Opinions? Do we really want people to vote that are.....

[homersapien 12,172]

I bet the people who are arguing there is an actual need for these efforts are the same people who declare regulations designed to shut down abortion clinics are needed to protect women seeking an abortion. :-\

Seriously. You can't really believe that. Can you?

Dr Gosnell says hi.

And I am sure if you looked hard you could find a case of voter fraud. That doesn't change the analogy, which is still valid.

[homersapien 12,172]

OK, here's an open question:

Everyone in the country is issued a SS card. How about adding a photo to it?

This would put the onus on the Federal government to see that everyone gets their new photo SS card. The states would be free to require it for voting - or not.

[Elephant Tipper 430]

3 prominent Dems disagree with you and believe there is a need for voter id.

Carter, Clinton, Young: http://www.portclint...article/7529291

OK, here's an open question:

Everyone in the country is issued a SS card. How about adding a photo to it?

This would put the onus on the Federal government to see that everyone gets their new photo SS card. The states would be free to require it for voting - or not.

I guess your morning coffee hadn't kicked in yet.

[Auctoritas 2,894]

There are lots of things wrong here.

1. The Federal Government has zero control on how individual states set up their voter registries, so long as it abides by the constitution. It is a plenary power granted to the states. So, the entire first paragraph is irrelevant.

Wow, that statement is sssooo wrong i do not know where to start. In the Constitution the Federal Govt is "GRANTED" specific powers, not the other way around. It is the inherent right of the state to set voter laws. The Feds only get involved if there is a Civil Rights issue. Again, the Constitution grants only certain powers to the Federal Govt, not the other way around.

That's what I said, DKW. A plenary power is one that is not enumerated in the constitution, and therefore is reserved to the states by way of the 10th amendment - without the 10th Amendment, the plenary powers would be up in the air, and therefore the constitution grants those powers to the states by omission.

Where did you get that I was granting the federal government anything?

[Auctoritas 2,894]

No, my argument is that the efforts do not spring from a desire to reduce illegal voting. I have no real problem with the requirement, so long as it is done in a way that minimizes what you are considering a "minor inconvenience." Just because something is free doesn't mean it's accessible equally to everyone. To argue otherwise is short-sighted; whether or not it's deliberate short-sightedness remains to be seen.

If this was an honest effort to make sure the right people are registered to vote, then there would be safeguards in place to ensure nobody is disenfranchised. But considering that when these ID laws are passed, they are frequently tied to efforts to reduce early voting (which, comparatively, a majority of Democratic voters utilize - i've seen figures around 70% early voters are democrat), eliminate same-day registration/voting (even if they have an ID), and making it harder for students to vote (again, more likely to be democrat), it's disingenuous to argue that the main thrust of the legislation is to somehow limit fraud that nobody seems to have any evidence of.

Voter id is equally accessible to everyone. The inconvenience is relative to the individual. You and I don't see eye to eye on this and it won't be resolved in a forum. The takeaway I suggest you consider is to understand that my concerns are legitimate and that when progressives call people like me a "racist" they only diminish themselves, it's irksome, but expected these days from progressives. Such appellations only demonstrate poor decorum and are designed to diminish, a disingenuous form of engagement.

Find me some evidence of it then. I've provided evidence and examples of attempts to disenfranchise Democrats, all you've got is assertions that that sort of thing happens and a seeming disregard for other people's rights.

Let's stick to the subject of this thread.

Oh, and I've been lucky overall. Every election I've voted in I've been in an area where the polling places were well staffed and resourced - except once. In a heavily minority area northeast of Atlanta, where I had to take a half-day off of work because the voting lines took forever. Thank goodness I had paid time off.

I guess the Republicans devised that lines be long in that polling area to subvert Democrats.

1. Voter ID is, as I've repeated tried to point out, is NOT as equally accessible to everyone as you think it is. You are right, we are not going to convince each other via this forum, but I think it's really in poor taste to ask for an acknowledgement of your position when you dismiss mine with prejudice. I've already said numerous times that I have no problem with requiring an ID.

Also, I didn't call anyone a racist or classist or anything else. I just called the laws sneaky, as I believe they have an ulterior motive to help Republicans win elections.

2. Wait, so you can ask me for evidence, but when I ask the same of you for YOUR argument, it is suddenly beyond the scope of this discussion? That's awfully strange.

