Great idea, you are verifying photo ID and allowing more people to register via the internet so they don't have to travel.

Republicans will hate this.....its not voter suppression.

RRV: Fraudulent voter registration is not a problem. Registering voters is non-impacting.

Fraudulent VOTING is a problem. Based on the number of reported incidents and convictions, its a very very small problem. Also it turns out that voters registered as "Mickey Mouse's Butt LOL" and the like can't really vote with that name.

You obviously didnt read the article. They verify the person through their Washington state ID or drivers license number. We here in Washington are not paranoid about this because we trust the computer and our voter registration system to be able to count votes properly as there could only be one person to each ID number. Once it is used it could not be used again in that election....simple! I do understand how republicans would find this scary as they tend to not even trust their own mothers and because of their own actions tend to see ghosts around every corner ..which are usually their fellow repubs spying on them. Alot, but not all, of republicans dont like anything they cant control and they are usually paranoid because they are.. well.. control freaks and if they truly loved this country they wouldnt try to opress everyone but themselves.

elaine - "We here in Washington are not paranoid about this because we trust the computer and our voter registration system to be able to count votes properly as there could only be one person to each ID number"

Would this be the same computer that is hacked by 10year olds on a weekly basis? The same computer that is protected by security measures that are subverted daily? The same computer that has led to millions of people around the world being victims of stolen identity or fraud? The same computer that has created a new way to bully people? The same computer that has failed to protect credit card numbers?

But keep confident in the ability of "the computer" to protect you. It will never fail.

At least there can be only person assigned to each voter id number. Of course multiple people are already assigned to many social security numbers which is how so many illegal immigrants manage to get drivers licenses and sign leasing agreements. It is not paranoia not to trust a technology that has already been shown to be easily and often manipulated. It is common sense!

Where were you folks who are complaining now? Where were you when online voter registration went into place all over this country?

Online voter registration IS THE STANDARD NOW. Facebook is merely an extention of existing programs that allow you to register online.

And for those claiming registration fraud is more possible, you do realize that this is no less secure than in person registration, right? when you do it in-person, there's no more validation that the person really is who they say they are than that done via online or facebook.

Unless you can absolutely prove AND VALIDATE that the person who registers to vote is really the person they say they are - none of this flapping of gums and none of these voter ID laws are worth anything.

And for those who claim voting REQUIRES a level of maturity or knowledge that facebook (or any other online registraiton method) fosters - I have only one comment: There's no legal requirement that you be a mature and informed voter. Why do you think the politicians and the PACs pander so pathetically? So that they can get the immature and un-informed voter to go thier way. While it's a great idea that you be mature and informed - that ain't a reality for most voters.

Washington
State already has a fouled up system for voting. Every ballot is mailed and
when you renew your driver’s license, you can register to vote. Click the box
to verify that you are not illegal, and that's it. We are also one of four
states that allow illegals to get a license. This is the reason we vote for
Democrats only, unfortunately. I cannot wait to move out of this awful state.

Don't the Dems love this! Now every illegal and dead person can vote for more handouts.

And for you naive libs who think that this will not lead to more fraud, please awaken. Do you honestly think that this system of 'id verification' on Facebook cannot be circumvented? Roses really smell good. Wake up and start smelling them.

Yep, Washington State is pulling a Mr. Obama "I don't need Congressional legislation" to get my agenda through.

Heck, the Washington State Department of Licensing has GIVEN away about 400,000 driver licenses to Illegal Aliens (Immigrants), some of which DO NOT RESIDE IN THE STATE. Further, guess what you need to vote in the State.....you guessed it.....a Washington State drivers license will be accepted. And, on the voter registration form you don't need to indicate your place of birth.

There are MORE driver licenses issued in the State than there are drivers.

Letting folks vote of FACEBOOK is a slap in the face to ALL AMERICANS.

Shucks, they can probably take the driver license down to the Social Welfare office and get ALL social benefits FREE. And Washington State is now running a deficit of $ 5,100,000,000:

• http://www.columbian.com/news/2011/mar/17/washington-state-deficit-grows-by-700-million/

Finally, our "elite" Congressional Representative Senator Murray just stated that if the Republicans do not agree to the Obama "Tax on the Rich", then she could care less about the United States going over a "FISCAL CLIFF":

• http://www.theblaze.com/stories/fiscal-cliff-senate-dem-threatens-tax-increases-on-middle-class-if-gop-doesnt-agree-to-make-rich-pay-their-fair-share/

Bottom line: Washington State is becoming California's off spring based upon State and Federal elected officials agenda.

Great idea? I don't know. I don't trust Facebook and don't use it. From what I hear, the security is pretty well non existant. Mark got his billions, now why should he care.

Besides, Dgibb, Facebook will be obsolete in a couple of years. Then the tech geniuses in so-cool Washington will have to figure out yet another way for us to waste time on line.

As a Washington state native (47 years), a registered voter and a facebook user I think this is a horrible idea. I would never put any of my personal information on facebook other than the basics. Facebook is not safe. I never click on any links on facebook, hit the like button for businesses etc...Why on earth would one register to vote facebook.

FormerMarineSgt - "There's no legal requirement that you be a mature and informed voter." I am not talking about what is or is not legal. I am talking about how things should work and in American an uniformed, uneducated voter is one of the most dangerous people in the world. And while it may not be a reality for most voters it is the height of idiocy to believe that reality is set and can't be changed. Just ask all those black voters who had lacked the education and even maturity (recently freed slaves were often described, even amongst other blacks as being like uncouth children) and yet within a short amount of time they were voting with great pride and making informed choices, choices that may have been wrong but at least they took time to learn what they were doing.

They don't call this the "left" coast for nothing. Here in Washington they do not require citizenship or proof of ANYTHING to get a license. I will be working hard to get rid of Patty Murray and her cronies -- she is as shameful, deceitful, and anti American as it gets!

Thank you Dotties girl. I will be voting her out also!

Since they give driver's licenses to illegal aliens, it mean they are giving illegals means to vote if all the identification you need is a driver's license, it's a bad idea.

Have we had enough of the leftys yet?

Is there any doubt left they would allow the devil to vote as along as he votes dem.

Look down into your soul, time to put a stop to this.

There should only be 1 day for voting. If you can't go to the polls so ID they you don't get to vote.

This is a politician's wet dream.

Dottie'sGirl wrote:

Here in Washington they do not require citizenship or proof of ANYTHING to get a license.

So what?

I lived in Washington for 22 years. The western part of the state is one of the most prosperous parts of the country. Microsoft, Amazon, Boeing, and Starbucks are there. Washington must be doing something right.

HELLOOOOOOOO IS ANYONE READING

They are allowing you to register via a portal through Facebook. Once you are a registered voter you still have to show up to vote with Identification. That is what the states with GOP leadership are using to supress the vote. I have been registered for decades and I am sent a card every year telling me where to vote. But this is the first year that they will have the right to ask me for I.D. in my state.

