# SC voter ID law shot down
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222
**Category:** Politics & Elections
**Created:** [December 23, 2011, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222 "2011-12-23T22:42:28Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 21
### Author:  [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/401 "2012-01-04T01:15:35Z")
> [@Terr](#):
>
> Post 388, when condensed to tl;dr, said “it costs money to show you’re a citizen that is eligible to vote”.
>
> So I asked - if you cannot show you’re a citizen eligible to vote, should you be allowed to vote?
You want an answer? Here are the steps:
1. Show good faith by withdrawing or defending your absurd claim in post 303. If you want to claim it was made facetiously, that’ll count, too; we’ll just tell you not to give up your day job.
2. Consider that post 388 is only tl;dr for someone raised on a diet of Twitter, and push yourself to the limit by reading its epic Melvilleian length, then answering the questions contained therein.
If you don’t actually want an answer to your question, of course, you’re welcome to fulfill my expectations of you.
---
### Author:  [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/402 "2012-01-04T01:30:21Z")
> [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](#):
>
> You want an answer? Here are the steps:
>
> 1. Show good faith by withdrawing or defending your absurd claim in post 303. If you want to claim it was made facetiously, that’ll count, too; we’ll just tell you not to give up your day job.
> 2. Consider that post 388 is only tl;dr for someone raised on a diet of Twitter, and push yourself to the limit by reading its epic Melvilleian length, then answering the questions contained therein.
>
> If you don’t actually want an answer to your question, of course, you’re welcome to fulfill my expectations of you.
I don’t really care if you answer or not. Your refusal to answer is an answer by itself.
---
### Author:  [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/403 "2012-01-04T01:56:08Z")
How many locations offer said photo ID cards? I seem to recall, in Wisconsin, not all DMVs offered them. Only specific ones, few of which were in Democratic strongholds. Further, they were open only one day a week… and not on weekends.
Oops. I was wrong. One day a month, according to this ThinkProgress article. (My apologies, but that’s what came up when I was looking for it.)
[http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/12/12/387601/wisconsins-voter-id-law-forces-woman-to-pay-unconstitutional-birth-certificate-poll-tax-to-get-photo-id/](http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/12/12/387601/wisconsins-voter-id-law-forces-woman-to-pay-unconstitutional-birth-certificate-poll-tax-to-get-photo-id/)
Further, it’s not uncommon for birth certificates to have the name misspelled on it, compared to the social security card. Which means you have to fix one or the other. Which takes a lot more effort.
Would you consider one location per county, open one day per month, elections less than a year away, an inconvenience? I’m wondering how many cards they could physically process in 12 months, given average speed of DMV, compared to population. I’d say it’d be in the mid-hundreds, max.
---
### Author:  [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 2:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/404 "2012-01-04T02:18:16Z")
> [@Terr](#):
>
> I don’t really care if you answer or not. Your refusal to answer is an answer by itself.
To exactly the degree that yours is.
---
### Author:  [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 3:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/405 "2012-01-04T03:18:01Z")
The question of relative convenience might be best left moot. I mean, for one thing, when did we start to measure prospective voters on their laziness? Since when is laziness un-American? We say necessity is the mother of invention, well, the father is laziness. The first TV in the first American living room made the remote control inevitable. More money is made by people who can talk than by people who lift things, hammer things, protect things, doing the things we profess to admire.
And, of course, not all lazy people are to be equally effected, are they? Some folks don’t even have to go to all the trouble of being personally lazy, they have people for that. They can pay for it, the just reward of the ambition, frugality and perseverance of their grandparents. As is so often the case, they are exempt from any such judgment.
Was that strategic? Were the SC Republicans mindful of this approach? They might have preferred to make Democrats illegal period, but took this tack because taking out the lazy demographic would crush the Democrats? If so, it offers an intriguing if repulsive view of their mindset, since it kinda insinuates the Hate That Dare Not Speak Its Name.
“We don’t have to run 'em out of town, we just have to discourage the lazy…Democrats!”
