Papers

Why papers? We can tatoo a scanner image on your wrist. Or implant a chip in your body like we do for dogs and cats. Maybe include GPS capabilities so it is even easier to find you.

Modern technology makes it look like George Orwell lacked imagination. Originally Posted by davidsmith0123

great idea!!! oh they don`t need doggy tags they have credit cards in the USA to track down people. Its interesting, you do not need to proof residency or require documents where you live (which state and house and city) like in europe, but to circumvent the problem of not being able to track down people everything requires creditcards.

Why papers? We can tatoo a scanner image on your wrist. Or implant a chip in your body like we do for dogs and cats. Maybe include GPS capabilities so it is even easier to find you.

Modern technology makes it look like George Orwell lacked imagination. Originally Posted by davidsmith0123

As long as the tattoo is on one of my butt cheeks I wouldn't mind.

I had to show ID to buy a pair of sun glasses yesterday. Whats the big fucking deal with presenting ID to vote.

• Do you think voting should be open to only US citizens? What about those people who are here legally? Do they get a say in their communities?

Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Hell yes it should be citizens only. Thats one of the basic privledges of citizenship. If I go to somebody's house for dinner, I don't get to vote on what we are eating -- and if I don't like it, my only options are not eating it or leaving. Same for non-citizens here. If you don't like the way we are running things, either accept it or go somewhere else.

Technically, in my town at least, and probably yours, it's already illegal to walk around without identification.

Keeping illegal aliens from voting has nothing to do with Straw Men goose stepping into the discussion ala Nazi Germany. . . that's a real reach, and fell well short.

Actually, the whole "Nazi Germany" meme is pretty interesting to bring up at a time when a politician running for American office talks about the need for massive, well armed civilian "security forces", has followers who interject race into absolutely every issue, and makes a speech before Greco-Roman columns in a packed German sports arena. And, once, elected, goes to war without consulting Congress.

Hummmmm. Originally Posted by Iaintliein

I only used the Nazi Germany "papers" issue as an example b/c I thought most people had a concept of the idea.

While others appear to love making sure absentee ballots never quiet make it in time from deployed military. . . despite the relative wealth and education of the government bureaucrats in charge.

There's no way to prove it, and I'm too cheap to bet, but my thought is more service men and women who actually wanted to vote have been disenfranchised over the last decade or two than the "poor and uneducated" who may or may not have actually wanted to. Originally Posted by Iaintliein

You are probably right. Since I travel a lot (and vote), I know that my vote has not made the final count in several instances. IDT this is as a result of the intent of nefarious people so much as the result of having to rely on the mails in the voting process. If your ballot doesn't get there timely, it isn't counted.

I would be so much in favor of being able to vote over the internet (secure server, id & pin # and all that). People seem to be aghast at the idea. But I do so for corporate stock I hold, and in elections of at least one professional organization of which I am a member. In both of these, you only get one vote (per share). Once voted, you are prevented from voting again. However, if someone other than you votes you can file a protest.

Why papers? We can tatoo a scanner image on your wrist. Or implant a chip in your body like we do for dogs and cats. Maybe include GPS capabilities so it is even easier to find you.

Modern technology makes it look like George Orwell lacked imagination. Originally Posted by davidsmith0123

I agree. Insert the chip in a forearm which can be read by a hand held scanner. It could contain a fingerprint and retina scan. If your address, etc., change, the data on the chip could be changed w/o removing and inserting a new chip (I think).

[Note to Camille: keep rowing/running...no need to carry ID under this plan. Although, you're beauty alone would probably get you out of any tight spot. lol]

great idea!!! oh they don`t need doggy tags they have credit cards in the USA to track down people. Its interesting, you do not need to proof residency or require documents where you live (which state and house and city) like in europe, but to circumvent the problem of not being able to track down people everything requires creditcards. Originally Posted by ninasastri

Or cell phone.....

There should be a requirement to provide ID when you vote and it should be provided by the state in which you live. There are too many instances of dead people voting and people voting multiple times and in different states. I own property in a couple of counties in the state in which I live and pay taxes in both, yet I have no say in the governmental affairs of the county I own property but do not live in. Is that truly right?