I don't have a problems with it since I operate a motor vehicle and have a Drivers Liscense. I do not understand them not letting college students use their student ID to vote. The GOP is attempting to supress the vote but that sword will cut both ways in the end.

@PKGoode: I think we are doing something right here in the NW. I'm also sick and tired of the racist culture warriors of the south and the corrupt culture of greed in the east.

"That the West should un-falteringly follow the East in fashions and ideals would be as false and fatal as that America should obey the standards of Europe. Let the West, daring and unprejudiced, discover its own ideals and follow them. The American standard in literature and philosophy has long been fixed by the remote East. Something wild and free, something robust and full will come out of the West and be recognized in the final American type. Under the shadow of those great mountains a distinct personality shall arise, it shall adopt other fashions, create new ideals, and generations shall justify them (“With Due Formality” Adell Parker, Preisdent UW Alumni Association 1894).

We have an alternative if American politics continue to fail to serve the people they claim to represent.

In the U.S.A. it is our constitutional right to vote -- someone tell GOP/Koch.

In Australia everyone HAS to vote.

In Canada, it is very, very highly encouraged by all.

The vote is not suppressed in the U.K. in any way. And certainly the same for the rest of Europe.

DO YOU NEED TO ASK WHY GOP GOVERNORS LIKE RICK SCOTT, WALKER, SNYDER ARE FIGHTING TOOTH & NAIL TO KNOCK COUNTLESS ELEGIBLE VOTERS OFF THE ROLLS?

What will American citizens do about it?

I will be working hard to get rid of Patty Murray and her cronies

It's never a bad thing when a member of the loony-tunes right wastes his or her time on something futile.

Actually more than half of Facebook users are over 26. 28 million users are over 45. Indeed the number of people age 55-64 is about the same as the number of people age 13-17. And it's just a means of communication. It has no content. Registering to vote is about communication.

Join the 21st century....

Youth get to vote once they turn 18. Now you want, in addition to photo ID and other voter suppression tactics, "a maturity test".

More people need to vote in America, this helps that process.

I guess reading requires more maturity than you possess, you connect to the registration process via facebook you don't register on facebook, it's a link like any other on the internet.

Eric- You have to pass a test to drive, to graduate from high school, to enter college, to join the military. The Boy Scouts have tests to pass, accountants pass tests, lawyers pass tests. New immigrants have to pass a tests. So yes I believe we need voter ID and a knowledge test (not a maturity test as you so immaturely define it). If a person doesn't understand the powers of a President or Congress, if they do not know what the Supreme Court does, if they cant tell you who controls the military or who creates taxes or who negotiates treaties then they have no business voting because that vote represents a lack of critical knowledge that not only effects them but also every American and future generations. A child making a poorly informed vote today will have consequences to my children and grandchildren. Your poorly informed vote affects those in your community and across the nation.

Facebook is a tool that makes communication easier and as such it is a fine tool. But voting is too important and has too many and to wide ranging consequences to be treated so casually and entered into with no more commitment than you would respond to a profound idea with a smiley face emoticon.

Orca - "Actually more than half of Facebook users are over 26. 28 million users are over 45." Perhaps but this does not target them. It targets the youngest adult facebook users. Those who tend not to bother voting because it takes up too much time. Well, if you cant get up and go down the street to vote then you don't deserve the right to vote to begin with. Voting is not a video game. It is the highest responsibility of democracy and desrves to be treated with much more respect than making it as easy as possible to just cast a vote. The important thing is not casting a vote, despite what Rock the vote migth say. The important thing is making an informed, educated and intelligent vote for your interests today, for the best interests of your country today and for the future.

I wish people would read the whole article before posting...1 voter 1 washington state ID or driver license number...how can that be hard to understand???

Candlewycke- what you are suggesting is banned by the constitution, and has been ruled on DOZENS of times by the supreme court. voting is a RIGHT, not a privilege, and any citizen over the age of 18 that has not had their rights removed under due process has the ABSOLUTE RIGHT to vote. what you think of their choices and how they make them is irrelevant and trivial.

in washington state, where i have lived all my 45 years, i can only find one reference to voter fraud conviction- a man mailed in his wife's ballot the day after she died, and he got 12 hours of community service.

As you go through the voter age brackets, you find more people that are already registered and voting. It makes sense that the majority of people that register would be younger voters, since before the age of 18, they could not register. The youngest would be the best audience to target due to the nature of them becoming adults and not previously having registered, ever.

Everyone knows that a Poll Tax is unconstitutional. A Poll Tax does not have to include making a payment. It is ANY sort of pre-condition that precludes a person's legal and Constitutional right to vote. It includes literacy tests, extra-legal intimidation, and land ownership requirements.

The American way is to encourage more people to register and participate in the voting process. Suppression of a legal right is unconstitutional and un-American, even if you think it gives your guy a better chance of winning. That's not America.

Clotho - Think about this. If you are a new immigrant you must pass a test in order to become a citizen and vote. That test is designed to make sure that you understand what you are doing when you take part in our elections. It is in effect a test for voting. This has been held to be constitutional. It is not a poll tax, does not disenfranchise anyone, suppresses nothing , involves no intimidation and denies no one a right because the right to vote is more complicated that you make it out. First of all it is a right that is dependent on certain things and it is a right that can be revoked. Criminals and ex-patriots can have their right to vote revoked. Those deemed mentally incompetent can be denied the right to vote.Further the right to vote is connected to an arbitrary age, currently 18. An 18 year old can vote but cant buy alcohol? Because the idea of an age of consent is strictly arbitrary and can and has in fact been changed over the years as society has evolved.

You are absolutely correct that the American way is to encourage more people to vote but the American way is one that demand responsibility and accountability lest American fall the way all other world powers have fallen. So what would you rather have, 100 percent of the population vote but have no idea what they are voting for, why they are voting or the powers of the position they are voting for that leads to decline in Americas ability to provide the protections upon which it is founded or would it be better to enforce a little more strictness in the voting process to ensure that all votes are counted and can be trusted to be well formed, individual votes? Before you answer consider that almost every dictator has come to power by being elected by the will of a people that have been deluded.

There are over 500 million Facebook accounts..the population of the USA is only 310 million.

Most FB accounts are in foreign countries..the USA has around 56 million FB accounts...some users have over ten accounts on FB..most FB users in the USA are under the age of 18.

As for registering to vote on FB....be an idiot to give more of your real ID to them!

Those who register to vote online with Facebook..will be giving their drivers license number or state ID to facebook..very very bad idea!

"The operative will be possible thanks to a software application interface jointly developed by Facebook and Microsoft Corp., at no cost to the state, with which users who want to register online to vote will be able to do so on the official Facebook page of Washington’s secretary of state by providing a name and birth date (which Facebook already collects from its users' profiles) and a state identification or driver's license number.

