
As for compulsory voting, I dont' know if it's the answer or not. As it stands, a small group of people basically determine who governs, and that is very disturbing to me. On the other hand, do I really want some idiot to vote who can' even be bothered to participate out of sense of civic duty? I dont' know
"Very few cases of actual voter fraud have been found,"
DeleteSo Max,,,,what's the big deal then?
Very few cases of actual voter fraud have been found,
DeleteIf you don't intentionally look for them you will never find anything wrong.
But then again the government denies anything wrong as far as illegal immigration (30-40 million invisible problems) so why think there is a problem with illegal voters???
"If you don't intentionally look for them you will never find anything wrong."
DeleteSorry Lou, I'm still thinking for myself these days. Unlike any Republican POTUS, Obama has achieved what is believed to be a net zero immigration from Mexico. Of course, you don't like Obama and on that basis alone, you will call bullshit. Fair enuf, I'll just assume in advance you disagree and save you some key strokes.
If Obama does win the states of douchebag voting laws, it will be even more satisfying.
Hey Max,
DeleteLiving in a state with massive illegals, bilingual ballots in numerous counties, think all the voters are legal? Nobody is checking either, Feds don't care, state can't afford the cost to check if they could get cooperation from DHS. As a side note, you need to be able to read and speak English to become a citizen. Why the bilingual ballot???
This issue has been ongoing since the Reagan era when he granted amnesty to 2 million illegals.
Think what our schools could do if they didn't have to spend money to educate illegals. How much would be save every year? Wouldn't need to pay as much in entitlements either.
Zero growth? Look at all the new citizens we have compliments of the illegals having children.
What don't I like about Obama?
1. The ongoing war started under a Repub.
2. The new conflicts we have supported, Egypt, Libya and Africa. Probably add Iran to that list in October.
3. 6 trillion in debt with nothing ton show for it.
4. 4 years and a wrecked economy with 50 million on food stamps, 23 million unemployed, doubled the number of disability cases.
5. The burden of over regulation.
6. I really love the treatment of the coal industry, those workers will be pissed when they lose their jobs and the lights and AC, well hope Nevada doesn't have coal fired plants. We have 4 and not enough time to replace them before the shut down date.
7. Obamacare and the nightmare soon to begin. The seniors will love it as 70 billion is pulled from an already failing program. At least Obama will share the pain as they cut payments to providers.
8. There are more if you would really like.
All in all, don't really dislike him but his policies that are destroying the country. Would Romney be any better? Guess we would need to elect him to find out. We know what Obama is about, 4 more years of the same. Romney isn't my favorite by far or even ideal. Probably will be more like Clinton than anyone else.
By the way, what's wrong with asking someone for an ID before they vote? What's wrong with deleting dead people from the voting roster? What's wrong with purging the rolls of people not qualified to vote? It's more important than an airplane ride and you need one for that.
Max,What really pisses me off is this:
DeleteRomney Dumpty sat on the wall
Romney Dumpty had a big fall
All of Romney's horses and
All of Romney's men couldn't
Put Romney together again--------he's toast, the Repubs are toast, and who knows how many Republicans in Congress will also be toast?
The reference to Mittens, does that mean we should disparage Obama in the same ways?
"The reference to Mittens, does that mean we should disparage Obama in the same ways? "
DeleteIt's a fair point. Yeah, my reference of Mittens to your references of Savior is not a morally superior position. It's meant to be dismissive. Romney has won the nomination, and yet, I feel as much contempt for him from right leaning posters, minus the name calling of course. Whether I call Romney, Mittens or not, it's not going to stop you from calling Obama savior, but, I don't dispute your point.
I take nothing for granted. When the cavalcade of genius's here were declaring Obama toast months ago, it wasn't my love for Obama that made me think they were a little baked. And now, with Obama ahead, I see nothing in his campaign that gives me uber confidence he just can't lose. Plenty can still happen.
To your points,
1+2) no liberal is happy with it either. We no longer have any defensible reason to be in Afghanistan. Obama did not "end" the war in Iraq, he honored Bush's timetable. This is not a defense of Obama, but the Republicans have no plan to leave Afghanistan either. I did not support what Obama did in Libya. Beyond both parties, Lou, we have a much bigger problem with how controlled our legislators are by the military industrial complex
3) The majority of the stimulus that Obama signed went to tax cuts and medicare and medicaid, well over half of it anyway. This is a dogma position. I don't favor endless spending, but I do believe some targeted spending can make a difference. I believe that the spending DID alleviate a true 1930's style depression. The right does not. At best, Romney promises his secret budget plan will solve everything. You and I both know that 16 trillion does not get paid overnight. So while it's great and all to say at least the Republicans produced a budget, the guy at the top of the Republican ticket currently does not offer any details of a solution.
