Should registering to vote require a federal and state background check? What does Obama and Acorn think?

In this last election cycle, there was a great deal of controversy over the actions of groups such as Acorn. As most people know, getting a voter registration card is very easy in many parts of the country.

The identity requirements in California are this:

• A first-time voter who registers by mail must submit a COPY of one of the following documents with his or her absentee ballot:

1) current and valid photo identification;


2) current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name and address of the voter.

Basically, give them a name, and address, and a utility bill in that name and address. The utility companies do not verify identity, and so the name can be completely false.

Given how easy it is to generate a fake voter ID, wouldn’t it be in the best interest of the real citizens of this country to require a federal background check? The procedure would be to verify the social security number with the three credit bureaus, and then do a criminal search to insure that they are not a felon. That criminal search could be done with the same instant background check system used to buy a gun, it’s in place and available.


From some of your answers, it appears that you think that the purpose of such a registration would be to restrict legal voting. That is not what I am asking about. From all I can see, this would have no effect on legal citizens voting. With a very few exceptions, all citizens of this country have social security numbers and can get either a drivers license or a state ID card. This would fulfill the basic form of ID required. The credit bureaus are used to verify the link between the name and the Social Security card. ADP could also be used to do this. The instant background check for firearms has been online for years and works reasonably well. The only people that would not want to have their ID verified would be those that have something to hide.

This would not impact minority citizens, they have the needed ID.

14 Answers

  • 1 decade ago
    Favourite answer

    There should be a national registry so nobody can vote in person in one state and absentee in another like millions of people did last election.

    We should have to provide proof of identity...

    Let's not have another stolen election...this one depressed me. Acorn and Chicago is all just too much!

  • Paul
    Lv 4
    4 years ago

    Get a No Cost Background Check Scan at

    Its a sensible way to start. The site allows you to do a no cost scan simply to find out if any sort of data is in existence. A smaller analysis is done without cost. To get a detailed report its a modest payment.

    You may not realize how many good reasons there are to try and find out more about the people around you. After all, whether you're talking about new friends, employees, doctors, caretakers for elderly family members, or even significant others, you, as a citizen, have a right to know whether the people you surround yourself with are who they say they are. This goes double in any situation that involves your children, which not only includes teachers and babysitters, but also scout masters, little league coaches and others. Bottom line, if you want to find out more about someone, you should perform a background check.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Background check for what?

    You can register to vote if you're a citizen 18 or older.

    That's all there is to it.

    What else would you be looking for?

    By the way, convicted felons can vote if they have finished their sentences.

    Yes, really.

    People in jail can vote if they have not been convicted yet.

    Yes, really.

    Why do you want to keep people from voting?

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Yes what a wonderful idea!! You will create a new department or government! That is what we need more wasted tax payer money on something that isn't broken! Only Republicans seem to think that things that work are broken.

    Why do Republicans think people will do things for nothing without something in return? Good luck shrinking government with these grand ideas! WHAT A THINKER!!!


  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    absolutely NOT. Being a US citizen, it is your constitutional right to vote regardless of how your character, credit score, education etc etc is. Imposing any conditions on the citizen for voting, takes away the true meaning of being a democracy. That is more or less like a dictatorship regime.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    That would cost a lot of money . Something a fiscal conservative Rep would not like. I mean they are so against spending our tax money on actually helping Americans for a change . But further trashing the constitution (as in the patriot act ) like that would cost .

  • 1 decade ago

    There hasn't been any real controversy except that which Fox, Limbaugh etc trumped up in desperation.

    I wonder who would monitor the monitors? lol.

    I wouldn't mind tighter restrictions myself but i worry that every improvement brings its own corruption. Look at Diebold.

  • 1 decade ago

    What's wrong with a felon voting? Really i want to know?

  • Panda
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago

    It is up to the official local Registrar of the town, city, county and State to determine whether a voter is eligible to vote or not .. what you are referring to is the 'application' to vote . . those are filled out and than it is the responsibility of the local Registrars to verify them .. that's their job.

    Definition for Registrar

    1. One who is in charge of official records.

    Registrar of Voters

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Too much money to conduct background checks.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.