We do not need national ID, or national drivers license, or anything national that the federal government controls and maintains a record of. I do think anyone of legal age should have some form of state provided identification.

The Federal Government has already taken away too many states rights and the federal court system has allowed it.

Just my 1 cent!

Top

I had to show ID to buy a pair of sun glasses yesterday. Whats the big fucking deal with presenting ID to vote. Originally Posted by pjorourke

What is the big deal about encoding a chip in your ass to track your every move?


...and what kinda al qaeda sunglasses were you buying!

There should be a requirement to provide ID when you vote and it should be provided by the state in which you live. There are too many instances of dead people voting and people voting multiple times and in different states. I own property in a couple of counties in the state in which I live and pay taxes in both, yet I have no say in the governmental affairs of the county I own property but do not live in. Is that truly right?

We do not need national ID, or national drivers license, or anything national that the federal government controls and maintains a record of. I do think anyone of legal age should have some form of state provided identification.

The Federal Government has already taken away too many states rights and the federal court system has allowed it.

Just my 1 cent!

Top Originally Posted by topsgt38801

Tell me again the difference between the state telling you wtf to do and the federal government doing so?

What is the big deal about encoding a chip in your ass to track your every move?


...and what kinda al qaeda sunglasses were you buying!
Originally Posted by WTF

+1

It’s already in the works. In 2005, the U.S. Congress passed a controversial bill known as the REAL ID Act that will transform the state-issued driver's license into what many contend will be a de facto national identification card (though still not a true one since it will still be issued by the state governments and not the federal government). The transformation will be carried out by giving the Department of Homeland Security the power to regulate the design and content of all state driver's licenses, and to require that all of the underlying state databases be linked into a single national database.

The state government will be responsible for issuing such cards, but then the information would be entered into a national database—where information can be analyzed for anomalies that might indicate a false identity and illegal use. This would discourage non-citizens from applying for such cards and discourage any other illegal use of such cards. By making a minor addition to their drivers’ license, a majority of voting age Americans can be dealt with. After all, many states already have a motor-voter law on the books.

It’s foolish to say that this would be another government intrusion into the private lives of the citizens. Standardization rather than intrusion should be the operative term. Consider, Social Security manages to issue a card to everyone who applies for a number. Military recruiters have the names, addresses and phone numbers of most every high school student of voting age. All males reaching the age of 18 must still register with Selective Service. To apply for food stamps, a person must bring identification, social security numbers, proof of income, benefits and expenses (including child care costs), and medical bills if any household member is over 60 to the office with you. Here’s a list of other specialized cards the typical adult in the United States often carries a large number of documents issued by many different public and private entities.

The U.S. Federal government issues the following types of identity documents:

• Certificate of U.S. Citizenship
• Certificate of Naturalization
• Immigration and travel-related documents issued by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services to non-U.S. citizens.
• Passport
• The passport card is a new travel document available to U.S. citizens for land and sea travel to Canada, Mexico, and various Caribbean destinations.
• NEXUS card for travel between the United States and Canada.
• SENTRI card for travel between the United States and Mexico.
• The Transportation Worker Identification Credential, a new biometric security identification credential to be phased in by April 15, 2009, issued by the Transportation Security Administration.
• The Merchant Mariner's Document, issued by the U.S. Coast Guard.
• Cards that prove participation in the Medicaid and Medicare programs.

Other documents that are evidence of an individual's identity:

• State/territory driver's license (see above)
• ID card issued by federal, state, or local government agencies or entities, provided it contains a photograph or information such as name, date of birth, gender, height, eye color and address
• School ID card with photograph
• Voter's registration card
• Native American tribal document

Other examples of documents involving personal identity include:

· Credit cards and debit cards
· Internal identification card issued by one's employer, university or school
· Proof of professional certification (for members of regulated professions)
· Proof of automobile insurance card (when driving)
· Health insurance card issued by a private health insurance company, by Medicare, or by a state public health insurance agency
· Library cards
· Membership cards issued by private clubs (social, athletic, educational, alumni, etc.)
· Membership cards (called loyalty cards) issued by private companies (supermarkets, warehouse club stores, etc.)
· Membership cards issued by professional organizations
· Membership cards issued by private associations
· Access documents issued by private or governmental organizations, such as a press pass, or a stage pass
· License documents issued by government organizations authorizing privileges other than driving, such as an amateur radio license or concealed firearm permit

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identit..._United_States
http://www.flhsmv.gov/realid/

First, from a practical standpoint, do you want a society where you always have your “papers” with you? When you are out for a walk, running a marathon, swimming at the lake, etc? Lots of times I’m carrying no ID day to day. Originally Posted by EJunkie

A standardized ID would be presented when you vote, board an aircraft, etc,.