Though Facebook assured that the additional data will not be shared with the social media network, it remains to be seen if voters of Washington state – or any other state that ends up implementing registration through the Facebook platform – will be comfortable sharing their driver licenses numbers as well as their date of birth (two pieces of data which are enough to open a credit line) through their Facebook profiles, given the constant issues of privacy that often arise – as exemplified by the U.S. Senate’s hearing on Facebook’s facial recognition technology."

I love the way people always 'claim' that no fraudulent voting goes on. I live in MO, and St. Louis has been 'voting' dead people for generations.

So, I have my dad's, my mom's, and my step mom's SS # and their DL numbers, so I guess I should be able to register them to vote?

I could get a DL for both the women, and my son could get one for my dad.

Fortunately, history shows that for the most part, people who can't be bothered to register to vote in person will also not be likely to vote.

While voting IS a right, it is also a responsibility, and part of that should be the willing to 'go out of your way to register to vote.

And of course it goes without saying that a PRIMARY part of the right to vote SHOULD be for every voter to do the research (and not just by watching whichever mainstream media that agrees with their tendency) on EACH candidate and issue. Sadly, most voters do not do that.

Voting demands a level of maturity and responsibility that Facebook simply does not foster.

I like this. With the maturity test, anyone who listens to Rush Limbaugh and watches Fox wouldn't be able to vote.

Guess again! Tens of thousands of dead people and convicted felons voted in the last election in Washington state and once they voted it was ruled it was too hard to throw them out so they let it stand.

Tens of thousands of dead people and convicted felons voted in the last election in Washington state.

That is an absolute LIE! I live in Washington and followed the debunking of those false claims closely.

Procrustes. Your screen name, if you actually know what it means is somewhat telling of your ideas in this arena. Procrustes was after all a mad rogue who cut peoples legs off to make them fit his ever changing iron bed. The very name Procrustes is synonymous with bad ideas being forced to fit arbitrary standards, like the idea that getting more young people to vote through facebook will somehow equate to better votes and thus better results from the voting populace. That is a very Procrustean idea!

More people voting is better.

Voter suppression is the wrong way to go.

Also consider, Washington is almost all a mail out vote, the only two counties that you can still have a polling place is in King and Pierce Ctys (Seattle and Tacoma). The rest is mail in only.

Nitro is right and we like it that way.

If republicans trusted their own people so much then why do they feel the need to silence others??

@ nitrot150

Washington State is 100% vote by mail. Although there are secure boxes at certain places in the major metropolitan areas you can drop off your ballot (so you arent required to use a stamp) there are no "Polling places" per se, with voting booths and poll workers with registry books. All ballots are mailed to the address of the registered voter & you fill them out & mail them back. (The August primary ballot went out yesterday)

you are right!!! THey have changed it. Although, I think in the last Prez election, there were still polling places in those two counties. (I remember looking it up).

Yes of course ERIC, any old vote fro any old lefty illegal alien or do or corpse is good as long as they voted dem.

I see this coming after we dump Obama, this time, lots of leftys, unions and immigrants going to jail, we are tired of messing with you scumbags.

Tens of thousands of dead people and convicted felons voted in the last election in Washington state and once they voted it was ruled it was too hard to throw them out so they let it stand.

When did this happen? Prove it.

I've looked all over the net and cannot find any verification of the claimed tens of thousands of dead people voting in Wa. state or any other state for that matter. I can find stories about voter registration rolls have the names of many dead people and the explanation is that the offices responsible for maintaining these rolls are badly understaffed due to budget cuts and are having a difficult time keeping current.

Good grief Ryan give me a break! You sound like my mother. What do you care what people buy if it doesnt effect you?

Don't worry elaine, he's just jealous that he has to leave his computer to purchase these items...

IT should be obvious but when I said "Liberals agree that 8 year old's are immature children." It should have been 18 year old's, not 8 year old's.

Candle: This is about registration, not voting. You know the difference?

And I would be careful of advocating a civics test for voting; your weak grasp of the Constitution might get you stopped at the voting booth.

Just sayin' :)

"Why do you think a 26 year old in college is now considered to be a dependent child for insurance purposes rather than an adult capable of making their own decisions in regards to health insurance?"

Actually they are not. Ideas like this will make you fail that voting test. At 18 a person can legally make their own decisions, sign a contract for their own health insurance and vote. The recent health care law does nothing to change the treatment of 18-26 yr olds. What it does do is give the parents the option, if they so choose, to keep their children on through college. But it is not an obligation or requirement. It gives parents choices and young people options to work with their family to get a start in life. If that offends you, fine. You have every right, according to law, to cut your kids off at 18 and send them off on their own to make their way in the world. Again, this option is allowed by law as well.

Now, I know 18-26 yr olds who have a firm grasp of the legal options afforded them at this time. They have discussed pros and cons with their familes and made different choices depending on the circumstances in each family.

And they are all registered to vote in the fall and I trust their vote will be more reasoned and mature than those, like yourself, who have a weak grasp of Constitutional history and current events.

Have a nice day!

There are plenty of 26+ voters who also lack the critical thinking skills to vote. Why do you think we keep electing the same two parties over and over again.

At what point exactly were 18 year olds highly developed critical thinkers? Do you honestly believe that 40 years ago 18 year olds were smarter or more mature? When did the military not recruit 18 year olds? I certainly agree that 18 is not a highly developed age but it never has been. As far as a test to vote it's been done there was a little thing called the civil rights movement you might have heard of that eliminated that because that's just a tool to keep "undesirables" from voting.

ckneeley - "As far as a test to vote it's been done there was a little thing called the civil rights movement you might have heard of that eliminated that because that's just a tool to keep "undesirables" from voting."

You are actually correct but here is a key thing that you miss.; First of all the voter "tests" were not official tests, they never were. They were enforced unofficially and specifically targeted blacks to keep them from voting. Had they given the correct answers they still would not have been allowed to vote because it was designed to prevent them from voting. And it was designed by Democrats by the way. Now in the 1960s two things happened., The Civil Rights Act's, which was mostly good was passed. This enfranchised black voters. But at the same time Liberal Democrats also passed new legislation that gave direct control over schools to the federal government. Through this the federal government began to target minority schools in effect keeping them poorly funded and ensuring that levels of education were kept inferior to that of white school. The effect was to offset the benefits of the Civil Rights act by making black communities apathetic to the voting process.

Think about it. Teachers unions, school funding, standardized tests, graduate levels, etc are all controlled through the department of Education which is historically the most liberal and democrat leaning department in the federal government. Since they were created minority schools have shown virtually no improvement and levels of black voters have remained in small percentages with young black voters representing such a small minority even with their own community as to make thier votes meaningless. This is the same group that is most likely to cast uninformed, uneducated votes.

What I propose as voting tests may seem like voter suppression but you must think of many different areas at once. This topic was not about education and so I have not addressed it but in addition to voter tests to show basic understanding of how our government works the Department of Education should be either dismantled or greatly modified to push higher levels of teaching in minority schools so that minority children are not simply told they are equal on paper but are in fact allowed to be equal in the real world. Teachers should be rewarded through bonuses for volunteering to work in inner city schools to allow the best teachers to meet with the most at risk students. And teachers who fail to perform, should be fired. Standardized testing should be eliminated because no two students are the same. This would of course have to be a gradual process, maybe over ten years but the end result would be that minority schools while perhaps lacking the best technology are equal in terms of teacher ability and student participation.

Now, here is where the eagerness of youth fails against wisdom. On this forum already my intelligence has been called into question by young people whom I disagree with without anyone actually bothering to consider what I said or to ask me for clarification. It is easier for young people to simply claim voter suppression because that is what the media and many politicians say for the specific purpose of catering to youthful inexperience. But what I propose and what I want is for all citizens to vote and to make the most informed vote possible. That can never be voter suppression but the accusation of voter suppression can do as much harm as actual suppression because it creates a false debate.

So do you agree or disagree that young minorities vote in too small numbers, that they are apathetic to voting and that their level of education is significantly less than their white middle class counterparts?

Do you believe that this is a problem?

If it is a problem do you believe that it should be addressed?

I think you would agree with all of these things which means you and are, despite differences are in agreement on some very basic and very important things. The rest can be addressed but only if there is a fair give and take without accusations and attacks and without rhetoric that caters to pure emotion.

And even though I disagree with you, even though I think there is a great gulf separating us I would like the opportunity to change your mind and I would be happy if you changed my mind for the better.

First, I didn't mean to imply that what you've described is voter suppression. In a perfect world your suggestion would seem perfectly reasonable however we don't exist in that world. What I mean by that is that if you have a test of any kind it will be used by someone somewhere to prevent voting, that is the nature of man and as history shows all human systems are subject to corruption. For example imagine that these tests existed in a state like Arizona or Texas with there immigration issues, I posit that very quickly in some border counties the tests or proctors would be corrupted either intentionally or simply out of a kind of hysterical fear so as to prevent or intimidate people of latino descent who are citizens from voting. Secondly to respond to your statements about education, I completely disagree with the idea that there is some level of proficiency that can be achieved by a teacher that will result in higher achievement for all students. As a product of an inner city public education in the 1970's I believe that the level of achievement a student reaches depends more on that individual than any teacher. All of the education reforms in recent history have led in one direction and that is in my opinion a lowest common denominator, it's easy to be on the honor roll if your only expected to do as well as the worst student in the class and then on top of that this minimal achievement is celebrated. I don't think the problem lies with the schools as much as with the anti-intellectual culture we've been promoting as a society.

"What I mean by that is that if you have a test of any kind it will be used by someone somewhere to prevent voting, that is the nature of man and as history shows all human systems are subject to corruption."

I agree. But corruptions goes both way. In this case I believe the greater threat of corruption lies with making the voting process easier to engage in and thus easier to manipulate.

"For example imagine that these tests existed in a state like Arizona or Texas with there immigration issues, I posit that very quickly in some border counties the tests or proctors would be corrupted either intentionally or simply out of a kind of hysterical fear so as to prevent or intimidate people of latino descent who are citizens from voting"

If that did happen then the person guilty for doing it should be punished severely with jail time. But to hit on what you are saying in a little more detail one of the reasons so many people in those border areas are so hysterical about the issue of immigration is because it has become such a terrible problem. Think about it like someone who lives in a ghetto surrounded by gang violence. Eventually they too will be come hysterical with paranoia so you have to deal with the problems as they come from the root upwards. In this case the first way to deal with voter fraud issues is to eliminate the ease with which illegal immigrants can get documents. MY solutions is not a one time, quick fix by the way, I propose an idea that would require a pole shift in the way we think so I don't believe my idea will ever take traction. But I still believe my idea would work and would benefit everyone.

"Secondly to respond to your statements about education, I completely disagree with the idea that there is some level of proficiency that can be achieved by a teacher that will result in higher achievement for all students. As a product of an inner city public education in the 1970's I believe that the level of achievement a student reaches depends more on that individual than any teacher."

It goes both ways. The best student has little chance when his or her teacher cant do the job and the best teacher will fail if the student fails to pay attention or if the students parents fail to teach responsibility at home. But a good teacher is the fist step to effecting change. SO I do believe and I believe that statistics have shown that a good teacher does in fact lead to better educated students.

"All of the education reforms in recent history have led in one direction and that is in my opinion a lowest common denominator, it's easy to be on the honor roll if your only expected to do as well as the worst student in the class and then on top of that this minimal achievement is celebrated."

I hate to agree with you on this one but what you say is correct. However we can not simply let our children's education fail. The best educated children come from private schools. Second to them are those students in public schools that are in more affluent areas with access to better funding and more parent involvement. Then the level of educations drops woefully to the poorest schools with the lowest student success rates ( I mean success in life post school not on standardized tests). So if Private schools are the best education then it stands to reason that this is where we need to emulate in public schools as much as is possible. This includes removing power for the federal board of education and giving it to the local communities (with assistance from a reformed board of education). But it also means more parent involvement. But this is an area where no regulation can do the trick. It requires a social change.

"I don't think the problem lies with the schools as much as with the anti-intellectual culture we've been promoting as a society."

I agree to a point but I would amend what you said by suggesting that we do not have an anti-intellectual culture but rather a culture with misplaced intellectual values. What I mean is that we have given much too much importance on college education which has only created a lot of college graduates that have no idea where they fit or that have wracked up so much student debt that most of their lives they spend paying it off because they were supposed to go to a good school no matter what they really wanted or what was really best for them. This has also reduced the value of technical schools, trade schools and even apprenticeship programs by making children who may not be able to get into good school feel stupid or less than their peers. This is especially true in urban, inner city, minority schools where apathy is a way of life.

For myself, I have had it both ways. I was about as poor as you could get when I was a young child. I went to bed hungry and I ate a lot of meals with nothing but beans because that was what my parents could afford. And through their hard work and a little luck my parents took advantage of opportunities and made a few opportunities along the way and I was then able to take advantage of some of the other end of the social spectrum. But the one factor that was most important for me and that I believe remains most important to every child was that my parents were always involved. Without the best teacher, the best school, the best student is doomed.

The irony is, anyone who thinks that a literacy test or knowledge of the law should be required before being allowed to vote, would automatically fail their own test of legal knowledge, since said test is unconstitutional. I realize I've sent myself spinning into an endless cycle of irony there.

