Social Question

jca2's avatar

When someone tells you they're in favor of having to show ID in order to vote, how would you present a logical argument?

Asked by jca2 (12423points) April 3rd, 2021
114 responses
“Great Question” (4points)

A friend told me she is in favor of voters having to show ID in order to vote. She said since we need to show ID in order to go to the hospital, doctor, bank, and other places, she sees no problem with having to show ID to vote. I countered with the cost to obtain ID (fees for obtaining birth certificates, etc to get the non-drivers ID, etc.) but she said she feels that’s acceptable.

I told her we (she and I) take it for granted that we have ID, since we have drivers licenses and government ID (both of us work for the government), but I would like a better defense.

Observing members: 0
Composing members: 0

Answers

hello321's avatar

@jca2: “I countered with the cost to obtain ID (fees for obtaining birth certificates, etc to get the non-drivers ID, etc.) but she said she feels that’s acceptable.”

Your work is done.

There is nothing else to discuss. She admitted to you that she wants to disenfranchise the poor.

Remember – the entire purpose of proposed voter ID laws is disenfranchisement. She conceded.

zenvelo's avatar

My mother is 97: she does not have a current ID, her last one expired three years ago. She has a Medicare card for the hospital. It does not qualify as valid for voting. She has voted in every presidential election since 1948. You gonna tell her she can’t vote anymore?

Tropical_Willie's avatar

Does she wear a red baseball cap ?

jca2's avatar

@Tropical_Willie: My friend is pretty liberal on most things, except immigration and this voter ID thing. Otherwise, labor laws, restricting gun ownership, etc. she’s leaning to the left on.

JLeslie's avatar

If we require ID we need to be willing to issue free ID’s and help everyone acquire ID. Similar to how we make extra efforts to make sure everyone completes the census every ten years. The government spends money for people to contact everyone and even help them fill it out. If someone is against helping people get ID or against free ID, then they are trying to take away their vote, not just simply concerned about proper identification.

The people who don’t have ID are probably homeless people, people who are extremely poor, and the elderly. Especially the homeless would be harder to reach and help, but if they are registered to vote then that shows an interest and there could be efforts made.

People should realize that immigrants are probably more likely to have ID than anyone. They spend years keeping track of their paperwork to become citizens. They have to get their birth certificates translated if in a foreign language, they have green card ID’s before becoming citizens. They are more likely to know where their paperwork is than someone born here.

Meanwhile, mail-in ballots are a signature match, and begs the question is a government ID really necessary or are other substitutes like having an SS card and some other picture ID for instance sufficient.

stanleybmanly's avatar

My immediate question would be “Why now?” What has happened 250 years in that this is NOW an issue?

Tropical_Willie's avatar

@stanleybmanly to answer you question, sort of. . .. In the 1800s voters were the landed gentry, that paid a poll tax a receipt was their ID to vote. No women and not any slaves.

gondwanalon's avatar

@hello321 Are there really a substantial number of people out there who can’t get their hands on enough money for an ID? Cost about $60 for a certified copy of a birth certificate and a DMV photo ID. If people are that feeble and irresponsible in managing their personal lives then perhaps it’s best for everyone that they not vote (which effects the lives of responsible people).

smudges's avatar

@gondwanalon Have you not heard of the poverty level? Or living beneath the poverty level? I remember back when I couldn’t have gotten my hands on $60! $60 was groceries and gas for 2 weeks! Really, have you no compassion?

Tropical_Willie's avatar

@gondwanalon The poor are poorer than you can imagine. Food from food bank and they may not have seen a doctor or dentist in 5 or 10 years because they can’t afford one.

Demosthenes's avatar

Voting isn’t a privilege open only to those who can afford it; it’s the right of every citizen. If voter ID laws would prevent certain demographics from voting (by economic or racial group) then it is a method of suppression. If showing an ID is necessary, then everyone should receive a free government-issued ID.

hello321's avatar

@gondwanalon: “Are there really a substantial number of people out there who can’t get their hands on enough money for an ID?”

If the number is > 0 (or the possibility for it to be > 0), then it’s by definition an undemocratic proposal to take away the right to vote. You know this. This is the economic system that not only says it’s ok for people to be struggling for survival among obscene wealth – your preferred economic system requires this to be the case.

Just stop.

hello321's avatar

And not that it’s necessary to go beyond this line of argument because your friend has already admitted that it’s voter suppression, but you could also bring up the fact that it’s a solution to a problem that does not exist.

Have you even asked one of these anti-democracy people what they thing the “problem” is? They’re likely to tell you that someone could just walk up and pretend to be someone else and vote. That is an admission that they either a) don’t vote, or b) have been suffering from a massive brain injury and you caught them on a bad day.

