96-year-old Chattanooga resident denied voting ID

[d_r]

Source: Chattanooga Times-Free Press

Dorothy Cooper is 96 but she can remember only one election when she's been eligible to vote but hasn't.

The retired domestic worker was born in a small North Georgia town before women had the right to vote. She began casting ballots in her 20s after moving to Chattanooga for work. She missed voting for John F. Kennedy in 1960 because a move to Nashville prevented her from registering in time.

So when she learned last month at a community meeting that under a new state law she'd need a photo ID to vote next year, she talked with a volunteer about how to get to a state Driver Service Center to get her free ID. But when she got there Monday with an envelope full of documents, a clerk denied her request.

That morning, Cooper slipped a rent receipt, a copy of her lease, her voter registration card and her birth certificate into a Manila envelope. Typewritten on the birth certificate was her maiden name, Dorothy Alexander.

Read more: http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2011/oct/05/marriage-certificate-required-bureaucrat-tells/

---

She didn't have her marriage license, so the name on her 96-year-old birth certificate didn't match the name on her voter registration card. Exactly the type of person these ID laws are meant to disenfranchise.

[cyberswede]

1. Disgusting

This is outrageous.

[yardwork]

2. My mom was denied a photo id in North Carolina because her social security card was laminated.

She does not have a driver's license. She has a current passport, NC voter registration card, photo id card from her previous state, and other documents. But when she showed up at Dept of Motor Vehicles to get a NC photo id, they denied it to her because her social security card was laminated - even though the same name appears on all the other documents.

She had to go to DSS to get a new card, wait for it to come in the mail, and then go back to DMV.

[melm00se]

12. don't social security cards

say "Do not laminate" on them?

[lark]

63. I'm 59 and my original SSI card was laminated

Maybe the law's been changed since then?

[Gormy Cuss]

111. Your card wasn't laminated by SSA.

They have always issued paper cards. It was common to laminate them after the fact though, and I've never heard of that as a reason to consider them invalid. My original card, which clearly states that it is not to be used as an ID, is laminated because I got it laminated.

[Bandit]

118. My original card issued in the fifties was laminated by the people that issued it to me.

:shrug: It also did not say anywhere on it, not to be laminated.

[Gormy Cuss]

120. It's not illegal to laminate them.

It was actually pretty common for people to laminate their own cards at least through the 1970s. They were just card stock and got ratty rather quickly. It was easier to laminate them rather than send for new ones.

My original card says not to use it for identification. The new one doesn't say that (I requested a new one my signature changed -- my original card was issued when I was a child)

The SSA does suggest that lamination should be avoided these days because it makes it hard to see 'security features' in the card. I doubt that our old style cards had these features.

[Bandit]

83. They also say Not to be Used as Identification..

It was not legal for the Dept to ask for it in the first place..

[Paka]

103. Thank you, Bandit.

Very good point. :fistbump:

[Kelvin Mace]

89. Gee, my card says

"Not for identification purposes".

My wife's card says:

"For Social Security and Tax Purposes -- Not For Identification"

How do they reconcile that with the demand that it be presented as I.D.?

[eyeofdelphi]

106. some have it, some don't

my boyfriend's SS card doesn't say it but mine does. we were born in different states, don't know if that matters. but they're so freaking flimsy you kinda need them laminated.

[dogmoma56]

114. if they weren't made out of recycled toilet paper, people wouldn't want to laminate them.

[kickysnana]

115. Are you the laminating police.

Another rule there is no reason for that cost us our lives.

[melm00se]

116. no, all I did was ask a question

but I guess questioning things that in your mind might me blasphemous is the wrong thing to do.


I checked last night and found that I have 2 copies of my SS card. One very old and one relatively new. the new one says do not laminate, the older one does not.

it makes me wonder if there are security features in the card (and I haven't googled it to find out) that lamination might interfere with.

[mysuzuki2]

16. when you apply for a replacement SS card, they will give you a printout varifying your name and SSN

that is good enough for DMV here in Wisconsin anyway.

[barbtries]

20. unreal.

and i'm in NC. ugh.

[Doctor_J]

3. Get used to it. eric "Sleepy" Holder doesn't seem to want to intervene

We need to face the fact that that the US is now a Banana Republic. The upside to this is that when things go bad for the rulers of such places, they go really, really bad.

[Kolesar]

4. Please elaborate

what about AG Holder?