Clotho - you really have no idea what you are talking about here. We are talking about what could be or should be not what currently is. And it is the grossest folly to believe that because someone would like to see a test to show basic competency in politics that said person would somehow fail the test. Of let me just cut through your lame obfuscations. What you are saying is that I would fail a test because I disagree with you.

Candlewyke--your last para about the measure of success of students being predictable by the level of involvement of that students PARENTS is absolutely true.

So is the reverse.

Candlewycke, yes, Jim Crow was established by Democrats. Conservative Democrats. Reactionary racist Democrats. I.e., the kind of Democrat who became Republican over 30 years ago.

pkgoode. Jim Crow was a whole series of laws that were primarily Democrat, Southern Democrat and even some Republicans. Long after the Jim Crow laws Democrats continued to work for the disenfranchisement of Blacks up to the Civil Rights era at which time many Democrats changed tactics and started supporting civil rights initiatives. BUT!!! These initiatives have only managed to keep Blacks in a small voting minority, absolutely unthinkingly loyal to the Democrats. Their initiatives have fostered gang, dead beat fathers, the significantly higher percentage of abortions among young black women and lowers rates of health care. In other words, the same Democrat ideology that led to Jim Crow subverted Civil Rights laws to keep blacks in the place.

All you have to do is look at the wording of the laws and the results and how little is done when those results are proven to be bad for the black community.

And make election day a holiday! If not every two years, then at least every four, during the Presidential election. In Australia, voting is compulsory for every citizen 18 years or older. Failure to vote without sufficient reason results in a penalty. It's only $20, but they do have a much higher voter turnout than in the U.S., and therefore elections better represent the populace.

Sunset, when my middle kid was in the middle kid, a poem he wrote won a contest to be included in a state published book. His teacher sent a note home that said in order for it to be included, I would have to TYPE it.

(this is in the early 90's, when not too many people could afford computers) Now, since my son had BROKEN my typewriter, that was impossible for me, but even more, it was UNFAIR to those students who might have written a beautiful story or poem and had no access to a typewriter. I took it to the principal, and while he began by backing the teacher, he realized that I was right.

So you cannot REQUIRE all people to use a computer to vote. Doing so disenfranchises those who have no access to a computer.

Last I checked Washington State was one of three states that allowed illegals to obtain drivers licenses

And you have the information to back that statement up right??

No we do not "allow" illegals to obtain drivers licenses... they somehow figure out how to purchase, or borrow a car and get in and drive.

12thman,

And you have the information to back that statement up right??

I can find nothing to the contrary. Why don't you look it up yourself.

actually, JJD, YOU made the assertion, which is false, so YOU need to prove what you are saying. but you cannot, because it is a lie you made up to prove an opinion that has no merit. fail.

Mermaids are real unless you can prove they don't exist.

Great...

I don't have to prove anything.

Do other states issue licenses to illegal immigrants?

Yes, there are currently three states that offer driver's licenses to undocumented residents. They are Utah, Washington and New Mexico.

The Washington State Department of Licensing requires applicants to bring a proof of identity and residency. Applicants must pass a written and skills test, undergo a vision screening and be photographed. While commercial driver's licenses are only issued to applicants with valid social security numbers, the state does issue ID cards to illegal immigrants. Washington accepts various documents -- to prove an applicant's identity -- issued by Guatemala and Mexico.

How many more references do you want? They aren't hard to find.

Sorry, link didn't post on #7.6

um, Work harder, work more- can you point to anywhere in those documents that says ILLEGALS can get a driver's license? i see stuff about legal residents getting a wdl, and stuff about undocumented immigrants getting state id, but nothing about them getting a wdl.

"I just don't know how else to help to get their vote to count." What about teaching people to make informed votes. Not to vote for people who pass laws they don't like or don't support. What about teaching minority black communities that they do not have to vote democrat just because they have always voted democrat. What about teaching white people from Mississippi that Conservative Republicans don't always know what is best?

If the best we can hope for is more people voting just to vote then we really have no hope at all. And gumming up the works wont change anything. It will only entrench each side and create more roadblocks.

But if voting lines stretch for whole city blocks and it takes 8 hours of standing in line then that is far better than making it easier to for more to people to vote if those votes are wasted vote, or if those votes were made without really understanding what was being voted on.

No one is saying fewer people should vote. Every American citizen of legal age should vote. But more voters simply will to make anything better. The revers is true for older people who will always vote for the person who promises not to touch their social security even if not touching it means future generations will have to pay for it without getting the benefit of it.

Do not call for more voters. Demand better voters!

Nick--BS---I live in MO and am required to show ID to vote, and it actually SPEEDS up the process, since the election worker has to look you up in the book, and being able to LOOK at the name in print is much better than having to have it spelled.

One person one id number ..dah!! The same way it works now...please read before posting. If they are illegals they wont have a valid ID number.

And I noticed you said "how would they no who the minorities are"..sounds like a republican thing for sure.

One person one ID number. Kinda like one person, one Social Security number. We all know how well that works. Wow....

Sigh* some are truly hopeless blind followers...or just afraid fo their fellow human beings.

At least we arent trying to buy anyone.

They have already begun finding illegals in Florida that thought they were allowed to vote because the received a registration card with their drivers license; you are naivete, or just in favor of foreiners voting in our elections.

wake up- NOBODY shows up in person, that's what 100% by-mail voting means. and king county has a high rate of voter fraud? how many convictions for voting fraud have there been in king county in the last 100 years? um, zero.

Sikchimp: you sure about that?

I beleive that the main reason most children are the way they are today is because they have been handed everything without having to earn it. They have learned to manipulate and cheat and believe it is now exceptible to do so. I blame this alot on the media, the government sticking its nose too far into families lives and child rearing, and the church overreaching its authority. Due to the high cost of living it made families to need 2 incomes to raise a family so the parents felt guilty not being there for their kids so they over compensated by buys them everything they wanted and never holding them responsible for their bad behavior. Its time we took it back a knotch and start teaching responsibility again...otherwise we are not doing our children or the future of our country any justice.

elaine - "I beleive that the main reason most children are the way they are today is because they have been handed everything without having to earn it."

I could not agree with you more!

"They have learned to manipulate and cheat and believe it is now exceptible to do so."

You are again correct. My concern is that when it comes to voting this same learned ability to cheat is carried over to the people they vote for because they are making bad choices based on bad information. This is why pushing young people to vote through initiative like Rock the Vote and others is a bad idea because all it does it give people a level of responsibility that they have not learned to appreciate or to use wisely.

"I blame this alot on the media, the government sticking its nose too far into families lives and child rearing, and the church overreaching its authority."

I agree to a point. The media is definitely a bad guy here. The government, both sides of the aisle is also a bad guy but what too many people fail to understand is that the government only exists as an extension of the will of the people. Voters who cast bad votes or liars, those who are unethical, those who chat on tehir families or taxes, those who say what they need to say to get elected will are being given carte blanche to continue doing thee things but with all the power that goes with elected office. Bad votes have consequences. Churches are really not a problem because there is no single idea behind church. They simply represent smaller microcosms of society. Without churches the people would still have the same ideas and the results would be the same.