4,5,6) This is where I have a respectful disagreement of philosophy with you. We've seen 30 years of deregulation, decrease of wages and reduction in benefits. Simultaneously, we have seen an enormous gain in wealth for a select few. We will never draw the same conclusion from that reality. In contrast, the Democrats have moved much further away from their platform then have Republicans. They, too, are now deeply in the pocket of wall street and were willing participants in allowing the meltdown to happen. Blaming the FED only goes so far.
Lastly, Obamacare. As I have said many times, Obama simply borrowed what was mainstream Republican thought from the late 80's. When you tweak the questions of a poll the right way, you can make the case America loves this or hates it. Did real debate about it happen? No. Did the Democrats deliver what they said they would? Again, No. What Obama did not challenge was the for profit nature of our system. Who is paying has changed a bit, but the fundamental nature of the system will not.
At best, Romney promises his secret budget plan will solve everything. You and I both know that 16 trillion does not get paid overnight. So while it's great and all to say at least the Republicans produced a budget, the guy at the top of the Republican ticket currently does not offer any details of a solution.
DeleteTo your point, you are 100% correct. The sooner we address the issue, the sooner the recession takes hold, people suffer and the true recovery takes place. None of this will happen under Obama and probably not under Romney as neither are up to addressing the real employment issues and the reasons for exporting labor. As a nation we cannot afford 4-6 trillion more in debt under Obama. He has said it will happen. Who knows what R will do.
As to who is paying for the Federal Gov't that has changed greatly. More taxes are headed our way with Obamacare and more in taxes to pay for the Federal Government. Really doesn't matter as we will be in a recession in the next 6 months with no recovery in sight as the Fed has expended its ammo except for the magic printing machine solution.
Do the math. 16 trillion x 3% is our interest due now. Raise the interest rates with a blend, 16 Trillion x 4%. Add 4 trillion to that, 800 billion in interest a year. Add the estimated 2.8 trillion in debt from Obamacare to that. Still think everything is wonderful? 4 more years? Really?
The next move will be to erase the SS trust fund bonds and the 2.5 trillion owed to the Federal Reserve and the debt will be magically affordable for a time. However, the politicians will have learned nothing and we will begin again only for a shorter time.
It's not a matter of thinking everything is wonderful, I don't understand why the only choices in life seem to be accept all is shit, or by default claim all is swell. Currently, we are being presented with nothing but false choices. Obama care will bankrupt us.......if we refuse to pay for it. But the same could be said of the military, or SS or any other large ticket item. To blame an eventual tax increase on Obamacare, or whatever Democrat finally finds the balls to do it is straw man. The Republicans created a lot of this false choice bullshit by making the Bush tax cuts a ten year free for all. They didn't pay for them then and the only way they are willing to pay for them now is by cutting programs they philosophically hate or feel that they will never need. I'm sorry, this is not a solution.
DeleteI realize I put a lot in that comment above, too much to answer to in one shot. But, as for fixing our economy, I see it this way, unless we plan to sell tons of shit to rest of the world while consuming none of it, then something needs to happen wherein the consumers in our economy have money to spend. As consumers, we don't seem to want to pay each other very much and we all have a freaking opinion about how many benefits each of us should get through a job. Consumers are the real job creators and we have done much to limit their ability to do so. But, again, it's pure fantasy to say that Obama will kill jobs while Romney will magically create them.
Max,
DeleteAs you probably know,
Medicare, medicaid, other health programs: 21%
Social Security: 20%
Safety Net Programs, Welfare: 14%
Benefits Federal Retirees, military: 7%
62% of the federal Budget for entitlements.
Military: 20%
Interest: 6%
Education: 3%
Other: 9%
Where to cut???
"To blame an eventual tax increase on Obamacare, or whatever Democrat finally finds the balls to do it is straw man."
Do you really believe you can insure 30-50 million more people and not raise taxes? The current estimate for the PPACA shortfall is 2.8 trillion over 10 years. As with every government program it will have been underestimated.
Where to get the money to pay for it. It will require tax increases on everyone including the poor, middle class and the wealthy. Cuts will need to done across the board. No program will be spared, no class of people spared. The options are limited, cut and tax or bail out and print our way out of debt. That will hurt across the board as inflation we have today will seem like a mild price hike. When it's done, will we have learned anything?? I think not as we send the same pathetic Republicans and Democrats to congress and the presidency every election year.
The whole thing is this country wants everything for nothing. Free Birth Control pills, free blood pressure pills, free physicals and whatever else the government can give us to make us feel we got a great deal. It's all free until the bill comes due.
An honest conversation needs to take place with the people of this country and decide what we really need and what we can afford.
The problem with the PPACA is it isn't a program that covers the basics with the bells and whistles at an additional cost to the user. It has the cherry on top. Nothing is free in this world and that includes healthcare. When everyone including the democrats and republicans in Washington wake up to that reality we will finally move ahead.
"An honest conversation needs to take place with the people of this country and decide what we really need and what we can afford."