[Tesha]

7. It is within the brief of the Attorney General to enforce things like the Voting Rights Act...

...and to take action against others who would dis-enfranchise
voters in Federal elections.

Think he'll do it?

Tesha

[KeepItReal]

14. +1 non-enforcement of the Voting Rights Act will be Obama's undoing

These GOP led state legislatures are rolling back decades of hard won voting rights.

If AG Holder is doing something to protect rights of citizens to vote, I'm not seeing it.

[Xtraneous]

41. Holder's not to blame, it's all the Dems who went before him...

starting with the selection of BushII. He did not win the election and it's been downhill since. Not one Democrat has lifted a finger to get the voting problems resolved. They did worse, they allowed these laws and machines to corrupt the foundation of our democracy while many warned of the consequences.

[Bluenorthwest]

66. It is currently the duty of Holder, the first non Bush AG since the

election we all decry, to enforce the election laws. He does not, and he is in fact at fault for that.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

74. Holder has the watch and is making the decisions

[emcguffie]

81. Can you think of any reason why they might choose to ignore the situation?

Is there something, some reason, that I'm missing? Why would it behoove any Dems to ignore this?

Back in 2004 I communicated with Donna Brazile about the election being stolen, and she was really nasty to me. Really superior, like I was a bothersome, mindless, stupid gnat or something.

[Xtraneous]

107. Good cop (dems) bad cop (reps)

Although Nader is a bad word around here, he nailed it when he said that our system is a duopoly. We are playing into the game by pretending otherwise. The message couldn't have been louder and clearer when Gore conceded and was written in stone when **** stole his second term when the cheating was even more obvious. Daily Kos even banned bloggers who discussed this subject until recently. The gig is up, we're all being played.

[emcguffie]

122. So there are no Dems who are honestly Dems?

They are all working for the nefarious elites? I believe those nefarious elites are there, but I don't believe all Dems are in on it. Gore was from Skull and Bones, after all. He may have had forces playing on him that made him cooperate.

And all that he is pushing on the climate front isn't necessarily for the betterment of the environment. I probably shouldn't say that because I'm not up on it, but much of the climate movement is just designed to enrich the already rich, with carbon credits. I may have misstated that as well. But I know the carbon credits are a big opening for a racket, and many indigenous peoples, who are interested in protecting the environment, are opposed to them.

But Obama? I wonder if he has been threatened, but when he was running for office I believed him. I believe Bernie Sanders and Dennis Kucinich. But of course with our media controlled and owned as it is, Kucinich could never get any traction.

Obama was the outsider in that election. It seemed to me then that Clinton was the obvious insider, who would have been playing us, for sure.

[MedicalAdmin]

92. Holder is well named.

He's just holding the office and keeping the chair warm until someone who gives a shit comes along and tells him to move his useless butt.

[chervilant]

110. hmph...

You'd best add that to the burgeoning laundry list of things that are Obama's undoing...

[Major Nikon]

47. It would be monumentally stupid of him to even try

The question of the constitutionality of voter ID laws had already been adjudicated all the way to the USSC before Obama even took office. Trying to retry the same case using the same argument would result in the case being thrown out of the first court they filed it under.

Everyone knows the real motivation behind these shitty laws, but the reality is the question of constitutionality has already been decided by the highest arbiter in the land. There's really only two ways these laws can go away. Either the USSC is going to have to get stacked with more justices who value the Constitution over partisan politics, or the people of those states are going to have to wake up and change things themselves. Blaming Obama for something he is powerless to change is fruitless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crawford_v._Marion_County_Election_Board

[elleng]

51. Good. Thanks for the clarifying facts.

It is up to We the People in the States to address all the crap the repugs are doing there.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

58. The concept was approved, not all implementations

The more egregious ones could be litigated to make them less onerous. But the concept has indeed been validated by SCOTUS even though it is clearly voter suppression.

[plumbob]

70. The case said that voters did not need an ID if they signed an affidavit

saying they could not afford one. They could vote without it.

That's from your link.

So yes, there is certainly room to question the way IDs are issued. In the case you cited, cost was a factor; I can easily see where lack of a marriage certificate only or a laminated SS card only would create no barrier to voting without the issuance of the photo ID.

Holder needs to get off his ass.

And SHAME on the wet-pant bureacrat ninny who denied this woman her ID.Hopefully, there is a hell, and he or she can burn in it.

[LiberalFighter]

98. I seriously doubt the issue was adjudicated properly.

If it was anything like David Debois when he represented Gore in 2000 then there is no doubt it wasn't properly done. Debois did not understand election law and was a poor choice for that matter.

