Vote suppression -- now we have some evidence of the effects

[sharon45]

Both sides have their prepared talking points. Fire with fire.

It isn't the talking points that bothers me, but the pretense of principle. Voter suppression laws are a purely partisan tactic. Democrats have used gerrymandering and other techniques to gain unfair advantage also, and it wasn't right when they did it. Republicans are the main ones guilty of this today. Let's not engage in false equivalences. The practice is wrong no matter who uses it.

Where did I say it was okay to do it? I merely pointed out that it is griped about from both sides.

 

[Jayjay]

So she lost her driver's license just before elections. Unfortunate, but how is that different from, say, failing to cast a vote because her car broke down? Accidents happen.

As for the racial component, I think the real reason is to keep the poor from voting. But there is nothing illegal about disenfranchising the poor, so the legal challenge has to come from the racial discrimination angle. It's stupid but there is no better way to fight it.

 

[bilby]

It disenfranchises people who don't have any officially accepted ID. This is not a class of voter whose distribution is uniform across the political spectrum, so the result is to bias the results in favour of the parties and candidates whose supporters are most likely to have an accepted ID.

This is particularly problematic in the US south, but even in other parts of the country it is mainly black people who are unable to vote as a result of these rules; and the detailed implementation of these rules - which forms of ID are and are not considered acceptable - makes very clear that the unstated purpose is to minimise the vote amongst that section of the population.

Or perhaps it's purely coincidental that the effect of rules imposed just happens to burden black people more than it does whites. Just like it's purely coincidental that there are far fewer voting places in black dominated districts, leading to long lines and suppressed turnout.

It's amazing how many rules that have nothing to do with race turn out to completely coincidentally disfavour blacks in the US. If the people making the rules weren't so quick to assure us that it's all purely coincidental, it could almost be mistaken for systemic racism.

It's impossible for a legal citizen not to have a legal ID

No, it isn't

and stupid not to keep it up to date.

On the contrary, it is considered by many to be a cornerstone of freedom that one does not have to identify oneself to the authorities if they do not have cause to believe that one has committed a crime

Racism has nothing to with it. Idiocy does.

Racism is a subset of idiocy, and is very obviously a major component of these rules; They are intended to ensure that white conservatives get more of a say in running the country than black liberals - and are put in place by people who don't think black people should have any say at all.

The article mentions one person who had out of date ID and some immediate relatives who appear just as stupid.

There is nothing stupid about not buying something you don't need.

The subject lady let it slip so whose fault is that.

It's not a 'fault' at all - it's a fundamental freedom. Of course, as an authoritarian follower, you likely don't have a very adult concept of what 'freedom' actually means.

Certainly if you think that it entails the government forcing citizens to carry ID on pain of disenfranchisement, you are making a dreadful error.

"Papers, please, Citizen".

 

[OLDMAN]

Sweet Jesus, does everything need to be so hard in Amerkia? Either the voter becomes engaged with politics and has a civic duty to perform or they don't. The idea that poor people only have to show up and vote for something at the last minute of a four year campaign is sad. In Canada we can register to vote when we file our income taxes. But I suppose that imposes on people's right to tax evasion.

Given the state of politics in the US, it might not be a bad idea if more is required from the voting public than a facebook account and a 19 second attention span.

 

[laughing dog]

What does that have to do with voter suppression efforts?

Are you saying that the right doesn't also talk about voter suppression efforts leveled against them?

No, although I have no idea what you referring to. I simply asked what does both sides having their prepared talking points have to do with voter suppression efforts?

 

[laughing dog]

So she lost her driver's license just before elections. Unfortunate, but how is that different from, say, failing to cast a vote because her car broke down?

It is different because she was legally prevented from having her vote count by losing her drivers' license due to the change in the law.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What does that have to do with voter suppression efforts?

Providing ID at a polling booth doesn't equate with voter suppression.

Look at the article I linked--the result is vote suppression.

There shouldn't be a charge at the polling booth as this is or should be covered by taxes

Even where it's "free" it's not--you still have to take the time and money to get to the place that has it and the supporting documentation isn't free.

Real world #1: We have a poster on here that would have to spend thousands to get id.

Real world #2: 25 years ago a mistake was made on my wife's naturalization certificate. It sat undiscovered for 15 years until an eagle-eye at social security noticed it. The result was they had one version of her name, everyone else had the correct version. As of next year she will need those names to match to renew her ID. Thus a legal name change.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You can get a state ID for free. This notion that ID laws are voter suppression is the disingenuous elevating of a non-issue so a political faction can morally grandstand. That's it. ID is necessary for so many things in life, that to say that it's fine for all those other things but not to verify that a voter is who they say they are is just ridiculous. And why it is that black people let liberals use them as ignorant pawns I simply don't understand.

1) Free in some states, not all.

2) It takes time and travel.

3) It takes supporting documentation which isn't free.

 

[LordKiran]

That depends where you live. In Mn, there is a fee ( https://www.dmv.org/mn-minnesota/id-cards.php ). But even if the ID may have no price. But getting to a location where one can get an ID is not costless. And the hassles in getting a replacement ID are not costless. So, the notion that ID cards are free is not based on reality.

