I don’t know. I completely disagree with the idea of making people pay for an ID to use to vote, but I just can’t believe in the sinister motives you’re ascribing to the Republican party.
I think someone came up with this idea because, hey, having a ‘proof-of-citizenship’ paper to use when you vote makes sense. I mean, that way we know everyone at the polls is supposed to be there, right?
The problem is that they identified a problem, they came up with a solution that works for them, and they’ve solved the problem.
There is no master plan to keep Democrats from the polls. It’s just that the folks proposing this legislation don’t care much about those poor individuals, who happen to by in large be minorities and vote Democrat.
Like much legislation in recent years; it is very goal-oriented without caring too much about the consequences and side-effects.
That’s true. The BMV boss’s “reasoning” was, if people in this area can’t afford to drive, what do they need with a BMV office? In addition, Indiana tightened the rules for getting a driver’s license in the wake of the 9/11 massacres. Now, you need 5 pieces of ID to get a license or a non-driving state ID.
That might sound simple, and for most of us it is. However, a lot of old people can’t put their hands on a birth certificate, they don’t have a phone in their own name, they don’t have charge card bills. They live with their children, who pay all the bills, or in a nursing home. Many are too crippled to endure a trip to the BMV, let alone back to Mississippi to get a birth certificate.
And what of the homeless? How many of them have 5 pieces of ID? How many of them have their birth certificates?
I worked with a man who had lived in the same house-with-a-few-acres near Middletown for over 30 years. When he retired, he had to come up with a birth certificate. He’d lost his, and getting a new one was a long, complicated process. He was born in a county where the court house had burned down. In all, it took several months, dozens of phone calls and letters, and several drives across the state to talk face-to-face with the county officials.
Now, here’s the carved in stone part. When congress passed the Voting Rights Act, it became illegal to charge a poll tax to vote in federal elections. A few years later, the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional to charge a poll tax in any election. You can look up the ruling, and let me know if it says that it’s OK if the poll tax is less than $35. Indiana’s law says if you sign a form that says you’re poor, you can get the ID for free. That doesn’t let the state off the hook; oddly, it’s a poll tax on everybody but the poor. It doesn’t matter what silly dances you make the law do, you cannot make anyone pay for the right to vote.
Uh-huh. And back in the '60s when various methods were being employed to do just what I described, which were either denied, or justified with spurious arguments (AS PROPONENTS ARE DOING NOW), I guess there was no nefarious agenda then either, right? Please.
Dead wrong. Reasons can be manufactured to justify any evil act, and have it believed by a large percentage of the populace if it’s presented in a way that confirms or plays into one’s view of how things should be. All the justification in the world for the imposition, or even proposition, of a discriminatory law, no matter how much it’s repeated and regurgitated, doesn’t make it right. Republicans have wanted to control the Black vote since Blacks could vote. Absolutely nothing’s changed in that regard.
There was/is no problem to solve, unless you consider Blacks impacting the outcomes of elections a problem.
This is as close to the truth as you’ve gotten, though you’re still blind, naive, or willfully ignorant if you believe there’s no agenda to minimize the number of democrat votes.
Now that’s just scary. Do you really believe this?
On a second read I see that I limited my response to your assertion that the current administration’s legislation is goal-oriented, which I strongly disagree with. I do, however, agree with your contention that they don’t care about the consequences and side-effects of their actions.
Yes , I’ve been corrected a couple of times. In a lame attempt at a defense I’ll say that although they did what may have been expedient in their day, they created a system that we as citizens could change and improve with changing times. Thats one reason why we shouldn’t take a step backwards now with a law that discourages voters.
Again the term was PAY EXTRA. We already pay for our drivers license. That should be enough ID to vote. If you paid $25 for a drivers license but then had to pay another $30 to get a special drinking license that was accpeted at a bar would you cry fair or foul? Now do you get it?
I use mine about twice a year when flying to visit family. The TSA screeners fail to notice that my ID is expired about 8 times out of ten. So far, the only thing my bank requires an ID for is re-ordering checks. I don’t know if they’ll accept my expired ID because I had misplaced it that day.
You need various forms of identification to start receiving assistance. After you are determined elligible, you no longer need your ID to keep receiving benefits. For the most part, they mail you the occasional form and you fill it out and mail it back.
Now prove that they want to commit voter fraud and you’ll have something.
Um, thanks. It can get confrontational in a debate. If someone criticizes a point I’m trying to make I’d like them to actually see the point first, that’s all.
Peace.