And it doesn't help to try a case if there aren't witnesses, facts and evidence to back up the premise.

[Xtraneous]

108. The voter ID laws are straw men

Why isn't Holder investigating and prosecuting election fraud? It's rampant. The machines are programmed by foreign entities- some of whom are career criminals- who are permitted to keep this software secret- even from our own government. The elections are now just one big computer game played by the people controlling them, not the voters. This is not some conspiracy theory, it's a well known fact and little to nothing's being done about it.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

24. He is too busy dodging the fallout of the gun running he approved

and then denied. As an AG he is somewhere between useless and compromised.

[Doctor_J]

27. And tracking down the most dangerous subculture in the US

recreational and medical pot users.

[Kolesar]

69. Thread hijack

:cry:

[ProgressiveProfessor]

76. Squawk 7500

[loyalsister]

87. Voting laws are regulated by states

Federal law does not dictate how elections are run. A voter may bring a suit asserting that federal law was violated, but there is no specific federal enforcement of the voting rights act.

[MedicalAdmin]

91. Come the revolution,

whoever is in charge needs to make sure that the roads and airports are shut down so we have heads to feed to Dr. Guillotine.

[No Elephants]

5. And people don't understand what the big deal is.

I don't drive and I lost my Social Security card.

Don't even ask me how many hoops I had to jump through, how many fees I had to pay to get certified copies of my birth certificate, my marriage certificate and then a passport and then, finally, a replacement Social Security card and, for good measure, a state ID for non-drivers.

[TheDebbieDee]

42. The issue and maintenance of birth records has been

outsourced in many states now - it can cost a pretty penny to get a certified copy of a birth certificate.

I was born in the state of Kansas and it cost me $44.00 to order a certified copy of my birth certificate - I needed it to get my driver's license renewed. Fortunately, I was working and the $44.00 was no problem.......

But what if I was in between jobs and money to do anything other than buy food or pay bills was just non-existant! These GOP-run state legislatures have taken steps to insure that the poor, the jobless, the homeless, the people most victimized by a decade of GOP policies and compassionate conservatism, these people WON'T be able to vote against them!

[proud2BlibKansan]

101. It's always been ridiculously difficult to get a birth certificate in Kansas

I was born in MO and it's so much easier to get one there. You just go down to the Health Dept on Troost. Takes about 5 minutes.

[judesedit]

6. Why doesn't she vote on an absentee ballot and give it to someone reliable to turn in for her?

That's what I would do and with the easily manipulated e-voting machines, that should be outlawed-but aren't, it's probably a much better way to make your vote count.....hopefully.

[enlightenment]

9. You still have to be registered to vote absentee.

The issue is getting registered.

[dragonlady]

21. At least in Wisconsin, that wouldn't help her

Absentee voters must send in a photocopy of their acceptable ID with the ballot, at least for the first election. (I assume that means the first election after you move to a new city. This doesn't start until next year so we haven't figured out all the problems yet.)

[Pab Sungenis]

8. Follow the link. Look at the photo.

Sure, her race had NOTHING to do with it.

[Faygo Kid]

10. This is infuriating. She's disenfranchised again.

What kind of society are we becoming? Or have become. I would say unbelievable, but the better term may be inevitable. I see no reason for optimism, other than the Wall Street protesters.

[No Elephants]

26. "Occupy" protestors all over the country "ain't nuttin," though, so cheer up!

[nadinbrzezinski]

11. I am sure her skin color had nuuthing to do with it...

Hey Mr. Holder do your fracking job... oh never mind...

[libinnyandia]

13. State bureaucracy

When I moved back to my home state, Ihad to provide documents I hadn't needed in 40 years of driving. And when I went to get a resident fishing license - a fishing license!- they refused to isssue one because I had bought non-resident licenses on visits back home-I had to present documents to prove I wasn't trying to obtain a fraudulent license. I had to assume that there are thousands of people who were bilking the state outof revenue, many of them terrorists. But trying to deprive people of the right to vote maes me sick. The Republicans will do anything to win.

[Tsiyu]

15. Powerful Caucasians

Have been very hard at work, gerry-mandering and passing voter suppression laws out the wazoo.

And Scalia and the Roberts court will do nada about it.

WE have gone backwards in this nation thanks to our homegrown Republican racist terrorists.

