# I Pit the ID-demanding GOP vote-suppressors (Part 1) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 12, 2012, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943 "2012-06-12T19:15:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 177
**Author:** ![Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kolak_of_twilo/32/73_2.png) [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kolak_of_Twilo)\ **Post date:** [October 29, 2013, 11:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3521 "2013-10-29T23:45:21Z")
[Watching this young lady](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CRSK0HItoI&feature=player_embedded&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Ffeature%3Dplayer_embedded%26v%3D3CRSK0HItoI&app=desktop) makes me suspect this is unlikely to work out the way the Republicans hope. At the very least, she is a remarkably articulate 12 year old. ---
**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:** [October 29, 2013, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3522 "2013-10-29T23:57:21Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > In fairness, **Bricker** has mostly said we need voter ID laws to combat the _perception_ that fraud is occurring, not to combat actual fraud. In a post about voodoo spells on people who vote Democrat, Bricker makes the point that we shouldn’t indulge such bullshit beliefs. If someone has the bullshit belief that voter fraud is widespread, why should we give it any more weight than voodoo? > [@Bricker](#): > > When the Republicans in Congress sought to derail Obamacare, you and your ilk were indignant: how could they dare try to upend an initiative that had the support of the legislature, the approval of the courts, and a general majority of the public’s approval? The right to vote is more fundamental to our democracy than majority rule and popular opinion. You can’t let a majority disenfranchise a minority. Legislative approval and popular support are irrelevant when it comes to voting rights. The courts are the only relevant metric in those cases and the courts have failed miserably in this the case of Posner, have even acknowledged their mistake. > [@Bricker](#): > > Subverting representative democracy would be taking a law passed by the representatives and signed by the executive, and scuttling it, which is precisely what you seek to do. “Democracy,” does not mean that you and your buddies get to run things. Does democracy mean that a majority can disenfranchise a minority? > [@Bricker](#): > > Sure. And if it should happen that, as you predict, the requirement is applied only to minorities, or only in Democratic strongholds, or any way other than universally, then I’ll certainly agree with you and call for the law’s repeal. Voter ID laws do not need uneven enforcement to create greater burdens on minorities and the poor than a failure to enforce abortion laws against men is needed to create a greater burden on women. > [@Bricker](#): > > At most, they have raised the concern that particular demographics are _less_ likely than others to hold them. But no recognized, tracked demographic I’ve ever heard is actually unlikely – that is, more likely than not to NOT – have photo ID. I don’t know what the ID requirements are in all states but driver’s licenses are probably the most commonly used form of voter ID. Urban blacks in some places (with well developed mass transportation) are more likely than not to have a valid driver’s license. But even if the percentage is only 30% or 20% why doesn’t it bother you that this law creates a burden for a significantly larger percentage of urban blacks than suburban whites? > [@BobLibDem](#): > > I can see where you’re coming from but I don’t think it’s possible to support the Republican Party in its current mutated form without being at least somewhat racist. You don’t have to be racist to be a Republican, you just have to be tolerant of them. Republicans are all about tolerance. > [@Bricker](#): > > To the extent that the justification for Jim Crow laws was held out to be anything other than “keep the blacks down,” I do in fact believe: (a) that it was pretextual; and (b) that no valid reason existed. That is, i regard the presence or absence of a pretext as a red herring. The only meaningful question is: is there a valid, morally neutral justification for the law? In the case of Jim Crow: no, there wasn’t. Why don’t you think that having an informed electorate is a valid reason? > [@Bricker](#): > > The goal, both then and now, was no national health care plan. In the 1990s, they offered up a more palatable alternative: not because they thought it was good, but merely because it was better than the alternative. If you change a tire in the rain, I cannot point to this act and start calling you to change other flat tires in other rainstorms. You changed that tire because, as unpleasant a task as it was, it was better than the alternative of being stuck where you were. That does not mean that you desire to change tires in the rain. So why didn’t they offer up a “more palatable version” this time around? IIRCl, their counter offer was tort reform. I don’t think the objection to Obamacare was racist. I don’t even think that their objection to every last fucking thing Obama wanted to achieve was racist. I think they