3. Those are your words, not mine. I actually think it was just poor planning...that was the 2008 election and voter turnout was extremely high.

[Auctoritas 2,894]

No, my argument is that the efforts do not spring from a desire to reduce illegal voting. I have no real problem with the requirement, so long as it is done in a way that minimizes what you are considering a "minor inconvenience." Just because something is free doesn't mean it's accessible equally to everyone. To argue otherwise is short-sighted; whether or not it's deliberate short-sightedness remains to be seen.

If this was an honest effort to make sure the right people are registered to vote, then there would be safeguards in place to ensure nobody is disenfranchised. But considering that when these ID laws are passed, they are frequently tied to efforts to reduce early voting (which, comparatively, a majority of Democratic voters utilize - i've seen figures around 70% early voters are democrat), eliminate same-day registration/voting (even if they have an ID), and making it harder for students to vote (again, more likely to be democrat), it's disingenuous to argue that the main thrust of the legislation is to somehow limit fraud that nobody seems to have any evidence of.

3 prominent Dems disagree with you and believe there is a need for voter id.

Carter, Clinton, Young: http://www.portclint...article/7529291

Look! There's some Republicans who disagree with you!

http://www.huffingto..._n_3829767.html

http://www.huffingto..._n_1904322.html

http://www.mediaite....-will-backfire/

I'm also not sure where you got the idea that those three Democrats disagreed with me. I've said over and over that IDs are a good idea - and they make no arguments about voter ID laws or voter fraud. In fact, they seem to agree with me that disadvantaged people tend to lack IDs and will need help getting them.

I'm not sure about how we'd go about getting a photo on a Social Security card...good idea in theory, but most of us get a card when we are infants and keep it a long time. Do we then have to go through the hassle of getting a new photo and new every 7 years? Honest question and I think it would be a good discussion to have.

[Weegle777 78]

I bet the people who are arguing there is an actual need for these efforts are the same people who declare regulations designed to shut down abortion clinics are needed to protect women seeking an abortion. :-\/>

Seriously. You can't really believe that. Can you?

Abortion has nothing to do with voting rights, that analogy doesn't make sense. ;D/>

Au contraire.

The comparison is not between voting and abortion. It's between the disingenuous arguments being made between the need for voter ID and the need to "upgrade" abortion clinics which are conceptually very much alike.

My argument in the Ruby Ridge thread is as valid as yours here.

[channonc 466]

No, my argument is that the efforts do not spring from a desire to reduce illegal voting. I have no real problem with the requirement, so long as it is done in a way that minimizes what you are considering a "minor inconvenience." Just because something is free doesn't mean it's accessible equally to everyone. To argue otherwise is short-sighted; whether or not it's deliberate short-sightedness remains to be seen.

If this was an honest effort to make sure the right people are registered to vote, then there would be safeguards in place to ensure nobody is disenfranchised. But considering that when these ID laws are passed, they are frequently tied to efforts to reduce early voting (which, comparatively, a majority of Democratic voters utilize - i've seen figures around 70% early voters are democrat), eliminate same-day registration/voting (even if they have an ID), and making it harder for students to vote (again, more likely to be democrat), it's disingenuous to argue that the main thrust of the legislation is to somehow limit fraud that nobody seems to have any evidence of.

3 prominent Dems disagree with you and believe there is a need for voter id.

Carter, Clinton, Young: http://www.portclint...article/7529291

Look! There's some Republicans who disagree with you!

http://www.huffingto..._n_3829767.html

http://www.huffingto..._n_1904322.html

http://www.mediaite....-will-backfire/

I'm also not sure where you got the idea that those three Democrats disagreed with me. I've said over and over that IDs are a good idea - and they make no arguments about voter ID laws or voter fraud. In fact, they seem to agree with me that disadvantaged people tend to lack IDs and will need help getting them.

I'm not sure about how we'd go about getting a photo on a Social Security card...good idea in theory, but most of us get a card when we are infants and keep it a long time. Do we then have to go through the hassle of getting a new photo and new every 7 years? Honest question and I think it would be a good discussion to have.

Food for thought, many states fought against a national ID (REAL ID). Not taking a side one way or another, but venturing into any national ID, whether it be adding a photo to your SS card, etc will be fought.

As for requiring an ID to vote, honestly, I did not think this was a big deal and had very much the same opinion as Auctoritas-- sounds like a good idea, and let's be prepared to help those with no ID get a free ID. But now that I am actually dealing and interacting with those in the community that don't have an ID, I am now seeing that this is much more complicated then it seems, and anyone who doesn't think this is a way to purge the voter rolls, then you are kidding yourself.