[L. Coyote]

17. Registering to vote while Black?

from: http://m.knoxnews.com/news/2011/oct/05/96-year-old-chattanooga-resident-denied-voting-id/

[ProgressiveProfessor]

29. True only if a white person with similar docs would have been allowed to register

[Major Nikon]

48. Sorry, gotta call bullshit on that one, 'professor'

There is such a thing as institutional racism. Might want to do yourself a favor and read up on it.

Just because a law isn't discriminatory on an individual basis, doesn't mean it isn't discriminatory on a group basis. These laws were Rove's idea that he promoted at the state level because he knew it would disenfranchise voters who traditionally voted for Democrats.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

52. I got call bullshit on the premptive assumption of this being a racial issue

Every time there is a false claim of racism, the real cases of racism (which clearly exist) are further devalued. There were some high profile cases along those line in higher education and the legitimate ones all took major hits because of it.

I strongly agree that Voter ID laws are voter suppression and a way to defeat motor voter and other enabling legislation, but playing the race card on this one is unsupportable at this point.

As for your claim of institutional racism, I suggest you look at the demographics of government workers. Also note that I am black.

[Major Nikon]

61. You are right as usual, 'professor'

You might want to shoot these organizations an email and straighten them out. I'm sure your vast knowledge and experience on this subject would be appreciated. :eyes:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/07/25/us-naacp-voters-idUSTRE76O6NP20110725

http://www.aclu.org/voter-id

[ProgressiveProfessor]

62. Indeed

And my position is not different from that of the ACLU and NAACP. Clearly Voter ID is a voter suppression dressed up as a solution to a non-problem. What is far from clear is if THIS EVENT was racially based (which some have claimed or alluded to) or not, and there is NOTHING to indicate that it is.

I really loathe the casual or fraudulent use of the race card since it hurts EVERY LEGITIMATE CLAIM out there. For that matter, so does the NAACP. After some high profile frauds in a couple of universities, it really hit home to academics. You might want to read up on them.

We as liberals or progressives gain nothing when we like, use hyperbole, or anything else that clearly supportable and obvious facts. Let the other guys be notorious for their falsehoods and other bad behaviors, not us.

[Major Nikon]

88. Once again, professor, you are trying to make this a case of individual racism

It's like trying to say someone enforcing a poll tax or a literacy test isn't racist while ignoring the larger issue that the law itself most certainly is. Every single one of these events should be heralded as institutional racism because that's exactly what they are. That's not hyperbole, 'professor', that's reality.

[Capn Sunshine]

97. is there anything funnier than a sock war at DU?

:shrug:

[Old and In the Way]

68. I wouldn't consider this to be necesarilly a racial issue, but note the demographic composition.

old, female, black - the trifecta of Democratic political demographics. If you were a Republican trying to devine voter party affiliation for purposes of disenfranchisement...I think you could pretty much guess what Party ID she'd be most likely be voting with.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

72. No doubt at a macro level its vote suppresion

[L. Coyote]

93. No doubt also at group level the effect of voter suppression is racially biased.

Just like the effect of disenfranchising felons, stripping voter rolls, voting during work days, poverty itself, etc. etc. It is called shaving points, and the cumulative effect is the fascist state we live in.

[RantinRavin]

73. Might want to read the story again

She is registered to vote. That is not the problem. Nobody is denying her the right to register.

She was denied a photo ID.

[L. Coyote]

94. Might want to read a history of the Sixties.

Not much has changed when they roll back people's rights, rights so hard fought for in her and my memory.

Minorities have not always been able to register to vote in the USA, and that change is recent.

[Name removed]

104. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[barbtries]

18. Call the ACLU!

this woman is guaranteed her right to vote, and it is being denied to her unconstitutionally.

those motherfuckers.

[AsahinaKimi]

19. Soon it could be all of us...

I hope that never happens, and we will all will remain eligible to vote.

[barbtries]

22. but she is eligible.

she is being denied her right to vote.

[think]

23. She doesn't deserve to vote because _____. Please fill in the blank

[valerief]

25. She's not a 1%er or moran supporter of the 1%ers. That's the truth! nt

[Kurovski]

28. People who deny people their rights in this manner are savage, hideous beings

This is not their country, there are countries in this world for them and their ilk.

The real and deep ugliness is appalling.

Their goal is the complete opposite of a democracy.

[SpankMe]

30. And so it begins.

Every one of these events needs to be documented. We need our own version of James O'keefe to accompany people registering to vote with a hidden camera and keep posting this stuff everywhere they can. The press needs to be carpet-bombed with anecdotes until their ears bleed.