"Due to the high cost of living it made families to need 2 incomes to raise a family so the parents felt guilty not being there for their kids so they over compensated by buys them everything they wanted and never holding them responsible for their bad behavior."

This one is very important. But it also is very complicated. Families should be allowed to make enough money to be families but time and time again social legislation that has been designed to support families have only compounded the problems, like welfare.

"Its time we took it back a knotch and start teaching responsibility again...otherwise we are not doing our children or the future of our country any justice."

In this I am in compete and total agreement.

Candlewycke

You claim to have a masters degree in history and a terrific education and yet you appear to be completely ignorant about the use of literacy tests in the US, a practice which was only stopped in the 1960's. I suspect, based on the comments you have made, that you would not pass these tests that you wish to administer. Young people do not hold a monopoly on ignorance, one only need to look at political dialogue in the US over the past fews years to confirm this.

What's the Point-6410133 - To be honest, I really don't even know what you are going on about other that wanting to stir up conflict. I stand by every thing I have said and an happy to defend it. But I think that what you are really after is some ego stroking and that I will not do for you or anyone. So play nice or go find another game to play.

No, it's not ego stroking, or wanting to stir conflict. The US has a history of disenfranchising people from voting, including literacy tests, that only ended with the Voting Rights Act of 1965. This is a very unfortunate and dark part of US history, a part of history that I would hope that we would not be eager to repeat.

What's the Point-6410133 - If this is where you are coming from then I actually agree. But I do not support literacy tests. I propose a basic knowledge test. Just enough to show that understand what you are voting for. I would not ask anyone to describe in detail the events leading up to Roe v Wade or the meanings of international trade agreements. I am talking about basic knowledge of who they are voting for. What are the respective branches of government what what do they do. Are we a republic or a democracy, that sort of thing. I and I promise you that more than a few people would fail even this basic information. Why is this important? Lets look at the last presidential election. Obama won in large part by making promises to do certain things or letting people believe he would do certain things that are not within the powers of the Presidency. (To be fair most politicians do this). But what happens is you get someone in power who either cant do what you want them to do or will try to go around the system to get something done that subverts the system and makes it easier for others to abuse their power. A basic knowledge test whose questions do not remains the same to avoid ease of cheating, or lets say it is a revisit of 4th grade civics, would not solve this but it would do two things.

1: It forces people to actually take a moment to think about why they are voting and what they are voting for and creates an air of importance to the process.

2: weeds out the those whose lack of knowledge prove most damaging to an informed voting base.

And of course, I would encourage retests to allow people the chance to become informed. So that is not at all voter suppression. It also means that maybe just a few people would stop and think, "well maybe this guy is making promises that he cant actually keep!"

In addition I would be for allowing convicts who are normally not allowed to vote to take this test if they are shown to be model prisoners and have some chance at changing their criminal ways. So it actually enfranchises more people.

In addition, if a lot of people fail the test then it is a great indicator that our schools are failing in their jobs.

I think Candlewycke is speaking purely theoretically, with the knowledge that everything he is suggesting is 100% unconstitutional. He is speaking from a historical perspective and not trying to defend the ideas as anything that could ever be done legally.

It's interesting, but since I'm an attorney I tend to stop at the very beginning, where these ideas are patently unconstitutional. Any sort of "basic knowledge test" (figuring out who writes the test and what constitutes "basic" would be fun) is illegal, and I think we all agree on that.

Beyond that, it's just mental gymnastics.

I would say your ideas on voter tests need to be applied to the political candidates, as well as private industries.

Perhaps if everything had a test that needed to be passed before you could do anything, we would all be much better off.

What if CEO's had to pass a test which proved they could anticipate every possible outcome of a decision that might come in front of them in a board room. There would be much less "gut" instinct on businesses matters.

If wall street was forced to pass tests which proved they could properly define a healthy business from a poor business, there would be much less instability in the markets.

If mortgage companies were forced to pass a test which proved they could accurately define a borrower that was going to default on loans, our housing market would be just dandy.

To think that any test would tell you that a human is worthy of voting, specially within a political system as extensive as ours, is very narrow minded. That would be like trying to make a test that would accurately prepare a couple for having children. How would you ever produce a test that encompassed a humans growth through age 18, or longer, with variances for region, in any manner with which any person could possibly pass it. But I am sure you would be for testing before allowing for reproduction, from the sounds of it.

"What if CEO's had to pass a test which proved they could anticipate every possible outcome of a decision that might come in front of them in a board room."

The test is called making to the level where a group of shareholders and peers have seen enough of yoru work to believe you will do the best possible job. Tests do not always mean you will never fail. But trust me, CEO's are tested every day.

"If wall street was forced to pass tests which proved they could properly define a healthy business from a poor business, there would be much less instability in the markets."

Those tests come in the form of the many regulations that Wall Street Brokers have to go by and the fact that not anyone can walk in and start trading on Wall Street. They have been tested through their education and through their careers.

"If mortgage companies were forced to pass a test which proved they could accurately define a borrower that was going to default on loans, our housing market would be just dandy."

You cant become a mortgage broker without passing a test. It is part of the licensing process. And Wall Street Brokers are also licensed and thus must pass a test.

"To think that any test would tell you that a human is worthy of voting, specially within a political system as extensive as ours, is very narrow minded."

It is not about being worthy to vote. It is about have the basic level of knowledge on what you are voting for. A person passes a drivers test because his driving will effect everyone else on the road. Well, voting effects everyone in the nation. It is a much higher responsibility. You confuse a test that measures ideology with a test that measures facts. It is a fact that the office of the Presidency has certain things it can and can't do. Test for that. No one is talking about a test to measure conservative or liberal values, or ideology.

Clotho - "It's interesting, but since I'm an attorney I tend to stop at the very beginning, where these ideas are patently unconstitutional."

And yet every day people gather in front of the Supreme Court to interpret the constitution and every day the constitution is altered slightly with every opinion passed down.

The 15th amendment says :Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.

It says nothing about intellectual ability and in fact there are many cases of voters being denied the right to vote. Among them convicts, which could easily fall under the condition of servitude.

Further the 15th amendment was added to the original constitution during reconstruction. SIt could easily be argued that this amendment is itself invalid because the reconstructed states were filled with elected officials that did not represent the will of the majority voters because many of those elected officials were still prevented from serving. But the point is the constitution offers very few concrete promises that do not also come with a lot grey areas of interpretation.

Now the voting rights act is another thing because it says that there shall be no pre qualification or pre requisite to vote. However the fact that you must be 18 years of age is a pre qualification and the requirement to register to vote, which has been upheld by the Supreme Court is a pre requisite so the very legislation that established the rules as we know them are themselves open to interpretation. Additionally the legislation can be read as speaking to race and sex and not to any rules set forth by the government that is outside of sex or race.