In the last ten years, the number of people charged with voting fraudulently in Indiana are less than Jerry Garcia could have counted on his fingertips. This “voter anti-fraud law” is a solution in search of a problem. It excludes the old and the poor. Who wins when you exclude the old and the poor? Uh, lemme see…
One problem no one has addressed is that if you have to have a special ID to vote then an unregistered but eligible resident can’t show up at the polls and vote. Professor Patterson of Harvard’s Vanishing Voter Project states that, “Same-day registration in all states would be the single most important step that lawmakers could take to increase turnout.” In 2000 turnout in the seven sates that didn’t require residents to preregister was 15 points higher than in the rest.
That doesn’t prove anything. I wish I remembered the name of the study, it found that even when there was good reason to believe that there was election fraud, it was unusual for prosecutors to investigate it and charge anyone with a crime. It is a political minefield that most prosecutors would rather avoid.
I remember that. I also seem to remember, although I can’t find anything on line to back my memory up, that one of the license branches they closed in Gary was issuing 65,000 IDs per year, despite them all “being too poor to drive.” Does that sound right to you?
Heh. Around here we do have a voter reg card as a picture ID type card. But in our case, due to different social environment, there is no major concern about population sectors of citizens being excluded.
Still, our poor, our elderly and our not-easily-transported do not seem to have much of a problem getting to the office to do this. Then again, it is a different culture IRT dealing with the bureaucracy.
System: What we have is in each electoral precinct (every municipality, and if the municipality is large enough to be multi-district, every one of those) we have between one and three registration offices staffed by members of the local community. You show up with other proofs of identity (including Birth Certificate OR Baptismal Certificate) and/or, if you don’t have all the documents, witnesses who are already voters in good standing in the district who will swear you are who you say you are. The card is free of all charge; your registration is good for a lifetime but the picture ID is only good for 10 years, or until you skip an election, or move precinct; in which cases you just show up and it gets reissued no questions asked. On election day the poll worker has on the list a reproduction of the key data on the face of the card (name, DoB, voter number, picture, signature) and you sign off on it.
JRDelirious - that is the kind of system I was thinking would work, if we could do it at no charge to the voter. There are always organizations in the area to drive people to the polls, so why not use the same resources to get them registered? I doubt it will ever happen, though, for the many reasons others have listed above. Some people are going to see it as trying to exclude voters even if it is free.
Well, I’m not talking about that specific instance, I’m talking about this specific instance.
I agree with most of this without question. Yes, reasons can be manufactured. Yes, justification for discrimination doesn’t make it right.
Not so sure about the inherent truth in partisan attitudes on race, though.
Well, call me all of those things, but I just refuse to believe that Republicans, as a general rule (and as opposed to Democrats), instead of sitting around talking about how to get more people to vote, spend their time sitting around talking about how to keep certain demographics away from the polls. Which is not to say that there aren’t people who are racist in power, and which is not to say that many things our government does don’t have clear racial (and, more importantly, IMHO, class) implications. It’s just to say that I truly believe that on the whole it’s a passive sort of racism, and not some intentional scheme.
Exactly.
An ID is not a poll tax.
Should I get re-imbursed for my gas money if I have to drive to the poll to vote? Or get paid because I had to take off of work early to make sure I vote on time?
It’s part of living in this country, everyone should have an ID (and I believe they should not cost you a dime unless it’s for driving purposes). If you can’t drag your ass to the DMV to get a license (with ample time and warnings) then what makes you suddenly able to get to a voting booth (on one particular day with time restrictions)?
ID’s are not only to prove who you say you are but they are also used to make sure you only vote once and that you’re not a felon.
I can’t imagine why anyone would be against an ID card for voting when they have four years to acquire one. Even if they aren’t free, if you can’t come up with $10-25 over the next four years, KNOWING you’ll need it to vote, then that’s your problem. You don’t have a birth cert or an SS card and no ID? Then you shouldn’t be able to vote anyway. We have no way of telling if your a felon or a citizen of this country or not.
Those who say that the pubbies want to restrict access to the voting booths;
we can turn that back on you and say that you want to continue to allow voter fraud to occur since most of the objectionable voting practices occur in the inner city (mostly democrat) where you have felons/aliens voting, voter registration being incomplete/fraudulent, and people voting multiple times in different districts.
In Milwaukee, during the last major election, there were several hundred questionable votes cast in the city alone. Multiply that by thousands for all the cities in the country and other voting districts with lax voter registration practices.
If the DNC wanted to they could start a grass roots program to get voters registered starting today. They could make people aware that if they needed help getting registered and monies for that purpose that volunteers are available to help them with efforts from a national fund raising program just for this purpose. They would never do that, however, since they desire to keep everything status-quo. For obvious reasons.
