You have lost your marbles. How does a photo ID prevent accidental third dosing any more than taking people’s information and putting it into the system?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Printable View
You have lost your marbles. How does a photo ID prevent accidental third dosing any more than taking people’s information and putting it into the system?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Just to "circle back" to the main issue...
one vote for one person, and that person has to be a legal, eligible, properly registered voter. Period. Anything else is voter fraud and disenfranchising of the millions of Americans who do it right.
80% of Americans support this.. 61% of democrats support voter ID laws..Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
We already have voter ID laws. Wouldn’t surprise me if much of that 80% haven’t heard the opposing view.Quote:
Originally Posted by FriscoDog
And part of the reason that I say that is because, in the same poll, 71 percent said they favored making it easier to vote. Why don’t you guys mention that part?Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
I really don't think it's some massive problem. The kind of thing that would be prevented by strict ID laws probably really is pretty rare. But having said that, it's not a totally unreasonable ask.
To me (and I know it's used as a bad faith argument sometimes, but I legitimately think it's a decent point) this is a problem for them in itself. Leaving aside voting, let's fix this if only so that this group has better options in life. Maybe there are other activities besides voting that they're missing out on by not having a good ID.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
It was kind of a beating to get a Texas DL (it gets a lot better once you have one for renewals). It's not as easy as it should be for women who get married and change their names. Simplify the process. Make it cheaper. Maybe find some ways to subsidize much or all of it for those in need. Maybe provide more help with the documentation (as in, have someone from the state bear the burden of tracking down the birth certificate instead of leaving it to the applicant).
I think it would also be proof of good intentions if there was some effort from the right to find ways to "prove" what they're looking to prove with other types of IDs. If the process to get a student ID isn't strict enough for lawmaker's tastes, maybe work on ways to make student IDs work somehow.
I wonder about this going forward. I agree it's the case now, and I also think that almost any action by any politician from either side is more likely to be an effort to stay in power than to act on principle. But the Democratic voters are increasingly more likely to be college educated. I don't think being stricter on IDs will hurt more Republican voters than Democrat voters anytime soon, but some of these other measures potentially could. I think the more populist your base is, the harder it's likely to be to get off from work to vote, etc. But then again, if you're in office now as an incumbent, you likely aren't concerned about the future so much as the now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
I don’t think folks would be objecting to the photo ID requirement if the same legislation requiring them somehow ensured that all eligible voters would actually get one.
If either side cared about more than just firing up the base and getting on Fox news (or MSNBC), you would probably see some horse-trading on the issue. Throw in another weekend of early voting and accept student IDs in exchange for a strict photo requirement. Or for tightening the already pretty safe option for what you have to do in order to vote without an ID.
Or like I said above - "fine, photo ID required, but the state has to make it way easier to get one."
That kind of thing.
But in the meantime, it's generally in Republicans best interest to have something to 1. explain any losses and 2. rant and rave and pass largely symbolic laws about. And it's in Democrats best interest to have an issue to 1. explain any losses and 2. fire up the base with "repression" talk.
I could go with that. Make my renewals $5 more so others can get a photo ID at no charge. Not sure anyone would even notice the extra $5 every 6 years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
Plus, if you don’t make it so that the state provides the photo ID for free, it raises 24th Amendment poll tax concerns.
Reckon how many named James Smith there are in Morehouse Parish? My guess is well over 50 adults living. Imagine the confusion if they all go to Walmart with no ID or picture ID for that matter.Quote:
Originally Posted by Guisslapp
And what does the photo ID do except prove that they are in fact one of those 50 James Smiths?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
They already collect info, like name and DOB for the system even without the ID.
Yes you are right, nothing could go wrong when voting in person or by mail with multiple same names. No need for any type ID to ensure one person one vote.
Hasn’t been a problem up to now. Why would it change all of a sudden?Quote:
Originally Posted by PawDawg
Hasn’t been a problem where they require picture IDs