Why I am FOR Voter ID

I envision something like that being rejected as a "federalizing" of elections. The same BS we hear about the proposals to standardize voting procedures now. The point being Repub states have already proven their goal is not to have voter participation by all eligible voters. They don't want to facilitate voting so why start now?

There is a large and growing pile of evidence that strict voter ID laws disproportionately impact voters of color.

• Using county-level turnout data around the country, researchers demonstrated that the racial turnout gap grew when states enacted strict voter ID laws.
• Researchers have also looked specifically at the turnout of individuals in North Carolina without proper identification, and they found that the enactment of the law reduced turnout. The turnout effects continued even after the strict voter ID law was repealed.
• Another study shows that voters in Texas who would be barred from voting absent the state’s “Reasonable Impediments Declaration” (a court-ordered remedy allowing voters without proper IDs to participate) are disproportionately Black and Latino. The study argues that its “findings indicate that strict identification laws will stop a disproportionately minority, otherwise willing set of registered voters from voting.”
• An article using a similar methodology and administrative records found that voters of color in Michigan were more likely to show up to the polls without proper identification.
• Yet another study used survey data to demonstrate that voters of color in states across the country lacked access to the needed IDs to vote in their state.
• While some studies have argued that voter IDs have little effect on overall turnout, it is clear that voters of color are less likely to have the IDs needed to participate.

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/impact-voter-suppression-communities-color

 

I have never heard of anyone being denied to vote. Anyone who is eligible to vote can vote. I'm sick of the left complaining that in is voter suppression when dead people aren't allowed to vote, illegals aren't allowed to vote, and that it is voter suppression to demand that everyone voting be able to prove they are eligible to vote. It's all a lefty wing myth used for political purposes. Any eligible person is allowed to vote.

 

That is the dumbest, less likely to succeed form of voter fraud. You said: "Keep in mind that every fraudulent vote that is cast is effectively denying someone else the legitimate right to vote." The rightful voter can STILL cast their vote. You do know that there is no scarcity of ballots. Just a matter of printing another one when the person requests it. I would be extremely surprised if there EVER was a single case in which somebody was denied their right in this manner.

This is not just a matter of poor choice of words. This is a matter of you seeking again and again some way to water down the fact that denying people their right to vote is a REAL tragedy (not like the one you made up). And you sitting there trying to make up ways to hide this problem is consistent with right-wing partisanship. So please respect my intelligence and don't try to hide behind smoke screens like "poor choice of words" and "I'm not going to debate about left wing or right wing". Own up to your words! Either support them or retract them. SHOW that this "ballot stealing" is as REAL a problem (not one that you made up as a smoke screen) as denying people their human right to elect who governs them, in the way I described.

 

So you're against voter ID, or against voting altogether?

 

Forum rules demand that I assume that you are the brightest fella on the planet. But your question is dumb. Read the OP!

 

Republicans arguing AGAINST voter ID? How the tables turn...

You are again arguing against voter ID as it is now. But not as to how I am describing it on the OP. If voter ID has an impact on the results it's very small. Democrats should focus on things that have a BIG impact, and stop focusing on the little things. People who don't register to vote, voter turnout, transportation to polling places, ... A Universal ID like the one I propose could allow people to vote online, for example. THAT will have a big impact on ensuring more people exercise their right to vote.

 

So you wrote to let us know that you gotta get out more...

 

Secure elections are very important. I.D. would be a big step. We have Drivers licenses which is enough for law abiding citizens to purchased guns. Crooks and gangstas will get guns without I.D. Is your plan for a government national I.D. sort of like a trade?....... You can have fairer elections, just give government more information so that gun confiscation will be easier when the time seems right?
I thought the idea of National voter I.D. was merely to cover those who don't have picture driver licenses. That way Progessives can't claim voter suppression.

 

Who has been denied to vote, people with no ID's to prove they are eligible to vote?

 

I understand it perfectly. the problem you have is the practicality of the proposal you are making. Under practical circumstances, it won't fly. Again, you are, in essence, creating a national identity card because that is how your national voter ID card will be viewed, both legally and aesthetically. Bear in mind, we not even begun which agency will be overseeing this, would the agency be a part of DHS or some other department within the Federal Government, or will it be seperate like the SSA. You would have to put at least one office in each county of every state and possession, I might add, and then you would need to hire federal employees to train, perform, evaluate, and analyze the performance. With an error rate of 1%, this program will automatically disenfranchise over 2 million voters and that will be another notch of anti government hysteria. For the card, you would need biometrics to make that card secure, which means, putting a chip that will have all the pertenant info of that person, be able to track the usage of that card however it is used, and assembled in a matadata house that can be accessed, analyzed, interpreted, etc, of every US citizen voter.