[homersapien 12,172]

I bet the people who are arguing there is an actual need for these efforts are the same people who declare regulations designed to shut down abortion clinics are needed to protect women seeking an abortion. :-\/>

Seriously. You can't really believe that. Can you?

Abortion has nothing to do with voting rights, that analogy doesn't make sense. ;D/>

Au contraire.

The comparison is not between voting and abortion. It's between the disingenuous arguments being made between the need for voter ID and the need to "upgrade" abortion clinics which are conceptually very much alike.

My argument in the Ruby Ridge thread is as valid as yours here.

Sorry, I don't see the connection. You will have to explain it.

[homersapien 12,172]

No, my argument is that the efforts do not spring from a desire to reduce illegal voting. I have no real problem with the requirement, so long as it is done in a way that minimizes what you are considering a "minor inconvenience." Just because something is free doesn't mean it's accessible equally to everyone. To argue otherwise is short-sighted; whether or not it's deliberate short-sightedness remains to be seen.

If this was an honest effort to make sure the right people are registered to vote, then there would be safeguards in place to ensure nobody is disenfranchised. But considering that when these ID laws are passed, they are frequently tied to efforts to reduce early voting (which, comparatively, a majority of Democratic voters utilize - i've seen figures around 70% early voters are democrat), eliminate same-day registration/voting (even if they have an ID), and making it harder for students to vote (again, more likely to be democrat), it's disingenuous to argue that the main thrust of the legislation is to somehow limit fraud that nobody seems to have any evidence of.

3 prominent Dems disagree with you and believe there is a need for voter id.

Carter, Clinton, Young: http://www.portclint...article/7529291

Look! There's some Republicans who disagree with you!

http://www.huffingto..._n_3829767.html

http://www.huffingto..._n_1904322.html

http://www.mediaite....-will-backfire/

I'm also not sure where you got the idea that those three Democrats disagreed with me. I've said over and over that IDs are a good idea - and they make no arguments about voter ID laws or voter fraud. In fact, they seem to agree with me that disadvantaged people tend to lack IDs and will need help getting them.

I'm not sure about how we'd go about getting a photo on a Social Security card...good idea in theory, but most of us get a card when we are infants and keep it a long time. Do we then have to go through the hassle of getting a new photo and new every 7 years? Honest question and I think it would be a good discussion to have.

Food for thought, many states fought against a national ID (REAL ID). Not taking a side one way or another, but venturing into any national ID, whether it be adding a photo to your SS card, etc will be fought.

As for requiring an ID to vote, honestly, I did not think this was a big deal and had very much the same opinion as Auctoritas-- sounds like a good idea, and let's be prepared to help those with no ID get a free ID. But now that I am actually dealing and interacting with those in the community that don't have an ID, I am now seeing that this is much more complicated then it seems, and anyone who doesn't think this is a way to purge the voter rolls, then you are kidding yourself.

Exactly. Which further illustrates the real motive here is voter suppression meant to help those who are pushing it.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

channoc.....can you elaborate on what you are seeing that changed your mind and why it is so complicated?

[Weegle777 78]

I bet the people who are arguing there is an actual need for these efforts are the same people who declare regulations designed to shut down abortion clinics are needed to protect women seeking an abortion. :-\/>

Seriously. You can't really believe that. Can you?

Abortion has nothing to do with voting rights, that analogy doesn't make sense. ;D/>

Au contraire.

The comparison is not between voting and abortion. It's between the disingenuous arguments being made between the need for voter ID and the need to "upgrade" abortion clinics which are conceptually very much alike.

My argument in the Ruby Ridge thread is as valid as yours here.

Sorry, I don't see the connection. You will have to explain it.

Neither do I see the connection between abortion and voting rights.

[AUisAll 2]

How many cases of 'voter fraud' are too many in your liberal minds? Is 1 too many or is it 100? Maybe 1000? After a 30 second web search I found an article with 35,750 cases of voter fraud (link below). Is that still not enough to require a photo id to vote? It actually funny to me to see you people whine about how difficult it is for someone to get a FREE photo id but those same people can somehow manage to get to polls to vote. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/apr/11/editorial-a-lesson-for-the-president/

[channonc 466]

channoc.....can you elaborate on what you are seeing that changed your mind and why it is so complicated?

