# 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:** 455
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2016, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9081 "2016-04-13T21:28:34Z")
The War Between the States was primarily a result of Northern economic aggression. That’s a true fact, you could look it up! ---
**Author:** ![Euphonious\_Polemic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/euphonious_polemic/32/3002_2.png) [@Euphonious\_Polemic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphonious_Polemic)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2016, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9082 "2016-04-13T21:32:17Z")
> [@inscrutable](#): > > Look at it this way: > > Say there is a liquor store 20 miles away that has a Half-Price Sale one day a month. > How many of these poor downtrodden would miraculously find a way to get there??? This is evidence of NOTHING other than your own nasty outlook towards anyone not in your exalted social status. It says rather a lot about you. ---
**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:** [April 13, 2016, 9:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9083 "2016-04-13T21:32:30Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That will be the context until they lose on that front…then without admitting error, they will shift back into demanding the courts step up and kill Voter ID, and the thread will continue its Great Migratory Cycle of Liberal Incompetence. :eek: 😕 I thought it was your brainless kitty-kat jumping on the keyboard when you claimed yesterday that you were posting here just to defend the concept of “legitimate law.” But no; now you’re doubling down. Have I ever said that my objection to voter suppression measures was _because they were unconstitutional_? Has 'Luci? Has Mr. Glutton? Has anyone in the thread? Geeez. 9000 posts in the thread and you don’t even know what your position is or that of your opponents? :smack: When you’re dead and wondering why St. Peter isn’t inviting you past the pearly gates, it really will be like that scene from _Chinatown_: “I’m an arrogant asshole.” [slap] “I’m a demented moron.” [slap] “I’m an arrogant asshole.” [slap] “I’m a demented moron.” [slap] [Bricker breaks down into tears] “I’m an arrogant asshole _and_ a demented moron.” ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2016, 9:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9084 "2016-04-13T21:34:52Z")
> [@inscrutable](#): > > Look at it this way: > > Say there is a liquor store 20 miles away that has a Half-Price Sale one day a month. > How many of these poor downtrodden would miraculously find a way to get there??? Or ask yourself does a poor downtrodden drunken asshole have less civil rights than an comfortable uptrodden drunken asshole? ---
**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:** [April 13, 2016, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9085 "2016-04-13T21:41:19Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Thank you for stating your position, I really appreciate it (no sarcasm). > > In reading about this issue, it seems that Canada passed it’s first Voter ID laws in 2007. Do you recall why they were necessary then and continue to be necessary today? > > Was there an outcry about disadvantaged voters being unable to obtain an ID to vote? Not that I recall. I suspect because: a) we have a nonpartisan government agency whose primary purpose is maintaining voter rolls with the goal of counting everyone, and not looking for ways to “purge” people off the lists, hence there’s less suspicion among Canadians that their elected officials are trying to steal (or at least bias) elections. b) the above-mentioned agency works with other governmental agencies to maintain those rolls, and Canadians have less paranoia about governmental surveillance. There’s a box on my federal tax return asking politely if I’d mind if Revenue Canada shared my info with Elections Canada. If someone suggests an American federal agency be set up with same goal of sharing info on American citizens, what percentage of your population would reflexively call it fascism or communism or (showing the depths of their furious confusion) both? 0-5? 5-10? 10-60? c) the list of acceptable IDs for a Canadian election is a pretty lengthy one. If an elected official today declared that the list was _too_ long and had to be pared down for security, he better have a pretty strong case that election security is being genuinely jeopardized. Citing a noncitizen who may have voted once back in 1996 isn’t compelling (ask Bricker if the name “Ramon Cue” means anything to him). d) basically overall, Canadians live at a much lower terror level than Americans. Thus reasonable regulations are more likely to pass without a blip, and unreasonable regulations are less likely to get traction without a public panic to drive them. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2016, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9086 "2016-04-13T21:41:53Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Grin! I think they are, as they are currently written, because they have the intent of discriminating against groups of people on the basis of their statistical partisan alignment. Jim Crow laws were also immoral. > > It could be possible to write a Voter ID law that was not discriminatory, and thus would be either morally neutral or even conceivably morally good (although it’s hard to praise someone for devising a cure for a disease which does not exist.) But the laws that have been put in place fail the moral test, because they have a deliberate and conscious partisan bias. A quibble, but an important point: I have no objection to voter ID _as such_. If the Republicans had wanted to ensure their precious voter confidence while assuring that there was no partisan bias in its operation, they could have done so. They did not, and for a very good reason. They did not want to. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2016, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9087 "2016-04-13T21:45:45Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > It’s moral to assuage the concerns of the public with respect to election results. Was it also moral to have whipped up those non-fact-related “concerns” in the first place? ---
**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:** [April 13, 2016, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9088 "2016-04-13T21:53:08Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No. Then that’s a healthy departure from an earlier position of yours which held that governmental efforts to emotionally manipulate citizens was okey-dokey. > [@](#): > > Assuming facts not in evidence: they ARE deeply concerned about the issue. I’ll need some facts to admit _that_ to evidence, preferably evidence of concerns that are _based_ on facts and not lies. Granted, Americans can choose what they wish to concern themselves with, and if I suppose there was a national panic about brain-sucking alien vampires, it would be within the purview of elected officials to investigate and if necessary legislate a response to make brain-sucking while in a vampiric condition and lacking citizen papers a Class B Felony, though since brain-sucking alien vampires don’t actually exist, anyone arrested on that basis is by definition a false positive, and that’s rather less acceptable, wot? ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2016, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9089 "2016-04-13T21:53:51Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Not that I recall. I suspect because: > > a) we have a nonpartisan government agency whose primary purpose is maintaining voter rolls with the goal of counting everyone, and not looking for ways to “purge” people off the lists, hence there’s less suspicion among Canadians that their elected officials are trying to steal (or at least bias) elections. > > b) the above-mentioned agency works with other governmental agencies to maintain those rolls, and Canadians have less paranoia about governmental surveillance. There’s a box on my federal tax return asking politely if I’d mind if Revenue Canada shared my info with Elections Canada. If someone suggests an American federal agency be set up with same goal of sharing info on American citizens, what percentage of your population would reflexively call it fascism or communism or (showing the depths of their furious confusion) both? 0-5? 5-10? 10-60? > > c) the list of acceptable IDs for a Canadian election is a pretty lengthy one. If an elected official today declared that the list was _too_ long and had to be pared down for security, he better have a pretty strong case that election security is being genuinely jeopardized. Citing a noncitizen who may have voted once back in 1996 isn’t compelling (ask Bricker if the name “Ramon Cue” means anything to him). > > d) basically overall, Canadians live at a much lower terror level than Americans. Thus reasonable regulations are more likely to pass without a blip, and unreasonable regulations are less likely to get traction without a public panic to drive them. Again, thanks for the answers. None of them, however, addressed the question of “Why all of a sudden in 2007 did people think having an ID to vote was a good idea?” You mentioned that a strong case would have to be made to pare down the acceptable ID list. However, why is such a list necessary? why have the need for ID at all? Seems like removing the need for an ID would probably save some time and money during elections. ---
**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:** [April 13, 2016, 9:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9090 "2016-04-13T21:59:59Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Grin! I think [voter ID laws] are [immoral], as they are currently written, because they have the intent of discriminating against groups of people on the basis of their statistical partisan alignment. Jim Crow laws were also immoral. Well, _as a concept_ I can’t say requiring identification to vote is immoral, but I would consider it immoral to add requirements that aren’t necessary for partisan advantage. Similarly, I’ve no objection and will gladly support health regulations on abortion clinics that medical experts have testified will protect health. I would find it to be an immoral exercise to add _more_ regulations that do _not_ reduce risks to health but simply reduce access to abortion, like requiring hospital-level infrastructure, requiring useless ultrasounds and delays, spreading misinformation linking abortion to breast cancer (suspect at best, a malicious lie more likely) or deciding that abortion clinics must be 2000 feet from schools. Immoral to do so, immoral to lie about _why_ you’re doing 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:** [April 13, 2016, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9091 "2016-04-13T22:08:29Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Again, thanks for the answers. None of them, however, addressed the question of “Why all of a sudden in 2007 did people think having an ID to vote was a good idea?” I’d have to look into it, since I’m unfamiliar with the debates before the legislation, if any. Frankly, American politics are so much more entertaining because you all make such a bloodsport out of it. Heck, for all I know, the legislation in 2007 was just to set a national standard for what forms of ID would be acceptable, replacing earlier more localized regulations of varying scrutiny. > [@](#): > > You mentioned that a strong case would have to be made to pare down the acceptable ID list. However, why is such a list necessary? why have the need for ID at all? Seems like removing the need for an ID would probably save some time and money during elections. No argument here. I’ve voted in elections (pre-2007, I’m sure) where I just gave my name and address, which an election official crossed off a list they had and then handed me a ballot. We could go back to that and still maintain a functional democracy, I’m sure. I’m not sure how much time and money would be saved, though. I’m guessing not a lot. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2016, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9092 "2016-04-13T22:37:08Z")
> [@inscrutable](#): > > First three are actually true, civil war is debatable. Today I learned \*\*inscrutable \*\*is fucking stupid. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2016, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9093 "2016-04-13T22:40:52Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > A quibble, but an important point: I have no objection to voter ID _as such_. If the Republicans had wanted to ensure their precious voter confidence while assuring that there was no partisan bias in its operation, they could have done so. They did not, and for a very good reason. They did not want to. Agreed; I tried to specify that in my post. > [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, _as a concept_ I can’t say requiring identification to vote is immoral, but I would consider it immoral to add requirements that aren’t necessary for partisan advantage. Similarly, I’ve no objection and will gladly support health regulations on abortion clinics that medical experts have testified will protect health. . . . Also agreed. Such laws could have been framed in a neutral fashion. In practice, they (sometimes) weren’t, and that’s the basis of my charge of immorality. And also unconstitutionality. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2016, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9094 "2016-04-13T22:47:02Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Such laws could have been framed in a neutral fashion. If real (not feigned and rationalized) neutrality had been a consideration, the bills would never have been written. Their central \*purpose \*is non-neutrality. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2016, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9095 "2016-04-13T22:52:25Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Bullshit, but, hey, you’re an incompetent liar, so who cares. > > Voter ID laws are immoral…and constitutionally invalid also. Several have already been knocked down by the courts. Several legislators have publicly admitted that the laws were enacted with the intent of decreasing Democratic voting, and that makes the laws unconstitutional, just as extreme Gerrymandering is unconstitutional. No, dumbo, the intent of the legislators doesn’t make it unconstitutional: > [@](#): > > But if a nondiscriminatory law is supported by valid neutral justifications, those justifications should not be disregarded simply because partisan interests may have provided one motivation for the votes of individual legislators. The state interests identified as justifications for SEA 483 are both neutral and sufficiently strong to require us to reject petitioners’ facial attack on the statute. Quoting, for the zillionth time, Crawford v Marion County. That’s the Supreme Court decision that upheld Voter ID laws. And, shock of shock, after numerous protests and admonitions that no one here is calling these laws unconstitutional, here comes a passionate attempt to argue that the laws are unconstitutional. I await the next series of posts which confidently declare that this post never happened. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2016, 10:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9096 "2016-04-13T22:56:51Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > :eek: 😕 I thought it was your brainless kitty-kat jumping on the keyboard when you claimed yesterday that you were posting here just to defend the concept of “legitimate law.” > > But no; now you’re doubling down. > > Have I ever said that my objection to voter suppression measures was _because they were unconstitutional_? Has 'Luci? Has Mr. Glutton? Has anyone in the thread? Yes. Plenty of times. See previous post. Or concentrate really really hard, and it will just vanish away, just as your approach to the world is in all things ideology, and when the facts are contrary to what your politics tell you should be true, it is the politics that you believe, and not those nasty terrible facts. ---
**Author:** ![inscrutable](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/a88e4f/32.png) [@inscrutable](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/inscrutable)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2016, 11:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9097 "2016-04-13T23:07:50Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > Today I learned \*\*inscrutable \*\*is fucking stupid. Insult from Lobohan = badge of honor. Civil War has been debated ever since, and regularly on this very board, so apparently “debatable”. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2016, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9098 "2016-04-13T23:16:38Z")
> [@inscrutable](#): > > Insult from Lobohan = badge of honor. I’m not insulting you, I’m noting that your views are those of a mental deficient. > [@](#): > > Civil War has been debated ever since, and regularly on this very board, so apparently “debatable”. It’s debatable, in that some will try. It isn’t actually in question though. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [April 13, 2016, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9099 "2016-04-13T23:20:38Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And, shock of shock, after numerous protests and admonitions that no one here is calling these laws unconstitutional, here comes a passionate attempt to argue that the laws are unconstitutional. I await the next series of posts which confidently declare that this post never happened. I have been careful not to say that “no one” is calling them unconstitutional. But that has certainly not been the main thrust of the “liberal side” of this debate, to the extent that there has been a main thrust when there are dozens of posters making different points. And, btw, Bricker, what is your opinion of post 9078 from inscrutable? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [April 14, 2016, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/9100 "2016-04-14T00:23:06Z")
BTW, there’s a [big protest](http://www.salon.com/2016/04/13/a_crisis_point_in_our_democracy_why_progressive_leaders_and_thousands_of_others_will_risk_arrest_this_week/) going on in Washington all this week, against voter-ID laws and a great deal else about our electoral systems. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=454) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=456)