# 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:** 245
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2014, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4881 "2014-05-28T22:38:12Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Plenty of laws, regulations, and government funded programs are rolled out to address things that cannot be measured with any degree of precision. A couple of years ago I started a thread complaining about what I called "green grocer liberalism,’ in which the city of Philadelphia spent $900,000 to outfit corner grocery stores with fresh fruits and vegetables despite having no way to measure the success of the program, and no reasonable belief that it would succeed, given failures in other cities of similar efforts. That program, along with several others was introduced to reduce Philadelphia’s obscene obesity rate. Although too late to be a factor in the last measurement [Philadelphia’s Obesity rate has been falling](http://www.rwjf.org/en/about-rwjf/newsroom/newsroom-content/2013/07/philadelphia--signs-of-progress.html), at least among children. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2014, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4882 "2014-05-28T23:23:47Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > Which extra difficulty is not unreasonably great? Here’s where you lose me… are you saying “no one has shown me that the extra difficulty is unreasonably great in any particular state, and I start with the assumption that the burden is not great” or are you saying that you actually have done that kind of analysis for all the states which have passed ID laws in recent years? Or are you saying “given what I know of society, no law requiring voter ID possibly COULD unreasonably add unreasonably great restrictions unless it had ludicrously insane provisions, and none of these do”? I have read the briefs of the parties challenging the laws in every state that has entertained a legal challenge. I assume that a highly motivated legal challenge would include the most objectionable parts of the law and it’s implementation. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2014, 11:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4883 "2014-05-28T23:26:49Z")
> [@Mr.Miskatonic](#): > > That program, along with several others was introduced to reduce Philadelphia’s obscene obesity rate. > > Although too late to be a factor in the last measurement [Philadelphia’s Obesity rate has been falling](http://www.rwjf.org/en/about-rwjf/newsroom/newsroom-content/2013/07/philadelphia--signs-of-progress.html), at least among children. And the article lists any number of steps that are more likely to have affected that drop: provided nutrition education to all public school students whose families are eligible for the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) since 1999; removed all sodas and sugar-sweetened drinks from public school vending machines in 2004, making it one of the first jurisdictions in the country to do so; implemented a comprehensive, district-wide school wellness policy in 2006, including guidelines for school meals, snacks, and drinks, physical activity, and nutrition education; banned deep fryers in school kitchens, and switched from serving 2% milk to 1% and skim milk, in 2009. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [May 28, 2014, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4884 "2014-05-28T23:36:07Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I have read the briefs of the parties challenging the laws in every state that has entertained a legal challenge. I assume that a highly motivated legal challenge would include the most objectionable parts of the law and it’s implementation. And what is your reaction to them? Is it “well, I’m an expert on the demographics of urban areas in that state, and thus I know that the impact will be minimal” or is it “I’m confident that impact is minimal because I know it would be minimal for me” or is it “whether or not that impact is minimal depends on precise details I’m unaware of, so I can see where the lawyers for that side might do some research to come up with a convincing argument…”? ---
**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:** [May 28, 2014, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4885 "2014-05-28T23:56:19Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It’s pretty clear to me that you lack the ability – the wit, if you will – to distinguish between advocating for the _legality_ of a practice and advocating for the _desirability_ of a practice. Does anyone here but you give a flying fuck about this practice being legal or not? I’ll happily concede that the voting repression laws are technically legal, but they are most definitely morally reprehensible. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2014, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4886 "2014-05-29T00:55:23Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It’s pretty clear to me that you lack the ability – the wit, if you will – to distinguish between advocating for the _legality_ of a practice and advocating for the _desirability_ of a practice. > [@Bricker](#): > > I know you liberals depend on the felon vote, but too bad. So, this was an argument for the _legality_ of a practice? Fuck off, you mendacious obfuscating piece of shit. ---
**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:** [May 29, 2014, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4887 "2014-05-29T01:50:20Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Does anyone here but you give a flying fuck about this practice being legal or not? I’ll happily concede that the voting repression laws are technically legal, but they are most definitely morally reprehensible. Fortunately, the judiciary is there to (sometimes) correct the mistakes of the legislature. I like