Indulging their fantasy for a minute, you’ll find yourself in a strange situation. Person A goes to polling location and identifies himself as Person B. Poll worker crosses off Person A’s name and gives Person B the poll meant for Person A. Now Person A goes to vote and….oops – there is an immediate problem. The police are involved and we have a major situation of voter fraud. This is literal proof, and there is likely cameras documenting the entire thing.

^ Note, this conservative masturbation fantasy does not happen.

End of story. Give them a glass of water and sit them in front of the tv and tune it in to OANN or Fox.

si3tech's avatar

@jca2 There is no logical argument against voter ID. It is the ONLY way we will have election integrity. *consider this: the same people who fight against voter ID, when it comes to members of unions..will NOT allow members
without ID to vote! How telling!

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Demosthenes has the only acceptable compromise.

Kropotkin's avatar

@si3tech Clearly not, since @hello321 has already made arguments that pretty much refute the arguments for voter ID.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@gondwanalon, @si3tech

Not a fan of the Constitution, are you?

Zaku's avatar

You need to identify yourself to vote, so that the system can restrict voting to one person per vote, BUT it has not required ID documents for over 240 years, because there are other ways to sufficiently handle that, and the risk to a person if they try to vote more than once, compared to the negligible gain for them, makes that not a real problem.

You also should not need to show ID in order to go to the hospital or doctor. The bank only needs it for practical reasons, and not even strictly then (q.v. Swiss numbered bank accounts, or bankers who personally know their clients).

If people aren’t concerned about being required to show ID for things, I think they should watch more movies about police states where people were required to present documents to travel or not be arrested / abused by the police, to get why the general idea of being required to identify oneself with official documents is not a good happy thing.

JLeslie's avatar

If you don’t have ID you still get treated at a hospital if you have an emergency. Actually, I would guess doctors treat you too as long as you pay. They would just make the patient a John Doe.

Kropotkin's avatar

Don’t know how it is in other countries, but I’ve never had to provide ID at the hospital or to see my doctor. The only time I remember needing ID at the bank was when opening a new account.

P.S. And yet more logical arguments refuting voter ID by Zaku. I hope @si3tech is here to see all this!

JLeslie's avatar

@Kropotkin You don’t show your health card?

gondwanalon's avatar

Strange world some of you seem to live in. My family were about as poor as you can get. My Mother raised me and my two older sisters by herself with no “State Aid” (as she called it). I had no adult supervision at home. Mom worked 2 and 3 jobs and was always gone or was sleeping. Sometimes there wasn’t enough food and Mom wrote some “hot” checks (as she called them) to by groceries. I use to skip lunch at school by going to the bathroom to hide for a while. When I was 16 years old I got my first job washing pans in a restaurant. Used the money to buy cheap clothes and to get a driver’s license (with photo ID). Worked my way through College by working part time at KMC. Took me 6 years to get my BA. That opened many doors for me. But I always worked my ass off.

When people make poor choices and are lazy, I can see how they can get into trouble quickly. Perhaps those unfortunate people should be given a free photo ID’s paid for by tax payers.

@Darth_Algar HA! I thought that you were above asking such a ridiculous question.

Kropotkin's avatar

@JLeslie We don’t have such a thing, no. Usually you just need to provide name, date of birth, and name of your GP when needing the hospital.

If I go to my clinic to make an appointment with the doctor (which can be done online or by phone) it’s enough to just provide your name, date of birth and address.

I did need ID and more work details to get my first Covid vaccination, but not for the second one. This was more of a special case as it was specifically for carers and support workers.

jca2's avatar

@Kropotkin: When I go to the hospital or doctor, I need to show both a drivers’ license (ID) and insurance card.

Kropotkin's avatar

@jca2 Maybe you don’t have free healthcare.

jca2's avatar

I have health insurance but I believe that the ID requirement is standard in both NY and CT. I don’t know about other states.

JLeslie's avatar

@Kropotkin For many years I would just show my insurance card the first time at a new doctor and after that I didn’t need to show ID. The last ten years doctors started requiring showing license and ID every single f**king time and it really pissed me off. Like it was some new legal requirement. Suddenly, when COVID hit, half my doctors stopped requiring seeing ID, so that means there is no legal requirement and the places still making patients do it don’t care that they are touching our cards and risking moving germs to each other. It really bothers.

Besides the germ factor I really don’t need another card stuffed in my wallet, or the hassle with checking in at the doctor’s office.

Kropotkin's avatar

@gondwanalon We don’t get to pick our personality traits, which are quite stable over life, and are heavily determined by inherited genes and environmental influences.

Highly conscientious types. which I’ll guess you are from what you’ve written, are more goal oriented and want to ‘fit in’ with social norms and societal expectations. It’s really a great trait to have to “succeed” in life, and typical of ‘rags to riches’ stories and those who like to attribute all their success to themselves alone (and dismiss any possible luck or external factors that helped them along the way).

