Will Baltimore ever be safe again?

[TIGERBLOOD]

But I agree that IDs should be free at least for the poor if nothing else than to take this argument away from the left.

[TIGERBLOOD]

The 24th amendment argument being argued is really just a distraction because nobody on the left is even arguing that. That's because in every state that requires ID to vote the poor can get one for free. The main states the left is threatening like GA and NC have offered free IDs for over a decade.

The argument is that it's discriminatory because supposedly many black citizens do not have IDs and it's too difficult for them to get one. This is insulting IMO and dishonest.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

[bmorebirds_24]

But I agree that IDs should be free at least for the poor if nothing else than to take this argument away from the left.

And make the ones on welfare and get 1000’s of dollars in food stamps each month take drug test. I work hard for my dime and still can’t afford each and every Jordan that came out. However I can watch a girl with 4 kids have the best clothes and jewelry on but pay with food stamps.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Greg]

I think it's a stretch to say anything required to vote that is issued by the government or taxed in any way is a tax to vote. If gas is taxed, and my only option to get to my polling location is to drive, then technically that becomes a tax to vote. That wasn't the intention of the amendment. Nearly every part of our lives in thus country are taxed now, especially in MD. There are nearly endless possibilities of stretching things to become "voting taxes".

Fortunately, the Supreme Court agreed with me. In 2008 in a major voter ID case they ruled that Voter ID requirements in Indiana did not violate the Constitution.

Did the issue of having to pay for the ID come up in this case?

If you have to pay anything to the government in any step required to vote then legally it is a poll tax.

Again, if the government provides the ID necessary to vote for free then this argument is moot.

[Greg]

The 24th amendment argument being argued is really just a distraction because nobody on the left is even arguing that. That's because in every state that requires ID to vote the poor can get one for free. The main states the left is threatening like GA and NC have offered free IDs for over a decade.

The argument is that it's discriminatory because supposedly many black citizens do not have IDs and it's too difficult for them to get one. This is insulting IMO and dishonest.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

I agree, but the Constitution is quite clear that no tax can be applied that would, or even MIGHT, prohibit somebody from voting,.

The rest of the argument against ID is pure BS. Just make voter IDs free and be done with it.

[TIGERBLOOD]

Did the issue of having to pay for the ID come up in this case?

If you have to pay anything to the government in any step required to vote then legally it is a poll tax.

Again, if the government provides the ID necessary to vote for free then this argument is moot.

I know the case in Florida ruled that having to purchase a government stamp to mail in proof of citizenship was not a tax to vote. I would think the same would apply with having to pay for the ID that is not specially an ID created only for the purpose of voting.

The Constitution unfortunately is not clear on what they are referring to when they prohibit a tax to vote. Is it a tax created specifically for the purpose of voting, or any tax or payment associated with anything you may need or use to vote. It's up to the courts interpretation, and you know how that goes.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

[Greg]

I know the case in Florida ruled that having to purchase a government stamp to mail in proof of citizenship was not a tax to vote. I would think the same would apply with having to pay for the ID that is not specially an ID created only for the purpose of voting.

The Constitution unfortunately is not clear on what they are referring to when they prohibit a tax to vote. Is it a tax created specifically for the purpose of voting, or any tax or payment associated with anything you may need or use to vote. It's up to the courts interpretation, and you know how that goes.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

Instead of buying the stamp you have other options like voting in person. It isn't a requirement to vote.

If I am on the SC I would vote the IDs need to be free if required.

[The Fanatic]

Instead of buying the stamp you have other options like voting in person. It isn't a requirement to vote.

If I am on the SC I would vote the IDs need to be free if required.

So we have an argument about the underprivileged not being able to afford a voter ID in order to vote as well as having that same ID to do other things that normally require an ID.
These same people are suppose to have that ID and have the ability to show it to buy goods that many of them buy quite frequently that are taxed to the nines such as cigarettes and liquor.

[TIGERBLOOD]

So we have an argument about the underprivileged not being able to afford a voter ID in order to vote as well as having that same ID to do other things that normally require an ID.
These same people are suppose to have that ID and have the ability to show it to buy goods that many of them buy quite frequently that are taxed to the nines such as cigarettes and liquor.

Right, I mean the entire argument is disingenuous but with the amount we pay in useless taxes just make them free for everyone and end the argument. All the millions Zuckerberg gave to swing states to cheat could have been used to purchase IDs if they were concerned about the poor.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

[Greg]

Right, I mean the entire argument is disingenuous but with the amount we pay in useless taxes just make them free for everyone and end the argument. All the millions Zuckerberg gave to swing states to cheat could have been used to purchase IDs if they were concerned about the poor.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk

The argument is not disingenuous unless you just discount the 24th amendment. No tax (a required payment) can be a barrier to somebody voting.

I don't disagree on principle with what is being said, like who doesn't have an ID? Everybody does . . . almost. But to clear up the only legal hurdle to requiring ID they must be available without payment. It's that simple. Either that or an amendment to the Constitution to allow some small fee for an ID.

[CarrollCoRaven]

The argument is not disingenuous unless you just discount the 24th amendment. No tax (a required payment) can be a barrier to somebody voting.

I don't disagree on principle with what is being said, like who doesn't have an ID? Everybody does . . . almost. But to clear up the only legal hurdle to requiring ID they must be available without payment. It's that simple. Either that or an amendment to the Constitution to allow some small fee for an ID.

Let's set up a GoFundMe for IDs.

[TIGERBLOOD]

The argument is not disingenuous unless you just discount the 24th amendment. No tax (a required payment) can be a barrier to somebody voting.

I don't disagree on principle with what is being said, like who doesn't have an ID? Everybody does . . . almost. But to clear up the only legal hurdle to requiring ID they must be available without payment. It's that simple. Either that or an amendment to the Constitution to allow some small fee for an ID.

I don't agree with the 24th Amendment argument but that's not what I was saying is disingenuous. You make a good argument but I just happen to disagree. I was saying that the left's general argument that black people are too poor or stupid to get an ID and that such a requirement is racist is disingenuous and they don't actually believe it.

Sent from my SM-N981U using Tapatalk