So who and what do we believe? Has a name for name comparison of the presumably dead folks DMV thinks may have voted been compared to the Election Commissions voting registration records? If not, why not? If so, what were the results?

Why is requiring an official ID such a problem. Though this argument may have had ground in the past due to inefficient birth records, restricted travel and cost, these issues have little concern in todays society. Without an ID it is almost impossible to conduct any legal business so everyone should have an ID. As long as the state informs the public of the requirement within let's use 6 months prior to the election why shouldn't a legal ID be required? Someone please explain how this will interfer with the voting process?

YMGONETOFAR believe it or not but there are may elderly people who do not have id. They may never have had ID or may have chosen to let ID expire due to no longer driving. Poor folks may not be able to afford the cost. These are just two reasons there are more. So while it might not affect you, it does affect a signifcant number of voters and a larhe percent of those impacted are the poor and minorities.

Voter ID is a good idea. However whoever doesn't have an ID to vote should not be made to pay for it. Government should encourage every one eligible to vote to vote. So government should be responsible for all expenses in obtaining that ID including travel expenses for those who do not drive. Every one without an ID cannot be automatically assumed ineligible to vote until proven he/she is.

I am amazed that people don't understand the problems that are associated with restrictive voter ID laws. 1. Election fraud in the U.S. is next to non-existent, our problem is that people DON'T vote. 2. Most elderly citizens do not have proper ID (those 65+). 3. Many people don't drive (ever notice public transportation in major cities?). 4. Many married women actually do not have proper ID (failure to change drivers license information). 5. Some costs associated with obtaining a proper ID are prohibitive for senior's and students or young people. 6. Many states have cut the number of locations where proper ID can be issued (Wisconsin as an example has cut over 15 locations) making for long distance travel to obtain ID, 7. Many people do not have the necessary documentation available (passport, certified birth certificate etc. ) to obtain the proper ID or the cost associated with obtain these documents is high. And then you have the problem of what is proper ID. It's so crazy that in Texas you can vote by showing a gun license, but a student ID issued at a state college is unacceptable.

It's not that these people don't have an ID, a lot of the time. they just don't have one that meets the super-restrictive new rules. Lots of people have a paper ID. Oklahoma voter registration cards, for instance, are paper, and have no photo. That's what the state has always issued. Even a social security card has no photo. Once my 90-year-old mother stopped driving, she probably wouldn't have been able to vote under these new rules, even though she had voted for 70 years in the same precinct. And getting a new photo ID has onerous, confusing requirements that she probably couldn't have handled. She had loads of ID, which worked very well in every other instance, but not for voting!
Seems to me that if someone walks in with a social security card, a medicare card, a student ID, a utility bill, etc.. even if you required more than one of the above or similar, then you should be accepted. Shoot, you can vote with a gun license in Texas!

It's not that these people don't have an ID, a lot of the time. They just don't have one that meets the super-restrictive new rules. Lots of people have a paper ID. Oklahoma voter registration cards, for instance, are paper, and have no photo. That's what the state has always issued. Even a social security card has no photo. Once my 90-year-old mother stopped driving, she probably wouldn't have been able to vote under these new rules, even though she had voted for 70 years in the same precinct. And getting a new photo ID has onerous, confusing requirements that she probably couldn't have handled. She had loads of ID, which worked very well in every other instance, but not for voting!
Seems to me that if someone walks in with a social security card, a medicare card, a student ID, a utility bill, a proof of income like a 1040 or 1099, a tax return, etc.. even if you required more than one of the above or similar, then you should be accepted.

A citizen has the RIGHT to vote. You need various IDs for other things, like driving and buying certain controlled medications, but those activities are not considered "rights". You should not have to jump through hoops to vote. Why should government officials require you to jump through hoops? There is a reason why changing the voting regulations in SC requires Dept of Justice Approval. It is because SC intentionally disenfranchised so many people illegally before the federal Voting Rights Act. So now SC must pay the price for sins committed by the government. If SC wants to introduce new barriers for anyone, the DOJ must approve. That is how it is for people (government) on parole for past crimes. It is their own fault.