It has some negatives, but it’s generally an adaptive trait to have.

I happen to be lazy (carefree), and score very low on the conscientiousness trait. Despite my intelligence and thinking skills, I’ve an unfortunate combination of other traits that means I’ll never be rich or climb up the career ladder. I’m basically maladaptive to current society, and my intelligence and thinking skills are largely wasted on futile arguments on obscure internet fora.

The thing is, a lot of “lazy and irresponsible” people who make “poor choices” are likely to have better ideas about how to improve society than the “hard working” and “responsible” types. It’s because the latter group, into which I believe you fall, never really felt the need to question or analyse it. It was just a matter of making good decisions and working hard (and pretending you never got lucky in any way at all).

There’s actually some weak evidence (mainly for a lack of studies and methodological difficulties) that conscientious populations make for overall worse societies. Unequivocally, you do tend to vote for dumb conservative arseholes.

gondwanalon's avatar

@Kropotkin I quickly learned that my “intelligence and thinking skills” were substantially lower than the brightest students in college. I made up for my shortcomings through strong desire, perseverance and seemingly limitless patience. Some people have wonderful talent. Others have brilliant minds. My strong point seems to be bold determination and blind defiance. That has served me well as I pushed through my life using mostly brute force.

I did vote for Trump. And I agree that Trump is a conservative a-hole. But he is far from being dumb.

KNOWITALL's avatar

Does anyone have actual stats on the percentage of the US population without photo id’s? Is this an actual problem or an emotion-based divisive non-issue?

jca2's avatar

@KNOWITALL: I was just googling it after you asked and I found sites that say approximately 11% of people but some of those sites are from 2012. Not sure if drives to get voters signed up have lessened that number in the past 8 years.

hello321's avatar

@KNOWITALL: “Is this an actual problem or an emotion-based divisive non-issue?”

It is a non-issue. That’s because proposing that people must show an ID to vote is a solution to a non-issue and problem that doesn’t exist.

Not only have I been that person without an ID and known people without an ID – to even provide statistics on this is to play into the narrative of those with anti-democratic goals.

The only thing you need to ponder if you’re wondering if photo ID laws are anti-democratic and designed to suppress voting is to ask if it’s possible that a single person might not have a photo ID and therefore be unable to vote. That’s it. You’re done. You don’t need to figure out the percentage.

Don’t make this more complicated than it is.

Dutchess_III's avatar

IMO there is absolutely nothing wrong with showing ID somewhere along the line. I can’t imagine anyone having a problem with it.

hello321's avatar

dear lord

jca2's avatar

@Dutchess_III: The problem is, if you have a driver’s license then you have ID. If you don’t drive, it costs money to get the ID. Not only does it cost money to get the actual ID, it costs money to get the proof that you need to get the ID.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I know all of that. It costs money to renew our driver’s license, too. But we need ID in so many aspects of our lives that I can’t imagine anyone having no ID. Hell I need to show ID when I check out at Goodwill.
If anyone doesn’t have the wherewithal to get ID I can’t imagine them having the wherewithal to vote.

hello321's avatar

@jca2 – ^ See? These people are pretty open about their desire to disenfranchise people.

Zaku's avatar

I don’t need an ID to check out at Goodwill.

Darth_Algar's avatar

What? I’ve never been asked for an ID at the Goodwill.

Darth_Algar's avatar

And seriously people: US Constitution, specifically the 24th Amendment. Look it up.

jca2's avatar

@Dutchess_III: I don’t need an ID to check out at Goodwill.

zenvelo's avatar

@Dutchess_III

“wherewithal noun the money or other means needed for a particular purpose.”

So, you expect people to pay for the right to vote?

Tropical_Willie's avatar

That study finds that black voters in Texas were about 54 percent more likely to vote without an ID than non-Hispanic, whites voters. Hispanic voters were 14 percent more likely.
Guess who the GOP doesn’t want to vote . . . I’ll wait while you figure it out ! j.k.

Black voter are more likely to vote for Democratic party.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I expect people to pay for an ID. We have to show ID in all kinds of places, under all kinds of circumstances. I can’t imagine anyone not having an ID.

jca2's avatar

@Dutchess_III: You don’t see the link between having to have an ID to vote= having to pay for an ID = having to pay to vote?

hello321's avatar

^ She does.

Dutchess_III's avatar

You need an ID for lots and lots of things besides voting.

jca2's avatar

@Dutchess_III: You don’t think voting should be free, since it’s a constitutional right?

hello321's avatar

@Dutchess_III: “You need an ID for lots and lots of things besides voting.”

