Thank you for giving us something to chew on.
I am very much against many of those laws, like the ones that prevent felons who have served their time from voting. But we should embark on a drive to get these young, old, and/or African-American citizens IDs, rather than draw the line in the sand insisting they have a right to vote without them. The idea that someone can just show up and say they are so and so and vote is just absurd and invites fraud even if it is not already happening on a large scale. I don’t want the government to take people’s word for it any more than I want the local schools to give my kid to a stranger based on their word, or to let someone cash my paycheck without ID.
Yeah there are plenty of idiots who we think speak for the “dems” and “pubs” and I agree there are a number who have clearly bad motives.
I am not sure that the 74% is irrelevant to the percieved need for voter ID laws and I would reverse your numbers for plain old every day people. I would put maybe 24% as pure partisan and 50% as it just seems right.
In either case, just because X is clearly the Will of the People does not mean nobody gets to argue against it.
Sure, but we need to set aside the motives of the most vocal advocates and look at whether our position is tenable. Same goes for some other issues like “card check”, where we just don’t have a leg to stand on.
For the record, I agree with this assesment. I only chimmed in because part of the discussion was one sided.
But how did it become, as you put it , “the Will of the People”? Where did the idea of Voter ID being needed to combat voter ID fraud come from?
The Fraudulent Fraud Squad. But they could not have been so successful if the people were not ready to believe them.
Real cute non-answer.
It may not matter to you whether this is a manufactured crisis or not, but I think understanding the motives behind the push will help us understand the ultimate goals of those doing the pushing. You can repeat “This is my idea, and I’m not with anybody” till the cows come home, but the facts remain that this idea was promoted big time before you ever posted about it in this thread. Since there have been no notable case of voter ID fraud changing the course of elections, would you have us believe that the fallacious notion that it was a problem just happened to pop into everyone’s heads around the same time?
No, of course not, it happened because the Fraud Squad put it there, and they are Republicans. But their lies fell on fertile ground. There are a lot of Americans who, consciously or not, really, really do not want The Other to vote. There are even more who are ready to believe anything bad about Obama/Dems/liberals. And there are still more who are ready to embrace anything that will obstruct Obama/Dems/liberals regardless of what they consciously or unconsciously believe about it. It’s all the fault of We the People ultimately.
My wife, a bleeding heart who really doesn’t follow the news, was amazed that she wasn’t asked for a photo ID when we voted in the last election. I’d put her firmly in the “it just feels right” camp. However, after I pointed out the rarity of in-person election fraud of the sort that voter ID would prevent and the surprising number of Americans who don’t have a photo ID, she went back to not giving a rats ass about the issue.
So when people point out that this is an idea with a wide amount of public support, I feel like the answer is to educate the public. Show them how the fraud threat is essentially a hypothetical exercise, but disenfranchised voters is a very real and legitimate concern. That seems like it should be the end of it.
That’s what makes Bricker’s interest in this issue so bizarre and troubling. He knows the facts, and yet his solution isn’t to make people more knowledgeable in order to bolster their confidence in the election system, but rather to spend money pointlessly so that people can remain ignorant. At least with most Republicans we can blame their stubborn adherence to a faulty plan on partisan hackery, but Bricker eschews such hackery in favor of… well, I don’t know what to call it.
This. Why all this exuberance to succumb to the supposed will of the people after admitting that such measures weren’t really needed in the first place? If the will of the people can be changed once, why not put a little honest effort into getting the facts out there instead of just saying “Well, the Republicans convinced them-we might as well just give up and support this to make everybody happy.”
No, my idea, presented in this thread for the first time ever, is the one about a national database of individual records of personal government-interaction serving as universal voter registration all by itself. I’ve never heard anyone else suggest it, and I very much doubt the Pubs would like it.
And, outside of placating a worked-up public, is there an actual need for it? What real problems that are out there now would it solve?
Well, there’s “a wide amount of public support” based on the polls, but, from what I’ve seen here, the polls just show how people will answer the question when asked. Not that they feel strongly about it, or ever thought about it before meeting the pollster. (A differently designed poll could determine that.)
I think in part “it seems right” to people because they forget that people have to prove identity when they register to vote. When talking about the issue, many people seem to think that absent Voter ID, one can just walk in off the street and vote.
While it may seem like in theory this system would be fraught with fraud, in practice it does just fine.
Education is key, not acquiescence to ignorance. After all, given the timing of immunizations and the typical onset of autism, it might seem like the former causes the latter. The solution is not to stop giving immunizations.
It just seems right. 
But, apart from that, I do consider it a real problem, in and of itself, that each and every American eligible to vote is not already registered to vote and, in most states, could not do so if he/she on the spur of the moment decided to vote on e-day. (A point on which Bricker and I very definitely part company; he’s on record with a kinda Calvinist view that your vote only means something if you take some special trouble to cast it.) It would solve that. No more need for voter-registration drives. If you’re an American not otherwise legally disqualified, you get to vote if you want to, period. And, it would solve other, less important, problems that I mentioned.
Heck, I’d even get behind an Australian-style system where voting is compulsory and you can get fined for shirking it.
Sure. People need to prove their identity when they open their bank account. Why should they prove it when they come to withdraw money from it?
Why indeed? I don’t need ID. I use my ATM card.