the judiciary, I must say, perhaps because they represent order, while legislatures thrive in and create chaos. Speaking of which, the policy may be legal and morally reprehensible, but it’s also mathematically unsound. By Bricker’s own pulled-from-the-ass estimate, he “bet” there’d be 200 illegal voters in an electorate of three million (a ratio of 1 to 15000). Later, he moved the goalposts (or perhaps more accurately, shrunk them) with this: > [@Bricker](#): > > Although the real issue is ratios. An election of 232,000 total votes decided by a margin of four votes – as happened in the Indiana Eighth in 1984 – is in precisely the same position. > > There’s no way to determine who cast votes in the Indiana Eighth in 1984. Only four votes switching sides changes the result. How can you say, with confidence, that there were not four illegal votes cast? Four votes out 232,000 is a ratio of 1:58000, which is somewhat not “precisely the same position” as 1:15000, leaving me to suspect that math is not Bricker’s strong suit. But anyway, let’s go with his first ratio, since it’s more favourable to his idea that voter fraud is a problem. So some kind of voter ID card is put into place, along with the mechanisms for producing and distributing said cards (though details on how this would work, I note, are often lacking). If even _one_ legitimate voter out of 15000 has enough problems with the process that they can’t get an ID (and _every single one_ of the alleged 200 illegal voters is stopped), then Bricker’s “solution” has already created the same size problem that it ostensibly solves. If even _one legitimate voter out of 14925_ has a problem getting the ID (resulting in 201 blocked voters out of an electorate of three million - _and_ all 200 of the original illegal voters are blocked), then Bricker’s “solution” has created a _bigger_ problem than it ostensibly solves. It was when I challenged his “200 out of 3 million” claim (post 4552) that he started on his “I think you don’t understand my argument” nonsense (4555), soon followed by a variant on his standard fallback position: “it doesn’t matter if it doesn’t make sense - if the legislators want to pass it, they will - neener neener neener.” (4566) Well, I hope more judiciaries will intervene on the side of reason. Neener. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2014, 2:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4888 "2014-05-29T02:20:56Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > And what is your reaction to them? Is it “well, I’m an expert on the demographics of urban areas in that state, and thus I know that the impact will be minimal” or is it “I’m confident that impact is minimal because I know it would be minimal for me” or is it “whether or not that impact is minimal depends on precise details I’m unaware of, so I can see where the lawyers for that side might do some research to come up with a convincing argument…”? The third is closest. I am not an expert myself, but the entire purpose of the adversarial legal system is to let each side marshal their strongest arguments. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2014, 2:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4889 "2014-05-29T02:25:37Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Fortunately, the judiciary is there to (sometimes) correct the mistakes of the legislature. I like the judiciary, I must say, perhaps because they represent order, while legislatures thrive in and create chaos. > > Speaking of which, the policy may be legal and morally reprehensible, but it’s also mathematically unsound. By Bricker’s own pulled-from-the-ass estimate, he “bet” there’d be 200 illegal voters in an electorate of three million (a ratio of 1 to 15000). Later, he moved the goalposts (or perhaps more accurately, shrunk them) with this: > > Four votes out 232,000 is a ratio of 1:58000, which is somewhat not “precisely the same position” as 1:15000, leaving me to suspect that math is not Bricker’s strong suit. > > But anyway, let’s go with his first ratio, since it’s more favourable to his idea that voter fraud is a problem. So some kind of voter ID card is put into place, along with the mechanisms for producing and distributing said cards (though details on how this would work, I note, are often lacking). If even _one_ legitimate voter out of 15000 has enough problems with the process that they can’t get an ID (and _every single one_ of the alleged 200 illegal voters is stopped), then Bricker’s “solution” has already created the same size problem that it ostensibly solves. > > If even _one legitimate voter out of 14925_ has a problem getting the ID (resulting in 201 blocked voters out of an electorate of three million - _and_ all 200 of the original illegal voters are blocked), then Bricker’s “solution” has created a _bigger_ problem than it ostensibly solves. > > It was when I challenged his “200 out of 3 million” claim (post 4552) that he started on his “I think you don’t understand my argument” nonsense (4555), soon followed by a variant on his standard fallback position: “it doesn’t matter if it doesn’t make sense - if the legislators want to pass it, they will - neener neener neener.” (4566) > > Well, I hope more judiciaries will intervene on the side of reason. Neener. The two are not fungible. An illegal vote is absolutely prohibited. A vote not cast because someone feels it’s too difficult to do so may, or may not, be a problem. It depends on whether the difficulty is unreasonable. Voodoo. If a Santeria priestess announced that voters would be punished with a Voodoo curse, and I showed you that five hundred votes were stopped, would that be sufficient cause to take some sort of legal action against the priestess? ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2014, 2:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4890 "2014-05-29T02:39:50Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > Does anyone here but you give a flying fuck about this practice being legal or not? I’ll happily concede that the voting repression laws are technically legal, but they are most definitely morally reprehensible. I won’t even go that far. They aren’t technically legal, and at least one court has ruled on that. Voter ID laws might be sufficiently sanitized to pass constitutional muster, but, to date, they have been written so badly as to be obvious for the partisan assaults on voting liberty that they actually are. They haven’t even bothered to craft a fig-leaf that the courts could wink at! ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2014, 2:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4891 "2014-05-29T02:43:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > . . . An illegal vote is absolutely prohibited. A vote not cast because someone feels it’s too difficult to do so may, or may not, be a problem. It depends on whether the difficulty is unreasonable. . . . And whether the difficulty is assigned to one class of people more than to another, which violates equal protection requirements. A voter ID law which targets the poor, students, the elderly and retired, and people who speak languages other than English is absolutely prohibited. It is every bit as evil as someone registering ineligible voters. ---
**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:** [May 29, 2014, 2:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4892 "2014-05-29T02:46:10Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The two are not fungible. An illegal vote is absolutely prohibited. A vote not cast because someone feels it’s too difficult to do so may, or may not, be a problem. It depends on whether the difficulty is unreasonable. I’m not talking about how someone “feels”, I’m talking about the likelihood of actual bureaucratic barriers getting in the way of someone who genuinely wants to vote and would gladly go to vote on the day of the vote, but can’t get the ID card necessary to vote. If even one legitimate voter out of 15000 can’t manage it because they lack certain documents or for any number of reasons that one could picture _one person out of fifteen thousand_ falling prey to just out of simple bad luck, then you’ve created a problem as great as your own estimate of the problem you claim exists. More people than that die of heat stroke, I mention just for the heck of it. So a vote that should have been registered does not get registered. I don’t think it unreasonable to see this as a problem of the same magnitude as a vote being registered that should not have been. Personally, I find it _more_ offensive to get in the way of a legitimate voter than to let an illegitimate voter by, but no matter. > [@](#): > > Voodoo. If a Santeria priestess announced that voters would be punished with a Voodoo curse, and I showed you that five hundred votes were stopped, would that be sufficient cause to take some sort of legal action against the priestess? Is there some legal obligation those 500 people had to get documents from the priestess, who declined to supply them or delayed in doing so? If not, relevance? ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2014, 2:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4893 "2014-05-29T02:53:53Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > . . . But anyway, let’s go with his first ratio, since it’s more favourable to his idea that voter fraud is a problem. So some kind of voter ID card is put into place, along with the mechanisms for producing and distributing said cards (though details on how this would work, I note, are often lacking). If even _one_ legitimate voter out of 15000 has enough problems with the process that they can’t get an ID (and _every single one_ of the alleged 200 illegal voters is stopped), then Bricker’s “solution” has already created the same size problem that it ostensibly solves. . . . I pointed this problem out when he first brought up closely-contested elections as a “problem” and claimed that voter ID was a “solution.” It isn’t! It is statistically almost exactly as likely to cause the problem as to solve it! Worse: if four votes out of 232,000 can decide an election, then the goal of a voter ID law must be to make our trust and assurance in every voter’s registration 99.9982 per cent certain. Just showing a photograph isn’t good enough, as there are lots of people who bear a two or three per cent resemblance to each other. We would have to use a full DNA test to identify each individual as a legitimate voter. Close elections are a problem inherent in democracy itself. If the two political parties are equally divided (and they would seem to be!) the odds are high that the four swing voters are also divided. Only one chance in 16 that all four of them voted the same way. (If one side is using cemetery residents to vote, who’s to say the other side isn’t using Canadians to vote? **Bricker** not only has to show that the problem exists, but, for his proposal to solve it, he also has to show that it is biased. Otherwise, we might end up excluding 3,192 people who voted one way…and 3,191 people who voted the other…and the election is still decided by three votes.) ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2014, 2:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4894 "2014-05-29T02:56:59Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > If even one legitimate voter out of 15000 can’t manage it because they lack certain documents or for any number of reasons that one could picture _one person out of fifteen thousand_ falling prey to just out of simple bad luck, then you’ve created a problem as great as your own estimate of the problem you claim exists. The thing is the current requirements probably prevent people from voting now. Anytime there is 1 requirement (assuming the requirement isn’t ‘breathing’), then there will be some subset who won’t be able to or won’t bother to comply. The argument here is what are reasonable requirements and the philosophical bent of the arguer. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2014, 2:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4895 "2014-05-29T02:57:50Z")
> [@](#): > > …I know you liberals depend on the felon vote, but too bad… You know, reading that again, for a second there I couldn’t believe he actually said that. Yep, #2501. ---