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2021/08/voting-rights-national-id-card/619772/

https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/d/download_file_10169.pdf

States are not regulating who gets to vote, generally, and who does not. States regulate which IDs to use in order to excercise that right. Some states provide more ids than others, like the difference between North and Soutth Dakato, between Texas and California, etc. Federal government passed legislations awaile aback providing minimum guidelines on what ids are acceptable. Some states have gone beyond that, as it is within their constittuional authority. Generally under federal law, and state law, convicted felons are not allowed to vote, per the Constitution. However two states allow this to happen if and only if the convicted felon has completed his/her sentence including the probationary, and has fully paid the restitution, if applicable. What you are proposing would eliminate all that because the voter system will not be federally mandated, via that national voter ID you are proposing.

Let me ask you, what do you think a national ID is. Even the Carter-Baker Commission and their report suggested that a national voter ID might be an option. In that report, it states "requirements to prove citizenship and verification by using the full Social Security Number." These are the two basic requirements that must be addressed in voting in the United States. And to do that, one much provide documentation to prove citizenship and a valid SS card number, among other things. We call this biometrics for that verification, the same way you provide those documents when you get or renew your driver's license, along with the thumb print. Some states do allow one or even twice to renew online as long as certain criteria has been met. But nonetheless, your proposal would make the national voter ID a montronsity, time consuming, etc. And that is the reality.

This is not about Republicans or Democrats, conservatives or liberals, it is about the Constitition and the realities of that document. And that is why we, as the United States will never have a national voter ID law, per the commission report I just gave as documented proof.

https://www.legislationline.org/download/id/1472/file/3b50795b2d0374cbef5c29766256.pdf

 

Lighten up, Francis! Geez! You’re disagreeable even when I agree with you on something. There’s a reason why you don’t get invited to any parties, ya grump.

 

So you are telling me Republicans are in favor of demanding an ID when people vote, but oppose giving people an ID.

Would be interesting to see how that flies....

By which they are picking and choosing who is allowed to vote and who isn't. That is a violation of human rights!

 

Your reason is dumb. It doesn't make you for voter id, it makes you for an id to buy guns.

 

I would assert that the only reason you now believe in voter ID is because you believe that illegals will use those IDs to vote with because who in their right mind would admit on the application that they were an illegal when getting a drivers license and who would actively check the box that says "not legal resident" when obtaining one. And knowing that they are automagically registered to vote, this is kind of that wink and nod to what you know is an illegal behavior then in the illegal immigrant community. If you create an exception that denies the universal ID to illegals, and you create the condition that you must prove citizenship for obtaining one, I might take you more seriously.

 

I doubt that is what Golem actually has in mind. The concept of real ID also forces you to produce citizenship documentation. It would substantively thwart what Golem is attempting to disguise as a good idea. Democrats yearn for illegal immigrant voters. It's the only way they see that will keep them in power....

 

I am not saying that at all. Republicans are now more concerned with the place in which you can vote, whether or not you can get an absentee vote, or how to submit to absentee vote than with ID per se. Some Republcian states are more restrictive on which ID one can use.

Not the same thing. Picking and choosing who can vote is more arbritrary than deciding which forms of ID are acceptable in order to vote. Considering most people have probably at least two forms of ID on them shows that the GOP are not concerned. What they are concerned in election intregrity. And Democrats are also about election integrity. The difference is the approach to solve that problem with election integrity.

 

You are saying EXACTLY that. And proof of it is that you immediately attempt to change the subject.

Wrong! If you demand drivers license for ID, for example, you are picking and choosing people who have the means to OBTAIN a driver's license.

 

That may be what you are interpreting what you think I said, but that is not what I said.

But a Driver's license IS NOT the only form of ID to use when voting. What you are proposing is a one stop for all type of thing to vote, which makes it even more problematic, at best, and goes to your own argument, or thought process, of "Republicans are in favor of demanding an ID when people vote, but oppose giving people an ID."

What I have said is that states have their own ways, based on their own state laws and priorities, of which forms, multiple, of id can be used. It not a one size fits all sort of thing, which is what you are proposing.

 

This isn't a very intelligent strawman.

Try harder

 

I'm not speaking for @seth, @Golem. I read his comment to mean that when an illegitimate vote is cast, it, in effect, cancels out a vote for the other party. So, the legitimate vote is essentially "erased".

Seth, please correct me if I misunderstood your point.

 

You keep making baseless claims like "even more problematic", "it won't fly", ... and never bother to provide any arguments as to WHY... or even what that means... Clearly you HAVE no arguments. So that makes this discussion a waste of time.

Thanks for playing.

 

He already clarified that's not what he meant. What he really meant was complete nonsense.

 

So you think registering and voting should all be on the honor system?

 

Are you going to apologize for saying I am mutilating my body?

 

Requiring someone to prove they are who they say they are does not amount to denying anything. As long as you actually ARE you, nothing is lost.