Besides the fact that you’ve heard this on Fox, have you tried to digest what this sentence actually means in the context of voting and how absurd it makes you sound?

Dutchess_III's avatar

Apply for foodstamps? Show ID.
Open a bank account? Show ID.
Get pulled over? Show ID.
I had to show my ID just the other day but I don’t remember why.
Have you never had to show ID?

Response moderated (Flame-Bait)
smudges's avatar

If you’re too poor to own a car, then you don’t need a driver’s license; no problem with getting pulled over. Bank account? No money to put in it. Need food stamps? They will accept documents such as a piece of mail showing your address; if you have no address, there are other documents they will accept, such as a letter from the shelter where you are staying. See, the people who work in fields in which the agency cares about people know that often, the poor don’t have the typical IDs that many of us have. There are people who get by without having an ID, and it’s frivolous and prejudicial to require them to have one in order to accomplish one of our constitutional rights.

jca2's avatar

@Dutchess_III: I show ID all the time but as I mentioned above, since I drive and since I work for the government, I have two foolproof forms of ID right there. Plus, since I work, I have no problem paying the fees to get the drivers’ license. However, if I didn’t work, and had no money, or was really short on money and could barely make ends meet, even to get the money to get a copy of my birth certificate would be really tough. I think people that drive take for granted that having ID is something simple. Try to put yourself in someone else’s shoes.

Dutchess_III's avatar

You can get state ID. It doesn’t have to be a driver’s license.

sadiesayit's avatar

@Dutchess_III—are you saying that people should or ought to have IDs in order to vote, or are you expressing your surprise at the idea that many people in the country don’t have IDs? Because those are separate things.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Having ID to vote is simply common sense. What’s to stop other countries from voting in our elections?

Tropical_Willie's avatar

“Having ID to vote is simply common sense. What’s to stop other countries from voting in our elections?”

You have to register to VOTE !!

That is it; some state require a photo ID to vote but not all. Operative word is register !

Fraud at voter polls is counted, in my state of North Carolina (there are 7 million registered voters), by a couple of handfuls and most are felons.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I know you have to register to vote. That’s when I had to show ID.
When I actually vote they glance at my ID and cross my name off a list.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

Not in all states @Dutchess_III.

My state tried setting up restrictive photo ID requirements (GOP controlled state Congress) it was declared unconstitutional . . . .

Dutchess_III's avatar

Why??? What is wrong with proving what jurisdiction you live in?

smudges's avatar

^^ Ohforgawd’ssake! What’s wrong is all the reasons that have been laid out here!

hello321's avatar

^ She’s completely fine with implementing a poll tax and disenfranchising people since it helps the Republicans. She’s explicitly saying it’s ok to stop poor people from voting, while pretending that there it’s worth it because she has to show an ID when renting a jet ski or something.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@hello321 I wish you would try harder to see another point of view and knock off sweeping judgements of people you don’t know.
@Dutchess is not Republican, we all know this, and she can have an unpopular opinion and still be a Democrat or however she identifies.
She mentioned registering a vehicle, which means to me, she expects those 11% to make a small effort to be sure requirements are met in order to exercise the right to vote. Many would agree, regardless of party.

@jca2 Thanks for providing a factual number, very helpful. That is higher than I thought actually. Did it give a demography by chance?

hello321's avatar

@KNOWITALL: “I wish you would try harder to see another point of view and knock off sweeping judgements of people you don’t know.”

I’m not making any sweeping judgements. She has explicitly stated that she’s ok with disenfranchising people:

- IMO there is absolutely nothing wrong with showing ID somewhere along the line. I can’t imagine anyone having a problem with it.

- I know all of that. It costs money to renew our driver’s license, too. But we need ID in so many aspects of our lives that I can’t imagine anyone having no ID. Hell I need to show ID when I check out at Goodwill.
If anyone doesn’t have the wherewithal to get ID I can’t imagine them having the wherewithal to vote.

And all of this to solve a “problem” she admits doesn’t exist.

How could this possibly be described as a “sweeping judgement” (and what is that supposed to mean anyway)?

jca2's avatar

@KNOWITALL: I got this from Politifact.org: ” Before the 2008 presidential election, researchers from the University of Washington and other schools carried out a national telephone survey of 4,563 registered voters. In the survey, 10 percent of blacks, 11 percent of Hispanics and 5 percent of whites said they did not have a valid driver’s license or an ID issued by their home state.” I googled “percentage of people in the US who don’t have ID.” There are a lot of more current links but that’s the first one I could find this morning that has the breakdown.

When I was researching just now, a lot of the sites talk about the actual problem – elderly people born at home who don’t have birth certificates, or people needing ID in order to get ID, which puts them back at square one.

