I said it before, but apparently I need to say it again: Even Democrats and Democrat-leaning people can be swayed by propaganda. And the whole ‘voter ID crisis’ has been just that – propaganda. It’s been phrased as a have-you-quit-beating-your-wife argument, and this has had an effect on some legislators on both sides of the aisle. But despite insinuations (“Dems count on illegal alien votes!!”), no one is actually in favor of voter fraud. Not even us dirty hippies. (OK, surely somewhere some whack job espouses this, but let’s be real here.) And I suspect few even of us liberals are actually opposed to voter ID. What we oppose is the trumped up crisis, the short time frame for implementation, and the lack of support provided to those affected by a need to secure photo ID to ensure their ability to exercise their Constitutional franchise in the next election. In short, we oppose a partisan advantage being institutionalized into law.
As a lover of our Constitutional system, you should not accept impediments to voting if those impediments are avoidable, regardless of whether those impediments have a partisan or bipartisan effect. If in fact, as you claim, the real crisis is a theoretical future one, then you should support efforts to hold off on new laws that will cause fewer people to be able to have their voice heard at the polls. Not forever, mind you. Just for the time required to draft laws that will actually prevent voter fraud and that also include support systems to ensure that all eligible voters can meet the requirements without hardship so that neither party is advantaged at the expense of the other. One person, one vote.
Instead you chortle fait accompli, neener neener, undo it if you can! I’m disappointed in you.
Somehow, I think if the voters in question who were finding it ‘difficult’ to vote were wealthy, white republicans, this discussion wouldn’t be taking place.
I like the crack about the elderly republican voters dying off so who gives a shit if they can’t vote, though.
Multiple jobs. A link from stats in Montana. They say the 2009 National Average was 5.2%. So, only half the 11% who don’t have ID’s actually work more than 1 job. Now how many of that subset are an undue distance from a place to get an ID? How many of the 5.2% are employed in multiple jobs for an entire 4 year period where it is impossible for them to take a day off work? To find a friend to drive them? That don’t have access to a bus. Etc, Etc.
You’re essentially left with the cost of an ID that someone has 4 years to save up for.
Again, Canada doesn’t give people IDs. I guess we expect people to be adults and get one themselves, or to comply with one of the many other options for equivalent ID.
I agree with you. Most, lets say 10% of the 11% could find the time within two years (they haven’t had four years) to go and get an ID.
However, in reality, it just doesn’t rank as that high a priority to most people who are struggling to survive. Hell, I’d be willing to bet that 7-8% of them probably don’t even know that an ID will be required.
What it is is a defacto hurdle that’s placed in front of them whereby many will just say, “Fuck it” where they otherwise wouldn’t have.
I mean, come on, even when people aren’t wearing themselves out struggling to survive, people are lazy. Sure, you could blame it on them for being apathetic, but the real problem is the hurdle that’s being put in front of them to solve a make-believe problem.
I am (sort of) enjoying the position we see here that the solution to the chimerical voter fraud problem is to become more like Europe, when any solution to the real health care problem that leads to that result must be staunchly resisted.
If it’s not that high a priority for them to find the time to get the ID if they are “struggling to survive”, why do you think it’s a high a priority for them to find the time to go vote on election day?
How big is the subset of people who (a) Can’t find the time/money/motivation to get an ID over the course of a few years because they are struggling to survive, work multiple jobs, and can’t drive, and (b) Can find the time/money/motivation to go vote on election day?
On election day, suddenly they aren’t struggling to survive, they’re not working multiple jobs, they can find someone to drive them?
Can we have concrete examples of these mythical creatures, besides people spouting off statistics?
On a more general note, why is this topic a partisan issue? It seems to me that either you think being able to vote without an ID is crazy or you think it’s acceptable as long as voter fraud is demonstrably negligible. One’s position on this should not be a left-right issue.
If anyone’s position on this issue is influenced by how many voters their party will win or lose depending on the outcome of such laws, they are partisan hacks.
