# 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:** 67
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2012, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1321 "2012-07-12T21:57:12Z")
Trying to finish me off, aren’t you, **John**? I’ll get you for this, I swear… ---
**Author:** ![gamerunknown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@gamerunknown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gamerunknown)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1322 "2012-07-13T13:17:41Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > By the way, did you ever come up with a workable rationalization for trimming back “Sunday voting” and making voter registration drives more difficult, and potentially criminal? Working on the Sabbath?! ---
**Author:** ![Mentor\_and\_Liar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/2acd7d/32.png) [@Mentor\_and\_Liar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mentor_and_Liar)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1323 "2012-07-13T13:50:18Z")
> [@gamerunknown](#): > > Working on the Sabbath?! Okay; I laughed. That, is some impressive thinking, you have a brilliant future in the GOP Department of Pretense. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1324 "2012-07-13T17:55:29Z")
Well, I looked into it. Mostly with an eye to finding someone Pubbish who would offer a rationale. A couple of points in passing. _Numero uno_, this is entirely Florida, best as I can tell. so I’m not that surprised to see so little comment upon it, since voter madness has a quite run amok in the Dangling Penis State. _Numero two-o_, a statistic I had not actually run across, suggests that fully a third of Florida’s black and hispanic voters took advantage of Sunday voting to cast their ballots. Which is a _lot_ more than I expected. The only Pubbie spokesgit mentioned in my Google search was Marco Rubio, in the midst of a stirring defense of the integrity of blah blah blah, he says this: > **[Florida Politics | Tampa Bay Times](https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/)** > > Politics news in the Tampa Bay area and Tallahassee, including local, county and state laws, breaking news and community topics and issues, from the Tampa Bay Times. > [@](#): > > …RUBIO: I’m not nearly as familiar with all the details of the 48-hour rule.\* On the Sunday voting process, I can tell you that, when I first got elected in Florida, we didn’t have Sunday voting or Monday voting or Wednesday voting. We barely had absentee voting. You went on Tuesday, and you voted. > > ``` > And so Sunday voting and, you know, early voting was built in, in order to hope to increase voter participation. But we also know, for example, that in the early stages of the - of campaigns, we used to have a two-week voting period in Florida. The cost-benefit analysis of the first week of voting was really not - was really not cost effective. In essence, the number of people voting versus the cost to local governments to comply or to carry out that voting were - the turnout just didn't justify the expenditure in the first week.... > > ``` \*referring to the voter registration restrictions that the League of Obama Bitches…ah, Women Voters…objected to. Note, please, a couple of disconnects: first, he is pleased to announce his party’s abiding concern with increasing voter turnout: “And so Sunday voting and, you know, early voting was built in, in order to hope to increase voter participation…” We are heartened to hear it! BUT!..“The cost-benefit analysis of the first week of voting was really not - was really not cost effective.” Please note: he has shifted the topic from Sunday voting to the “first week” of voting and offered us the conclusion, without any actual numbers, that it was not “cost effective”. One has to wonder if he had the same facts at his fingertips that I do, to wit: the huge proportion of black and hispanic voters who voted on that one day! Maybe that extra week wasn’t very “cost effective”, but it sure seems like the Sunday part was. Looks kinda like they strove to increase voter turnout and, to their shock and horror, succeeded. Now, about those numbers: best source appears to be : > [@](#): > > In 2008, “33.2 percent of those who voted early on the last Sunday before Election Day were African-American, while 23.6 percent were Hispanic.” _U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown, (D-Jacksonville) on Friday, June 15th, 2012 in a press release_ _Politico_ did a fact check on those numbers, available here: > **['Souls to the Polls' Sunday drew high numbers of African-Americans and...](https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2012/jun/22/corrine-brown/souls-polls-sunday-drew-more-african-american-and-/)** > > When Floridians head to church on the Sunday before Election Day in November, they might hear sermons about voting. But Their conclusion: > [@](#): > > …But we did check the numbers Brown cited. Those numbers are backed up by sound research from multiple sources. We rate her claim True… With a capital “T”, which I take to mean extra-special true, rather than just being factual. So, I guess you could say that the Republican position is that Sunday voting isn’t “cost effective”, but no actual substance has been offered to support the suggestion, and only Rubio has actually said it (so far as I can tell). Seems to me that if a third of any major demographic group is using Sunday voting effectively, and not so much the other “early voting” opportunities, then Sunday voting is _very_ cost effective, and the others, not so much. My opinion remains unchanged: this is a baldly cynical effort to suppress the demographics likely to vote Dem. If anyone has a rational basis for a rebuttal, I’m off the Google now, so its all theirs! Aside: Jesus fuck a shit soufflé , but election day in Florida is going to be a napalm clusterfuck of galactic proportions! I endeavor to remain both sane and sober, but interesting times call for tough choices… ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1325 "2012-07-13T18:29:53Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Seems to me that if a third of any major demographic group is using Sunday voting effectively, and not so much the other “early voting” opportunities, then Sunday voting is _very_ cost effective, and the others, not so much. Well, sure. Except that I don’t agree the numbers said that. (1) In 2008, “33.2 percent of those who voted early on the last Sunday before Election Day were African-American, while 23.6 percent were Hispanic.” (2) In 2008, 33.2 percent of African-Americans that voted, voted on the last Sunday before Election Day. See the difference? Your quote said (1). You concluded (2). ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1326 "2012-07-13T18:44:42Z")
Read the Politifact. > [@](#): > > …Researchers examined the race of voters on the final Sunday > > Brown’s spokesman said that the statistics about minority voting on the final Sunday came from the NAACP, and we found several researchers have cited similar statistics to Brown’s claim. > > They arrive at those numbers by obtaining statewide early vote data and then matching voters’ information with registration records which list self-reported race and ethnicity. > > Here is what professors and lawyers found for who voted early on Sunday Nov. 2, 2008 > > The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law: > • African-American: 33.2 percent > • Hispanic: 23.6 percent > > The Brennan Center was focused on the impact of minorities and didn’t list a percentage for whites. > > University of Florida political science professor Daniel A Smith and Michael Herron, professor of government at Dartmouth: > > • Whites: 40 percent > • African American: 34 percent > • Hispanics: 24 percent > • Asian: 2 percent > > “We find that Democratic, African-American, Hispanic, younger, and first-time voters were > disproportionately likely to vote early in 2008 and in particular on weekends, including the final Sunday of early voting,” wrote the professors in a paper. > > Justin Levitt of Loyola Law School: > • White: 37.2 percent > • African-American: 31.5 percent > • Hispanic: 22.4 percent > • Unknown: 5.1 percent > • Other: 3.8 percent > > Levitt told us in an email that those percentages represent conservative estimates: Voters of unknown race or ethnicity were treated for purposes of this analysis as white. > > The three sets of research reached similar conclusions for the turnout on the final Sunday of early voting: About one-third were black and about one-quarter were Hispanic. > > That’s higher than their representation in the overall electorate that year: Blacks comprised 13 percent of total voters and Hispanics 11 percent, Levitt wrote… Anything else? ---
**Author:** ![Bosstone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/22d042/32.png) [@Bosstone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosstone)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1327 "2012-07-13T19:00:06Z")
That’s still not saying what you’re saying it’s saying. There is a difference between these two statements: 33% of African-American voters are early voters. (Your claim) 33% of early voters are African-American voters. (The cite’s claim) ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1328 "2012-07-13T19:12:18Z")
Put another way. There may have been only 500 voters who voted early. 166 (33%) were African American, and 118 (24%) were Hispanic. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1329 "2012-07-13T22:52:18Z")
Or it may have been that black and hispanic voters crushed the local polling places under a tidal wave of melananin-affected complexions! And the resulting damage ruined the cost effectiveness of the program! Of course, I have no evidence of such a thing, so my conjecture might reasonably be regarded as blowing smoke. That would be fair, I’d have to admit. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 13, 2012, 11:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1330 "2012-07-13T23:32:22Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Or it may have been that black and hispanic voters crushed the local polling places under a tidal wave of melananin-affected complexions! And the resulting damage ruined the cost effectiveness of the program! > > Of course, I have no evidence of such a thing, so my conjecture might reasonably be regarded as blowing smoke. That would be fair, I’d have to admit. And he retreats to the bullshit. I have no idea what the numbers are. But apparently Rubio said the early voting wasn’t cost effective. The numbers you post don’t address that claim. They show that early voting was _proportionally_ used by a good number of black voters but doesn’t address the Rubio claim at all. If only a small number of voters used the system, it doesn’t make sense to keep funding it. Can’t you just say, “OK, good point, let me find put how many voters were involved?” Why retreat to the crush-the-polling-station crap? ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2012, 1:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1331 "2012-07-14T01:42:36Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I have no idea what the numbers are. But apparently Rubio said the early voting wasn’t cost effective. The numbers you post don’t address that claim. They show that early voting was _proportionally_ used by a good number of black voters but doesn’t address the Rubio claim at all. If only a small number of voters used the system, it doesn’t make sense to keep funding it. How about [2.62 million](https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/370392-souls-to-the-polls-paper.html) Florida voters in 2008 who cast early in-person (EIP) votes in the general election? That’s out of approximately 8.3 million total votes in Florida, which works out to over 30%. And that’s not counting the 1.87 million who voted by absentee ballot. So in 2008, over half of Florida voters cast their ballots prior to Election Day. Those numbers are on page two of the link above, which was one of the links in the Politifact article supplied by **elucidator**. Was pretty fucking easy to find for me, but then, I’m not trying to create an impression that the system was poorly used in order to make Rubio and the GOP seem reasonable. ---
