# 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:** 546
**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:** [June 12, 2018, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10901 "2018-06-12T17:15:32Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Way, way back in the early pages, in a rare spasm of candor, he noted that “some” Republicans have malign motives in all this. He has his moments. But they are moments. Is it about 1% of Republicans who have malign motives? Or is it closer to 99%? Rational humans might find this quantitative assessment relevant, but our **Esquire** considers the distinction meaningless. “Plurality” — there’s a nice lawyerly term; it means “two or more.” Has the **Esquire** admitted that a _plurality_ of Republicans have malign motives? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10902 "2018-06-12T18:07:29Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > True, and [owning guns, but not going to school.](https://progresstexas.org/blog/stricken-texas-voter-id-law-allowed-gun-licenses-not-student-id) Gun license = issued by state government School ID = issued by individual school I’m comfortable in saying that there’s a higher degree of reliability associated with correct identification for a gun license than for a student ID. Do you believe the reverse is true? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 6:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10903 "2018-06-12T18:10:29Z")
> [@Buck\_Godot](#): > > Now I suppose one might be able to argue that it may have unforeseen effects which would inconvenience certain voters, in a way that happens to provide electoral advantage to our side, but that shouldn’t matter as long as it has a rational basis. Agreed. But that test - the rational basis test – is where I contend your proposed law would fail. > [@](#): > > No one is being prevented from voting. I suppose you also could argue that there would be better ways of dealing with the issue of voter fraud that wouldn’t disenfranchise so many people, or be so one sided, but that wasn’t that law that was passed. No. I’d never argue that the law you mentioned should be judicially invalidated merely because the courts can conceive a better method, because that’s not how the rational basis test works. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 6:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10904 "2018-06-12T18:50:40Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Gun license = issued by state government > School ID = issued by individual school > > I’m comfortable in saying that there’s a higher degree of reliability associated with correct identification for a gun license than for a student ID. Do you believe the reverse is true? I was for one, responding to your idea that the types of ID that are approved of by the GOP are the types that more mainstream society carries, which does reflect a general disdain for people in school. Then, there’s the fact that the ID that I use for voting, my 11 month old verizon bill, was made by neither. Finally, when I went to school, I had to show them my ID and my social security card in order to enroll, and then when I got my student ID, I had to again show them my driver’s license. I see no higher degree in reliability in an ID just because it was issued by a department that is under the state government. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10905 "2018-06-12T18:58:28Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > I was for one, responding to your idea that the types of ID that are approved of by the GOP are the types that more mainstream society carries, which does reflect a general disdain for people in school. > > Then, there’s the fact that the ID that I use for voting, my 11 month old verizon bill, was made by neither. > > Finally, when I went to school, I had to show them my ID and my social security card in order to enroll, and then when I got my student ID, I had to again show them my driver’s license. > > I see no higher degree in reliability in an ID just because it was issued by a department that is under the state government. You don’t? Is there something about your Verizon bill that I couldn’t duplicate with a home scanner and a color printer? Now, as to the student ID – I’m not so interested in what you showed them as in what their list of acceptable IDs was. If you didn’t have a driver’s license, could you have showed them your Verizon bill that you printed on your home color printer? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 7:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10906 "2018-06-12T19:07:31Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > True, and [owning guns, but not going to school.](https://progresstexas.org/blog/stricken-texas-voter-id-law-allowed-gun-licenses-not-student-id) By the way – you link to an article saying that the Texas law was struck down. But of course that article was written in 2015. Just this April, the Fifth Circuit upheld their revised law, which kept the list of acceptable IDs and cured the concerns about voters not having ID by allowing them to vote if they sign an affidavit attesting to who they are, and why they can’t get a real ID. This law was also opposed, on the grounds that the criminal penalties for those who make false statements in their sworn affidavits would discourage voters. That line of attack was not successful. So Texas has a Voter ID law! Court approved! Ain’t it grand? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10907 "2018-06-12T19:56:14Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > …This law was also opposed, on the grounds that the criminal penalties for those who make false statements in their sworn affidavits would discourage voters… > [@](#): > > …One of the most contentious issues with the new law is that it creates criminal penalties for those who make false statements in their sworn affidavits, a move that critics of the law believe confuses and frightens potential voters… > **[Texas’ Voter ID Law Does Not Discriminate and Can Stand, Appeals Panel Rules...](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/27/us/texas-voter-id.html)** > > The decision by a three-judge panel overturned a lower-court ruling that had struck down the law, the latest milestone in a yearslong legal battle. Now, the way you spun it, it about half implies and insinuates an effort to encourage illegal voting, which must be firmly addressed. The explanation offered above, which seems to have escaped your attention, suggests that minority persons are often wary and fearful of interactions with the law, and might be discouraged from exercising their rights. In Texas? Ya think maybe? > [@](#): > > …So Texas has a Voter ID law! Court approved! Ain’t it grand? Gloat while you can, hoss. Tick tock, tick tock. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10908 "2018-06-12T20:06:14Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > [https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/27/us/texas-voter-id.html](https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/27/us/texas-voter-id.html) > > Now, the way you spun it, it about half implies and insinuates an effort to encourage illegal voting, which must be firmly addressed. The explanation offered above, which seems to have escaped your attention, suggests that minority persons are often wary and fearful of interactions with the law, and might be discouraged from exercising their rights. That’s an unreasonable concern, and society is under no obligation to bow to it. The whole POINT of an affidavit is to create a criminal penalty for lying. The existence of the penalty is part of the value of the process. ---
**Author:** ![k9bfriender](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/k9bfriender/32/3283_2.png) [@k9bfriender](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/k9bfriender)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10909 "2018-06-12T20:31:07Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > By the way – you link to an article saying that the Texas law was struck down. But of course that article was written in 2015. Just this April, the Fifth Circuit upheld their revised law, which kept the list of acceptable IDs and cured the concerns about voters not having ID by allowing them to vote if they sign an affidavit attesting to who they are, and why they can’t get a real ID. Odd, that wasn’t the one I meant to link to, just a general one about the texas law, but I take it you get the point. > [@](#): > > This law was also opposed, on the grounds that the criminal penalties for those who make false statements in their sworn affidavits would discourage voters. This makes some sense, as those who are most marginalized are also those who are the least trustful of government institutions. I can see how someone would be concerned about signing their name to an affidavit that if they made any errors at all, the law can come crushing down on them. > [@](#): > > That line of attack was not successful. Not all that surprising, there is very little support for those who are most marginalized in our society. > [@](#): > > So Texas has a Voter ID law! Court approved! Ain’t it grand? So does Ohio, where I intentionally use my 11 month old cell phone bill, because I can. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10910 "2018-06-12T21:47:14Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s an unreasonable concern… Oh, really? In the paragon of justice that is Texas? Was it always an unreasonable concern, or is this an historical development? So, OK, when, exactly? Do they know that, these people with their “unreasonable concerns”? Somebody should tell them. Make their day. Wouldn’t that be grand? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 9:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10911 "2018-06-12T21:52:19Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > So does Ohio, where I intentionally use my 11 month old cell phone bill, because I can. That’s a foolish choice for the voters of Ohio to make, in my opinion, but my stronger opinion is: it’s theirs to make. I fully support Ohio’s scheme. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10912 "2018-06-12T22:00:19Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Oh, really? In the paragon of justice that is Texas? Was it always an unreasonable concern, or is this an historical development? So, OK, when, exactly? Since 1982, with the passage of the extension of the Voting Rights Act. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 12, 2018, 10:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10913 "2018-06-12T22:15:33Z")
Do you believe in miracles as a general sort of thing, or just legislative ones? Generations of fear, poof! Gone! ---