used racism to stir up the cretins who would help them oppose every last fucking thing that Obama wanted to achieve. Bricker, you are like the sarduakar. You exist and thrive in environment that is very hostile to you and you are probably stronger for it but on this one, I see you making excuse after excuse to justify a law that is widely recognized as having disparate impact on minority voting rights. The laws tries to solve don’t solve the problem of voter fraud by addressing the least common form of voter fraud and so you say it is about voter confidence. Ignorant people may feel more confident about the integrity of the process even though voter ID laws don’t actually accomplish much other than stepping on the voting rights of some minorities and create long lines at the voting booths. You could say many of the same things about the assault weapons ban. The gun grabbers try to address gun violence by banning the a weapon that is rarely ever used in gun violence. It doesn’t reduce gun violence one bit and you end up stepping on the rights of gun owners. Of course it makes ignorant people feel safer but should we really be driving policy based on what makes ignorant people feel better? ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 12:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3523 "2013-10-30T00:02:48Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > You don’t have to be racist to be a Republican, you just have to be tolerant of them. Republicans are all about tolerance. You don’t have to be racist to be Republican, but you do have to be Republican to be racist. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 12:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3524 "2013-10-30T00:04:13Z")
> [@Kolak\_of\_Twilo](#): > > [Watching this young lady](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3CRSK0HItoI&feature=player_embedded&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Ffeature%3Dplayer_embedded%26v%3D3CRSK0HItoI&app=desktop) makes me suspect this is unlikely to work out the way the Republicans hope. At the very least, she is a remarkably articulate 12 year old. More awesome than Hit Girl! I’ll wait for her! ---
**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:** [October 30, 2013, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3525 "2013-10-30T00:13:11Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > By “such an impact”, do you mean a reduction in voter turnout? > > Because it seems to be that it’s an inescapable fact of human nature and the behavior of crowds that if you make things harder to do, then, all other things being equal, fewer people will do them. > > If you raise the price of donuts from $1.00 to $1.10, fewer people will buy those donuts. > > If you decrease the time that polls are open, fewer people will vote. > > If you add administrative overhead that people have to go through in order to vote, fewer people will vote. > > Do you disagree? Sometimes scarcity or cost creates value where none existed before. A line outside a nightclub might make more people go to the club. Charging people for bottled tap water might make people drink more water and less soda. Making it marginally tougher to vote might create fear of loss that results in one of the highest voter turnouts among minorities in recent history. This thing might just be backfiring on the Republicans. It doesn’t seem to be having the effect that Republicans were looking for. Its still wrong in principle but it might not actually end up suppressing the vote. It might create some value where none existed before. As one guy told me, “if they want to stop me from voting so bad, maybe my vote makes a difference” ---
**Author:** ![Zakalwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zakalwe/32/270_2.png) [@Zakalwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zakalwe)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3526 "2013-10-30T01:38:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > In the 1990s, they offered up a more palatable alternative: **not because they thought it was good** , but merely because it was better than the alternative. > [@Bricker](#): > > Correct. And since the law is supported by many legislators, there’s no objective method for determining how many evil-intentioned delegates it would take to poison the pool. So, when it comes to an actual proposed law (the Clinton-plan alternative, you can POSITIVELY state NO Republicans actually WANTED national health care, they were just willing to accept that version of it instead of the one they were offered. Then, with regard to voter ID laws, in spite of numerous examples of people who actually voted for these laws openly stating that part of the purpose of the law was to disenfranchise Democratic-leaning voters, we suddenly need some magical objective number in order for that to matter? Jesus, Bricker. Listen to yourself. You have gone off the fucking deep end on this issue. I don’t know why this gets under your skin so hard, but damn. ---
**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:** [October 30, 2013, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3527 "2013-10-30T02:26:19Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Sometimes scarcity or cost creates value where none existed before. A line outside a