**Author:** ![gamerunknown](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/6bbea6/32.png) [@gamerunknown](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gamerunknown)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2012, 1:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1332 "2012-07-14T13:09:19Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But apparently Rubio said the early voting wasn’t cost effective. Yeah, thing is, voting isn’t cost effective. There’s no real way to spin a profit from it, which is abhorrent to the GOP. In fact, a few guys in the South hit on a method of making it less mired in government inefficiency, but turns out some people weren’t too happy with that (though it technically didn’t disenfranchise anyone and I’d like to hear a retraction from anyone claiming it did). You know, Gadaffi hit on the same thing. Consensus based direct democracy at a regional level, devolution of power and Libya avoids costly elections. Bada bing, bada bam, highest quality of life outcomes and GDP in Africa. Only one drawback, brutal suppression of the population. Though maybe Rubio was discussing a new metric with which to interpret the data: votes for the GOP reduce the deficit (except when they’re cutting taxes, but that increases taxable revenue according to Patented Hans-Hermann Hoppe and a skip technology). Thus, any votes benefiting the Democrats are not cost-effective. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2012, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1333 "2012-07-14T13:49:39Z")
> [@gamerunknown](#): > > Yeah, thing is, voting isn’t cost effective. There’s no real way to spin a profit from it, which is abhorrent to the GOP. In fact, a few guys in the South hit on a method of making it less mired in government inefficiency, but turns out some people weren’t too happy with that (though it technically didn’t disenfranchise anyone and I’d like to hear a retraction from anyone claiming it did). You know, Gadaffi hit on the same thing. Consensus based direct democracy at a regional level, devolution of power and Libya avoids costly elections. Bada bing, bada bam, highest quality of life outcomes and GDP in Africa. Only one drawback, brutal suppression of the population. > > Though maybe Rubio was discussing a new metric with which to interpret the data: votes for the GOP reduce the deficit (except when they’re cutting taxes, but that increases taxable revenue according to Patented Hans-Hermann Hoppe and a skip technology). Thus, any votes benefiting the Democrats are not cost-effective. Hilarious. But even acknowledging that voting as an activity is not cost effective, suppose we learn that collecting 55% of the votes on Election Day cost the state $3 million, and collecting 45% of the vote in pre-Election Day voting cost $9 million. (Figures made up to illustrate the point). ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2012, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1334 "2012-07-14T14:13:32Z")
And just to illustrate the mindset of these who shriek and wail about GOP vote suppressors, we have good ol’ Harvard University political science professor Stephen Ansolabehere, who was an “expert” witness for the Justice Department as they asked the federal courts to uphold their attempt to stop the Texas Voter ID law. Ansolabehere testified that the Texas law was more likely to affect Hispanic and black voters than white ones, and had a list of he scope of the problem: 1.5 million Texas residents without photo ID that would be disenfranchised with no remedy. On cross examination, Texas pointed out that Ansolabehere’s list included Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison ®, former president George W. Bush and former senator Phil Gramm ®. Um… now, I can’t say I ever got a paycheck from Harvard, but his analysis sure seems like it might be … um … a bit biased towards including lots of names. Without all that much regard for the accuracy of the claims he’s making. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2012, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1335 "2012-07-14T14:23:15Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Hilarious. > > But even acknowledging that voting as an activity is not cost effective, suppose we learn that collecting 55% of the votes on Election Day cost the state $3 million, and collecting 45% of the vote in pre-Election Day voting cost $9 million. (Figures made up to illustrate the point). Then let’s hear the _actual_ numbers. And even then, here’s an interesting counterpoint – what if, of that 45%, a considerable number could not voter on election day? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 14, 2012, 5:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1336 "2012-07-14T17:27:58Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > Then let’s hear the _actual_ numbers. And even then, here’s an interesting counterpoint – what if, of that 45%, a considerable number could not voter on election day? I have no idea what the actual numbers are. But since I am not advancing any claim, I don’t bear the burden of providing them. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1337 "2012-07-15T00:05:39Z")