I live in California where these asinine rules aren't in effect. Yet. So, I'm unable to volunteer myself to assist in getting folks registered. But, does anyone know of any organizations who will be getting in to the business of assisting voters in registering in accordance with these new laws that would accept donations?

The League of Women voters has all but given up registering voters in some areas because the rules have become too tight. Others must take up the mantle and run.

[xxqqqzme]

33. You are so right.

I have volunteered as a poll clerk for a number of years, here in California. One of the very first things you are told, at the training, is you are NOT to ask for ID before a person votes. If their name is not on the roll, they get a provisional ballot. With the provisional ballot, the person receives a phone number to call to find out if their ballot was valid. If not, then why is was not counted.

Occasionally on the voter rolls, there will be a name w/ an 'ID needed' note. It is almost always a kid who just turned 18 and is voting for the first time. When a person registers to vote in CA you provide either your SS # or your CA Driver's License #. It is the Registrar of Voters JOB to verify those numbers.

The only election recently, when charges of voter fraud/illegal voting charges were flying fast and furious was when Loretta Sanchez defeated B-1 Bob doofus. The rethugs tried every way imaginable to deny her victory. There was no voter fraud and no massive illegal alien voting ever proven. There was the case of rethug in Anaheim, Pringle, hiring private security guards to show up at select polling places (Hispanic neighborhoods) to 'guard' the polling places. Just 2 years ago the Orange County Rethugs paid a fine for switching many persons party preference on their voter re-registration forms.

So the only time, in California, voter/election fraud has occurred, is at the direction of the rethugs.

[Uncle Joe]

31. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, d_r.

[kestrel91316]

32. If she is/was married, there should be SOME way for her to get a copy of her marriage

license from the authorities. She needs a good pro bono attorney.

[AllyCat]

46. Except this is one more step WOMEN have to go through that men do not.

This is all a big game to make another large block of Democratic-leaning voters unable to vote. All these voter ID laws do is make it harder for anyone who isn't a white male, to vote. And it's even hard for most of them. There is no widespread voter fraud. The ones pushing the laws are probably guilty of ELECTION fraud though.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

56. It is also a choice

My wife chose not to change her name. I was not offended in the least. My daughters did change their names. Surprised the hell out me. In all cases, clearly their own choices.

[Bluenorthwest]

67. When a 96 year old woman got married, that 'choice' might have

existed, but I don't think so. All women took their husband's name then. Period.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

71. Actually I know of exceptions from the period...

Though it may have been "professional names" vice legal/personal names. Not sure if it was a legal mandate or not back then. If you have not seen it, Miss Manners has a hilarious write up on this on the back cover of one of her books.

Also be interesting to know what the trends are today. Both of my daughters chose to be a one name family since they both plan on having kids. My wife was already established in her field and kept her name (from a prior marriage) as did the kids, though I adopted them early on.

[AllyCat]

112. Uh uh. No way. We have a society in which that is the norm.

Had someone said "gee, years from now, you will have more trouble voting if you take your husband's name" maybe we wouldn't do it. But to suddenly tie that to ability to vote is a direct attempt to make it harder for women to vote.

[Blacksheep214]

34. When does this become a chargeable offense?

Surely denying someone their constitutional rights is a crime!

Maybe it's time to rethink this system of governance.

[Zambero]

35. Elder abuse, targeted racism, voter suppression

How many crimes will over-reaching righties be able to legislate before this abuse comes to a screeching halt? Their justification: It stops the "ACORN folks" from perpetrating election fraud. Now that's certainly a double non-sequitir if I ever heard one. As an organization ACORN never perpetrated fraud to begin with, and they were defunded and ultimately disbanded as a result of fraudulent investigative techniques. One should never underestimate the right wing's ability to create a smokescreen by redirecting (through false accusation) their own questionable tactics onto their political opponents.

[Old and In the Way]

36. She's one of 5MM that Republicans plan to disenfranchise in 2012.

Every state with Republican majorities in the state government are working fast and furious to get these voter disenfranchisement laws passed. They know they can't win open and honest elections anymore...they have no ideas to fix the problems that they have created with their "pro-business/anti-regulation/anti-tax" agenda. But they don't want the bottom 99% empowered to fix the problems that they've created...so they pass these anti-democratic laws to obstruct our democracy. I sure open the rubes and morons who vote Republican are paying attention because their economic well-being will be going down the shitter along with the rest of us.