---
### Author:  [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 3:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/406 "2012-01-04T03:28:47Z")
> [@Saint\_Cad](#):
>
> And my point is if someone is in that position (and a lot of Americans are) where they cannot afford $50 to get proper ID, the issue is not voting but what are we doing to help them to survive. As unamerican as this may sound, as a member of my community I would worry more about their day-to-day survival than what they do the second Tuesday of November every 4 years.
Because you couldn’t possibly do both…
---
### Author:  [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 4:35am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/407 "2012-01-04T04:35:55Z")
> [@Terr](#):
>
> I am not asking about the legality of having that person vote. I am asking, if someone cannot show to you that he is a citizen, why (outside of the legality of it) should he be allowed to vote?
And I’m explaining that in at least one great State in the US of A, the citizens of North Dakota disagree with you and one can vote simply by signing a voter affidavit that they comply with the requirements. No proof of citizenship needed. Here’s a pdf link: [http://www.nd.gov/eforms/Doc/sfn17343.pdf](http://www.nd.gov/eforms/Doc/sfn17343.pdf)
It would also be easy enough for a voter to register in North Dakota and in another State. Why are you not up in arms about that potential voter fraud?
---
### Author:  [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/408 "2012-01-04T04:59:03Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#):
>
> If the Supreme Court ruled the day sky legally orange, what color would it be in your world?
In matters of Law the Supreme Court can say whatever it wants. It is the nature of law that there has to be a final arbiter at some point and the Supreme Court is it.
> [@](#):
>
> The law should be just or it is an illegitimate tyranny.
I am going to guess that at least some people think that it is not unjust to ask people who are voting to provide some proof that they have the right to vote.
> [@Bricker](#):
>
> But that doesn’t make it anything more than your opinion, which, when weighed against the opinion of those people who can actually decide these things, ends up to be wholly lacking in persuasive force.
Not really sure that this is a convincing argument. Some court says so the matter is settled, no debate or contrary opinions are persuasive?
> [@Honesty](#):
>
> IDs are not free. Make them 100% free and I’ll change my mind.
I believe they are free. Sure you have to get your ass to the DMV and get your picture taken but I don’t believe the state charges you a dime. If it did, it would amount to a poll tax and would be knocked out pretty much right out of the gate.
> [@Lobohan](#):
>
> You offered public opinion as a reason to have voter ID laws.
Public opinions are not supposed to have much influence on constitutional rights
> [@Bricker](#):
>
> Public opinion has much to do with issues of rights.
I am pretty sure that rights are supposed to be protected from the vagaries of public opinion. Tyranny of the majority and all that. In the state of South Carolina it was once public opinion that blacks couldn’t vote.
> [@](#):
>
> It depends on HOW the law reduces the number of voters. If the law is reasonable and neutral in its application, then the fact that it happens to impact minority, poor, and young voters is fine.
Generally true, except in former Jim Crow states. Disparate impact does seem to matter when you are talking about states that have a history of deliberately excluding blacks from the franchise.
> [@Bricker](#):
>
> Virtually impossible, because nearly EVERYTHING IN LIFE disproportionately affects the poor and minorities. Merely taking the time to vote is easier for the well-off than it is for the poor.
>
> That’s the way life is.
And that argument doesn’t carry as much water in South Carolina as it might in New Jersey.
> [@Bricker](#):
>
> I absolutely agree that the law should be applied completely equally.
And the law in all its majesty forbids both rich and poor from stealing bread and sleeping under bridges.
---
### Author:  [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 4:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/409 "2012-01-04T04:59:32Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#):
>
> And I’m explaining that in at least one great State in the US of A, the citizens of North Dakota disagree with you and one can vote simply by signing a voter affidavit that they comply with the requirements. No proof of citizenship needed.
For the third time, I didn’t ask you about the legality of it. I asked your opinion. If you don’t have one, just say so.
---
### Author:  [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/410 "2012-01-04T05:46:48Z")
> [@Terr](#):
>
> I am not asking about the legality of having that person vote. I am asking, if someone cannot show to you that he is a citizen, why (outside of the legality of it) should he be allowed to vote?
I agree that voters should be able to prove that they are eligible (not all US citizens are eligible). What form that proof of eligibility is up for debate, when that proof needs to be shown can be up for debate, how long should the grandfather period be if rules get changed is up for debate, how to treat felons, etc. I’m a simple guy, there should be one set of rules for all Americans. Not one set for Nevadans and a different set for Georgans. We are one nation and the rules for electing our President should be uniform with uniform set of criteria and enforcement.
You want to enforce voter ID for elections to prevent the threat of fraud, then come back with real suggestions on how to do it in such a way as to not disenfranchise voters or potential voters. Let me phrase it a different way, come back with suggestions on how to actually address the problem that does not give an unfair advantage to the Republican party.
Did this answer your question?
---
### Author:  [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 5:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/411 "2012-01-04T05:53:50Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#):
>
> I agree that voters should be able to prove that they are eligible (not all US citizens are eligible).
Good. Then we agree that when people whine that SOME proof is needed and call that “partisan advantage” that’s bunk.
> [@](#):
>
> You want to enforce voter ID for elections to prevent the threat of fraud, then come back with real suggestions on how to do it in such a way as to not disenfranchise voters or potential voters. Let me phrase it a different way, come back with suggestions on how to actually address the problem that does not give an unfair advantage to the Republican party.
Voter ID, at the time of voting. If you asked me, probably a passport is the best, since non-citizens have drivers licenses and Social Security cards as well. After all, passports are required to exercise the other “absolute” citizenship right. Unless you think that requiring the passport to enter United States violates US citizens’ rights?
And no, I don’t think it should be a federal law. Each state should decide on its own. That’s what states are for - to regulate intrastate things. Of which voting is one.
---
### Author:  [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 7:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/412 "2012-01-04T07:00:56Z")
Let us imagine that we both agree that literacy tests were a valid exclusion from voting. I know we don’t both agree with that, because I don’t, so even if you did, we wouldn’t. Agree.
But even if it were legitimate, the manner in which it was applied in the Deep South, as a tool for racial discrimination in the voting place, would still be wrong.
You shrug off partisan redistricting plans as business as usual, yet scream and tear your hair about dead people on voting rolls. But the first is clearly partisan corruption, while the second might well be nothing more than poor bookkeeping. Yours is an oddly fractured set of political ethics.
---
### Author:  [@China\_Guy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/China_Guy)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 3:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/413 "2012-01-04T15:00:13Z")
> [@Terr](#):
>
> Good. Then we agree that when people whine that SOME proof is needed and call that “partisan advantage” that’s bunk.
Why do you have to inject partisan advantage? Some proof is needed that you are both a State resident and a US Citizen (unless you live in North Dakota). But what that proof is and the implementation of same should not be left up to partisan hacks.
> [@Terr](#):
>
> Voter ID, at the time of voting. If you asked me, probably a passport is the best, since non-citizens have drivers licenses and Social Security cards as well. After all, passports are required to exercise the other “absolute” citizenship right. Unless you think that requiring the passport to enter United States violates US citizens’ rights?
Passport is Federal Gubmint. So, let me get this straight, you are opposed to a National ID but all for requiring a US Passport as proof of citizenship?
Not sure how easy it is to get a passport. My kids had to do an in person submission of their passport form and birth certificates (in our case consular report of birth abroad) at the local post office, but not sure if all post offices offer this service.
---
### Author:  [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 3:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/414 "2012-01-04T15:48:29Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#):
>
> Why do you have to inject partisan advantage? Some proof is needed that you are both a State resident and a US Citizen (unless you live in North Dakota). But what that proof is and the implementation of same should not be left up to partisan hacks.
Laws are written and voted on by politicians.
> [@](#):
>
> Passport is Federal Gubmint. So, let me get this straight, you are opposed to a National ID but all for requiring a US Passport as proof of citizenship?
If a state decides on that as the method, I am fine with it.