Who writes the test? Great question. I would suggest a committee representative of political scholars who have displayed no political bias. But of course the test already exists in the form the INS citizenship test. Simply modify that to be used. If an American citizen born and raised in American cant pass the same test a Lithuanian who has only been here for a few years and barely speaks English can pass then we have a real problem.

Which adds my last point. Citizenship is both a pre requisite and a condition of voting.

Candlestyk! Get a life!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Nick Bartow - In 2008 38 people in Virginia were charged and arrested for voter fraud. The Washington Post among others reported it.

Beyond this there is voter fraud and there is the potential for voter fraud, and both must be taken seriously. Anytime in America voting has become too easy voter fraud has increased. For example in the early 1800's (the exact date escapes me) votes were cast on handwritten skips of paper and placed in vote boxes (lets call this the 19th century equivalent of online voting) Many of those boxes were found to have been made with hidden openings that allowed people to reach in and replace votes with others for particular candidates. When it was discovered new rules were set in place and new ballot boxes were designed to make it harder to cheat.

The book Deliver the Vote talks about this in great detail and would certainly surprise you with how much voter fraud and cheating in general has existed when people stopped paying close attention.

Not in Washington STATE (the subject of this article) Perhaps you are thinking of the "other Washington?"

The majority of those cases were felons that registered to vote, or voted, and they were American citizens but did not realize they could not vote. None of the cases were fraudulent identity cases.

Candlewycke, I think you accidentally prove the opposite point you intended to. You showed that voter fraud is incredibly rare in the U.S. and in no need of voter suppression laws. Between 2002 and 2005, 96 people were indicted for federal election-related crimes, and 70 of them were convicted. Of those convicted, 41 were campaign employees and government officials, and only 5 were voters who case multiple ballots.

These voter suppression laws would ONLY prevent impersonation crimes, not the vast majority involving campaign employees and government officials. In any case, the numbers are so tiny as to be irrelevant to the election results.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/07/19/is-voter-fraud-a-fraud.html

In Florida, where I live, shark attack cases are more common than voter fraud, with 49 cases of voter fraud since 2008 vs. 72 shark attacks. To repeat: in the entire state of Florida, there were 49 cases of voter fraud. State government may not do everything right, but the states do have this voting thing down really well.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/05/30/1095160/-Shark-Attacks-outnumber-cases-of-Voter-Fraud-in-Florida-since-2008-GOP-to-steal-FL-elections-anyway

"Candlewycke, I think you accidentally prove the opposite point you intended to. You showed that voter fraud is incredibly rare in the U.S. and in no need of voter suppression laws."

And rape is actually rare by percentage of the population so why not do away with laws covering rape?

Voter fraud happens several ways. Through deliberate voter fraud as in false id, though accidental voter fraud as in duplicate voting, though vote tampering and manipulation. Through over registration, even through redistricting tricks.

And lets be clear. You are incorrect when you call them voter suppression laws. They are not voter suppression laws. They voting regulations.

And the reality is that voter fraud does exists but because every attempt to look at the issue or measure it has been stopped by mostly liberal Democrats (and no few Conservative Republicans) we just don't really know how big it actually is. These laws if enacted and if upheld according to the law will eliminate the voter fraud that does exist and take steps to purge records of fraudulent information to ensure that vote fraud is made much harder to accomplish. It is both reactionary and precautionary.

Or I could be more direct. Nick Bartow said "Voter fraud has not I repeat not been proved anywhere!: and yet I gave examples of where it had been proven. And Nick seems to be ignoring this fact and you sidestep the argument Nick made and which I was refuting by deciding that the argument all along was something different. You seem like a smart guy Clotho so let me be clear. Nick Bartow made a very specific statement that voter fraud did not exist anywhere. And I respond by giving more than a couple examples that contradict his statement. If you want to talk about actual level of voter fraud then it is a different subject. Nick was not talking about level of voter fraud though, He is of the opinion that it did not exist " anywhere".

Nick, be careful about making dogged statements. The state of MO has successfully prosecuted ACORN for voter fraud.

And by virtue of the crime, the only ones that get caught are the STUPID ones.

My county sends me a new voter card every year. They ALSO send one to my son who has lived in CA for 6 years, NOTIFIED them he had moved, I notified them EVERY year, and at every election when I saw his name in the book right above mine. It would be incredibly easy for someone to illegally vote in his name.

MOmaid wrote:

Nick, be careful about making dogged statements. The state of MO has successfully prosecuted ACORN for voter fraud.

No, it didn't:

Be careful about making "dogged" statements.

try searching the Internet..., there are plenty if you dare to look, and Florida is just starting to cull illegal aliens from its rolls and they know that they have been voting in previous elections. Their "excuse" they thought that they were allowed to vote since the voter registration card came with their drivers license.

There are not plenty, as evidenced by your retort to "try searching the internet" instead of providing evidence. See my post at #12.4.

Nick--I will give you a PERSONAL example. I was voting 15 years ago, and an elderly lady came in to vote.

She asked for help, which IS permitted--the election official is alowed to read the ballot to the voter who has difficulty seeing.

Unfortunately, the election official proceeded to ADVISE her on specific people to vote for, which I overheard, and she was ONLY recommending those candidates that were of the same political party as she was.

Which I knew, since she and my mom were friends, and of similar political opinions.

silly me, mom's friend and all, I REPORTED HER. And she was from then on forbidden to work elections, and if it were not for the local political machine, would probably have been charged with the crime of voter fraud.

Another example--at 85, my dad was diagnosed with Alzhemiers, and was living in a care facility. Election workers CAME to the nursing home, and 'assisted' people to vote who were TOTALLY incompetent, and occasionally barely even CONSCIOUS.

I reported that, too. The election workers were VOTING for the old folks. Not helping them, but doing the choosing for them.

Small town politics at its best.

And ironically, I am basically of the same political 'affiliation' as both the examples above. Doesn't mean I don't resent someone cheating.

there are plenty if you dare to look, and Florida is just starting to cull illegal aliens

I hate to introduce reason into the discussion, but "just starting" does not in any sane world imply "has already happened."

The state of Missouri is now safe from the electoral predations of octogenarian women. I'll sleep easier tonight.

"So who here believes that illegal aliens would put themselves at risk of deportation in order to register to vote?"

There would be little risk of deportation, especially as the Justice Department has declared that only those illegal immigrants who pose an actual threat will be looked at.

So they have very little to lose but what do they have to gain?

Hispanics are the largest growing minority in the nation today and most illegal immigrants are Hispanic. By voting for candidates who want to loosen immigration or grant amnesty they would have direct and powerful reasons to cheat the system by voting for liberal democrats who will in turn pay their loyalty back with decreased scrutiny.