**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:** [June 13, 2018, 8:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10914 "2018-06-13T08:41:47Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Oh, really? In the paragon of justice that is Texas? Was it always an unreasonable concern, or is this an historical development? So, OK, when, exactly? > > Do they know that, these people with their “unreasonable concerns”? Somebody should tell them. Make their day. Wouldn’t that be grand? An “unreasonable” concern in **Bricker** ’s view is one that doesn’t affect him. He prefers to focus on “reasonable” concerns, like “voter confidence”. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tooth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/c67d28/32.png) [@The\_Tooth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tooth)\ **Post date:** [June 13, 2018, 11:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10915 "2018-06-13T11:15:49Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Do you believe in miracles as a general sort of thing, or just legislative ones? Generations of fear, poof! Gone! He believes what he’s told to believe. ---
**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:** [June 13, 2018, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10916 "2018-06-13T12:18:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Well, he had 318 signatures; he needed 250. To prove an intent to defraud, I suspect the prosecutor would have needed to show that 69 or more signatures were fake. > [@Mr. Bumble](#): > > If the law supposes that, the law is a ass — a idiot. Human beings would instead define “intent to defraud” based on whether there was _intent_ to … wait for it … _defraud_. > [@Bricker](#): > > The conditions of his plea deal were:… > … > Do you agree with that? > … > Do you agree with that? > … Of course none of us agrees with this bullshit. There’s a separate thread where you may whine about plea bargaining if you wish. _This thread is about **Justice** _. > [@elucidator](#): > > …Big fan of mental gymnastics, and the Counselor is the master, he can jump up in the air, do a double back flip, tie himself in a granny knot on the way up, untie on the way down and land twinkle-toe perfect! The rhetorical equivalent of Nadia Comăneci! Uh oh. We know Counselor packs heat, and of course he keeps a round in the chamber. Do we know whether one of his guns is the dangerous Glock? Better clear the arena when he’s doing backflips. (Disclaimer: I also always kept my gun cocked in younger days. Now I often bolster myself with 20 mg of blue powder there’s risk I’ll need to use my weapon.) > [@Bricker](#): > > Well, this is the Pit. > > But no – I was urging you, a wise man, to learn from the example of the foolish man… > Well, sure - but that was penned in the wake of a guilty plea and agreed-upon sentence. I am very confident that had he been convicted, he would have stood before a sentencing judge with Disney-wide eyes, contrite and cooperative. > > In other words, you cannot argue his lack of repentance would have aggravated hsi sentence, since it’s very likely he would have adopted a repentant attitude if he needed to. So Mr. Bumble (see quote upthread) was right? Is that your point? > [@Bricker](#): > > Republicans fear a country in which the plain text meaning of the law can get changed because a judge likes another result better. > > Thankfully, that fear was averted today. But the danger remains. > [@Bricker](#): > > The Ohio procedures conformed precisely to the removal requirements listed in the NVRA. Read 52 USC §20507(d)(1)(B). Babble, babble, babble. A good law clerk could dig out cites that go either way. The right-wing ogres on SCOTUS find whatever precedent serves their immoral agenda. One can pity **Clothahump** and the other idjits who don’t know that. What’s your excuse? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2018, 7:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10917 "2018-06-14T19:42:51Z")
> [@Gyrate](#): > > An “unreasonable” concern in **Bricker** ’s view is one that doesn’t affect him. He prefers to focus on “reasonable” concerns, like “voter confidence”. It seems clear that you won’t allow me to decide what society should accept as reasonable, and I’m certainly not willing to allow you to define it. So we should set up a tribunal, and let that tribunal decide how to interpret “reasonable,” as applied to a given set of facts. And their decision will be accepted by us both. Hey! We did that already! How lucky – what a time-saver, eh? Now I accept their decision. But I bet you don’t. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2018, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10918 "2018-06-14T20:11:46Z")
Still having trouble with the distinction between justice and the law, aren’t we, Counselor? ---
**Author:** ![Buck\_Godot](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/buck_godot/32/6573_2.png) [@Buck\_Godot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Buck_Godot)\ **Post date:** [June 14, 2018, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10919 "2018-06-14T21:01:48Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Agreed. > > But that test - the rational basis test – is where I contend your proposed law would fail. The rational basis is to prevent voter fraud by requiring ID. Same as any of the other laws discussed in this thread. ---
**Author:** ![Lance\_Turbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lance_turbo/32/6156_2.png) [@Lance\_Turbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lance_Turbo)\ **Post date:** [June 18, 2018, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/10920 "2018-06-18T22:23:29Z")
Kansas proof of citizenship voter law struck down by federal judge. Trump’s voter fraud czar (also Kansas Secretary of State) personally defended this law in court. The judge was less than impressed with how Kobach handled himself in court and assigned him six hours of continuing legal education that, “pertain to federal or Kansas civil rules of procedure or evidence.” [Sam Levine Tweet](https://twitter.com/srl/status/1008833346460372993) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=545) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=547)