> [@](#):
>
> Not sure how easy it is to get a passport. My kids had to do an in person submission of their passport form and birth certificates (in our case consular report of birth abroad) at the local post office, but not sure if all post offices offer this service.
It is a bit harder than getting the drivers-license-like state ID. And it costs a lot more. But if it is proof of citizenship you want, the passport is it.
---
### Author:  [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/415 "2012-01-04T16:00:06Z")
> **[Yahoo | Mail, Weather, Search, Politics, News, Finance, Sports & Videos](https://www.yahoo.com/)**
>
> Latest news coverage, email, free stock quotes, live scores and video are just the beginning. Discover more every day at Yahoo!
According to Yahoo Answers, the cost of a passport is $97. Damn, but you guys are lazy! You probably shouldn’t be allowed to vote…
---
### Author:  [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 4:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/416 "2012-01-04T16:15:16Z")
> [@elucidator](#):
>
> [Yahoo Search - Web Search](http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071209030232AAlyE5A)
>
> According to Yahoo Answers, the cost of a passport is $97. Damn, but you guys are lazy! You probably shouldn’t be allowed to vote…
No, it’s not $97. Lazy is going to Yahoo Answers for the answer instead of horse’s mouth:
> **[U.S. Passports](https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/passports.html/fees/fees_837.html)**
>
> How to apply for or renew your U.S. passport if you live in United States
---
### Author:  [@HMS\_Irruncible](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HMS_Irruncible)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/417 "2012-01-04T16:26:42Z")
> [@Terr](#):
>
> Voter ID, at the time of voting.
Good, then that means we can get rid of that pesky absentee voting thing, since they cannot provide ID when they vote. Since most voter fraud originates via absentee balloting, I assume you’ll be willing to sacrifice the franchise of overseas military personnel? Because voter fraud is that critical of a problem, right?
> [@](#):
>
> If you asked me, probably a passport is the best, since non-citizens have drivers licenses and Social Security cards as well. After all, passports are required to exercise the other “absolute” citizenship right. Unless you think that requiring the passport to enter United States violates US citizens’ rights?
So you believe it’s reasonable to force a US citizen to acquire a passport if they have no intention of ever leaving the country?
---
### Author:  [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 4:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/418 "2012-01-04T16:32:29Z")
> [@Cosmic Relief](#):
>
> Good, then that means we can get rid of that pesky absentee voting thing, since they cannot provide ID when they vote.
Yes, definitely. Absentee voting is even more open to fraud.
> [@](#):
>
> Since most voter fraud originates via absentee balloting, I assume you’ll be willing to sacrifice the franchise of overseas military personnel?
Why? Set up the voting booths at military bases overseas.
> [@](#):
>
> So you believe it’s reasonable to force a US citizen to acquire a passport if they have no intention of ever leaving the country?
“Force”? No. There are other ways to prove citizenship - birth certificate+driver’s license for example. But there should be proof of citizenship in order to vote. Because only citizens can vote.
---
### Author:  [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/419 "2012-01-04T16:36:01Z")
The State Dept. doesn’t trust voter registration documents:
> **[U.S. Passports](https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/passports.html/get/secondary_evidence/secondary_evidence_4315.html)**
>
> How to apply for or renew your U.S. passport if you live in United States
Unacceptable Documents
- Voter Registration Card
---
### Author:  [@JoelUpchurch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JoelUpchurch)
#### Post date: [January 4, 2012, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222/420 "2012-01-04T16:58:19Z")
Slate has an interesting article on this issue.
[http://www.slate.com/articles/news\_and\_politics/jurisprudence/2011/12/the\_obama\_administration\_s\_risky\_voter\_id\_move\_threatens\_the\_voting\_rights\_act.html](http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2011/12/the_obama_administration_s_risky_voter_id_move_threatens_the_voting_rights_act.html)
The thrust of the article is that the Supreme Court may end tossing out Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act as unconstitutional. There were procedural issues that would force the Supreme Court to rule on this, instead of dodging it.
[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222.md?page=20)
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sc-voter-id-law-shot-down/607222.md?page=22)