But Bricker, how can you have such confidence in the vote without any Voter ID regulations in place here… 
Voter ID Laws: Necessary to combat rampant fraud or subtle subjugation of the Democratic demographic
That would make it more or less a popularity contest, and I quail before that standard. Your simple, direct candor and open mindedness are a beacon to us all.
Since less than half of voting age residence actually take the time to vote, some unscrupuless person or party could supply bus loads of people with local SS numbers and take them to various polling stations. If they get caught or questioned, they can just leave and recieve another SS number on the bus.
It’s harder to create a good photo ID and they would need a new one for each polling location.
If you live in Wisconsin, you should vote in Wisconsin. If you live in Illinois, you should vote in Illinois. And have a photo ID to prove it. I can live with the cost of creating a State photo ID system to prevent voter fraud.
IMHO, of course.
So the U.S. has 10x the population of Peru, I’d imagine also 10x the number of public officials and also 100x GDP, so 10x GDP per capita; therefore much more money per individual to spend.
Also, much, much, much, better roads, transport, communications.
Giving each person in the US an ID should be 50x easier than in Peru.
Some logic! I suppose that tracking all of Walmart’s inventory should be 50X easier than inventory at Mom & Pop’s Convenience Store, for all the same reasons.
You do make a nice point for me, though. Is Bricker er al willing to spend all of the resources you’ve outlined here to trade a problem that doesn’t exist for a solution that doesn’t solve?
There must be some additional benefits weighing into the calculation that conservatives see here. I wonder what those might be?
The problem is Republicans selfishly hate the poor so much they’d never for the government program to see to that. Republicans traitorously value greed over democracy. All those people who believed they fought for American democracy, giving their lives. Republicans piss on their graves to get tax cuts.
Well, it is. I’m sure you can get the full inventory of a WM store with a click of a mouse, not so much in a Mom & Pop.
My point, therefore, wins. it is not expensive and not logistically difficult. The reasons for not doing it are political.
Your political commentary is irrelevant.
Wow. That’s some technology that can count stock and maintain databases just by clicking a button.
Your perceptions on this and your obvious ignorance of the problems with inventory accuracy suggest a disconnection with reality. A moment’s thought should make clear that accuracy does not increase as the population of things to count increases.
What political parties are there in Peru? Has one made an effort to warp this program of voter ID to their partisan advantage? The quest for relevance continues…
User name and password required to vote. Single factor authentication. 
I’m a conservative on the SDMB. I’ve been called a racist, a woman-hater, a troll, a Republithug, an Uncle Tom, a traitor, treasonous, and those were the compliments.
If you believe you might fail to win votes for this question based on my relative popularity over yours, I suggest you rethink.
It’s the basic premise of “One person, one vote”. Many people in both major political parties and many independents expect their vote to count. They object to the fact that a fradulent vote would cancel theirs.
I can prove who I am and I’m eligible to vote. Once. Anyone who votes more than once is undermining our democratic republic.
How does allowing anyone the opportunity to vote just because they walked into a polling booth represent a democratic process? Did they cast a vote somewhere else? Will they cast another vote after they leave this voting booth? Were they bussed in from some other State?
I see nothing wrong with proving you live in the district where you are voting.
There should be no cost to the individual to obtain a State issued photo ID because there are laws against poll taxes and fees and tests.
You poor dear! Need a moment?
Hanky? Borrowed it from John Mace, sure he won’t mind. Well, yeah, it is a bit crusty, but that’s probably nasal. Probably.
No, no, you can keep it. He wasn’t going to ask for it back, anyway.
Doorhinge, gonna try this one more time, thinking that maybe you came in late. Voter ID laws are not the true subject here, its using voter ID laws to gain an electoral, partisan advantage. That’s not right, in the sense of being totally wrong.
Walmart’s inventory control and tracking system is one of the keys to their financial success. Inventory at a click of a mouse is only slight hyperbole. They were one of the first to enable RFID tags on items in the store for tracking. Each time an item is scanned and sold it hits the database, which drives automatic distribution of product from their warehouses to individual stores, maintaining a constant inventory level at each store.
So, yes, Walmart’s size has allowed it to surpass many a mom-and-pop store’s inventory controls. Walmart was able to easily cover the cost of developing cutting edge inventory control systems.
The United States could easily (from a cost and technology perspective) implement a national ID and database that would cover a variety of uses. Combine the data in the e-Verify system (for working in the US), with Social Security and add in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) that is used for firearms (giving us felony and mental illness status). At this point you have a national ID, and the ability to tag everyone as either eligible to vote or not.
To then use that at the state level, other work would still have to be done. For example, each state has a different list of felonies that it allows to vote or not. Other issues would be around residency status at the state level as well.
Now it is the conservatives who were against a National ID the last time around as I recall (and I could be wrong on that). But combining all of this disparate information to make it an easier process for voter registration, eligibility and identification could also help with work identification, firearms purchasing, and other issues where ID is required.
I have no issue with making this a free service for the first card, and only charging for replacements. This could even help with the census count. Finally, the 11% with no ID could finally buy a beer, a gun, open a checking account or just walk down the street and have something to show the police in case they are stopped.
Voter photo ID laws allow legitimate voters to vote IN THEIR DISTRICT and help prevent fraudulent votings.
Who gains an electoral, partisan advantage if non-residents, illegal aliens, and political operatives are not prevented from walking into any voting booth and casting a vote?
Does that vote total truely represent the “will of the people” or the will of those who are willing to lie, cheat, and steal to gain power over the people?
Are legitimate voters being denied the right to vote
OR
should illegal votes being allowed to alter the outcome of elections.
No voter wants their vote cancelled by an illegal voter.
Are you tip-toeing towards advancing the notion that the Democrats favor, and depend upon, illegal voters? Be advised that such a notion has already been advanced, and has been offered the scorn and derision it deserves. Well, maybe not all the scorn it deserves, space is limited, time is short…
Voting is a State issue. As a legal resident of Illinois, I vote in Illinois. Every State decides who and who is not elegible to vote in that State. I object to the Federal government deciding or influencing who should vote in Illinois or Texas or Utah.
There’s no point in charging for a replacement card. That will initiate lawsuits claim the individual’s cost is a form of poll tax which has already been declared unconstitutional. That’s a battle that has already been lost.
Deservedly so. Yes?
Oh No, not scorn and derision. How will I manage to sleep at night? How will I manage to feed my children? What will become of me now?
I’m not tip-toeing anywhere. One person, one vote. Democrats, Republicans, independants, and third-parties. One person, one vote.
What do you consider the downside to one person, one vote?