Tell me again the difference between the state telling you wtf to do and the federal government doing so? Originally Posted by WTF

It's a Constitutional consideration; particularly, the 10th Amendment. One's vote in a national election is debased by the votes of millions of others whose values and interests may be very different than yours. One's vote in a local or state election is of greater value and more import because it is not as debased. Additionally, one's neighbors are more likely to have the same or similar values and interests; thus, the laws that don't reflect those values and interests are more likely to be rejected out-of-hand at the polls.

It's a Constitutional consideration; particularly, the 10th Amendment. One's vote in a national election is debased by the votes of millions of others whose values and interests may be very different than yours. One's vote in a local or state election is of greater value and more import because it is not as debased. Additionally, one's neighbors are more likely to have the same or similar values and interests; thus, the laws that don't reflect those values and interests are more likely to be rejected out-of-hand at the polls. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Really then why don't we stop there instead of the state or Federal government level.

The fact of the matter is that these state right cryers are just a bunch of half ass Federal power grabbers. They want the power that the Federal govt currently has. Neither has the average joe blow concerns in tow.

I want neither to have that much power over me. Why would you want to give anyone that type of power?

What is really funny is that the very same people who rail aganist the Federal government vs. state rights then bitch and moan if you were to compare say the Federal Government = Big Business and State rights = a workers union.

@IBH

I was wondering when someone would realize it's here. Has been for several years, except for a state-by-state resistance.

From the DHS website: http://www.dhs.gov/files/programs/gc_1200062053842.shtm

Secure state-issued identification is a nationwide effort to establish minimum performance standards to improve the integrity and security of state-issued driver's licenses and identification cards, while retaining states' flexibility to meet and exceed the standards as they are incorporated into each state's unique operations. The goals of this effort are to reduce identity theft, make it more difficult for criminals to obtain fraudulent identities, and to help fight terrorism.
The 9/11 Commission recommended that the U.S. improve its system for issuing identification documents, urging the federal government to set standards for the issuance of sources of identification. In 2005, Congress passed a law implementing the Commission’s recommendations – a law that included several provisions of the Drivers' License Compact, a voluntary state standard endorsed by more than 45 states.
Key measures that increase the level of assurance for a document include the following:

• information and security features that must be incorporated into each card
• documentation and verification of an applicant’s identity, date of birth, social security number, and legal presence in the United States
• checks to ensure that an individual does not hold multiple driver’s licenses in other states, and
• minimum security standards for issuance of licenses and identification cards

I still think internet based voting would solve a multitude of problems, including the enormous cost of current elections. The feds could run their elections on their servers, states on theirs, and locals on theirs. They could even have different registration and address requirements this way.

Those w/o computers/internet could do so at the public library or other public buildings with access.

Really then why don't we stop there instead of the state or Federal government level. Originally Posted by WTF

Unfortunately, it’s a byproduct of Tom Friedman’s “Flat Earth” syndrome.

The fact of the matter is that these state right cryers are just a bunch of half ass Federal power grabbers. They want the power that the Federal govt currently has. Neither has the average joe blow concerns in tow.

I want neither to have that much power over me. Why would you want to give anyone that type of power? Originally Posted by WTF

I too have experienced the frustration and irony of state and federal laws. Once I took a motorcycle trip and passed through a state where helmets were not required. We tooled along at 75 to 85 mph, so we opted to wear a helmet—but we weren’t required to wear helmets. Along the way, one of our stops was in a National Park located geographically within that same state that did not require helmets. The speed limit was 15 mph, but we were normally running under 10 mph so as to better enjoy the sights. We had taken our helmets off so that we could see better and talk more easily. A park ranger stopped us and told us that we must wear helmets because we were in a National Park, and federal law governs National Parks! Go figure!