nightclub might make more people go to the club. Charging people for bottled tap water might make people drink more water and less soda. Making it marginally tougher to vote might create fear of loss that results in one of the highest voter turnouts among minorities in recent history. > > This thing might just be backfiring on the Republicans. It doesn’t seem to be having the effect that Republicans were looking for. Its still wrong in principle but it might not actually end up suppressing the vote. It might create some value where none existed before. As one guy told me, “if they want to stop me from voting so bad, maybe my vote makes a difference” I’m kind of curious if there’s anything an eager civilian can do akin to helping southern blacks in the 1950s and 60s to register. Maybe offer free car services to drive poor voters to the DMV? Collect numbers at the DMV to minimize wait times? Start charities to pay fees? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3528 "2013-10-30T02:31:52Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > It might create some value where none existed before. As one guy told me, “if they want to stop me from voting so bad, maybe my vote makes a difference” Especially lately, because the country is so polarized and so many elections are so hard-fought and so many elections are so **close.** ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3529 "2013-10-30T03:24:45Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Its still wrong in principle but it might not actually end up suppressing the vote. As I’ve said from the beginning. If people want to vote they will. Someone who can’t be assed to get their free ID in a two or 4 year period isn’t likely to make the effort to struggle down to the voting booth. > [@](#): > > It might create some value where none existed before. As one guy told me, “if they want to stop me from voting so bad, maybe my vote makes a difference” You mean that enforcing voter ID actually inspires more confidence that their vote means something and might make them want to vote? Who’d of thunk it?😛 ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3530 "2013-10-30T04:27:12Z")
Not very many. And most of them, their very next thought was “No, wait, that’s stupid.” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 9:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3531 "2013-10-30T09:15:43Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > … you don’t think voting rights warrant elevated scrutiny? Why? Because elevated scrutiny hands power to the unelected bench. And because there’s nothing about voting that triggers elevated scrutiny. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 9:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3532 "2013-10-30T09:27:07Z")
> [@Zakalwe](#): > > So, when it comes to an actual proposed law (the Clinton-plan alternative, you can POSITIVELY state NO Republicans actually WANTED national health care, they were just willing to accept that version of it instead of the one they were offered. No. I can say that as a group, Republicans’ actions showed they did not favor national health care. I cannot – and did not – say the words to try to put in my mouth. > [@](#): > > Then, with regard to voter ID laws, in spite of numerous examples of people who actually voted for these laws openly stating that part of the purpose of the law was to disenfranchise Democratic-leaning voters, we suddenly need some magical objective number in order for that to matter? No, again, and it would really free up my time if you learn to read. For approximately the ninety quadrillionth time: the motives of individual legislators are irrelevant if there is a valid, neutral justification for the law. We have no idea who had what idea, but even if we did, it doesn’t matter. Those are not my original words. The term “valid, neutral justification,” is direct from the Supreme Court. They are the final arbiters of the supreme law of the land. If you don’t like it, too fucking bad for you – your dislike does not allow you to pretend I didn’t say it. I am not always a fan of unelected judges holding such power. But they do. I accept it, even when I don’t like the result. But you, and your ilk, seem to accept the Court’s authority when you like it, and hold it illegitimate when you don’t…saying in effect that there’s only one real rule: what you want is the only legitimate outcome. Why not cut the pretense, and nominate a wise philosopher king to rule over us benignly and absolutely? I bet you have just the guy in mind. ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 10:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3533 "2013-10-30T10:35:41Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Why not cut the pretense, and nominate a wise philosopher king to rule over us benignly and absolutely? I bet you have just the guy in mind. Is he made of straw? Because it looks like you’ve got one ready-made right there. ---
