Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Contact Us | Home RSS

Requiring identification is something feds do

April 24, 2012
Gary Andersen, Lee Smith

State laws requiring voters to produce proof of identity - something voters in Minnesota will have a chance to enact this fall - have been condemned roundly by the liberal community, including many Democrats in Congress and President Barack Obama. It is unfair to demand a voter produce a photo ID, they maintain. They ask:?What about poor people who don't have driver's licenses?

Well, what about them? And what about existing federal law on the Medicaid program, which helps the poor with health care expenses? A federal law enacted in 2006 requires applicants to prove their identity, including that they are U.S. citizens, before they can receive Medicaid benefits.

Among proof of identity documents considered acceptable are driver's licenses, school identification cards with photographs, state-issued ID cards with photos, health care records, and U.S. military cards or draft records.

This isn't the first time liberals have gone off the deep end in condeming something at the state level that the federal government does. Unions, Obama and other liberals went ballistic when Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker followed through on his pledge to limit state workers' collective bargaining rights. (Walker was trying to resolve budget problems.) What liberals did not talk about:?Federal workers cannot collectively bargain over pay and benefits, which are set by Congress. In fact, Walker's reforms are less restrictive in terms of bargaining rights than the federal government.

There is nothing wrong with asking voters to prove they are citizens. There is nothing wrong with limiting public employee pay and benefits. Liberals' arguments to the contrary are sounding false and falling flat.



I am looking for:
News, Blogs & Events Web