Another position would be that you are against any voter fraud, but that there is no proposed system that would mwaningfully change the level of voter fraud. Further, in addition to these minimal to not existent benfits, there are substantial costs. Thus, you prefer the status quo, until a better solution is proposed.
What line do you want to pursue? They don’t exist at all, or there are too few of them for you to care about?
It pleases some to dwell with intensity on the voter id issue, because that’s where they feel most comfortable, and will drag the discussion there by any means available. I don’t have any problem with voter id, I have a problem with using that as an excuse to empower one party over another. Did I mention that? Pretty sure I did…
Not a matter of winning or losing votes, its a matter of the method. Again, I think we covered this.
Well, for one, voting doesn’t require the same logistics as obtaining an ID.
DMV sites are normally only open during working hours (8-5). I was going to source my home state ¶, but they’re website appears down at the moment. Additionally, there is usually only one or a few offices per county.
Compared to voting (7 or 8AM - 8PM) and a normally (can’t speak to rural as I have no experience there) close voting center, usually within walking distance.
Lets stipulate that they are either stupid or lazy. Doesn’t matter, isn’t the point. Making it more difficult for stupid or lazy people to vote is one thing. Making it more difficult for the stupid or lazy people who lean towards one political party is quite another kettle of piranha.
Pretty sure I mentioned this. Couple times. Sixty. Somewhere in there.
For some of the people mentioned here, i.e. those struggling to survive, I think the 8am-8pm range is not that much better than the 8am-5pm range of the DMV, since they are working multiple jobs which will span most of the day, and not just during normal business hours. So, even with the 8am-8pm range, it seems that some people will need to take time off work, just like they have to with the 8am-5pm range.
To really help with this aspect, voting should move to Sundays. (Anyone know why it’s always Tuesdays in the US?)
I tried to find info on this, but after a quick web search, can’t find stats on the max distances of polling stations. Anyone have any info on this?
Whole 'nother can of worms. The relative ease of voting, the convenience, of the inner city districts as compared to the suburbs. That, by all rights, should be equalized, a voter from the lower socio-economic rungs should be equal in those regards with his more affluent fellow citizen. Such efforts as I am suggesting have typically met resistance. Go ahead, guess who. Win a cookie.
Right there with ya. In fact, Republicans also removed Sunday as an early voting day in Florida. It also just so happens that African-Americans are twice as likely to vote on the Sunday they took away. Go figure.
But another thing to keep in mind is that the time frame for voting has been that way for a long time, so people are familiar with it, though I agree it doesn’t make it any easier for some people.
About to leave work and don’t want to wait for the gotcha, so I’ll just lay out why the vice-versa is wrong in this instance.
A.) Democrats/Liberals don’t mind imitating European policies that work. We’re a pragmatic bunch.
B.) The situation and logistics in Europe is different than in America. In Europe, most countries REQUIRE ID for everyone. I’ll also add that several liberal posters in this thread and others have endorsed this system, but for all intents and purposes, it’s not going to happen in the near future in the U.S. due to big brother worries. Thus, it’s not a big deal for European countries to require it to vote, because everyone already has one.
The best way to counteract this would be for Democrats to make it less likely for stupid people on the other side to vote, by pushing their own particular buttons. So, maybe they should start a “grass-roots” campaign to paint elections as an atheist commie plot. “Why, the good people in the Bible didn’t need no elections. It was an invention of those heathens, the Ancient Greeks”.
Assuming that they are stupid and lazy, why should any democracy care that they vote or not? Their personalities may well reflect in their votes.
Or are you hoping that your group of stupid and lazy (lets call them ‘lupids’) outweighs the lupids on the other side of the spectrum - the religious whackjob: a group while even stupider, tends to be slightly more motivated when it comes to pushing their nuttery upon others? Such that they manage to stop slamming their heads against the ground worshiping their idols to figure out how to vote.