In post #14, I asked you a specific question. I will repeat it here.

This is from the start of the OP article. After you have read it, do you think this woman should have been effectively disenfranchised given the specifics of her situation?

You can’t say Andrea Anthony didn’t try. A 37-year-old African American woman with an infectious smile, Anthony had voted in every major election since she was 18. On November 8, 2016, she went to the Clinton Rose Senior Center, her polling site on the predominantly black north side of Milwaukee, to cast a ballot for Hillary Clinton. “Voting is important to me because I know I have a little, teeny, tiny voice, but that is a way for it to be heard,” she said. “Even though it’s one vote, I feel it needs to count.”

She’d lost her driver’s license a few days earlier, but she came prepared with an expired Wisconsin state ID and proof of residency. A poll worker confirmed she was registered to vote at her current address. But this was Wisconsin’s first major election that required voters—even those who were already registered—to present a current driver’s license, passport, or state or military ID to cast a ballot. Anthony couldn’t, and so she wasn’t able to vote.

The poll worker gave her a provisional ballot instead. It would be counted only if she went to the Department of Motor Vehicles to get a new ID and then to the city clerk’s office to confirm her vote, all within 72 hours of Election Day. But Anthony couldn’t take time off from her job as an administrative assistant at a housing management company, and she had five kids and two grandkids to look after. For the first time in her life, her vote wasn’t counted.

Can confirm this. In my area of North-Eastern PA getting any kind of state ID can only be done at a distant dmv three days out of the week, requires you to fork over 25 in cash and two articles of paper that show your residency.

 

[braces_for_impact]

By the way, just to mention, the picture of Mandela wearing that shirt is out of context for American politics. Obama urged African Americans to get ID and vote as well, but that doesn't mean he supported these voter ID laws.

 

[whichphilosophy]

So she lost her driver's license just before elections. Unfortunate, but how is that different from, say, failing to cast a vote because her car broke down?

It is different because she was legally prevented from having her vote count by losing her drivers' license due to the change in the law.

Does this mean anyone who never passed a driving test can't vote??

 

[whichphilosophy]

It's impossible for a legal citizen not to have a legal ID

No, it isn't

and stupid not to keep it up to date.

On the contrary, it is considered by many to be a cornerstone of freedom that one does not have to identify oneself to the authorities if they do not have cause to believe that one has committed a crime

Racism has nothing to with it. Idiocy does.

Racism is a subset of idiocy, and is very obviously a major component of these rules; They are intended to ensure that white conservatives get more of a say in running the country than black liberals - and are put in place by people who don't think black people should have any say at all.

The article mentions one person who had out of date ID and some immediate relatives who appear just as stupid.

There is nothing stupid about not buying something you don't need.

The subject lady let it slip so whose fault is that.

It's not a 'fault' at all - it's a fundamental freedom. Of course, as an authoritarian follower, you likely don't have a very adult concept of what 'freedom' actually means.

Certainly if you think that it entails the government forcing citizens to carry ID on pain of disenfranchisement, you are making a dreadful error.

"Papers, please, Citizen".

Unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world given the security issues. We need IDs for store purchases or financial transactions with banks. However, honest citizens see no problem identifying themselves. Likewise we wish to minimize the chance of voter fraud incl using live or dead person's votes.

 

[bilby]

No, it isn't

and stupid not to keep it up to date.

On the contrary, it is considered by many to be a cornerstone of freedom that one does not have to identify oneself to the authorities if they do not have cause to believe that one has committed a crime

Racism has nothing to with it. Idiocy does.

Racism is a subset of idiocy, and is very obviously a major component of these rules; They are intended to ensure that white conservatives get more of a say in running the country than black liberals - and are put in place by people who don't think black people should have any say at all.

The article mentions one person who had out of date ID and some immediate relatives who appear just as stupid.

There is nothing stupid about not buying something you don't need.

The subject lady let it slip so whose fault is that.

It's not a 'fault' at all - it's a fundamental freedom. Of course, as an authoritarian follower, you likely don't have a very adult concept of what 'freedom' actually means.

Certainly if you think that it entails the government forcing citizens to carry ID on pain of disenfranchisement, you are making a dreadful error.

"Papers, please, Citizen".

Unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world given the security issues. We need IDs for store purchases or financial transactions with banks. However, honest citizens see no problem identifying themselves. Likewise we wish to minimize the chance of voter fraud incl using live or dead person's votes.

The idea that honest citizens have nothing to fear from mass identity schemes is currently under review by the axioms review board.

 

[marc]

You need ID for a number of reasons.

Stops or reduces:
dead people voting
non-citizens voting
non-existent people voting

And the evidence that any of these are going on? Not assertions or accusations, but evidence. And this is for actual voting, not 'dead people are on the voting rolls', as the voting rolls are not instantaneously updated when someone dies. Someone submitting a bogus voter registration is not voting, unless you can show the registration was accepted and they actually voted under the false identity. My guess would be that even finding 5 cases in the past 20 years would be surprising.

