U.S. Constitution needs a "Right to Vote" Amendment

[jeninnflorida]

and you suspend your right to vote, when you go on welfare and food stamps

So when was the last time you voted?

 

[Sean Renaud]

Why because the are going to require an ID? Which you need to do anything in the states at all anyway?

That is the lamest excuse ever. Beside...all citizens are required to carry an ID anyway. It's state law. That's why state ID are so cheap. The only problem is you have prove your a citizen.

Where are they required to carry an ID?

and you suspend your right to vote, when you go on welfare and food stamps

Yeah. . .if you want to live in a country where the rich have even more power. Why don't we just skip over the boring middle bullshit and just pick a King and Queen and get rid of voting all together, it will be less messy.

 

[jeninflorida]

if we remove the welfare vote, we can fix America

While I will admit to seeing your point, but you have to realize that the obama and those around him are complete fuckups. they want to reward people for being stupid. ie IRS pay raises and bonuses for being a thug wing.

obama wants to reward people for being stupid and underwater in the homes with debt forgiveness while he wants to punish those people that do the right thing by not over spending and paying their bills

Where are they required to carry an ID?



Yeah. . .if you want to live in a country where the rich have even more power. Why don't we just skip over the boring middle bullshit and just pick a King and Queen and get rid of voting all together, it will be less messy.

 

[Morwen]

Your criminal government doesn't care about the Constitution at all, so I am not sure what delusional, nitrogen-gas filled planet you live on.

Don't bother to respond the obvious.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Even if this amendment never passes, proposing it is more than a feel-good measure. It is also a goalpost-moving, Overton-window-shifting measure. Simply pointing out that voting is not a constitutional right can spark public debate over whether it should be, and the mere occurrence of such debate is a form of victory here, as it takes the center-of-controversy away from the ID-demanders.

 

[Sean Renaud]

if we remove the welfare vote, we can fix America

While I will admit to seeing your point, but you have to realize that the obama and those around him are complete fuckups. they want to reward people for being stupid. ie IRS pay raises and bonuses for being a thug wing.

obama wants to reward people for being stupid and underwater in the homes with debt forgiveness while he wants to punish those people that do the right thing by not over spending and paying their bills

No. If we remove the welfare vote we destroy any hope America has of becoming the place it used to be where the poor can come an succeed. That will be the final consolidation of power and we'll be no better off than peasants living for our lords. The world may be better off but we'd be less free.

No. Obama is not a fuck up. He does not reward people for being stupid.

Ultimately the people who are underwater may or may not be stupid. We can aregue that for ever because there is no way of knowing. Besides underwater doesn't mean they are over spending or aren't paying their bills. It means the house is worth less now than when they purhcased it. That is true of almost every American who bought a house in the last ten or so years. There are some who got in before the prices went up and some who got in after they plummeted but that's not yet true of the majority of people.

Even if it was at some point you have to simply declare game over and figure out what the best way is to clean up the board and start again. You're never gonna get 400k out of a guy who lost his job. Doesn't matter if he was fired to send his job over seas, replaced with a machine or simply quit because he was lazy and wanted everything for free. At some point everybody else has to figure what we're doing, how and why and stop crying about what people coulda, shoulda, woulda done because that time is past.

Even if this amendment never passes, proposing it is more than a feel-good measure. It is also a goalpost-moving, Overton-window-shifting measure. Simply pointing out that voting is not a constitutional right can spark public debate over whether it should be, and the mere occurrence of such debate is a form of victory here, as it takes the center-of-controversy away from the ID-demanders.

It might be interesting. Ultimately I doubt it would do much good.

 

[jeninflorida]

you mean the welfare class can succeed by sucking down more entitlements?

the vast majority of people on welfare love being on welfare

baby needs more money, time to have another kid

No. If we remove the welfare vote we destroy any hope America has of becoming the place it used to be where the poor can come an succeed. That will be the final consolidation of power and we'll be no better off than peasants living for our lords. The world may be better off but we'd be less free.

No. Obama is not a fuck up. He does not reward people for being stupid.

Ultimately the people who are underwater may or may not be stupid. We can aregue that for ever because there is no way of knowing. Besides underwater doesn't mean they are over spending or aren't paying their bills. It means the house is worth less now than when they purhcased it. That is true of almost every American who bought a house in the last ten or so years. There are some who got in before the prices went up and some who got in after they plummeted but that's not yet true of the majority of people.

Even if it was at some point you have to simply declare game over and figure out what the best way is to clean up the board and start again. You're never gonna get 400k out of a guy who lost his job. Doesn't matter if he was fired to send his job over seas, replaced with a machine or simply quit because he was lazy and wanted everything for free. At some point everybody else has to figure what we're doing, how and why and stop crying about what people coulda, shoulda, woulda done because that time is past.



It might be interesting. Ultimately I doubt it would do much good.

 

[Sean Renaud]

you mean the welfare class can succeed by sucking down more entitlements?

the vast majority of people on welfare love being on welfare

baby needs more money, time to have another kid

Better the welfare class than the 1%. Like I said if you really believe these things lets just pick a King and be done with it. It'll solve a lot of our other stupid problems.

No, most people don't enjoy being on welfare. You need to slap who ever told you that vicious lie. And who ever told you they want to have kids to stay on welfare you should probably just shoot them, the world will be better off without em.

 

[about_average]

If you want to stay anonymous that's your business, except you could be arrested for not having an ID in most states or at the least held until they verify your identity.