Well, sure you are, you are claiming we are wrong. So, anyway, if some academic douchebag presents bad evidence and poorly run studies that prove the sun rises in the East, does it stop doing so? Because some guy fucks up his statistical sampling, this makes us wrong? > [@](#): > > And just to illustrate the mindset of these who shriek and wail about GOP vote suppressors… Well, OK, then, as long as you’re merely projecting some sort of mindset and not actually suggesting this has any bearing on the argument. Far be it from me to scold someone for a bit of pointless snark, after all. Long as you’re not pretending its anything more, hell, freak freely… ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 6:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1338 "2012-07-15T18:45:56Z")
No link offered, gotta do it myself. Google that weirdass name (Ansolabehere) and Texas, bound to hit. Number one is _Breitbart_. OK, no fucking way. _FoxNews_ second. Well, that’s a step up. Thats where this little nugget of courtroom hilarity ensues, so drum roll please, my first and last citation of _FoxNews_… [http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/13/texas-attorney-faces-tough-questions-from-judges-on-final-day-voter-id-case/](http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/07/13/texas-attorney-faces-tough-questions-from-judges-on-final-day-voter-id-case/) (I feel dirty now, and not in the good way…) **Texas’ attorney faces tough questions from judges on final day of voter ID case** Seems the court didn’t close up shop after the Perry Mason moments above. Because: > [@](#): > > …But as the judges said and as Hughes acknowledged, “Texas has the burden” to prove that the voter ID law is not discriminatory. The Justice Department does not have to prove that the law is in fact discriminatory… So, however good it may have felt to stick pins in the Feds evidence, they don’t actually need any evidence, because of the technicality lawyers call the burdock of proof. After a while, they got to the point where they start asking questions. > [@](#): > > …And Tatel noted that professor Shaw, a witness called by the state of Texas, found that there was in fact a “subset of registered voters that lack” the required ID. Tatel said that while “significant” portions of both minority and white voters don’t have the necessary ID, “the economic burden of obtaining it” is “what creates the retrogressive” effect. _He said the record shows minorities in Texas disproportionately lack their own cars and live up to 120 miles away from the closest ID office._ > > _Colangelo said 80 of 200 counties in Texas don’t have any ID office,_ which he said means minority voters would face “tremendous burdens” in obtaining even free IDs offered by the state. > > In addition, U.S. District Court Judge Robert Wilkins _cited federal law banning subpoenas to people who live more than 100 miles away because, according to the law, that is “unduly burdensome.” He asked Hughes how it can be “unduly burdensome” for a Texan under subpoena to have to drive more than 100 miles but it’s not “unduly burdensome” for a Texan to have to drive more than 100 miles to get a state ID._ Gotta hand it to the boy, he had an answer! Yessiree, Bob, no flies on him! . > [@](#): > > ..Hughes said some Texans “select to live in a place” that requires them to travel long distances “to do any number of things.” > > “It’s just a reality of life that they have to drive long distances,” he said… As a recovering Texan, I can offer this rejoinder my rock solid anecdotal affirmation. Texas is fucking huge, with tiny dollops of not much surrounded by endless expanses of nothing at all. Many’s the time as a child we would drive two-three hours to picnic with relatives for a while, then drive two-three hours back. Partly why the words “speed limit” are given the same authority as “suggested serving”. But note the vast bulk of insinuation in that one word: they “select to live in a place that requires them to travel long distances”. Its a matter of free choice, you see. They selected to live in Texas, hence, the responsibility is entirely theirs! Hence it follows, as the shovel follows the elephant, that the burden in obtaining the needful ID was a result of their own free choice, and Texas stands ready to defend that free choice from tyrannical federal intervention! OK, he didn’t actually say that part. But the rest of it, yeah. Take that, Florida! You just try and out-crazy Texas, you just go on and try it! Oh, I’m done with the Google now, anybody else needs it… ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1339 "2012-07-15T22:55:10Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Texas is fucking huge, with tiny dollops of not much surrounded by endless expanses of nothing at all. Texas is huge? Bub, you don’t know what huge is. ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [July 15, 2012, 11:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/1340 "2012-07-15T23:39:13Z")
> [@](#): > > In addition, U.S. District Court Judge Robert Wilkins cited federal law banning subpoenas to people who live more than 100 miles away because, according to the law, that is “unduly burdensome.” He asked Hughes how it can be “unduly burdensome” for a Texan under subpoena to have to drive more than 100 miles but it’s not “unduly burdensome” for a Texan to have to drive more than 100 miles to get a state ID. Now, this was interesting. I support voter ID laws, so long as they’re free and not a material burden. Someone needs to answer this question, ISTM. Can’t they have a voter ID drive and set up stations in key locations that minimize this? That kind of thing? If voters don’t get ID because they can’t be bothered, I have no sympathy. The process needn’t be completely pain-free. But this sounds different (and wrong). [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=66) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=68)