News Alert
POLL: Big Raises For Ocean County Employees - Is…

Letter: Voters Should Provide Photo ID at the Polls

Resident urges Adler to support move

Letter to the editor as submitted:

It has come to my attention that Congressional Candidate Shelly Adler is opposed to requiring photo identification for voting. Let us say, for the sake of argument, that there is no proof or no research has been done to show that there is a problem in New Jersey. We know other states have a problem and why wait until the problem gets to the point where it is no longer isolated. Why is it intrusive or inconvenient to ask for a photo I.D. to take part in this great American privilege? It should never be violated.
When you use a credit card or cash a check, you are asked for photo identification. To rent a hotel room or get a rental car you need to show photo identification. It is necessary when you have a prescription for a controlled substance, or even to go to the doctor's office. To board an airplane, drive a car, or travel outside the United States – identification is required. Even students from middle school, high school, and college are issued a photo I.D. You need a photo I.D. to enter a federal courthouse, or even tour one of American’s greatest symbols – the White House. Even if you don't drive, you can go to any MVC Agency in the State and get a photo I.D. I don't understand why Mrs. Adler would be against photo I.D.'s. Voting in the United States is the right of our citizens and it is a tradition that only American’s can take part in. Why would she want to take a chance on violating our system?

Susan Bond-Masterson
Toms River, NJ

wheres murrow? July 25, 2012 at 01:10 AM
A non existent issue http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/ApplewhiteStipulation.pdf In a stipulation agreement signed earlier this month, state officials conceded that they had no evidence of prior in-person voter fraud, or even any reason to believe that such crimes would occur with more frequency if a voter ID law wasn't in effect. "There have been no investigations or prosecutions of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania; and the parties do not have direct personal knowledge of any such investigations or prosecutions in other states,” the statement reads. According to the agreement, the state “will not offer any evidence in this action that in-person voter fraud has in fact occurred in Pennsylvania and elsewhere,” nor will it "offer argument or evidence that in-person voter fraud is likely to occur in November 2012 in the absence of the Photo ID law
Frederick John LaVergne for Congress August 18, 2012 at 12:15 AM
If you are already registered to vote, and you do not have a photo id to present at the polling place, what stops you from submitting a mail-in ballot? I have hundreds of mail-in applications for Ocean and Burlington County available - we will be travelling to the towns in this district to provide voter registration and absentee ballot opportunities in the weeks leading up to the election. I do not agree, however, that an ID requirement at the polls disenfranchises anyone in these modern times. ID is readily available if you have non-photo id to prove who you are. I and my fellow candidates are independents, running as "Democratic-Republicans" - the historic party of Jefferson, Madison, Monroe, and JQ Adams. We believe in a strict adherence to the Constitution - the WHOLE Constitution, including "Article the First" of the "Articles of Amendment" (The "Bill of Rights"), which was thought to have failed ratification until last Fall, when the ratification votes of Connecticut and Kentucky "turned up" in our research. With 80% of the then Fifteen States assenting, Article the First has been the law of the land since 1792. A lawsuit is pending in the Federal Third Circuit Court of Appeals - "LaVergne v Bryson, et al", Docket # 12-1171, compelling recognition of the historical fact of the ratification, AND the interpretation under the Constitutional Law-making process and the application of this Amendment to the present decennial apportionment. - Frederick John LaVergne
Frederick John LaVergne for Congress August 18, 2012 at 12:21 AM
Oral Arguments are Scheduled for 09/14/2012. In Ocean County, your Democratic-Republican Candidates for Freeholder are Tracy M. Caprioni and Scott Neuman. For Congress, in the Fourth District, we have Len Marshall, formerly of the New Jersey Conservative Party. In the Third District, I am the Candidate for the House of Representatives. We will be "bracketed" together on the ballot...in spite of our First Amendment Right to use the slogan "Democratic-Republican" - which IS our political philosophy, and which, as a party, predates the modern Democratic Party (the "Jacksonian Democrats") by nearly 30 years, and the modern "Republican" party by over 60 years. We have been blocked from using this historic name for our political affiliation in violation of our First Amendment Rights - this will have been remedied before the election...the initial denial was purely political and will not stand up to scrutiny even in the lowest court. http://www.facebook.com/FrederickJohnLaVergneForCongress?ref=hl
Lakeland63 September 08, 2012 at 04:48 PM
Everyone of age and residence has the right to vote. What is being suppressed is voting, two, three or four times under different names at different polls.
Frederick John LaVergne for Congress September 08, 2012 at 05:29 PM
If you want to see where voters were counted more than once, look no further than the Primary Election in June. If I told you that, by going in and pulling a lever for President, Vice President, Senator, Congressman, Freeholder x 2, Sheriff, Mayor, Councilperson...heck, the only one left out appears to be "dog-catcher"...that, for the purposes of determining "major party" status, the two major parties have, for YEARS, counted each of those lever-pulls as an individual ballot, because each has often failed to meet the mandatory standard of 10% of the total ballots cast in the prior NJ Assembly Election...without which, they do not enjoy a State-funded primary (that's right, you pay for it), a secure "Ballot Line" or "Bracket", and other preferential treatments? This last June, using the Constitutional interpretation of the law, the Democrats squeaked by because of the hotly contested race in NJ won by Bill Pascrell, but the anemic turnout of primary voters for the Republican Party, counted as individual voters, fell over 50,000 short of the required >267,000 votes necessary to retain Major Party status (and benefits). Meanwhile, we DO bracket...we being "Democratic-Republican" candidates in your community. The necessary litigation has been filed to compel the Board of Elections to follow the law as written, and to place our bracket appropriately on the left side of the ballot, with only other Democratic-Republican Candidates. Too bad we have to sue to be treated fairly.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »