# The voter ID Thread **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 24, 2017, 3:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346 "2017-05-24T15:57:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![CurtC](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ce73a5/32.png) [@CurtC](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CurtC)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/141 "2017-05-30T15:24:38Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Normal in the sense of a mathematical concept, not a value judgement. In what mathematical sense of “normal” would the bottom 20% not be included? ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/142 "2017-05-30T15:35:20Z")
> [@Musicat](#): > > Had a cellphone for 40 years, never showed an ID You’ve had a cellphone for 40 years? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 6:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/143 "2017-05-30T18:24:29Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > You’ve had a cellphone for 40 years? Hey, don’t knock it! For one thing, you don’t need complicated plug-in slots, just keep up the kerosene level and you’re good to go! ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2017, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/144 "2017-05-30T18:32:05Z")
Well, that’s a good point. I guess they just don’t make them like they used to. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2017, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/145 "2017-09-09T17:06:04Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > In Texas, a voter ID law was struck down specifically because some people had to travel upwards of _120 miles each way_ to get to the nearest place they could get photo ID. The Fifth Circuit has fixed that erroneous decision, re-instating the law after Texas modified the law to allow a voter to vote after executing an affidavit that they faced “a reasonable impediment” to obtaining ID. The Fifth Circuit told the district judge to re-evaluate that change, and she again struck down the law, so the Fifth Circuit got involved again, this time saying: > [@](#): > > The State has made a strong showing that it is likely to succeed on the merits. SB 5 allows voters without qualifying photo ID to cast regular ballots by executing a declaration that they face a reasonable impediment to obtaining qualifying photo ID. This declaration is made under the penalty of perjury. As the State explains, each of the 27 voters identified—whose testimony the plaintiffs used to support their discriminatory-effect claim—can vote without impediment under SB 5. They also scold Judge Ramos for trying to dodge the direction they gave her on their first remand, calling her decision to again enjoin the whole law “puzzling.” ---
**Author:** ![gatorslap](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gatorslap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gatorslap)\ **Post date:** [September 9, 2017, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/146 "2017-09-09T22:12:47Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The Fifth Circuit has fixed that erroneous decision, re-instating the law after Texas modified the law to allow a voter to vote after executing an affidavit that they faced “a reasonable impediment” to obtaining ID. The Fifth Circuit told the district judge to re-evaluate that change, and she again struck down the law, so the Fifth Circuit got involved again, this time saying: > > They also scold Judge Ramos for trying to dodge the direction they gave her on their first remand, calling her decision to again enjoin the whole law “puzzling.” Does the law provide a definition of what is or is not a “reasonable impediment”? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2017, 4:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/147 "2017-09-10T16:21:01Z")
> [@gatorslap](#): > > Does the law provide a definition of what is or is not a “reasonable impediment”? No, that’s left to the affiant. ---
**Author:** ![gatorslap](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gatorslap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gatorslap)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2017, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/148 "2017-09-10T22:24:18Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No, that’s left to the affiant. Seems odd to require a declaration under penalty of perjury for something vague and ill-defined. That’s a subjective assessment, not a statement of fact. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2017, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/149 "2017-09-10T22:38:35Z")
Maybe people should stop whining about how hard it is to procure an ID, when it’s clearly not. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 10, 2017, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/150 "2017-09-10T23:14:13Z")
Maybe people should stop whining about how hard it is to buy a gun, when clearly it is not. (And yet there have been recent successful lawsuits against gun control laws. Funny how much different it is when it’s your ox getting gored.) ---
**Author:** ![gatorslap](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gatorslap](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gatorslap)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2017, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/151 "2017-09-11T00:30:07Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > Maybe people should stop whining about how hard it is to procure an ID, when it’s clearly not. It’s not for most people, but it is for some people. But even that’s not the point. The point is, simply making it more inconvenient for some people to vote, even if they’re not actually prevented from voting, will reduce turnout to some degree. Every new restriction, every new hoop you make people jump through, will cause fewer people to vote. And the people implementing (or trying to implement) these voter ID schemes know this, and have calculated that it will reduce votes for the other side moreso than them. They’re gaming the system. ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2017, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/152 "2017-09-11T00:49:14Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Maybe people should stop whining about how hard it is to buy a gun, when clearly it is not. > > (And yet there have been recent successful lawsuits against gun control laws. Funny how much different it is when it’s your ox getting gored.) Gun control, for or against, is NOT my ox to gore. When was the last time I posted in a gun thread? Please don’t put words in my mouth. It’s very rude. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2017, 1:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/153 "2017-09-11T01:01:57Z")
But accusing people of whining is the apex of courtesy, apparently. You’re hardly one to comment on anyone else being rude! ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2017, 1:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/154 "2017-09-11T01:15:46Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > But accusing people of whining is the apex of courtesy, apparently. I call it like I see it. Now, when did I post about gun control, for or against? ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2017, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/155 "2017-09-11T01:25:32Z")
> [@k9bfriender](#): > > Just as republicans keep saying that voter ID isn’t about disenfranchisement, but about “election integrity”, democrats keep pointing out that it is not Voter ID they have a problem with, but the manner in which it is implemented. So if that is so important to the Dems then how many Democratic controlled political units (state, county, cities) are actively trying to get 100% of their residents a photo ID? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2017, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/156 "2017-09-11T03:46:11Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Maybe people should stop whining about how hard it is to buy a gun, when clearly it is not. > > (And yet there have been recent successful lawsuits against gun control laws. Funny how much different it is when it’s your ox getting gored.) I’d be totally on board with identical barriers for each, but I bet you won’t be. Right? ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 11, 2017, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/157 "2017-09-11T23:57:52Z")
Fact is, you’re right. I think that voting is a positive thing that benefits the entire country…and guns are currently killing tens of thousands of people (including voters.) I didn’t actually equate the two, save only in the sense that “whining” is subjective, and it’s always different when it’s your pet cause that gets attacked. Rent a Clue: using the courts to try to defend rights is not “whining.” Even rights you might not agree with. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2017, 12:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/158 "2017-09-12T00:10:45Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > Fact is, you’re right. I think that voting is a positive thing that benefits the entire country…and guns are currently killing tens of thousands of people (including voters.) > > I didn’t actually equate the two, save only in the sense that “whining” is subjective, and it’s always different when it’s your pet cause that gets attacked. > > Rent a Clue: using the courts to try to defend rights is not “whining.” Even rights you might not agree with. We have a right to vote. We do not have a right to vote with perfect ease. We can be required to undergo a modicum of inconvenience in order to vote. Attempts to use courts to create a right to vote without ID is closer to whining than to enforcing an existing right, because the right to vote with literally no inconvenience does not exist. ---
**Author:** ![Trinopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/2bfe46/32.png) [@Trinopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Trinopus)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2017, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/159 "2017-09-13T01:08:09Z")
What strikes many of us as highly dubious is that the inconveniences are correlated with group identity. The laws have made it harder for the poor to vote, for students (who often do not live “at home”) to vote, and (scandalously) for members of the armed forces (same reason) to vote. It is the opinion of a good many of us that these inconveniences are placed with strategic deliberation, to cause fewer of “the wrong kind of people” to vote. The legislative breakdown is highly partisan, and that sends a disturbing signal. Inconveniences that actually served a valid purpose could be defended – although there is no rash of illegal voting, so the “cure” is almost wholly in the absence of a disease. But inconveniences that harm people according to class are really hard to defend. The same is true for the allocation of election resources. Rich neighborhoods had more polling stations per capita than poor neighborhoods. This looks, to many of us, as if it were strategically designed to deter poor people from voting. At least some courts have agreed that the burdens were not justifiable. You can’t use the argument, “Nobody said it had to be perfectly easy” to justify making it unfairly difficult. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2017, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346/160 "2017-09-13T03:06:54Z")
> [@Trinopus](#): > > What strikes many of us as highly dubious is that the inconveniences are correlated with group identity. The laws have made it harder for the poor to vote, for students (who often do not live “at home”) to vote, and (scandalously) for members of the armed forces (same reason) to vote. Yes — but the armed forces skew Republican, which weakens your partisan advantage theory. > [@](#): > > It is the opinion of a good many of us that these inconveniences are placed with strategic deliberation, to cause fewer of “the wrong kind of people” to vote. The legislative breakdown is highly partisan, and that sends a disturbing signal. I have no doubt that some legislators who approve of these measures did so for partisan advantage as opposed to support of a wise neutral policy. And equally I believe some legislators that disapprove of the measures do so because they perceive partisan disadvantage, not because they regard the measures as unwise. > [@](#): > > The same is true for the allocation of election resources. Rich neighborhoods had more polling stations per capita than poor neighborhoods. This looks, to many of us, as if it were strategically designed to deter poor people from voting. Sure. But the rich have it easier in all walks of life. It’s not strategic design; it’s a natural consequence of having more resources to devote to the tasks that face you. > [@](#): > > At least some courts have agreed that the burdens were not justifiable. So? Other courts – higher courts – have overruled some of those courts. Ultimately, I’m fine with shaking things out by court. But the Supreme Court, in _Crawford v Marion County_, has approved the basic design of Voter ID laws. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-voter-id-thread/787346.md?page=9)