JLeslie's avatar

@hello321 You accused Dutchess_III of being a Republican, and she definitely is not. If you don’t agree with her opinion on the topic then explain why, and maybe she will change her mind, but you are just acting pissed off and intolerant and putting her in a box that she is not in. Mischaracterizing her won’t help you change her mind, it just means you don’t listen to her when she writes on other Q’s, and you don’t know her. Also @KNOWITALL who usually is aligned with Republicans, obviously shows efforts to hear other opinions and read statistics that are provided, and does not just follow along with everything the Republican party says. Seems like we should be encouraging a willingness to listen to other points of view and to disagree with our political parties some times. Just my opinion. People don’t always change their mind in a fast minute, but being willing to have a conversation shows there can be changes in thought on a subject, why not allow for that rather than just crucify people and put them on defensive?

hello321's avatar

^ huh?

KNOWITALL's avatar

@JLeslie Exactly, thanks.

Zaku's avatar

@hello321 I agree with you that requiring official ID to vote is a problem, but you did overstate your conclusions about @Dutchess_III . She just hasn’t been getting what the point is – it’s about her norms rather than her politics, which is part of what actual vote-suppressing politicians are counting on to get ID laws accepted and passed.

hello321's avatar

If she was arguing the following, there would be something to discuss:

Not a single voter will be disenfranchised by photo ID laws.

We could provide reasons why this is not the case, and explore how these laws are a solution to a non-existent problem.

However, she has acknowledged that she fully understands that this will disenfranchise people, yet she does not care.

Where do you go from there? If the entire issue of photo ID voting laws is based around the concept of whether or not people would be disenfranchised, then if a person concedes that people will be disenfranchised, then the discussion is over.

She agrees with me that people will be disenfranchised if required to show a photo ID to vote. What we disagree on is whether it’s right to disenfranchise people based on income. Arguing this issue with someone is completely useless, and not really the issue.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@hello321 You could ask her why she believes the photo id would be effective since there are practically zero cases of in-person voter fraud.

Kansas, her state, has required photo id of some kind since 2011. It’s currently required in twelve states in the US with another 13 pursuing the same thing.

It’s the Supreme Court’s decision now, not ours, as Wisconsin and others ruled it as constitutional to require photo id.

hello321's avatar

@KNOWITALL: _“You could ask her why she believes the photo id would be effective since there are practically zero cases of in-person voter fraud.”

I’m not particularly interested in this line of argument when it comes to someone who has stated that it’s ok to disenfranchise people. Do you believe her desire to set a minimum price to vote is based on a true desire that voting is broken due to people misidentifying themselves at polling booths?

I asked “this question’:https://www.fluther.com/226104/when-you-go-to-vote-how-often-are-you-turned-away/, and she said that she had never been sent home without being able to vote because someone had pretended to be her and voted in her place.

It’s quite possible that she’s just parroting conservative spin and hasn’t really given any of this some thought. But she’s an adult and has had plenty of time to understand the issues at play here. She has engaged the various threads around this with nonsensical comments and refused to elaborate. I was hoping when she elaborated on her conservative talking points, she’d see the absurdity herself. But she is unwilling to do any of that.

She’s on the wrong side of a very easy issue, and I understand that some of you choose to race to “both sides” this in an attempt to find the mythical truth that exists between two positions. You two can go right ahead and engage her. Let’s see how far you get.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@Dutchess_III How would you feel if you knew about 30k people in your state were ineligible to vote due to this law specifically?
Those probably would have been mostly Democratic votes based on the Latino and Black population in Kansas.

Here’s an article to back that up.
https://publicintegrity.org/politics/elections/us-polling-places/kansas-legacy-of-voter-suppression-clouds-progress/

@hello321 Let me rephrase in Midwestern. :)

Dutchess_III's avatar

Automatic voter registration would help.

stanleybmanly's avatar

We should step back and look at this. The requirement for photo ID sounds like a reasonable request in this day and age. And I agree. But here’s the deal. Our voting process was established and uniform long before there were established forms of identification. You show up at the polls, give your name and address. A poll worker reviews the list of registered voters and checks your name off the list. That’s been the routine and it’s worked just fine. It is the assumption that the routine NO LONGER WORKS with NO evidence supporting that assumption that makes me suspicious of the motivation behind these proposals. The argument that photo ID would serve as a check against possible fraud makes sense, but if there little evidence of voter fraud in these 250 years, what’s the problem? Considering the traditional method, and the fact that no one can provide an explanation as to how that method might be gamed to sway an election, the new requirement is in fact a NEW obstacle between the citizen and his/her access to the vote. It’s that simple. If the necessity cannot be demonstrated, why erect another hurdle?

