# Are voter ID policies (and their supporters) racist? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 15, 2016, 4:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039 "2016-11-15T04:38:25Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 5:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/161 "2016-11-17T17:45:03Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > Which of your other constitutional rights do you think we should require an ID for you to receive? Reasonable regulations are permitted for the exercise of almost any right, including as **Bricker** mentioned, having to produce ID to purchase a firearm. It has also been mentioned that the government may not forbid the purchase of ink and paper as a corollary to free speech or the press. What if government then passes health and safety laws saying that in order to shop in an office supply store (to buy ink and paper) that a person must wear a shirt and shoes? Would anyone seriously argue that since some people cannot afford shoes (or cannot afford transportation to the store) that these regulations infringe upon a free press? Would we be asking for mobile government units to deliver free pens and paper to poor homes? In my mind the “barriers” to a cost free state issued ID are the same de minimis sort of infringements that would be permissible under almost any scheme. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 5:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/162 "2016-11-17T17:46:23Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Even the most texty textualist S would agree there is a First Amendment remedy if the government prohibited the purchase of ink and paper in a civil context. > [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > On what basis? The First Amendment. As the Supreme Court explained in _Grosjean v. American Press Co._, 297 U.S. 233 (1936) : > [@](#): > > In 1712, in response to a message from Queen Anne (Hansard’s Parliamentary History of England, vol. 6, p. 1063), Parliament imposed a tax upon all newspapers and upon advertisements. Collett, vol. I, pp. 8-10. That the main purpose of these taxes was to suppress the publication of comments and criticisms objectionable to the Crown does not admit of doubt. Stewart, Lennox and the Taxes on Knowledge, 15 Scottish Historical Review, 322-327. There followed more than a century of resistance to, and evasion of, the taxes, and of agitation for their repeal. > . > . > . > That the taxes had, and were intended to have, the effect of curtailing the circulation of newspapers, and particularly the cheaper ones whose readers were generally found among the masses of the people, went almost without question, even on the part of those who defended the act. > . > . > . > The framers of the First Amendment were familiar with the English struggle, which then had continued for nearly eighty years and was destined to go on for another sixty-five years, at the end of which time it culminated in a lasting abandonment of the obnoxious taxes. The framers were likewise familiar with the then recent Massachusetts episode, and while that occurrence did much to bring about the adoption of the amendment (see Pennsylvania and the Federal Constitution, 1888, p. 181), the predominant influence must have come from the English experience. It is impossible to concede that, by the words “freedom of the press,” the framers of the amendment intended to adopt merely the narrow view then reflected by the law of England that such freedom consisted only in immunity from previous censorship, for this abuse had then permanently disappeared from English practice. It is equally impossible to believe that it was not intended to bring within the reach of these words such modes of restraint as were embodied in the two forms of taxation already described. In short summary, the words “freedom of the press,” as appear in the First Amendment mean the freedom to exercise publication and entail such activities as carry a tight nexus to publishing. ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/163 "2016-11-17T18:00:15Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > By that I mean that I expect a law to have a valid, neutral justification. If a democratically controlled legislature cutting or removing absentee ballot voting for the admitted purpose of reducing Republican turnout, and could not offer a valid reason apart from that, then I’d believe that law should be challenged. > > If, on the other hand, a democratically controlled legislature cutting or removing absentee ballot voting for the admitted purpose of reducing voter fraud associated with absentee ballots, then I’d accept it as a valid exercise of legislative discretion – even if I were to learn that some members of the legislature favored the new policy because it would reduce Republican turnout. Should the stated justification be the only criterion on which to judge whether the purpose of the law is biased? Or should the reasonably-anticipated effects be considered, too? To what extent must the stated neutral justification be rooted in reality? What if the legislature proposes to cut absentee ballots, and cites the public health purpose of preventing tongue-based paper cuts while sealing envelopes? ---
**Author:** ![Revenant\_Threshold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f1d935/32.png) [@Revenant\_Threshold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revenant_Threshold)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/164 "2016-11-17T18:01:53Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > In short summary, the words “freedom of the press,” as appear in the First Amendment mean the freedom to exercise publication and entail such activities as carry a tight nexus to publishing. Given that the Supreme Court is demonstrably wrong in their supposition about the impossibility they cite, I’m not entirely sure this is a reasonable point they make, but that’s besides the point. As far as your point, it seems to hinge on that final sentence of what you quote, and I’m afraid I don’t understand it. Could I ask you to dumb it down for me? ---
**Author:** ![riffraffselbow](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/7c8e57/32.png) [@riffraffselbow](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/riffraffselbow)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/165 "2016-11-17T18:17:37Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > I am a people too my friend. > > But, just to be clear, from an ethical or legal or constitutional standpoint, you would have no problem