Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Politics 'All These People' Buy Beer and Cigarettes, House Photo ID Sponsor Says
Posted by Jeff Woods on Wed, Oct 5, 2011 at 2:59 PM
In this video, the House sponsor of the photo ID voter law defends it against questions from a gaggle of pesky reporters. Rep. Debra Maggart, R-Hendersonville, dismisses Democratic claims that many poor people don't have photo ID. She wonders how "all these people" are able to buy beer and cigarettes without driver's licenses. Later in the interview, she denies she's referring to poor people. Maybe she was talking about wealthy Republican voters.
Maggart: Tell me how people are buying beer and cigarettes? They have to have an ID to do that, a photo ID to do that. I have a hard time believing that all these people don’t have an ID. … You have to have a photo ID to get public housing. You have to have a birth certificate to get public housing. … I think there’s more people with a photo ID than they want to admit.
...
Q: You were referring to housing project residents? You think they buy an inordinate amount of beer and cigarettes?
Maggart: No, I didn’t say that. I’m just saying a lot of people have photo ID.
Comments (26)
Showing 1-26 of 26
like
dislike
Two points:
1. Dorothy Cooper HAS a birth certificate. Debra Maggart apparently doesn't think that's good enough anyway.
2. I get carded far less in Tennessee than in other ungodly, immoral states where they allow sinful things like the sale of wine and liquor in grocery stores.
Give it up. The elections process must be secured. It's way past time. And we need, as some states have passed, proof of U.S. citizenship on the front end -- at voter registration.
In one of these threads, I posted a link to a story about Colorado's reports of illegal voter registration and illegal voting by thousands of noncitizens. Some other states have reported the same situation.
"What kind of a retard doesnt have an id? Its called turning 16."
I didn't obtain a drivers license, until I was 22 years old (didn't need one, as I didn't have a car). And yet, I was still able to vote in two gubernatorial elections and a presidential election between the ages of 17, when I was registered to vote, and 22, when I finally got my drivers license. Hell, I even marched in Reagan's inaugural parade without having ever been issued a drivers license or other state photo ID.
idme- You just called a 96 YR. old woman a 'retard'. Your mamma would NOT be happy with you for that. It's called manners.And respect for your elders. And yes, it is your responsibility to look after the aged .To protect their rights. To make sure they have all the advantages that you have and are not taken advantage OF.
There are foreseeable problems with the acceptable forms of photo ID under this new state law. Expired DLs and out-of-state DLs? Yeah, what could go wrong there?
The best voter photo ID would be one issued at voter registration but only if the state requires in-person registration and proof of U.S. citizenship (to be verified).
Keep in mind this state requirement does not apply to federal elections. That should be fixed at the federal level.
Donna, I apparently need to say this again, slowly.
Dorothy. Cooper. Has. A. Birth. Certificate. She. Has. Proof. Of. Citizenship.
And we now have proof that in Tennessee, it's still not enough. What more do you need, Donna? Does she need to take a blood test to prove she's as American as you?
How much would you have to pay for this ID? How is this not a poll tax, made illegal by the 24th Amendment?
The IDs are free. Otherwise they'd be unconstitutional under the Supreme Court's '08 ruling on Indiana's law.
Funny, but when I registered to vote many years ago, I was asked to swear that I was a U.S. citizen. Isn't a sworn statement enough proof?
GoldnI, I'm not referring to Cooper in my comments above. But she would still need photo ID under this law. The law provides for provisional voting, but the voter who shows up without required ID and is allowed to vote is still going to have to come up with acceptable ID after that.
We are not the only state doing this. And even more states are likely to.
No, George, a sworn statement is not proof, not good enough. You might be surprised at the number of noncitizens who have gotten confused -- unintentional; not fraud -- and have registered to vote or have been registered to vote by others. I saw it happening at a church near my house in Georgia after Bob Barr's local office heard about it and told some folks about it. Tennessee still needs to pass a law to require proof of U.S. citizenship for voter registration.
We should have a national id card, one that's as secure as possible.
It can be used for voter, driver license, proof of citizenship to eliminate the lame excuse of outlaw employers who hire illegal aliens, and any other function we want to use it for.
What's the difference between that and this?
>reports of illegal voter registration and illegal voting by thousands of noncitizens.
Verified, confirmed, documented accounts? I think not.
Donna, are you really that obtuse? She had several forms of ID and was TRYING to get a photo ID so she could continue to vote. She was TRYING to comply with the new law. But even her birth certificate, that's not enough proof for the state. Or for you, but then again, we know that you would question someone's citizenship unless they took a DNA test that traced their ancestry back to the Mayflower.
You can bet that a white suburbanite from, say, Brentwood would have had no trouble whatsoever. This law is working just exactly as the GOP intended: a black senior citizen, likely to vote Democratic, is denied the right to vote.
She did not have any proof of ID with her current name on it. A birth certificate with a different name does not make you the person you say you are. She did not have a marriage certificate or any proof of change of name. She could still vote absentee with no problems or get the forms with a trip to the court house. Is it a minor inconvenience? Possibly. But voting should have some reasonable standards and safeguards. Sorry.
GoldnI, if you marry and change your last name, you will be introduced to a lot of paperwork and hoop-jumping, baby. If you divorce and want your maiden name back, expect to show the REQUIRED paperwork, and that includes for eventual voting, to get yourself matched up with yourself in every area of your life. Married or divorced women are more used to this kind of mess than men are.
I am used to showing both my birth certificate and my marriage paperwork TO PROVE WHO I AM. BECAUSE THE NAMES DON'T MATCH. This is logical, not obtuse.
My advice: Never change your name, girls. Never. Unless you just can't stand it. The only reason I changed mine was so that my kids and I would have the same name.
Okay, Pseudo, I have already posted this link to a story about noncitizen voting in Colorado:
http://thehill.com/homenews/house/153079-g…
Colorado's secretary of state told a congressional panel about a study his department did that identified nearly 12,000 noncitizens as registered to vote in Colorado, and nearly 5,000 who voted in the state's 2010 general election. Colorado compared the state's voter registration database with driver's license records, according to published reports.
Now, allowance must be made for the possibility, even probability, that some of those identified as noncitizens may have become U.S. citizens before voting. Colorado officials say they don't know how much of a problem they have there. I guess they are trying to find out.
State officials in New Mexcio and some other states have identified apparent and/or confirmed noncitizen voting in their states.
We now have an unknown but definitely unprecedented number of noncitizens in the United States. Illegal voting, all kinds of illegal voting, can happen, so we should either secure and safeguard the foundation of our republic or turn the entire country into even more of a free-for-all than it has become. There is really no lukewarm in this anymore. Make your choice, but take a stand, how about it? Just don't cry about any consequences. This is a national security problem, and your children's and grandchildren's futures are jelling as we write.
kosh,
I totally agree. One that is issued at birth and is updated to include a fingerprint around age 16 to coincide with the start of driving. At that point, the old card is exchanged for a new photo card.
It wouldn't be a bad idea to establish paternity at birth also so that there can be no doubt about who the cardholder is later in life. Not to mention that genetically establishing parenthood would allow children who are put up for adoption to find a parent in cases of medical necessity.
Goldni,
I am in agreement with you regarding Mrs. Cooper. Any reasonable law will have situations that were not predictable or fall into some odd exception. The most salient point in this case is that there is no problem with 90+ adults sneaking into America so the presumption should be that she is a citizen. Similarly she is too old to be hopping from state to state so the presumption is that she is a Tennessee resident.
