Maybe I wasn’t clear but you’re interpreting what I said in an odd way.
To work in the US, unless you have had continuous employment with the same employer since 1986, or are a worker on a job for less than 3 days, employees are required to submit, and employers are required to retain completed I-9 forms. This form requires ID that proves you are eligible to work in the US.
To get a day off, there is the supposition that you are actually employed. Since being employed overwhelmingly requires you to have had presented an ID to complete the I-9 form, to even have a day off work you would have had to have had an ID at some point.
If you’re thinking that the person could have lost their ID and they should still be able to get a day off, sure of course. But that’s not the point I was making. By them having a job in the first place, they had ID.
Working and not working isn’t the same. Requiring an ID to have a legal job is not the same as requiring an ID to allow a person not to show up to work. It’s like saying that a driver license is required to drive, and a driver license is required not to drive. It’s nonsensical.
Can you see the interpretation that I’ve tried to clarify? I know you don’t believe that’s the logical conclusion to draw, but I tried to explain it. You don’t need ID to get a day off per se. However, to get a day off in the first place, you would need an actual job to get a day off from. If you have a job that you are getting a day off from, the fundamental assumption is that you have an ID, since it is required to get a job in the first place.
In your example, it’s not saying *‘that a driver license is required to drive, and a driver license is required not to drive. *’ Instead it’s a driver’s license is required to drive, therefore to stop driving there is a fundamental assumption that there was a license to drive to start with - otherwise you aren’t stopping anything since you never started in the first place.
You do realize how absurd the last several posts were, right? Well, your contention that opposition to making Election Day a holiday has anything to do with voter ID laws is even more nonsensical.
I think nearly every argument in this thread in opposition to a holiday to vote would also apply in countering opposition to requiring an ID to vote as well. Both are related to voting and the lengths that society should adopt to encourage it. If you don’t think that’s worthwhile to explore so be it. Consider:
It isn’t free to the government to provide [voter IDs], but it relies heavily on [existing infrastructure] to keep costs down; and overall if you want to vote in an election, everyone has ample opportunity to [acquire an ID] in a way that doesn’t involve [difficult means].
But unless you’re a government employee, the government does not require your employer to give you a paid day off for any of those days. Any paid holidays you may have are the result of collective bargaining and/or your employer’s largesse.
I have Christmas as a guaranteed paid day off because I work for an employee-owned company and have a contract which is required to match or beat that which our unionized competitors have, and I like that I have that day off. The idea that the government should require my employer to give it to me off, however, just strikes me as being outside their purview.
I understand now. Your argument relies on a basic logical fallacy, argumentum ad Madlibs.
For example, if I say that people older than 18 should have the right to vote; it doesn’t mean that you can score points on my opinion by saying that [badgers] older than [2] should have the [obligation] to [eat toddlers].
Buried in your posts seems to be support for all voters to have ID. Which you have connected to the idea of paid days off to vote. Despite your subsequent posts, the only connection between the arguments is that both contain the letters V, O, T and E.
No, there’s no reason to have a national, paid holiday for elections.
No, there’s no need to require photo ID of voters. (Get back to us on the argument when voter fraud exceeds a fraction of a percent overall, and cases of voter identity fraud exceed single digits.)
I don’t think it’s inconsistent at all. In fact, even a cursory analysis of the effects of the two shows how different they are.
The reason that we don’t need a paid holiday is that it’s not that difficult for people with jobs to be able to vote. The lack of a paid holiday is not presenting a meaningful obstacle to people who want to vote doing so, so regulating a paid holiday is an unnecessary step.
The reason we shouldn’t have an ID requirement is that it sometimes is that difficult for people without ID to get one. Note that in the “holiday” case, we need to consider people with full-time-ish jobs, whereas in this case we need to consider legal voters who don’t have an ID. People who don’t have any ID already are probably old, poor, marginalized, or disabled. Making those people get an ID is a meaningful obstacle in many cases.
Could you explain why you think it’s inconsistent?
Not only is a meaningful obstacle, it’s an unnecessary one. An ID is not a necessary requirement to vote. Casting your vote is necessary to vote. Having a card with your picture on it is superfluous to the basic task.
Sure, more vacation is great, but I get effectively 6 weeks of vacation a year. Plus I can shift my hours as needed, work from home, take off early on Fridays when I’m headed north, etc. The only difference is we have fewer public holidays, I can live with that.
Ultimately I am indifferent on voter ID requirements. I don’t think it’s a big deal either way. Since my state already provides paid time to vote it never seemed to be a big deal to me either. For me this is an illustration of logical consistency.
Part of the rationale against holidays to vote is because working does not seem to be a significant obstacle to voting - there are absentee/mail in voting, extended voting times, plentiful polling locations, etc.
Part of the rationale against requiring an ID to vote is that it is in fact a burden to obtain an ID. But the thing is, I don’t agree it’s a burden to obtain ID anymore than it is for a person to take time from work to go vote.
The premise is that it is not a burden to either take time off work to vote, or obtain a proper ID. Therefore people should be expected to take time from work, and obtain an ID in order to vote. That is not to say that it is not a burden for everyone - it certainly would be. But that applies to each scenario as well. For every individual that struggles with obtaining an ID due to time/money, there will be those same employees who struggle with voting because of time/money.
I suppose if you reject the idea that getting an ID in order to vote is not a burden then there is no inconsistency.
There is vote by mail for people who are going to be out of state. Absentee balloting is a somewhat well established practice. I’d go for July 4 as being a day with a lot of sunlight and a lot of patriotic themes and think it might get more people to participate in democracy. I’m one of those people who thinks that lots of people voting would be a good thing and that making voting difficult is a bad thing. The mileage of others may vary.
The thesis here is that people need time off to vote. As already noted, if all states offered mail-in voting, problem solved. You’re assuming they all do, which is not true.
But still, having an election when many people are on vacation isn’t a good idea, since that’s not what people go on vacation for. It’s unclear that you’d get more votes, and you might get fewer.
I’m only familiar with one state’s laws, namely California. The employer is obliged to give the employee time to go vote and voting by mail is allowed. I also think that more people would vote on July 4 than the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November, one being a patriotic holiday devoted to parties and patriotic one-upsmanship, and the other being Tuesday. One being a long summer day, and the other a short, wet late autumn sort of day.
Saturday folks, Saturday. What’s so complicated about that? No, it’s not perfect, that’s why you have early, postal, and absentee voting. Tuesday is not a magic day.