with a democratically controlled legislature cutting or removing absentee ballot voting for the admitted purpose of reducing republican turnout? > > The reason that it doesn’t have much support is because democrats tend to want the vote to be more inclusive, so even something like that that could give a win, would typically be against what the electorate want. (IOW, we want a fair fight, even if it means we lose.) Republicans, in their vote suppression efforts, have shown that they want to win, even if it does not mean fighting fair. Now, I am sure you could point to officials and employees on either side doing things that are not in keeping with the ideals of universal suffrage, but I think that the democrat doing so would be looked upon unfavorably by their own party, as opposed to the republican who will be rewarded for their efforts. > > We can change that. The democratic electorate has never said that it should be harder for the elderly to vote. We do have a voice. We are trying to find a way. I for one am thinking of starting a campaign against absentee ballots, if I can get enough others on board, then it will have support of the legislature, and will be the will of the people. > > The fact that it will severely cripple republicans, we can openly admit is the impetus. I think we can get our people behind that. > > It’s not a “Tu quoque”, but I don’t know what the latin phrase for, “The other side does it, and is kicking our ass with it, so we have to do it too.” I’m a Trump supporter, and I support getting rid of absentee ballots; they decrease social engagement in the election process. The physical act of going to a polling place and standing in line with your fellow community members to cast a vote, secure in the knowledge that your vote is secret and your vote is free to be different from theirs is one of the most positive, democratic experiences on earth. For people who are unable to physically attend due to illness or injury, I’d support a “roving ballot-box” initiative, with poll watchers and poll workers going around in a van to the homes and hospitals of those who register for it. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/166 "2016-11-17T20:26:43Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > How do you feel about using a fingerprint as identification before voting in each state? Any way in which a policy such as that could be racist? Like I just show up at the voting station and give them my fingerprint? Assuming that there are some accommodations for people who don’t have fingerprints, I don’t see the problem. Blacks are no less likely to have them than whites. Poor are no less likely to have them than the wealthy or middle class. Noone has to go out of their way to get a fingerprint, God gave them one at birth. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/167 "2016-11-17T20:31:09Z")
What about a PIN system. Seem like it would resolve the whole photo ID and stolen absentee issue. When I register to vote, I pick a 12 digit number (or one is randomly assigned) that I put on my envelope or give the poll worker. They check it against the data base and if it is correct then my vote is counted. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 8:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/168 "2016-11-17T20:36:08Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > What about a PIN system. Seem like it would resolve the whole photo ID and stolen absentee issue. > > When I register to vote, I pick a 12 digit number (or one is randomly assigned) that I put on my envelope or give the poll worker. They check it against the data base and if it is correct then my vote is counted. How many people are going to remember this number, when they only use it once every 4 years? Your social is only 9 numbers, is used much more often than that, and I know plenty of people that don’t know it off hand. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/169 "2016-11-17T20:56:25Z")
> [@Revenant\_Threshold](#): > > As far as your point, it seems to hinge on that final sentence of what you quote, and I’m afraid I don’t understand it. Could I ask you to dumb it down for me? Sure. The idea is that the freedom to print newspapers means that certain other things must also be protected by that same freedom, because one simply can’t print newspapers without ink. So the Supreme Court says that when the First Amendment protects free press, it necessarily protects the purchase of paper and ink, because the very ability to print a paper means you have to use paper and ink. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 9:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/170 "2016-11-17T21:15:47Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > In my mind the “barriers” to a cost free state issued ID are the same de minimis sort of infringements that would be permissible under almost any scheme. But they’re not de minimus. The laws would never have been introduced if the effect was de minimus. Let’s not lose sight of the fact that these laws were passed with the explicit stated intent of affecting voting outcomes. If they didn’t reduce minority voting, no one would bother agitating for the law at all. The “voter confidence” stuff is a transparent ploy to accommodate the letter of the law. No one actually believes it. The arguments about voter fraud are likewise just lies. No one actually believes that voter fraud (of the kind which would be prevented by these laws) occurs at any effective level (well, the uninformed electorate believes that, because we’re lying to them). The “it’s de minimus” argument fails on its face. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 9:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/171 "2016-11-17T21:22:05Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Like I just show up at the voting station and give them my fingerprint? > > Assuming that there are some accommodations for people who don’t have fingerprints, I don’t see the problem. > > Blacks are no less likely to have them than whites. Poor are no less likely to have them than the wealthy or middle class. Noone has to go out of their way to get a fingerprint, God gave them one at birth. I’m curious what the cost of a fingerprint scheme would be. We’d have to train all the poll workers how to take fingerprints (and maintain training for new workers). We’d have to buy ink (and buy new ink every year). We’d have to buy soap and paper towels to clean up. We’d have to buy extra paper (need space for the fingerprint). Maybe a lot of extra paper (probably many people will have to try multiple times). There’s the extra time incurred–taking a fingerprint takes time. There’s storage costs… My wild estimate: 15 billion dollars in additional costs. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/172 "2016-11-17T21:29:05Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Reasonable regulations are permitted for the exercise of almost any right, including as **Bricker** mentioned, having to produce ID to purchase a firearm. What if those regulations are created for the explicit stated purpose of preventing a group of people from buying firearms (say, people likely to vote against Clinton)? And the laws are tested to make sure they actually have the intended effect of preventing those people from buying firearms? And Obama gets up on stage and makes up a lie about the reason for the regulations. Let’s say he claims the laws were created for the purpose of “improving confidence in the firearms purchase process” (but everyone knows it’s a lie)/ Still OK with them? ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/173 "2016-11-17T21:37:06Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > How many people are going to remember this number, when they only use it once every 4 years? > > Your social is only 9 numbers, is used much more often than that, and I know plenty of people that don’t know it off hand. If it is that important to you to vote you’ll figure out a way. Write it down and put it in your sock drawer. There ya go. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 10:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/174 "2016-11-17T22:17:29Z")
> [@Evil\_Economist](#): > > But they’re not de minimus. The laws would never have been introduced if the effect was de minimus. > > Let’s not lose sight of the fact that these laws were passed with the explicit stated intent of affecting voting outcomes. If they didn’t reduce minority voting, no one would bother agitating for the law at all. The “voter confidence” stuff is a transparent ploy to accommodate the letter of the law. No one actually believes it. The arguments about voter fraud are likewise just lies. No one actually believes that voter fraud (of the kind which would be prevented by these laws) occurs at any effective level (well, the uninformed electorate believes that, because we’re lying to them). > > The “it’s de minimus” argument fails on its face. I don’t agree you have the authority to announce what I believe. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Economist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/c89c15/32.png) [@Evil\_Economist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Economist)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/175 "2016-11-17T22:58:20Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I don’t agree you have the authority to announce what I believe. Well, let’s find out what you believe: Do you believe that the actual purpose (not “stated purpose”) of, say the NC laws that were overturned, was to increase voter confidence? ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2016, 11:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/176 "2016-11-17T23:04:45Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#): > > If it is that important to you to vote you’ll figure out a way. Write it down and put it in your sock drawer. There ya go. What if they don’t HAVE a sock drawer? What if their landlord throws all of their stuff into the street? What then? :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![iamthewalrus\_3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/258eb7/32.png) [@iamthewalrus\_3](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iamthewalrus_3)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2016, 12:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/177 "2016-11-18T00:46:44Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > What if they don’t HAVE a sock drawer? What if their landlord throws all of their stuff into the street? What then? > > :rolleyes: I assume this is a parody of the legitimate claims that some people can’t easily get ID, but even in parody, the argument fails. _What about_ people who lose their ID or their PIN or didn’t get the thing or whatever. Some number of people who have the right to vote are going to be prevented from voting by any system you come up with that adds a barrier to voting. So if the system doesn’t provide a tangible benefit, why do it? Some people actually will get evicted and lose their PIN. Or whatever. Annoying bad shit happens on election day to some unlucky few. True story: I couldn’t find my wallet this November 8. As I was leaving the house, I realized it wasn’t in my pocket. I realized I didn’t need it that day, and I was already late for work, so I did without it for the day. Since I voted absentee (and as far as I know I wouldn’t need my ID to vote in California anyway), it didn’t matter. But what if I had lived in some other state? Yeah, it was dumb of me to misplace my wallet. I almost never do that. But I got unlucky that day. Is my error justification enough to deny me a vote? I’m pretty glad the legislature of CA doesn’t think so. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2016, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/178 "2016-11-18T00:57:36Z")
> [@riffraffselbow](#): > > I’m a Trump supporter, and I support getting rid of absentee ballots; they decrease social engagement in the election process. The physical act of going to a polling place and standing in line with your fellow community members to cast a vote, secure in the knowledge that your vote is secret and your vote is free to be different from theirs is one of the most positive, democratic experiences on earth. Gosh, that sounds about as positive and pleasant an experience as a mandatory weekend “group dynamic building exercise” organized by your HR director. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2016, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/179 "2016-11-18T02:06:07Z")
> [@iamthewalrus\_3](#): > > Yeah, it was dumb of me to misplace my wallet. I almost never do that. But I got unlucky that day. It wasn’t luck, it was irresponsibility. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [November 18, 2016, 2:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039/180 "2016-11-18T02:33:54Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > It wasn’t luck, it was irresponsibility. And that’s why America needs Trump. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/are-voter-id-policies-and-their-supporters-racist/772039.md?page=10)