# 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:** 54
**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:** [July 8, 2012, 5:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1061 "2012-07-08T17:14:01Z")
> [@Lobohan](#): > > If 90% of people can climb three flights of stairs, then I guess everyone can. :rolleyes: That guy’s a lying and repetitve moron. Why even waste your time on him? ---
**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:** [July 8, 2012, 5:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1062 "2012-07-08T17:16:41Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, and I just reviewed the link originally posted, and it doesn’t mention it, so why would I have known it? The trouble is, you’re a snide, condescending, dick so often, things you say are often read in that voice. Re-read your post about resigning and assume that the words are spoken by a complete tool. See how someone would assume that you knew the info? This fits thematically with your bullshit gloating about how the Dems have control in Wisconsin, but there are no more sessions, so they win nothing. Har har har. Make sense? You act like a terrible person, so people assume you’re being terrible. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 5:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1063 "2012-07-08T17:53:00Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > It’s been pretty big news recently. Weren’t you the one making the argument that politically oriented posters here should be well versed enough in current events to catch a reference like “It’s the right thing to do?” Yes. Still, I missed it. I don’t say it was reasonable to have missed it. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1064 "2012-07-08T17:56:57Z")
He didn`t miss it. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2012, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1065 "2012-07-08T18:45:41Z")
Hey, we all do it! I made a mistake once back in '76. I thought I was wrong, but I wasn’t! ---
**Author:** ![Klaatu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/e0b2c6/32.png) [@Klaatu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Klaatu)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1066 "2012-07-09T04:43:38Z")
So the argument is that low income people have a problem getting an ID card so they can vote. Well, they have to have an ID to get food stamps and other gov assistance. State and Fed. Not tracking that. Please explain. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1067 "2012-07-09T05:22:17Z")
> [@Klaatu](#): > > Well, they have to have an ID to get food stamps and other gov assistance. State and Fed. > Not tracking that. Please explain. [http://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset\_library/myths-homeless.pdf](http://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/myths-homeless.pdf) > [@](#): > > MYTH: You need a photo ID to get SNAP benefits. > > FACT: You need proof of identity. A photo ID is one way to prove identity. You can’t be turned down for SNAP benefits because you don’t have photo ID. You can use another ID like a work or school badge, a health benefits card, an ID from another social service, a pay stub, a birth certificate, or a voter registration card. The SNAP worker can also check your identity by calling shelter workers or employers. ---
**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1068 "2012-07-09T06:30:05Z")
> [@Lord\_Feldon](#): > > [http://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset\_library/myths-homeless.pdf](http://www.usich.gov/resources/uploads/asset_library/myths-homeless.pdf) Klaatu, we await your apology ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Feldon](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lord_feldon/32/341_2.png) [@Lord\_Feldon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Feldon)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 7:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1069 "2012-07-09T07:21:57Z")
Even if you _did_ need the same kind of ID to get SNAP benefits that you need to vote in many states, one household that receives SNAP benefits can have more than one eligible voter. ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 8:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1070 "2012-07-09T08:33:34Z")
> [@Mentor\_and\_Liar](#): > > The legislative body that will be charged with prescribing “valid photographic identification” if the amendment should pass, has a history of proscribing anything that does not both have a photo and prove residency. I will thus continue to aver, like a motherfucker, that if the amendment passes, no one knows what, exactly, will be considered “valid photographic identification” but add that it’s not lookin’ real good for brother passport. I think I should make clear that when I say valid ID, I don’t just mean one specific piece of ID. I’ve posted Canada’s requirements previously. There are numbers of ways to prove your identity that should satisfy an eligibility requirement enough to vote. Any state government who doesn’t consider the nation’s passport enough to prove your ID is bonkers and should be replaced with untrained monkeys, which is essentially what they are. At least Monkeys can be paid in bananas rather than money. Of course, a proof of residency in that voting jurisdiction would be an additional consideration. ---
