Home subscribe manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Thu Fri Sat Sun Mon Tue Wed

Opinion
Jan. 15, 2008
Copyright © Las Vegas Review-Journal

EDITORIAL: Democrats want to see your photo ID

At Saturday's presidential preference caucus

We're used to Democrats saying one thing and doing another, but the hypocrisy that will unfold at some local presidential caucus sites Saturday will surprise even hardened cynics.

For decades, Democrats have stood against strengthening voter identification standards at polling sites. Modest identification reforms have been enacted in about half the states, with a handful of them requiring photo identification to prevent election fraud and uphold the integrity of balloting.

Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

Most Popular Stories
  • LETTERS: Tight-fisted casinos need to loosen up
  • LETTERS: Professor needs to get with the program
  • LETTERS: Trickle-down economics is dead
  • EDITORIAL: Tip jar
  • FROM OUR READERS: We can't do worse than country's current leadership
  • VIN SUPRYNOWICZ: Shall we save the economy ... or the government?
  • EDITORIAL: A tiny bit of good news?
  • EDITORIAL: Cut spending during lean times
  • LETTERS: Don't expect district to cut waste
  • EDITORIAL: Sending the right message



    • Although Americans need photo ID to write checks, use credit cards, board airplanes and even collect welfare benefits, Democrats have argued that lower-income and minority citizens are less likely to possess acceptable identification, and therefore more likely to be denied their right to vote.

    The party and loyal special interests have spent millions of dollars on court challenges against photo ID laws, comparing them to poll taxes -- even when governments issue photo identification free of charge. The U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments on the issue last week and could decide the constitutionality of photo identification laws once and for all.

    But for Saturday's much-anticipated caucus, the state party is poised to demand that Strip workers -- many of them minority, low-income citizens -- furnish ID to participate in the "at-large" sites set up near major hotels to accommodate them.

    Neighborhood caucus sites will have the registration rolls for their precincts. But because registered Democrats from all corners of the county will be working on the Strip on Saturday, the state party must check at-large participants against a massive voter database. That requires identification -- signatures alone won't do. Some Strip workers will have no alternative but to provide photo identification.

    The very inconvenience that supposedly disenfranchises voters is necessary to protect the validity of a party caucus, where people openly debate the merits and shortcomings of candidates for president?

    It reminds us of last year's Democratic efforts to impose the card-check system on union elections that would otherwise be decided by secret ballot. Party leaders insisted that having labor groups solicit and collect votes in person would not result in harassment and intimidation. Meanwhile, in congressional leadership elections, Democrats were so fearful of suffering political retribution for publicly revealing their allegiances that they voted in secret.

    During tonight's Democratic debate at Cashman Center, you might hear candidates call for energy independence ... then rule out opening coastal areas and the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil and gas exploration. You might hear candidates demand more affordable health care ... then propose costly new regulations and government mandates. You might hear candidates command better job protections for workers and higher wages for the middle class ... then advocate huge tax increases on the wealthy investors who provide capital and create jobs.

    In its defense, the Democratic Party is a private organization that's free to decide who can join and under what circumstances they can participate. But you can bet that when state party leaders celebrate the conclusion of this week's caucus events, they'll be having their cake and eating it, too.



    Leave Your Comment 26 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    THOMAS E. SMITH wrote on September 30, 2008 11:12 AM: DEMOCRATS ARE SOCIALISTS... THEY ARE TRYING TO TURN THIS COUNTRY INTO ANOTHER SOVIET UNION...


    reader wrote on May 07, 2008 02:05 PM: According to the new photo ID requirements, neither a photo student ID nor an out of state current driver's license will be an acceptable form of proof of ID for hundreds of thousands of college students who are attending college out of state, but who are registered to vote where they attend college. I think the best answer is for all college students to take the time during the summer to make sure they have a current US passport for ID purposes. Yes, a passport is expensive, but consider the alternative.


    grumpy wrote on January 16, 2008 02:57 AM: Ken,
    Working and paying taxes like a lot of folks. Getting involved in school board meetings, unlike a lot of folks. Going on record with my representatives in Congress demanding the debate on legislative issues important to me. Most of all, I was being ignored because I was only one voice when thousands more were needed. Thus my contempt at society at large. I am unhappy with the course of society--seems a lot of others are too, yet I never heard those voices when I tried to make a difference. See what I mean now?


    Tom, Burbank wrote on January 15, 2008 08:00 PM: Ken - Please accept my apology for the for the previous comment. I've reconsidered the impetuous post. It was unnecessary and I regret I can't retract it at this time.


    Tom


    Tom, Burbank wrote on January 15, 2008 07:47 PM: Ken, you wrote: "...than to dicipline one of them, only to here "but..."

    and: "What were you doing while the rest of us just sat around getting fat, dumb and happy?"

    Well, 1 out of 3 ain't bad.


    Ken wrote on January 15, 2008 06:01 PM: For the record Grumpy, What were you doing while the rest of us just sat around getting fat, dumb and happy?


    Ken wrote on January 15, 2008 05:55 PM: Tim,

    Where do you want me to go with this. I am not a big Bush fan. However I have two children. Nothing makes me more upset than to dicipline one of them, only to here "but he did that" as an excuse for their bad behavior.

    So you and Russ just keep relying on the fact that the mistakes committed by president will excuse any bad deeds done by your party.


    grumpy wrote on January 15, 2008 04:07 PM: BAHAAHAHHH!! BAHAHAHAAHAAAAHHHH!!! Listen to the sheeple bleat!!! For years you sat and allowed freedom and liberty to be confiscated by our putative leaders, both republican and democrat. (mostly democrat: Remember, this is the party who threw American citizens into concentration camps based solely on their ethnicity) Now, you bleat! Where have you been for the past half century while this has been transpiring? Fat, dumb, and happy, too preoccupied with American Idol to give a rat's backside. Now, faced with the obvious, you don't what to do except carp and snipe at opposing sides failing to realize the opposing sides are merely a reflection of the ignorant apathetic "citizen".

    You caused the wreakage with your apathy: deal with it!


    Mark wrote on January 15, 2008 04:00 PM: The world would become a better place when we'll finally get rid of Dick Bush and their war against Iran, Iraq and all the other innocent people around the world. He’s used his so-called war on terror to spy on Americans, listen to our phone conversations, torture the innocent and the list goes on and on.


    Louis wrote on January 15, 2008 03:08 PM: JeezusF*ck, already, people. It's not about the 2 party system anymore. That system is BROKEN. If you can't see that, you haven't been alive or following politics long enough. Can't you see that it's in the best interests of the 2 parties to keep us all bickering and slinging vitriol at each other? NOBODY CARES ABOUT YOU! That's the plain truth. The bottom line is election or reelection. THAT'S ALL!

    So go play your caucus games, but when the 3rd party candidates declare their campaigns, jump on board the one that makes the most sense to you. It will DEFINITELY tak A LOT of research, because the media outlets are scared stiff of anything but the status quo,meaning that 3rd party candidates will get fluff coverage at best if they're mentioned at all.

    PLEASE don't buy what th 2 parties are selling. Snake oil is what it is.


    Read All Comments