seawulf575's avatar

I keep hearing about the poverty angle of the voter ID law. But when I do some research I find that IDs are required to buy alcohol. To buy cigarettes. To open a bank account. To apply for welfare. To apply for food stamps. To apply for Medicare or Social Security. To apply for unemployment. To apply for a job. To go to a doctor. To rent an apartment or buy a house. To drive a car. To buy a car. To rent a car. To get on an airplane. To get married. To adopt a pet. To buy a gun. To get a hunting license. To get a fishing license. To pick up many prescriptions. To apply for a permit to protest. To enter many government buildings. The list goes on and on. Are all you that are saying the poor can’t get an ID aren’t doing any of these things? They are getting welfare and food stamps without an ID? They are buying beer without an ID? They are going to the courthouse without an ID? They are driving cars without an ID?
When you cut through all the bullshit, the number of people that don’t have some form of Identification is actually relatively small. And many states make getting an ID easy and very cost effective if not free. So what is the REAL problem with asking people to prove who they are when they vote?

stanleybmanly's avatar

You want to know the difference? The difference is that in virtually every one of those instances you have listed, the requirement for identification was established to exercise a PRIVILEGE. They are IMPOSITIONS levied on those seeking to avail themselves of that privilege. Voting was established as a RIGHT before documented proof of identity was the norm. It has been the tradition and standard since with NO legitimately demonstrated excuse for its modification. The fact that there are complaints exclusively from those places notorious for excluding a SPECIFIC class of citizens from their RIGHTS is more than suspicious.

hello321's avatar

@seawulf575: “So what is the REAL problem with asking people to prove who they are when they vote?”

What is wrong with the way it works now? You say your name and address, they cross you off, and then you vote. If someone then came and claimed they were the same person, they would be sent home because they “already voted”. So, you would have a clear case of voter fraud. This doesn’t happen.

You didn’t indicate how often this happens to you, so am I to assume this has never happened to you either?

seawulf575's avatar

@stanleybmanly Once again, you dodge the point. All those things require IDs. Every day, many of those things are done by the poor in this country. There is no problem with them having IDs to do all those things and they have those IDs. So the claim that it is an undo burden is bogus since it has been proven over and over that having an ID is not a barrier.

seawulf575's avatar

@hello321 What’s wrong with the way it works now? Because there are many cases of improper votes being cast. Either through fraud or clerical errors, it happens a lot more than you think. But you are showing how little you know about voting. If you show up at the polls and are told you have already voted, you aren’t just turned away. You are given a provisional ballot which is then put into a pile to be researched later. It isn’t a clear cut case of voter fraud even then, but it does put a big question mark on that vote. Your vote may or may not get counted later on. Here’s an example of how that is to work. Interesting thing in this article is that they say often the cases of someone previously voting for you are a clerical error…that a polling worker chose the wrong name or a similar name when another person voted. That is a possibility, but one that would be eliminated or at least greatly reduced with an ID check. But then it does on to say that out of 60,000 provisional ballots that were cast in the last election in NC, 69% of them were because the person was not registered. That is over 41,000 unregistered people trying to vote. Seems an awful lot for mere human error. And it is an error that showing an ID would eliminate. If you show up and say you are Joe Fabeetz and show an ID, they can readily see if you are registered to vote, if you have already voted, and a few other potential scams that could and probably do occur.

I didn’t indicate anything on that silly Fluther question because it looked amazingly like a leftist self-congratulatory party. If you would like an answer, it has never happened to me, but did to my wife. Why should we have to wait until it happens to every person before we agree it isn’t acceptable? OR do you think showing up and being told you have already voted acceptable?

BTW, I notice you didn’t actually answer the question of what is the REAL problem with askign people to prove who they are when they vote? You completely dodged that one. Care to take a stab and answering that?

hello321's avatar

@seawulf575: “what is the REAL problem with askign people to prove who they are when they vote”

- It amounts to a poll tax.
– It takes away the right to vote.

I’m not going to argue why disenfranchising people is bad.

And since this is literally not a problem, “fixing” it would = creating a problem.

hello321's avatar

@KNOWITALL – You tried. I think there might be an attention issue at play here.

KNOWITALL's avatar

@hello321 Some issues reach into the core of a person’s belief system. It’s not always comfortable or quick. :)

stanleybmanly's avatar

@seawulf575 i have not dodged anything. I’m telling you point blank that there is a difference between a privilege and a right. This is why you may be charged a fee for a driver’s license but poll taxes are illegal. That is why you are compelled to have that license to drive, while you CANNOT be licensed to vote. That is also why you are allowed to vote simply by demonstrating that you are registered, and that demonstration is achieved through your declaration at your polling place and that fact verified by the list therein.

