The electoral register. Cross reference it with the national security database as a means of validation. Everyone who is a citizen will appear on both.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

That's not the point. The constitution establishes that voting must be free of charge; 1 cent would be too much.

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

What if you're blind? What if you're 85 and haven't driven in 10 years? What if you're a veteran who lost the ability to drive along with his lower body function when he stepped on an IED in Baghdad?

Would it be weird not to have a driver's license then?

Regardless, the Constitution says it's free, so you cannot require someone to have a document that costs money in order to vote. It was an amendment to the Constitution actually, which means they thought about it afterwards and 2/3rds of the States agreed that it was a good idea.

Still, you found 29 bucks down the back of your couch so you're alright.

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.

How high are the incidents of voter fraud out of interest.
It's not my job to come up with solutions to technicalities. The question is a bit silly really. What is your solution now it seems Brexit will leave many service sector jobs unfilled ? How would you solve the Ireland / Northern Ireland border Brexit conundrum? Go on answer. You expect me to deal with voter fraud.
Also, you seem to blithely. dismiss that there are poor people about without a pot to pish in.
Shame on you.

The concern for me, and I think its a reasonable one, is that there isn't really any evidence that voter fraud is a significant problem in the US, certainly not to the degree where such excessive measures are required.

The concern should be how its being used to justify a number of 'solutions' who's impact is greater to the capacity of individual citizens to vote, than the problem of voter fraud itself.

The first question of resolving a problem, is to assess whether the impact of the solution would exceed the problem (i.e. are you going to end up with less people being able to vote than you prevent fraudulently voting).

We see a similar problem here, where pursuit of benefit fraud costs exceed the cost of benefit fraud - justified by a 'moral stance' (and in order to get results, its actually people who are just getting a bit extra, rather than defrauding the benefits system for a living - that pay the price). As a result the people paying the price are not the problem.

Solutions always should be proportional to the problem, when politicians suggest solutions that seem draconian or excess and counter-productive, they're always driving an agenda.

"One Nation Under God, has turned into One Nation Under the Influence of One Drug"
[Link]

It's one of the weird things about Republicans over here - which includes the entirety of my in-laws. They're all wonderful people who will go out of their way to help those less fortunate than themselves; I have seen this on many occasions. Friends, neighbors, strangers, anyone.

It may be a Texan thing (I hope not only Texan), but it was on full display to the world during Hurricane Harvey when the "Texas Navy" of fishermen and outdoorsmen loaded up their boats and drove their trucks through the storm to rescue people trapped in their houses by flood waters. We had people from all over the state and also from Louisiana and Oklahoma (so maybe it's a southern thing).

I was helping a family demo the inside of their house, and while we were at it people were walking the neighborhood giving out sandwiches and water. Most of us helpers had brought water (and beer) anyway, so we had tons left. Afterwards, I walked the neighborhood and handed out the water (and beer) I had left.

But Republicanism...it's just ugly. I've got mine now you go get your own even though I've pulled up the ladder so you've got no chance. Why should my tax dollars go to better your life...or just to keep you alive?

House Speaker Paul Ryan lost his father at a young age, which is sad. But his family was due survivor benefits from Social Security which allowed his single mother to raise her kids on one income and for Ryan to go through college and come out the other side debt free. Now he wants to destroy all the things that gave him his opportunity because Ayn Rand says that "takers" aren't worthy, even though he was about as pure a "taker" as Rand could have ever imagined. (Rand, who fell bankrupt in later life and was supported by social security benefits including a state-provided care-giver once she was too infirm to look after herself).

Everyone deserves a chance. Even ungrateful s***s like Paul Ryan and Ayn Rand.

Edited by Ray in Houston (27 Sep 2017 4.03pm)

We don't do possession; we do defense and attack. Everything else is just wa**ing with a football.