**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:** [July 9, 2012, 10:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1071 "2012-07-09T10:09:45Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > I think I should make clear that when I say valid ID, I don’t just mean one specific piece of ID. I’ve posted Canada’s requirements previously. There are numbers of ways to prove your identity that should satisfy an eligibility requirement enough to vote. Exactly! And these numerous ways have worked perfectly well in the existing voter registration systems that are already in place. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1072 "2012-07-09T12:35:17Z")
Bricker: I think I’ve asked you this before in another thread, but if so I’ve lost track. So suppose for a moment that we were able to convince you of the following: (1) The type of voter fraud these laws claim to address is a trivial or totally nonexistent problem (2) Republican lawmakers who propose these laws are aware of (1) (3) Republican lawmakers who propose these laws believe that the actual effect of these laws, should they pass, would be to suppress turnout among Democratic-leaning demographics. If you were convinced that all of the above were true, what would then be your reaction to these laws? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1073 "2012-07-09T12:53:32Z")
> [@Mentor\_and\_Liar](#): > > (Though I suppose it matters not, a US passport would not be an acceptable form of ID under the proposed Minnesota voter suppression amendment.) So, just to clarify, you now agree that this statement was merely some kind of a guess on your part? And the basis of that guess was that the state rep that authored the proposed amendment’s language is a bad person? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 1:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1074 "2012-07-09T13:00:44Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > Bricker: I think I’ve asked you this before in another thread, but if so I’ve lost track. So suppose for a moment that we were able to convince you of the following: > (1) The type of voter fraud these laws claim to address is a trivial or totally nonexistent problem > (2) Republican lawmakers who propose these laws are aware of (1) > (3) Republican lawmakers who propose these laws believe that the actual effect of these laws, should they pass, would be to suppress turnout among Democratic-leaning demographics. > If you were convinced that all of the above were true, what would then be your reaction to these laws? Unchanged. Because even though the motive for the laws is wrong, the laws nonetheless address a valid need. If a future election is very very close (like Florida presidential 2000 or Washington gubernatorial 2004) then the previously “trivial” numbers of illegal voters will take on belated significance, and it will be too late to do anything about them. If I were to learn that some governor signed a law against heroin use because he knew that African Americans use heroin disproportionately to whites, and he wanted as many blacks locked up as possible, I would not be automatically against the law either. The motive of the law’s proponents is not all that relevant – the question is simply what the text of the law provides for. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 1:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1075 "2012-07-09T13:02:19Z")
> [@Mentor\_and\_Liar](#): > > Lawya, please. The amendment reads “valid photographic identification as prescribed by law.” There exists no current Minnesota law–that I know of, that has stood–that defines “photographic identification.” Ima let former Republican Governor Arne Carlson and former Democratic Vice-President Walter Mondale take over here [“Surprisingly, there are also two glaring omissions in the proposed amendment. The first is that it does not specify an acceptable government-issued ID. A passport would not qualify, nor would a regular student ID.”](http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentaries/159799395.html) > > The legislative body that will be charged with prescribing “valid photographic identification” if the amendment should pass, has a history of proscribing anything that does not both have a photo and prove residency. I will thus continue to aver, like a motherfucker, that if the amendment passes, no one knows what, exactly, will be considered “valid photographic identification” but add that it’s not lookin’ real good for brother passport. In all the other states that have passed voter ID laws, have any of them disallowed US passports? ---
**Author:** ![gamerunknown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@gamerunknown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gamerunknown)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1076 "2012-07-09T13:19:59Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > the question is simply what the text of the law provides for. _Mens rea_? Sounds sexist. ---
**Author:** ![Skip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ebca7d/32.png) [@Skip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skip)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1077 "2012-07-09T13:50:14Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > the laws nonetheless address a valid need No they don’t. A fiscal conservative like yourself would surely be horrified at the millions of dollars that will be spent on Voter ID laws in each state in order to stop a less than one thousandth of one percent discrepancy in election results. Your money would be much better spent invested in improved ballot design and tallying procedures. Or even better, to lobby for more effective legislation to combat voter suppression which could possibly affect elections by thousands and thousands of votes. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1078 "2012-07-09T13:50:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Unchanged. > > Because even though the motive for the laws is wrong, the laws nonetheless address a valid need. If a future election is very very close (like Florida presidential 2000 or Washington gubernatorial 2004) then the previously “trivial” numbers of illegal voters will take on belated significance, and it will be too late to do anything about them. > > If I were to learn that some governor signed a law against heroin use because he knew that African Americans use heroin disproportionately to whites, and he wanted as many blacks locked up as possible, I would not be automatically against the law either. The motive of the law’s proponents is not all that relevant – the question is simply what the text of the law provides for. And this, folks, is sophistic thinking at its finest, intellectual gymnastics in a moral vacuum. Clearly, the Democrats have a moral duty to accept this buggering with enthusiasm, shouting out cheerfully “Thank you, sir, can I have another?” at each stroke. I note that your previous rock solid foundation appears to have evaporated, you are no longer basing your fervent insistence on the electoral confidence of the voter, but have deftly shifted to the theoretical impact of an election so close that the vanishingly small impact of “voter fraud” might be magnified, as a Japanese condom might be inflated to the size of the Hindenburg. If you were kidding, this would be very droll. Sadly, no. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1079 "2012-07-09T14:15:37Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > And this, folks, is sophistic thinking at its finest, intellectual gymnastics in a moral vacuum. Clearly, the Democrats have a moral duty to accept this buggering with enthusiasm, shouting out cheerfully “Thank you, sir, can I have another?” at each stroke. > > I note that your previous rock solid foundation appears to have evaporated, you are no longer basing your fervent insistence on the electoral confidence of the voter, but have deftly shifted to the theoretical impact of an election so close that the vanishingly small impact of “voter fraud” might be magnified, as a Japanese condom might be inflated to the size of the Hindenburg. > > If you were kidding, this would be very droll. Sadly, no. No, to the contrary – the knowledge that a future close election is at risk is precisely what upsets voter confidence. I have made that point repeatedly – for example, in this thread, three weeks ago: > [@Bricker](#): > > > [@Bosstone](#): > > > > I thought voter fraud was a serious problem that could sway elections? > > That’s not really been my argument. The chance of voter fraud affecting a given election is very small. When an election is decided by 50,000 votes, or even 10,000 votes, we simply can’t posit a voter fraud problem that could have swayed it. Sure, there might have been 600 non-citizens voting – who cares? So the winner won by 9,400 instead of 10,000 – big deal. > > The problem arises only in the very rare cases when an election’s results are within a margin of error that includes voter fraud numbers. > > The Washington State governor’s race in 2004 is a good example. No one knew ahead of time that the race would be so razor-thin. After a recount, Democrat Christine Gregoire was ahead by 129 votes. > > That is not the time to discover that 200 voters were illegal aliens. > > What do you do? You can’t subtract 200 votes from Gregoire – that would clearly be unfair, absent some showing they all voted for her. At the same time, you realize that the opponent is going to point to those votes as evidence that the winner shouldn’t be considered the winner. > > So my point is: prudence dictates we implement a system ahead of time that allows us to reliably associate voters with voting. That may not stop fraud, but it creates a real framework for catching and punishing non-citizen voters, for example. Now, a voter can simply deny he was the one casting the ballots. So, **eluciudator** – why would you possibly say I have shifted my argument? My argument is identical to the post I just quoted from myself, three weeks ago. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2012, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1080 "2012-07-09T14:20:14Z")
> [@Skip](#): > > No they don’t. > > A fiscal conservative like yourself would surely be horrified at the millions of dollars that will be spent on Voter ID laws in each state in order to stop a less than one thousandth of one percent discrepancy in election results. Not at all – because although I grant that the payoff from such investment as a general rule is virtually nil, what price do you place on the correct selection for a state governor? Or for the President? When we invest in such procedures, we mitigate the risk of another Florida-2000 clouding the legitimacy of the next President. That’s easily worth the money being spent. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=53) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=55)