I will definitely give it my best effort to be as articulate as possible.

But basically, there is a whole subset (I will admit they are a minority) of people-- very poor, very little opportunity-- who are surviving in a world that quite honestly, does not operate in the world that you and I live in. A lot of these people, do not take advantage of the services you and I think of as being "everyday" and require an ID. They are too poor to own a car, so they don't and may not even know how to drive. For example, some grew up in foster care, and were never able to even be taught how to drive, therefore, no driver's license. They don't have a bank account, so there would be no need for an ID there. They may not even own a phone or if they do, it may be something they got on the street using cash. Places such as free clinics allow you to use bills that are mailed to your house as confirmation of your address, and knowing that a lot of these people rent, or even live with friends or other relatives and move around... getting an ID just isn't even on their radar screen. Then you get into the issues of getting the ID.

First, how do you get them there, can they even take off work to do it-- for many, a day off work is the difference between having a place to live and not. Let's say you can get them there and the time off work isn't an issue, then what do you use to get your ID. Again, if you were in a foster system, or literally have been pretty transient, moving from place to place, home to home, maybe even in foster care as a child, do you even have your SS card? Do you even have a copy of your birth certificate? For many of these people, the answer is no to at least one of these. Now you are talking about a whole other set of issues. Now you are talking about transportation and days, even weeks, to track down the supporting documents needed to get an ID. This becomes a laborious process, all for someone to vote. And if you are this person, it's probably easier to just stay home rather than bother going to the polls.

Like I said, these are people who are living on the very brink of our society. And according to the constitution, they also have a right to vote. Many of these people also happen to be minorities (not all of them, mind you). So while I can totally understand the line of thinking that it seems so easy to get an ID (I also had trouble wrapping my mind around how it would be so difficult, and who are these people that don't have an ID). Now that I have been exposed to them, I now have a better understanding of the fact that for these people, nothing in life is simple and straightforward. They aren't bankable, they don't drive, they don't own a home or a car, they likely did not finish high school, and if they did, that's as far as it went. They likely have very loose connections to birth parents (if they are still living) or even have a relationship with many relatives who would be able to help with documentation, etc.

I haven't even touched on the cost for the ID, because I am working off the assumption that somehow the ID would be free to them. But if not, then that becomes another barrier.

Again, while it seems very inconceivable that these people are out there-- trust me when I say that they are. I am not opposed to trying to find a solution to getting them an ID, but I hope I have helped to demonstrate that it isn't as simple as just making sure it is free. It's way more complicated to get these people IDs and until that problem has been sorted through, requirements to have an ID to vote does encourage those people to not even bother.

Edited to include these links:

ID hard to obtain for 84 year old

Elderly woman finds it hard to vote

Again, it's worth mentioning that placing a undue burden on people in these unique situations is akin to taking away their right to vote.

[WarTim 3,524]

The answer to the question is......NO. I do not WANT stupid and or those to lazy to follow rules to VOTE. Now the legal question.....well......

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

channoc.......thank you. As I hope you know (in spite of all the yada yada back and forth here) I respect your experience and opinion. I know these people are out there. I would be more than willing to volunteer to help them regardless of how they ended up voting. But I would ask you a few questions:

1. Under all the circumstances you describe, how will they be able to go to a voting place I they can't get to a place to get ID? Maybe have more places in neighborhoods where a person can get an ID?

2. Both parties make efforts to register. Why couldn't they provide a way to get an ID when they register. Seems to me both parties could benefit from this.

3. I hope this doesn't come across wrong but do you think the core of the group you describe is up to speed on candidates and issues at any given time in order to make a reasonably intelligent vote?

I do understand the cost issue but surely that can be resolved. I can think of several ways.

[Auctoritas 2,894]

PT, remember that polling places are generally fairly close to one's residence, whereas a DMV may not be. I think you acknowledge that, though, with your idea of having more places in a neighborhood that can give IDs. GA used to have them all over, but to cut costs they centralized a lot of the centers.

Channoc, I think you nailed it with your post. One of the things that we've not discussed in detail are the new secure ID rules, and I think you brought up a great point about the birth certificate or SSN card. Thank you for relating your experiences - you and I work with the same people, but you explained it much better than I did (or could).

[Weegle777 78]

channoc.....can you elaborate on what you are seeing that changed your mind and why it is so complicated?