**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:** [May 29, 2014, 3:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4896 "2014-05-29T03:00:58Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > And whether the difficulty is assigned to one class of people more than to another, which violates equal protection requirements. > > A voter ID law which targets the poor, students, the elderly and retired, and people who speak languages other than English is absolutely prohibited. It is every bit as evil as someone registering ineligible voters. I don’t quite agree. Simply _registering_ voters who might not be eligible doesn’t strike me as nearly as odious as trying to stymie people known to be legitimate voters. As an example, there were numerous volunteers helping to register blacks to vote in southern states in the fifties and sixties. Some of those voters would not be able to pass the voter-eligibility requirements imposed on the day of the vote (i.e. the infamous Alabama literacy test) so _technically_ they were not eligible to vote. It was still the right thing to register them. I realize that’s a pretty-far-afield objection and won’t harp on it. ---
**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:** [May 29, 2014, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4897 "2014-05-29T03:10:02Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > **Bricker** not only has to show that the problem exists, but, for his proposal to solve it, he also has to show that it is biased. If he hasn’t already, I’m sure Bricker will be proud to point out to you that he doesn’t have to prove a damn thing - if a legislature wants to pass it, they will. > [@Uzi](#): > > The thing is the current requirements probably prevent people from voting now. Anytime there is 1 requirement (assuming the requirement isn’t ‘breathing’), then there will be some subset who won’t be able to or won’t bother to comply. The argument here is what are reasonable requirements and the philosophical bent of the arguer. Sure, which is why I asked some time back if Bricker knew of any politicians who were promoting the idea of voter ID while also promoting the idea of making these IDs easy to get, i.e. someone who had given some thought to the idea of not creating a bigger problem then the one they were ostensibly solving (generously assuming honest intent). I don’t recall him naming any, but the invitation is open to all. Even then, a bureaucratic process that only proves nightmarish and unmanageable to one person out of 15000 is probably working pretty _well_, as bureaucracies go. ---
**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:** [May 29, 2014, 3:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4898 "2014-05-29T03:17:23Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > You know, reading that again, for a second there I couldn’t believe he actually said that. Yep, #2501. I’ve seen him say stupider things. It’s actually a tad refreshing when we get a glimpse of his true feelings. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2014, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4899 "2014-05-29T03:59:09Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > What i’m wondering now is how many Republicans totally believe in voter fraud, and believe that it is why they don’t win elections. Sincere question for **Bricker** , if he can dismount his high hypothetical horse long enough to contemplate the real world. Can you point to any national elections that were very likely swung by fraud or malfeasance, whether voter ID would have prevented it or not? I’ll go first. The Presidential elections of 1960, 2000, and 2004 would likely have had different results if the wills of legitimate voters had been strictly followed. (Though I guess experts think JFK might still have won in a squeaker.) > [@Bricker](#): > > I know you liberals depend on the felon vote, but too bad. Can you point to any national elections that were very likely swung by felons’ votes, illegal or otherwise? Don’t wait for the consecutive translation into legalese, please. This is a test to see whether you are aware of the real world, or your catatonia is too deep. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2014, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/4900 "2014-05-29T04:07:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And the article lists any number of steps that are more likely to have affected that drop: > > provided nutrition education to all public school students whose families are eligible for the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) since 1999; > > removed all sodas and sugar-sweetened drinks from public school vending machines in 2004, making it one of the first jurisdictions in the country to do so; > > implemented a comprehensive, district-wide school wellness policy in 2006, including guidelines for school meals, snacks, and drinks, physical activity, and nutrition education; > > banned deep fryers in school kitchens, and switched from serving 2% milk to 1% and skim milk, in 2009. Hence why I mentioned that it was part of a series of actions taken. Standing alone it won’t do much, but it is considered a brick in the building of a less obese Philadelphia. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=244) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=246)