 

[Malintent]

In NY state, a non-driver ID issued by the DMV is "legal photo identification" anywhere... costs $13, and is good for 4 years.

It costs more to take public transportation to the voting centers from most of the poor residential places on the outskirts of town.

The so-called $50+ fee is for a driver's license... something only those that can afford to own a car need to maintain.

 

[Elixir]

Some people are panicked by their own shadow.

"You need ID for a number of reasons.

Stops or reduces:
dead people voting
non-citizens voting
non-existent people voting"​

The moron who posted that is foreign to the US voting process, and wishes that any of those three "problems" is a problem here. You can count the known instances of any of them on your fingers. I no way are they a concern that warrants suppressing the votes of hundreds of thousands of eligible voters.

 

[whichphilosophy]

No, it isn't

and stupid not to keep it up to date.

On the contrary, it is considered by many to be a cornerstone of freedom that one does not have to identify oneself to the authorities if they do not have cause to believe that one has committed a crime

Racism has nothing to with it. Idiocy does.

Racism is a subset of idiocy, and is very obviously a major component of these rules; They are intended to ensure that white conservatives get more of a say in running the country than black liberals - and are put in place by people who don't think black people should have any say at all.

The article mentions one person who had out of date ID and some immediate relatives who appear just as stupid.

There is nothing stupid about not buying something you don't need.

The subject lady let it slip so whose fault is that.

It's not a 'fault' at all - it's a fundamental freedom. Of course, as an authoritarian follower, you likely don't have a very adult concept of what 'freedom' actually means.

Certainly if you think that it entails the government forcing citizens to carry ID on pain of disenfranchisement, you are making a dreadful error.

"Papers, please, Citizen".

Unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world given the security issues. We need IDs for store purchases or financial transactions with banks. However, honest citizens see no problem identifying themselves. Likewise we wish to minimize the chance of voter fraud incl using live or dead person's votes.

The idea that honest citizens have nothing to fear from mass identity schemes is currently under review by the axioms review board.

The USA has been exercising this since the 1770's. It's called a passport.

 

[Keith&Co.]

If you have ever lived in a communist country you will realize how important up to date ID is.

The irony of this statement is astounding.

I remember when I was little, we were watching a spy thriller. Some secret policeman asked someone for 'your papers.' I asked Daddy if he carried 'papers.'

All I really remember of the next half hour was that Americans were not in fear of our government.

That he needed _A_ piece of paper when operating a vehicle, but for the rest of the time, Americans basked in the benevolence of a loving god who made sure we didn't need 'papers' because....um, reasons.

And something about 'papers' being a tool of communists who wanted to take our guns... Not sure how voter ID connects to gun control, but it would be a wonderful rumor to circulate.

 

[bilby]

No, it isn't

and stupid not to keep it up to date.

On the contrary, it is considered by many to be a cornerstone of freedom that one does not have to identify oneself to the authorities if they do not have cause to believe that one has committed a crime

Racism has nothing to with it. Idiocy does.

Racism is a subset of idiocy, and is very obviously a major component of these rules; They are intended to ensure that white conservatives get more of a say in running the country than black liberals - and are put in place by people who don't think black people should have any say at all.

The article mentions one person who had out of date ID and some immediate relatives who appear just as stupid.

There is nothing stupid about not buying something you don't need.

The subject lady let it slip so whose fault is that.

It's not a 'fault' at all - it's a fundamental freedom. Of course, as an authoritarian follower, you likely don't have a very adult concept of what 'freedom' actually means.

Certainly if you think that it entails the government forcing citizens to carry ID on pain of disenfranchisement, you are making a dreadful error.

"Papers, please, Citizen".

Unfortunately we don't live in an ideal world given the security issues. We need IDs for store purchases or financial transactions with banks. However, honest citizens see no problem identifying themselves. Likewise we wish to minimize the chance of voter fraud incl using live or dead person's votes.

The idea that honest citizens have nothing to fear from mass identity schemes is currently under review by the axioms review board.

The USA has been exercising this since the 1770's. It's called a passport.

According to the State Department, in 2016 there were 113,431,943 valid passports in circulation, which means 36% of Americans own a valid passport (and therefore 64% do not).

The number of US passport holders is sharply up since 2007, when passports became mandatory for most US citizens traveling to Canada or Mexico by air (the same rules were subsequently imposed for travel by land in 2009, leading to a second spike in passport numbers).

Before these changes, US citizens could travel to Canada or Mexico with only a driver's license and birth certificate; and the proportion of US citizens who held passports was even lower. In 1989, there were around 7 million US passport holders, representing just 3% of the total population.

Passports were only used by diplomats and in war zones prior to World War I, when they were first issued to ordinary citizens as a defence against possible infiltration by enemy spies.

So no. You are full of shit.

 

[laughing dog]

It is different because she was legally prevented from having her vote count by losing her drivers' license due to the change in the law.

Does this mean anyone who never passed a driving test can't vote??

No. Did you even bother to read the first entire page of the cited OP article?

BTW, a drivers' licence does not indicate citizenship in the US. It simply is an example of an "official" picture ID.