I will definitely give it my best effort to be as articulate as possible.

But basically, there is a whole subset (I will admit they are a minority) of people-- very poor, very little opportunity-- who are surviving in a world that quite honestly, does not operate in the world that you and I live in. A lot of these people, do not take advantage of the services you and I think of as being "everyday" and require an ID. They are too poor to own a car, so they don't and may not even know how to drive. For example, some grew up in foster care, and were never able to even be taught how to drive, therefore, no driver's license. They don't have a bank account, so there would be no need for an ID there. They may not even own a phone or if they do, it may be something they got on the street using cash. Places such as free clinics allow you to use bills that are mailed to your house as confirmation of your address, and knowing that a lot of these people rent, or even live with friends or other relatives and move around... getting an ID just isn't even on their radar screen. Then you get into the issues of getting the ID.

First, how do you get them there, can they even take off work to do it-- for many, a day off work is the difference between having a place to live and not. Let's say you can get them there and the time off work isn't an issue, then what do you use to get your ID. Again, if you were in a foster system, or literally have been pretty transient, moving from place to place, home to home, maybe even in foster care as a child, do you even have your SS card? Do you even have a copy of your birth certificate? For many of these people, the answer is no to at least one of these. Now you are talking about a whole other set of issues. Now you are talking about transportation and days, even weeks, to track down the supporting documents needed to get an ID. This becomes a laborious process, all for someone to vote. And if you are this person, it's probably easier to just stay home rather than bother going to the polls.

Like I said, these are people who are living on the very brink of our society. And according to the constitution, they also have a right to vote. Many of these people also happen to be minorities (not all of them, mind you). So while I can totally understand the line of thinking that it seems so easy to get an ID (I also had trouble wrapping my mind around how it would be so difficult, and who are these people that don't have an ID). Now that I have been exposed to them, I now have a better understanding of the fact that for these people, nothing in life is simple and straightforward. They aren't bankable, they don't drive, they don't own a home or a car, they likely did not finish high school, and if they did, that's as far as it went. They likely have very loose connections to birth parents (if they are still living) or even have a relationship with many relatives who would be able to help with documentation, etc.

I haven't even touched on the cost for the ID, because I am working off the assumption that somehow the ID would be free to them. But if not, then that becomes another barrier.

Again, while it seems very inconceivable that these people are out there-- trust me when I say that they are. I am not opposed to trying to find a solution to getting them an ID, but I hope I have helped to demonstrate that it isn't as simple as just making sure it is free. It's way more complicated to get these people IDs and until that problem has been sorted through, requirements to have an ID to vote does encourage those people to not even bother.

Edited to include these links:

ID hard to obtain for 84 year old

Elderly woman finds it hard to vote

Again, it's worth mentioning that placing a undue burden on people in these unique situations is akin to taking away their right to vote.

Note to the snarky on this board:

If you want to argue a point that has the ability to persuade someone like me to change my perspective on an issue, THIS IS THE WAY TO DO IT! Exceptionally well stated and explained my friend!

[channonc 466]

channoc.......thank you. As I hope you know (in spite of all the yada yada back and forth here) I respect your experience and opinion. I know these people are out there. I would be more than willing to volunteer to help them regardless of how they ended up voting. But I would ask you a few questions:

1. Under all the circumstances you describe, how will they be able to go to a voting place I they can't get to a place to get ID? Maybe have more places in neighborhoods where a person can get an ID?

2. Both parties make efforts to register. Why couldn't they provide a way to get an ID when they register. Seems to me both parties could benefit from this.

3. I hope this doesn't come across wrong but do you think the core of the group you describe is up to speed on candidates and issues at any given time in order to make a reasonably intelligent vote?

I do understand the cost issue but surely that can be resolved. I can think of several ways.

Again, cost is only one of the barriers, and in my opinion, probably the most easily solved. I will try to answer your questions as best that I can.

1. So getting to a voting place on voting day is much easier than getting an ID on a day that works for your work schedule. On voting day, there are almost always caravans getting people to polling places, churches and a variety of other organizations that work on GOTV. So conceivably, this is one of the easiest days to get transportation-- to a place where lots of others are already headed. Getting a ride to the DMV on a date/time that works for my work schedule... probably much more difficult, especially given the hardship of someone then having to wait around for you to be done and get you back to either home or work. As far as having neighborhoods set up to issue IDs. That would likely be costly, but certainly a solution to explore, but probably unlikely given that ID issuance is up to the state... so we are talking more state employees, a building that's open in the neighborhood to be leased by the state, etc. It gets complicated.