[elleng]

53. You're right, and we have to get to the States! All part of rover's plans.

Will probably take a while for this to register on the rubes and morons, unfortunately.

[PatrynXX]

37. racism here??

yeah it shouldn't matter.... law goes after all races, but it hits blacks the most :(

[tblue]

60. My first thought too.

It wasn't lost on me.

[booley]

38. A lot of the comments are disgusting

and displays one of the big problems with conservatism today.

To them it is perfectly acceptable to disenfranchise a lady like this , who has every right to vote. Just as long as they can keep their imaginary illegal voters from getting to the polls.

Yeah, it's all based on a sham. There are no hordes of illegal aliens voting. But the right wing grunts are the ones fooled by this. I am sure they honestly believe that Obama became President because of ACORN sponsored Mexicans being bussed in. It's a matter of faith to them. They can't point to anything but hypothetical situations to support their case but they believe all the more. But even if there were such a problem, a law that also punishes those that did nothing wrong is still a bad law. So even if they weren't full of crap, they would still be full of crap.

This and many other conservative positions of issues can be boiled down to this simple principle.

It' s ok of the innocent to suffer then for even one of the guilty to get away with it, no matter how the cost, no matter if there even ARE any guilty.

[MrsBrady]

39. the article didn't say why she didn't have her marriage license

I know this is bull sh*t, but can't she get her marriage license?

It says she can vote absentee, and won't need her ID.
But she wants go to the polls.

I hate that the article doesn't mention why she doesn't have her marriage license.

[happyslug]

64. And if she was married under the Common Law, how do you get something that does NOT exist?

Common Law Marriages are VALID marriages, in fact, prior to the Council of Trent (Called in response to the Protestant Reformation of the early 1500), almost all marriages in Europe would be called "Common law" Marriages (the most common practice pre council of Trent was for a Couple to go to the Steps of their Village Church, exchange vows in front of their families and the rest of the Village, then enter the Church for the local Priest to bless the Marriage, notice the Priest did NOT marry the couple, he just "blessed" the marriage they had already entered into).

With the Council of Trent, the Catholic Church adopted the Policy that all Marriages must occur within a Church in a ceremony done by a Catholic Priest. This was extended to non-Catholics as the various Catholic Countries adopted what the Council of Trent had passed. By the 1600s, the same rules had been adopted by almost all of the Protestant Countries as while (Britain held out till 1732, and even then only for marriages in England, the Colonies were exempted, thus Common Law Marriages survived in the US to this day, unless a state adopted a law abolishing Common Law Marriages. Most States have adopted such a rule, but a handful of States still retain Common Law Marriage to this day (Pennsylvania was the last state to Abolish Common Law Marriages effective January 1, 2005 but any Common Law Marriages entered into before that date is still a Valid Marriage).

The key to Common Law Marriage is an exchange of Vows, no exchange of Vows no marriage. On the other hand how do you prove such an exchange of vows took place? The best evidence of that is when a couple held themselves out as Married, one way was for the wife to use her Husband's name and for him to also adopt that change in his wife's name (yes, in Common Law Marriages it was more important for the Wife to use her Husband's name then in Ceremonial marriages, it was one way to show the couple were married).

Notice the key is an exchange in Vows, NO License or other WRITTEN Documentation. Furthermore under the Full Faith and Credit Clause, such marriages are valid even when the couple moved to another state (New York Courts had the Majority of Cases involving Pennsylvania Common Law Marriages, a man would take his girlfriend to the Poconos for the weekend, they would sign as Husband and Wife, and the New York Courts would find that that was enough evidence to support a finding of Fact that the Couple had exchange vows in Pennsylvania, which was enough to make it a Valid Pennsylvania Common Law Marriage and under the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the US Constitution valid when the couple moved back to New York State at the end of the Weekend).

Thus the Courts have long upheld marriages without any paperwork to support such marriages. Demanding a Marriage license that may not exist is a way to disenfranchise a lot of poor people, who tend to be most of the people found to be married under the Common Law.

[MrsBrady]

84. right, but per the article, we don't know

it didn't say

[dogmoma56]

113. my mother is 90, they made a spelling error on her birth certificate..crossed it out. she cant vote

[LittleGirl]

40. check out this link from Indiana in '08

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/24490932/ns/politics-decision_08/t/nuns-dated-id-turned-away-ind-polls/#.ToyJUHLVanA

describes how some elderly nuns were turned away from voting even though they brought passports (expired) with their photos on them.

