State Senator Mary Lazich (R-New Berlin) represents parts of four counties: Milwaukee, Waukesha, Racine, and Walworth. Her Senate District 28 includes New Berlin, Franklin, Greendale, Hales Corners, Muskego, Waterford, Big Bend, the town of Vernon and parts of Greenfield, East Troy, and Mukwonago. Senator Lazich has been in the Legislature for more than a decade. She considers herself a tireless crusader for lower taxes, reduced spending and smaller government.
Here is a very interesting story from the state’s capital city. See if you detect any irony.
The Wisconsin State Journal reports the
“The Madison School District will ask for proof of age when registering students who live with people other than their parents or guardians or those who are 18 years or older and are enrolling themselves for school. The district disclosed the new procedure — which goes into effect next month for the 2010-11 school year — in a statement to the State Journal dated July 23 and received Monday. The announcement comes three months after the revelation that a 21-year-old gang member charged in a fatal April shooting had enrolled in
Asking for proof of age will serve as a good ‘second-check’ on information that is provided with the student's standard registration forms and any information received from a former school,’ the district said in its statement to the newspaper.
Don Johnson, superintendent of the Middleton-Cross Plains School District, which also has reviewed its enrollment policy, said the district will be more aggressive in asking for proof of age from students who don't provide it during registration.
‘In every case, we'll make at least three attempts to get that birth certificate or proof of name or date of birth,’ Johnson said.”
I find it more than a bit strange that a school district can, without much fanfare, opposition, or controversy, quietly and quickly implement a policy requiring proof of age and promise to enforce it aggressively. However, the state cannot find its way to implement a common sense photo ID requirement for voting.
Historically, Democrat lawmakers in
Here are two examples of photo ID irony.
1) From a Florida Democrat website:
“The Congressional district-level caucuses to select
In order to participate in the district-level caucus, one must establish that he or she is a registered Democratic voter in the Congressional district within which the caucus is taking place. Voters must present a photo I.D. and if possible, a voter information card.”
2) The Las Vegas Review Journal ran an editorial about Nevada Democrat presidential caucuses during January 2008 that read, in part:
“For decades, Democrats have stood against strengthening voter identification standards at polling sites. Modest identification reforms have been enacted in about half the states, with a handful of them requiring photo identification to prevent election fraud and uphold the integrity of balloting.
Although Americans need photo ID to write checks, use credit cards, board airplanes and even collect welfare benefits, Democrats have argued that lower-income and minority citizens are less likely to possess acceptable identification, and therefore more likely to be denied their right to vote.
But for Saturday's much-anticipated caucus, the state party is poised to demand that Strip workers -- many of them minority, low-income citizens -- furnish ID to participate in the ‘at-large’ sites set up near major hotels to accommodate them.”
I guess showing proof of age or a photo ID isn’t such a terrible burden after all.