DeleteThere we are in full agreement. Do we need a for profit health care system? Right now, sick people with no insurance go to the ER for what is essentially a routine doctor visit. Are we better served paying that ER bill through taxes or by raising taxes and giving that person an option to see someone at a clinic? Discussing this would be a honest debate to me. No medical care is free, that I fully understand. Here in Vegas, I volunteer at a clinic for people who work but can't afford insurance and don't get it through work. We live on wealthy benefactors and grants. Seeing the people that I see come in there and then listening to assumptions made about people without insurance just leaves me feeling like the discussions held in Washington are very far removed from reality.
I don't believe we can insure 30-50 MM without raising taxes. That said, is not giving them insurance really saving us anything? You are correct though about most Americans wanting everything and being willing to pay for none of it. That is an attitude that crosses all levels of wealth.
Going hiking today. Hitting the south loop trail of Mt. Charleston. It's about 18 miles and change out and back. Not sure I'll do it all, but I at least want to crunch through all the switchbacks. Hopefully I dont' add to the nation's health care costs by the time I'm done.
"Right now, sick people with no insurance go to the ER for what is essentially a routine doctor visit."
DeleteSo do people on Medicaid as physicians refuse to see them with the current reimbursement rates. How will dumping the current healthcare system for the PPACA change that? The payout rate is the same?
I don't believe we can insure 30-50 MM without raising taxes. That said, is not giving them insurance really saving us anything?
As I stated we should have a baseline system for healthcare not a free for all with the cherry on top. With a minimum co-pay, where is the incentive to stay home when you have a cold vs. going to the doctor to hear take 2 aspirin and get some rest? Where are the savings to reduce healthcare costs in the PPACA? We have this brandy new PPACA because the politicians have it all and are far removed from the reality of the American experience.
Back from my fall tour. The colors are great this year. Unusual thing, rain today.
Gearing up for the traffic nightmare on Wed. Debate at University of Denver. Shutting down I25 at rush hour, the main arterial for north to south in the city.
Have a good hike.
What a dope. 18 miles round trip buried me today. No hockey tomorrow, that's for sure. I thought Obama's choice of holing up in Henderson was weird. (Hendertucky as it's known around here, and for good reason too!) The resort he is staying at is kinda close to Hoover dam and after the resort went bankrupt, some investors have done a decent turn around on it.
DeleteAnyway, to this point here "So do people on Medicaid as physicians refuse to see them with the current reimbursement rates." I'm genuinely curious, are you saying that you do want to see a basic benefit for everyone regardless of whether they can afford it outright? Currently, I don't believe that is a Republican suggestion. As for the rest, it's hard to say what is really true and what is hyperbole. In my experience, poor people just don't go the doctor until they have a major catastrophe. So in that case, I don't honestly believe you are going to see this massive flood of poor people coming in for a hangnail. Regardless of income, people frequently wait too long to see a doctor.
The theory, put forth by the illustrious Phil Gramm is that when it's "free" people will overwhelm the system. Looking at the level of noncompliance I see, I find his proposition dubious. Tack on copays, which I agree with doing, you will still make poor family's think twice before going in just to be told to take aspirin. I dunno, I'm not trying to make a massive love post for what Obama passed, but I just don't think the drama statements match what I saw on a regular basis. As always, though, you are correct that the politicians, FROM BOTH SIDES OF THE AISLE, are clueless about what the average American goes through.
To leave the world of ICU, I took an $8/hr paycut and had a significant reduction in benefits. My copays went from 5 bucks a vist to 25. I can afford it, but that's a huge jump. There is no fat in providing hospice care.
Amazing to think that someone who doesn't have the ability to obtain proof that he/she is a citizen, shows consistently at the polls on election day.
ReplyDelete1773-2009 Without ACORN this election will be fairly won or lost. And yes, people will be paying attention and checking.
Acorn lives, just under other names and organizations. Yes the government still gives them money.
DeleteObama seems to be ahead in Va. , Ohio and Michigan already, he will win the next 4 years in the WH--------
ReplyDeleteRomney Dumpty sat on the wall
Romney Dumpty had a big fall
All of Romney's horses and
All of Romney's men couldn't
Put Romney together again--------he's toast, the Repubs are toast, and who knows how many Republicans in Congress will also be toast?
The Republicans are hopelessly fragmented, the in-fighting about how the campaign was handled is another liability the Greedy Ole Party just could NOT afford.
This election will NOT be bought, it will be won----AGAIN.
Eric Cantor is a mess too, a petty little man,a severe, unfriendly sort of little man------I liken him to Boehner, McConnell, King and all of their ilk who would rather see America go down a rathole than admit defeat------Pity
ReplyDeleteObama had to tell Cantor recently, "hey Eric, I won."
Anybody else you would like to trash Carol???
DeleteWhat all the Democrats are perfect and not worthy of your hate?
ReplyDelete3)What if you have moved?
You would need to register in your new area or provide a change of address. They don't accept change of address over the phone. Requires you fill out a form.