[Flatulo]

43. I wouldn't be so quick to rule out DMV incompetence and belligerence.

When my son turned 16 I took him to the DMV to get his learner's permit. I brought his original birth certificate and his original (unlaminated) SS card. After waiting for hours were told that he needed a document with his original signature on it, like a cancelled check. I showed the clerk the printout from the DMV website and that we had followed the instructions to the letter, but he insisted that we produce a cancelled check. I told him that he was 16 and didn't even have a checking account and that I paid the bills, not my kid. The clerk wouldn't budge.

I said Fine, give me a piece of paper and I'll have him sign his fucking name. Nope, no good. It had to have been signed elsewhere so that they could compare his current signature to it.

After speaking with a supervisor, it was agreed that we would be allowed to drive back home and get some schoolwork that he had signed.

30 miles and a few hours later we were back. I brought up in with the supervisor that the web site was very specific in what to bring for ID and he said they had the right to make any additional requirements they felt like.

He finally got his permit, but what a fucking nightmare. I was ready to kill after that episode.

Talk about a useless agency. What does the registry accomplish anyway? At least the post office delivers my mail flawlessly.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

54. We had similar issues with the MVA

They did not want to accept passports as ID for minors.

[Flatulo]

79. It makes one wonder what on earth people who lose everything

due to fire or flood must have to go through...

[EmeraldCityGrl]

44. If I was a man and my name was "Cooper" I'd ask Ms. Cooper

to marry me. They would get their damn marriage certificate and we could sort out the details later.

Can't play fair with these racist pigs.

[AllyCat]

45. And people want to know why folks don't vote. And why they are marching in the streets

all over the country. They are trying to take away the little bit of voice we have. Boy, I think they have tangled with a mess of rattlesnakes.

[patrice]

49. K&R

[Enthusiast]

50. This is how we roll. (Republicans)

Elect one now if you prefer fascism.

[KT2000]

55. DOJ needs to hire

lawyers or other representatives to send to all states with suspectde regressive voter registration laws. These lawyers should be tationed in registrar's offices in those states to assist and make sure these things don't happen. This is an emergency and crisis that must be handled NOW!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

57. I believe SCOTUS let voter id laws stand a while back

Though I too believe the are clearly voter suppression.

[tblue]

59. That is freaking BULLCRAP!

How insane is this country? Are we a democracy or not? If we're not, then let's stop pretending and telling everybody how superior we are to every other nation.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

65. An interesting generational angle on this

Earlier today I asked one of my classes about the requirements for a recognized government photo ID for voting. Every last one had a passport, and one could not fathom not having one ("who wouldn't have a passport"). None of them thought it was a problem to mandate an ID for voting. One of them recalled that SCOTUS had already ruled on it.

Demographics were all under 25, mixed races/genders, 300 level computer class, Univ California campus. Obviously quite anecdotal, but I thought it was worth sharing.

[Name removed]

75. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[RedCloud]

77. Not so quickly there.

Repugs control over 75% of the state legislatures and have many laws to suppress the vote ready. They need to be punched in those BEFORE it happens again.

[U4ikLefty]

80. Did they all have a jar of Grey Poupon as well?

Take that poll at a Laundromat in East Los Angeles & compare results.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

82. Its who I have access to...

Its UC, not Radcliff or Yale. Not sure of their general economic backgrounds, but the class was far from lily white.

The conclusion I am coming to is that the current college generation (like many generations) has the common human failing of not being able to conceptualize of things outside their immediate experience. They have always had ID and can not imagine not having it. Not sure what would happen if they lost instant comms...but it would certainly rock their world. You should hear the whinning when they are in a class where the tools have no GUI, and life revolves around a line editor.

One of the things I have researched and track is the effect of technology on social evolution. This is a reflection of that. The results in the third world are more dramatic, but they still occur here as well.

[U4ikLefty]

121. I'm quite aware of the makeup of tech students as I am an engineer myself.

You research is skewed.

Just sayin'

[saras]

96. Fucking stupid yuppies in training. There's no excuse for that level of ignorance at college level.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

105. They are upper division at UC

Geek class, but still reasonable diverse.

[Gman]

78. Works as designed

[Xicano]

85. Your papers please

Your papers are not in order.....

[FLAprogressive]

86. The whole idea is to disenfranchise blacks. Seems like it's working.

[fascisthunter]

90. proof republicans are Anti-Democratic elitist suck-ups

[dpbrown]

95. Republican bastards

They don't want the people to vote.

[rucky]

99. Without clicking to look at a photo...

I'm going to wager she's black.

[sulphurdunn]

100. All state voting laws

are designed to suppress voter turnout. Most moneyed interests and their puppet politicians have issues with participatory democracy becasue they are tiny, numerical minorities. It is not unreasonable to set a national standard for age, citizenship and residency requirements (the 14th Amendment would cover such a thing). Otherwise, anyone who can sign his or her name to an affidavit attesting the right to vote should be allowed to vote. State issued voter ID is a travesty against universal suffrage. Furthermore, it is a reaction without a cause. Statistically, voter fraud in this country is non-existent.

[proud2BlibKansan]

102. Same thing happened to my mom when she was 81

It was a nightmare. I posted about it here and unbelievably, some doubted my story.

[dflprincess]

109. Several years ago I took my mom to get a state ID card

She brought her birth certificate and marriage license with her. The clerk who was waited on us was a pleasant young man but, very young.

The first problem we had was that the copy of her birth certificate that Mom had was one she had picked up from the county clerk in 1942. It was the "long form" and it was typed. The kid had never seen such a thing before. Fortunately, an older (by older I mean my age) happened by, look at the certificate and said "It's fine, there's the XXX County seal. This is how they used to do them before computers."

The "the kid" looks at the marriage license - issued in 1946. He waved the older clerk over showed her that he could see the county seal so she asked "What's the problem?" He stammered out - it doesn't say what name she's going to use. The older clerk looke at the license, said to "the kid", "What year was this issued?" (pointing to the year). He answered and she said, "In 1946 what name the bride was going to use was a given, they didn't bother to ask."

So, with that settled, my mother's application was approved and her picture taken. At that point, mom pulled out her checkbook and the kid said "We can't take a check without a photo ID." (And this time the older clerk said "I know it's goofy, but he's right.") Fortunately, I had my ID & checkbook with me.

[peacetalksforall]

117. NOW is the time to organize - the rules have to spread out to everyone who

is going to vote and they will need help preparing. They will probably be lied to through flyers, radio, and maybe by their own pastor.

They need time to prepare. They need the facts. They may need transportation.

They have two agendas:
- Tilt the results of an election.
- Strike at the hispanics they hate - who came here for the work that some wanted them for - cheap (and in some instances because they were not Black Americans). Single family to a medium size business to a mega large corporation. They still want them for work, but as slaves suspended.

Some of the people of this country turned ugly and lost their decency. We are being taken over by our own people. The clouds must be seeded with hate mist.

What happened to this former Democracy?

Confusion. Obfuscation. All citizens need to help themselves and help others.

[Igel]

119. My wife's having the same problem.

She got married and didn't change her last name.

In the last 10 years she's kept her personal life under my last name, her professional life under her maiden name. Now that she's changing careers she's putting everything under my last name.


All her coursework and almost all the requirements for having a state license issued have been met. But they've been met under my surname. Now she has to submit all kinds of paperwork to a state agency. She has to present legal documentation that she is who she says she is and submit to a background check. The license has to be under her legal name. The state can't the satisfaction of the requirements to the person who's applying, even though she stands there. She needs something connecting "Mrs. Igel" to "Ms. pre-Igel." Which is exactly Mrs. Cooper's problem: Connecting her maiden and married names.

So we're getting remarried for the sole purpose of having a legal document that'll allow her to easily change her surname and produce a document linking her two surnames. This will bring all her legal paperwork into line and allow the issuance of a state license. There are certainly other ways of doing it, we're just picking the lowest cost option.

No issues of race, class, sex, or age involved. It's not even clear if there was a serious problem with people fraudulently applying under aliases for such state licenses. But people are afraid, often groundlessly, at what a person might be hiding under that alias and so there are such laws and requirements--which, ostensibly, were intended to prevent certain classes of felons from obtaining state licenses and providing the ability to have real-time tracking information of any new felonies committed by those holding state licenses. Those felons were almost entirely middle-class white men, aged 30-50.


The most humorous line in the article was this: "Kilpatrick has had to call the state at least twice after taking someone to get a photo ID or have a photo added to the driver's license." She's had to call the state at least twice, and had to call over two different matters. In other words, she's had to call the state at least once after somebody failed to get a photo ID (that's the subject of the article) and at least once to have a photo added to somebody's driver's license.

And the article doesn't include an update: Did Mrs. Cooper succeed in supplying the necessary documentation after the event described?