Okay - so Candlewyke believes that illegal aliens "have very little to lose" by risking deportation in order to vote. I strongly disgree, and think Candlewyke has extremist views on the matter with little evidence to back them up.

That's one. Anyone else?

Many illegal immigrants are allowed to stay as long as they are not committing major crimes. I do believe that working without a green card is a major crime as well as not paying taxes on income would be a major crime, which is how illegal immigrants are found and deported. Voting when you are not a legal citizen would also be a major crime, so therefore, illegal immigrants voting in American elections would be cause for them to be deported. It is easiest for find illegal immigrants when they break the law, instead of wandering around trying to find them by just looking at people. This is the way it works.

Patrook Goreng - So I have extremist views? Wow, you do like to project. I cited evidence. The Justice department specifically stating they will not seek to deport illegal immigrants who do not pose a an actual threat. But lets not let facts get in the way of inflammatory rhetoric. It is much easier to validate your arguments if you can convince people that anyone who does not agree is an extremest. Before long you will have me stealing children and hiding guns in a cave in the mountains.

Most illegal immigrants don't risk being caught by going out to vote. The problem stinks to high heaven as the US can't seem to get a proper immigration policy in place. Thank you do nothing Congress!

Hey Patrook, we all know that illegals dont have fake ssn numbers, right?

wow, that's a great idea. (we've had that for years, here in washington state) facebook is just linking to it. do you read the articles you comment on?

Read the article. The facebook link goes to a secure website run by the WA Sec of State.

@aster...did you read the article? Or did you read the headline and chose to troll and fear-monger?

Rosso3 Nothing aster said was fear-mongering or trolling. What he said is absolutely correct. Facebook has a poor track record of maintaining privacy. There is no reason tho take anyone word that this information will not be shared. Especially not facebook or the government.

I wonder why is it that small minds need to go to such great lengths to make such personal attacks or to try to derail debate with incendiary attacks that have no basis in reality.

Shandril - Americans really could not get any stupider. Stupider is not a state anyone can attain. It is a word that belongs best to 13 year old who has yet to grasp what language can actually do. Maybe American's could not get any more stupid. But never stupider...

"Registering voters is stupid."

This is a Republican canard.

Sane Central - As soon as anything can be done online with real security then perhaps it will be okay but until then it is always a bad idea. Imagine the same people who hack our bank information having access to voting information or even being able to manipulate the votes. Imagine someone like Asange and his group or others with the tools and ability to hack into a presidential election.

So yes, anything that creates an easier way to manipulate voting deserves to be suppressed.

But hey this is all just pretend. I mean no one has even had their identity stolen online. No ones bank account has ever been stolen. No ones email has ever been tampered with. Playstation has never lost control of the private information of tens of thousands of their users. Oh wait these and many more have actually happened. Now imagine if we all vote online and and it wasn't PlayStation that was hacked but the voting numbers.

Online voting will be a reality within our lifetime. The major component that needs to exist first is a paper trail. People used to be suspicious of electronic voting machines too (well, some still are, after the Diebold rumors). Once a trustworthy paper trail can prove the votes cast online, the states will begin to implement it.

Wouldn't need a Supreme court if the constitution was clear as a bell.

Lawyer here. The framers themselves were divided as to whether the Constitution was a living document, subject to changed interpretations based on a changing world, or whether it should always be read as if the world was stuck in 1789. Thomas Jefferson advocated a new Constitutional convention every 20 years, to go through the document and revise it to reflect the changing world. He also cautioned that failure to revise and reinterpret the Constitution could result in Americans seeing the document as some sort of holy or religious, or perfect artifact, when it's clearly not.

As far as the theory that the Constitution was perfect from the start, never requires changes or constant examination, or needs to acknowledge centuries of changes: I would point out that the Bill of Rights is made up of the first 10 "changes", or amendment, to the original document. In addition, we have added a total of 27 amendment over the centuries, to reflect the changing times.

I have no respect for the legal "knowledge" of anyone who says "The Constitution is easy! Just read it and do what it says!" So, since the first amendment prohibits suppression of free speech, I guess child pornography is legal? And the second amendment prohibits any gun regulation, so children and felons get all the guns they want! And those are the really easy ones. "Clear as a bell"....

I have never heard any liberal or any person, argue that non-citizens should be permitted to vote. Can you cite any authority? Also, the Constitution never had a 21 year old age limit. It was previously set by the states, some of which had a 21 year age limit. The 26th Amendment expanded rights for Americans by declaring a national age requirement of 18.

My cousin who is female told me recently that the constitution was perfect when written and there should have been no changes. I pointed out that one of those changes was the 19th amendment passed in 1920 that gave women the right to vote...The founders seemed to overlook 1/2 the population, not to mention non-whites when it came to giving the right to vote. The constitution is a great document, but not a perfect one. Which is why it has been amended 27 times. Perhaps there should be an amendment passed forbidding congress from giving the wealthy more tax breaks until the deficit is paid off. The largest cause of the deficit right now is the Bush tax cuts for the wealthy, so it would be sheer fiscal stupidity and policy to let them continue.

The Constitution is NOT a 'living document'. It's meanings are as clear as a bell.

Yeah? Read it some time.

What part of the Constitution, for example, give the Supreme Court the power of judicial review?

The 14th Amendment says plainly that anyone born in the United States is a citizen. Conservatives show no compunction about claiming that Congress didn't mean for that to apply to the sons and daughters of illegal immigrants.

I agree that everyone should vote but I think it is a dangerous slope if we start making voting mandatory. Americans should have the fundamental right to refuse to take part if they so choose. And if we start taxing those who do not vote then we have to also enforce the penalty for not paying that tax. Do we arrest someone who refuses to vote because the candidates are in direct opposition to a deeply held conviction on behalf of the one refusing to vote? Perhaps you are anti-abortion and the two viable candidates are both pro choice. Taxing someone for not choosing one or the other then becomes a tax on idealism. You could argue that a person can always do a write in vote but a write in vote is no different from refusing to vote to begin with. A wasted vote is still no vote. Now, I would like to see an option to vote for "none of the above" as a means to show with concrete numbers that neither of the candidates are supported.

In Nevada, Republicans are trying to eliminate the none of the above option. They are afraid it will sink Romney's chances of winning the state. ^_^

Brian J - I was not aware of this in Nevada. I know that it has been tried in the past and in the past Democrats have worked to stop it so it only makes sense that Republicans would try the same. Ideas behind who should vote and how they should vote are always determined by which power has the most to lose. In the next presidential election Obama and Romney looks to be a tight race with the issue settled by Independents so of course Democrats want as many Blacks and Hispanics to register and vote because they will vote for Obama. Of course you never hear about Liberals working in Asian immigrant communities because Asians immigrants traditionally vote Conservative Republican. It is all Pandering.