Dutchess_III's avatar

There are notmany cases of improper votes being cast.@seawulf575. Unless you can provide proof otherwise. Which you can’t/ won’t.

seawulf575's avatar

@hello321 It isn’t a tax at all. Just like the penalties associated with Obamacare weren’t taxes. And when many states are giving away the IDs, saying it is a tax or taking away the right to vote is meaningless. And when an ID is already required for so many things and even the poor have the IDs already, it already puts to rest the entire argument you have.
As for disenfranchising people, I think this poll would argue with you. What is it? 69% of blacks favor voter ID laws? 60% of Democrats? 75% of all American voters? Doesn’t sound like much disenfranchisement to me.

So…blacks are okay with it, Hispanics are okay with it, Democrats and Republicans are okay with it, it isn’t a tax and isn’t really limiting anyone from voting and it isn’t disenfranchising anyone, and most other countries already do it, the question still remains, but now it is focusing more specifically on YOU.

Why are you so against Voter ID laws? Do you not have an ID? Would having to prove you are who you say you are be so hard? Are you so dirt poor, uneducated, and incapable that having to get an ID would be an insurmountable task?

stanleybmanly's avatar

None of that is what I object to. None of that is the issue. The issue is about erecting an obstacle in a process that is working JUST FINE. It is about inventing issues to promote an agenda. It is about adding an unnecessary requirement to a process we are otherwise GUARANTEED. The argument that it is a small obstacle does not counter the fact that it is an UNNECESSARY obstacle with little or no justification.

Dutchess_III's avatar

But this process has required ID to get registered @StanMan.

hello321's avatar

I forgot why I don’t engage @seawulf575.

@seawulf575: “As for disenfranchising people, I think this poll would argue with you. What is it? 69% of blacks favor voter ID laws? 60% of Democrats? 75% of all American voters? Doesn’t sound like much disenfranchisement to me.”

How many people like jelly donuts? I’m sure that’s relevant to the issue of disenfranchisement as well, right? Are you trying to do this? You respond to a claim that stopping people from voting is disenfranchisement with a poll about how popular disenfranchisement is? Huh?

This is too much. And what’s with the Obamacare nonsense? Is that supposed to get me to agree with you? I’m very anti-ACA, so try to Fox news someone else. I’m also not a Democrat.

@seawulf575: “Why are you so against Voter ID laws? Do you not have an ID?”

Maybe it’s because in this absurdity that we call “democracy”, the only thing that we have is a largely performative ritual called voting. And the explicit attempts to take that away should make everyone ready to storm the capital for real.

Personally, I’ve been without a photo ID a few times in my life years after registering to vote. I was still able to vote because you don’t show an id to vote. Know why? Because it isn’t a problem. It just isn’t.

I get that you’re anti-democracy and all, but just say it. Someone else in this thread already did. Join them.

seawulf575's avatar

@hello321 I think you need to get out a dictionary and look up disenfranchisement. Because I don’t think it means what you think it means. When a large majority of people are in favor of Voter IDs being required, you can’t claim disenfranchisement by requiring them.
But let me turn that around on you for a moment. A large majority of the American voting public WANTS voter IDs. So by you fighting against them, you are trying to disenfranchise them. I think that makes you want to destroy the vote and makes you anti-democracy, doesn’t it?

hello321's avatar

^ Take care skippy. I think we’re dealing with a language barrier at this point. I’m not sure what you’re native language is, but maybe that’s what is causing the miscommunication.

stanleybmanly's avatar

@Dutchess III That’s it exactly. You register ONCE and you’re good to go from there on out, until you move. THAT’s the way it has always worked. That’s the way it should continue. There are 2 aspects to this issue that mark the necessity for its vigorous resistance. The first is the record of the places and people advocating it and last but not least, the failure to provide credible evidence for the necessity of it. The history of voting in these places dictates that we should sit up when ANY measure is proposed that is suited to excuse turning people away from the polls. And THAT is what this is about!

Dutchess_III's avatar

So if everyone has sufficient ID to show one time to get registered, what is this voter supression brouhaha all about? Maybe I just don’t understand what they’re demanding.

stanleybmanly's avatar

There was a time when you could go to your polling place with a utility bill to register to vote. I can remember when I was a boy, if you didn’t have Identification, but gave your address, there were people in the registrars office who would look you up in the phone book, then mail you notification of your polling place. The point is that there is no credible way for an individual to rely on perpetrating voter fraud to the the extent of swinging an election.

seawulf575's avatar

So @stanleybmanly If asking someone to show an ID to vote is a tax and therefore wrong because you are making them pay for their rights, then doesn’t the same apply to paying for a license to buy a gun? Or making someone buy insurance because they have a gun? Or to make them invest in a giant safe to keep a gun in? So you are against all those things too, right?

hello321's avatar

@Dutchess_III – You don’t necessarily need a photo ID to register in all states. But even if you did, you’re only talking about one time and then you vote forever as long as you still live there.