**Author:** ![Zakalwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zakalwe/32/270_2.png) [@Zakalwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zakalwe)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 11:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3534 "2013-10-30T11:07:15Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > For approximately the ninety quadrillionth time: the motives of individual legislators are irrelevant if there is a valid, neutral justification for the law. We have no idea who had what idea, but even if we did, it doesn’t matter. Neutral in what sense? We have strong and increasing evidence that this law was neutral in neither intent or effect. So at what point does the actual situation on the ground get have an impact on this “valid justification” that can be made up by the judiciary without regard to actual legislative intent. > [@](#): > > Why not cut the pretense, and nominate a wise philosopher king to rule over us benignly and absolutely? I bet you have just the guy in mind. Why not cut the pretense, and admit you don’t want poor people to vote because they won’t vote the way you want them to? I bet you have just the system in miind. ---
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 11:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3535 "2013-10-30T11:31:02Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > Originally Posted by BobLibDem > Its still wrong in principle but it might not actually end up suppressing the vote. When did I ever say that? The linked post in the quote doesn’t contain that statement. Looks like someone’s still hiding behind that fig leaf. “Sure, the law has the effect of keeping minorities, the poor, and the elderly from voting, but as long as there’s a theoretical alternative explanation for it, tough titties! It’s leeeeeeeeegal! Neener neener neener!” ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3536 "2013-10-30T13:22:15Z")
Besides, the common slander that the working poor don’t get ID only because they’re too damn lazy (and sometimes we even hear the word “shiftless” :dubious: ), to pass up a vital day’s income and go to the county seat or wherever, is not only false and insulting but revealing. Even more revealing is the refusal of \*\*Bricker \*\*and cohorts to acknowledge that voting fraud, when it even exists, happens with \*absentee \*balloting, or to propose even the slightest measure to address that. If you have to base your argument on lies, it should not be a surprise when you get called on it, no? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 1:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3537 "2013-10-30T13:27:05Z")
> [@Zakalwe](#): > > Neutral in what sense? We have strong and increasing evidence that this law was neutral in neither intent or effect. So at what point does the actual situation on the ground get have an impact on this “valid justification” that can be made up by the judiciary without regard to actual legislative intent. Actually, you don’t. You can’t point to any state in which the law has been in effect and show any statistically significant negative effects, can you? Indeed, in at least some cases, the effect has been in the other direction, leading at least some commentators to postulate that the publicity about Republicans trying to “steal votes,” energized the populations supposedly targeted for theft. But I of course welcome any solid evidence about effect you have to the contrary. Note that “solid evidence” means actual results, not speculation and imagination. > [@](#): > > Why not cut the pretense, and admit you don’t want poor people to vote because they won’t vote the way you want them to? I bet you have just the system in miind. I do! It’s called: Photo ID _status quo_. ---
**Author:** ![Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e8c25b/32.png) [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Really_Not_All_That_Bright)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3538 "2013-10-30T13:33:35Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Because elevated scrutiny hands power to the unelected bench. > > And because there’s nothing about voting that triggers elevated scrutiny. Voting isn’t a fundamental right? ---
**Author:** ![Gyrate](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gyrate/32/3588_2.png) [@Gyrate](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gyrate)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3539 "2013-10-30T13:43:32Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > Even more revealing is the refusal of \*\*Bricker \*\*and cohorts to acknowledge that voting fraud, when it even exists, happens with \*absentee \*balloting, or to propose even the slightest measure to address that. But voter fraud at the polling place _could_ be happening, and therefore we must implement voter ID requirements to prevent the fraud that might be happening even though (apart from a few Republicans “testing” the system) there’s very little evidence that it \*is \*happening. Because CONFIDENCE. Also, voter IDs prevent chupacabra attacks, as shown by the low incidence of chupacabra attacks in areas where voter ID requirements have been implemented. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [October 30, 2013, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/3540 "2013-10-30T13:56:28Z")
> [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Voting isn’t a fundamental right? [Yick Wo v. Hopkins](http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0118_0356_ZO.html) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=176) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=178)