For the third time, which states?

 

[jeninflorida]

For the third time, which states?

only in America do we have a POTUS that cowtails to islamic fuckers that would stop on the obama face with their shoes yet obama keeps bending down to kiss their ass

 

[jeninflorida]

Better the welfare class than the 1%. Like I said if you really believe these things lets just pick a King and be done with it. It'll solve a lot of our other stupid problems.

No, most people don't enjoy being on welfare. You need to slap who ever told you that vicious lie. And who ever told you they want to have kids to stay on welfare you should probably just shoot them, the world will be better off without em.

yeah, and look at Detroit and other cities like that. they want to be on it and chose to stay on it

we must end welfare
we must stop rewarding stupid fuckers

 

[about_average]

For the third time, which states?

only in America do we have a POTUS that cowtails to islamic fuckers that would stop on the obama face with their shoes yet obama keeps bending down to kiss their ass

I think you've had enough booze today. Better cap the bottle.

 

[Sean Renaud]

only in America do we have a POTUS that cowtails to islamic fuckers that would stop on the obama face with their shoes yet obama keeps bending down to kiss their ass

Bolded the truth!

yeah, and look at Detroit and other cities like that. they want to be on it and chose to stay on it

we must end welfare
we must stop rewarding stupid fuckers

LOL. No, Detroit choose your path and it failed them as it must.

The rest of your plan would just result in your death.

 

[KingOrfeo]

It might be interesting. Ultimately I doubt it would do much good.

What would?

 

[BotanyBoy]

I see what you're saying but you aren't going far enough. Don't forget the GOP needs to invent reasons to deny people the vote.

The fact is that the republicans are simply trying to prevent people (who won't vote for them) to simply not vote. Thereby shrinking the electorate to those who will vote for the GOP shitty stance on everything.

I want to know exactly how requiring an ID prevents democrats from voting.

I'm going to assume you can't because you're full of shit.

 

[Sean Renaud]

What would?

I kinda agree with Hogan that the threat is probably overblown. Regardless a right to vote wouldn't prevent states that don't want certain groups from voting from making it complicated as they attempted this last election. Currently it's really just something that someone should be compiling a list of every single time it happens and it's effects so when the time comes all the necessary info is available, reviewed etc etc.

 

[KingOrfeo]

In light of this, I say we need this amendment -- or some better-worded and broader-reaching one -- now more than ever!

By Scott Keyes on July 23, 2013 at 12:00 pm

Voting in North Carolina may soon change, much in the same way a wrecking ball changes a building.

The highly-conservative North Carolina legislature just released a new voter suppression bill that would enact not just voter ID, but a host of other new initiatives designed to make it more difficult to vote. A significant roadblock to the legislation was removed last month when the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act, making it easier for states with a history of racial discrimination like North Carolina to enact new voter suppression laws.

The Senate will consider substituted language for HB 589 on Tuesday afternoon. Among the dozens of changes, these are the most onerous for North Carolina voters:

•Implementing a strict voter ID requirement that bars citizens who don’t have a proper photo ID from casting a ballot.
•Eliminating same-day voter registration, which allowed residents to register at the polls.
•Cutting early voting by a full week.
•Increasing the influence of money in elections by raising the maximum campaign contribution to $5,000 and increasing the limit every two years.
•Making it easier for voter suppression groups like True The Vote to challenge any voter who they think may be ineligible by requiring that challengers simply be registered in the same county, rather than precinct, of those they challenge.
•Vastly increasing the number of “poll observers” and increasing what they’re permitted to do. In 2012, ThinkProgress caught the Romney campaign training such poll observers using highly misleading information.
•Only permitting citizens to vote in their specific precinct, rather than casting a ballot in any nearby ward or election district. This can lead to widespread confusion, particularly in urban areas where many precincts can often be housed in the same building.
•Barring young adults from pre-registering as 16- and 17-year-olds, which is permitted by current law, and repealing a state directive that high schools conduct voter registration drives in order to boost turnout among young voters.
•Prohibiting some types of paid voter registration drives, which tend to register poor and minority citizens.
•Dismantling three state public financing programs, including the landmark program that funded judicial elections.
•Weakening disclosure requirements for outside spending groups.
•Preventing counties from extending polling hours in the event of long lines or other extraordinary circumstances and making it more difficult for them to accommodate elderly or disabled voters with satellite polling sites at nursing homes, for instance.
Each of these changes, on their own, would be a significant step away from increasing voting rights. Taken together, this is the voter suppression magnum opus.

Republicans currently hold strong majorities in both legislative houses and control the governorship, leaving Democrats with little recourse to block HB 589. In the last few weeks, Republicans have passed conservative legislation on a range of issues, from a major anti-choice bill to tax cuts for the rich paid for by the poor.

If passed, HB 589 will almost certainly have a disastrous impact on voting in North Carolina. As Ari Berman notes, 56 percent of North Carolinians voted early in 2012, including a disproportionate number of minorities. In addition, more than 155,000 voters registered to vote at the polls last year. And with 10 percent of North Carolinians — 613,000 people, a third of whom are black and half of whom are registered Democrats — lacking photo ID, it doesn’t take Encyclopedia Brown to figure out which party will be helped by HB 589.

In December, the Center for American Progress released a report detailing 11 specific pieces of legislation state lawmakers could enact to strengthen voting rights. This North Carolina bill is what you would get if you looked at that report, then did the exact opposite.