I first voted in 1992. I’ve never had to show any ID since. What if I had lost my license and was not working and was not driving and didn’t have a need for a license. All of a sudden the state says that I need a photo ID (pay to vote), then I would be unable to.

There are plenty of older people who haven’t driven in decades and have never had to show an ID when voting. Those people would not be able to vote. The US has extremely-high poverty and inequality rates. The combination of reducing polling locations and making voting cost money is the definition of taking away someone’s ability to vote.

hello321's avatar

The self-owning occuring here is top-notch. Guns :)

Tropical_Willie's avatar

Disenfranchisement – -

The state of being deprived of a right or privilege, especially the right to vote.

“the widespread disenfranchisement of minority voters”

Where does it say the majority can take away the ability to vote.

Dutchess_III's avatar

What is the bill proposing?

stanleybmanly's avatar

@seawulf575 What I’m against is irrelevant. And you who whine here about government interference and overregulation should certainly understand my insistence that ANY additional impediment between a citizen and his vote MUST be proven necessary. What I’m saying is that your word regarding who you are is currently accepted once you are registered. If there is any doubt, the state should be inconvenienced in demonstrating it NOT the voter. That’s the way it has ALWAYS worked. What has changed?

stanleybmanly's avatar

@DutchessIII the proposal is that one must show identification before being permitted to vote. It in effect would be an excuse to eliminate such traditions as the poll workers recognizing or knowing you as sufficient. It appears to be a simple enough regulation, but you MUST consider the motivation for it, and recognize it for what it is. And what it is is another hoop between you and the ballot box. And then you must consider just which segment of the population likely to forget or misplace their ID. Personally, this past year, I bet I haven’t seen my driver’s license or passport card. I know when I walk to the corner NOW to cast my vote I don’t reach for my wallet. It’s the key to the door that matters.

seawulf575's avatar

@Tropical_Willie but the majority of minorities want the change. They want honest and fair elections. You are trying to deprive them of that right by fighting against Voter ID laws.

As for the majority taking away a right, it happens all the time. And sometimes it’s the minority taking away rights.

Dutchess_III's avatar

Well, you have to show ID to get registered. How is that any different?

stanleybmanly's avatar

@seawulf575 that is the flaw in your reasoning—the idea that they are being deprived of free and fair elections NOW. You want to erect the barriers against a hypothetical flaw which is NOT in evidence.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

The last time the “the majority of minorities want(ed) the change” to disenfranchise a group was Germany in the 1930’s !

Get my drift !

Dutchess_III's avatar

I found this:
The law also does away with the signature-matching system Georgia used to use to check the identities of absentee voters. Instead, voters will have to provide their Georgia driver’s license number, the number on their state identification card, or the last four digits of their Social Security number. If they don’t have any of that, they can provide one of several alternative forms of identification, such as a copy of a utility bill, bank statement or government check. Advocates of the change say that this identification system is more precise than subjective attempts to try to match handwriting…”

seawulf575's avatar

@Dutchess_III Because it might be someone else voting for you. Just because you showed an ID to register doesn’t equal it being you at the poll. And if you had an ID to register, why is showing it when you vote such a burden?

stanleybmanly's avatar

The difference is that unlike other functions for which identification is required, voting was established prior to an era when documentation was common. The tradition is to register, usually within a specified period prior to your first time voting in a certain district or precinct. This period supposedly allows the agency overseeing the elections to verify the validity of your information. If you are registered, it is your responsibility to notify said agency of your change of address should you move. And that is the extent of YOUR obligation aside from the apparently often considerable inconvenience of physically attending your polling place and standing in line. The obligation to obtain, carry and flash a document transfers the burden of proof from the back of the state to that of the voter.

Dutchess_III's avatar

I didn’t ask a question.

stanleybmanly's avatar

It shouldn’t be up to you to prove you are entitled to vote. Once you are registered, the state has the duty to show why you should not be entitled to vote.

Darth_Algar's avatar

@Dutchess_III “Well, you have to show ID to get registered.”

I didn’t. I had to establish my identity, that I was who I claimed I was, yes. But I was not required to present an ID card for this. An ID card was simply one, but not the only, form accepted.

For that matter, I actually registered to vote before I had an ID card. Registering to vote was pretty much the first thing I did upon turning 18.

JLeslie's avatar

We don’t have to show ID in Florida to register either. I’m not sure what other documents they take. I think you do probably need some sort of documentation.

Here’s a link https://registertovoteflorida.gov/home

Dutchess_III's avatar

In my post above Ga accepts all kinds of proof of identity like bills with your address on it.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.

Mobile | Desktop


Send Feedback   

`