Again, I think the other thing you are missing, is that you assume that once these people get to a place to get an ID they will get one. What happens if you don't have your birth certificate? Well, now you have to not only track that down, which takes enormous amounts of time (again, for people who are living on the brink this is hugely problematic), but it also requires money to get a certified copy-- sometimes as much as $100. What if you don't have your social security card? What if you don't have any bills in your name at the place where you live (i.e. living with a relative or a friend) and are living without a lease? How do you go about proving you actually live there? Again, getting an ID sounds simple for those of us who have readily had access to this information all of our lives and it is just a matter of taking the time and paying (for us) a relatively low fee. For these people, it can be weeks of process-- tracking down a birth certificate, paying for that, picking it up, getting proof of address, etc. Just to be able to walk in that door and get an ID.

2. Registration. Currently, some polling places offer same day registration. Also, there are organizations that do GOTV activities which involve door-to-door registrations. Requiring an ID then becomes much more difficult to have rolling registrations. For example, are we now going to require training on which IDs are acceptable, and how to spot counterfit IDs?

3. Voting is a right, and while I would love to think everyone who goes to the polls have researched the issues and are making what I think is an intelligent vote, but that is just simply not reality. It also starts making the right to vote subjective-- which is hugely dangerous territory, a slippery slope I just flat out do not want to go down. (Much like the innocent until proven guilty...in this case, I gladly take the bad with the overarching good). Who determines who is smart enough to vote? Is there some sort of test? At the end of the day, this is a basic right given to us by the Constitution. There should not be any major hurdles to allowing someone to exercise that right, whether or not I agree with how they vote, or why they vote for a particular candidate or another or whether or not I think they have made "an intelligent" vote.

[channonc 466]

channoc.....can you elaborate on what you are seeing that changed your mind and why it is so complicated?

I will definitely give it my best effort to be as articulate as possible.

But basically, there is a whole subset (I will admit they are a minority) of people-- very poor, very little opportunity-- who are surviving in a world that quite honestly, does not operate in the world that you and I live in. A lot of these people, do not take advantage of the services you and I think of as being "everyday" and require an ID. They are too poor to own a car, so they don't and may not even know how to drive. For example, some grew up in foster care, and were never able to even be taught how to drive, therefore, no driver's license. They don't have a bank account, so there would be no need for an ID there. They may not even own a phone or if they do, it may be something they got on the street using cash. Places such as free clinics allow you to use bills that are mailed to your house as confirmation of your address, and knowing that a lot of these people rent, or even live with friends or other relatives and move around... getting an ID just isn't even on their radar screen. Then you get into the issues of getting the ID.

First, how do you get them there, can they even take off work to do it-- for many, a day off work is the difference between having a place to live and not. Let's say you can get them there and the time off work isn't an issue, then what do you use to get your ID. Again, if you were in a foster system, or literally have been pretty transient, moving from place to place, home to home, maybe even in foster care as a child, do you even have your SS card? Do you even have a copy of your birth certificate? For many of these people, the answer is no to at least one of these. Now you are talking about a whole other set of issues. Now you are talking about transportation and days, even weeks, to track down the supporting documents needed to get an ID. This becomes a laborious process, all for someone to vote. And if you are this person, it's probably easier to just stay home rather than bother going to the polls.

Like I said, these are people who are living on the very brink of our society. And according to the constitution, they also have a right to vote. Many of these people also happen to be minorities (not all of them, mind you). So while I can totally understand the line of thinking that it seems so easy to get an ID (I also had trouble wrapping my mind around how it would be so difficult, and who are these people that don't have an ID). Now that I have been exposed to them, I now have a better understanding of the fact that for these people, nothing in life is simple and straightforward. They aren't bankable, they don't drive, they don't own a home or a car, they likely did not finish high school, and if they did, that's as far as it went. They likely have very loose connections to birth parents (if they are still living) or even have a relationship with many relatives who would be able to help with documentation, etc.

I haven't even touched on the cost for the ID, because I am working off the assumption that somehow the ID would be free to them. But if not, then that becomes another barrier.

Again, while it seems very inconceivable that these people are out there-- trust me when I say that they are. I am not opposed to trying to find a solution to getting them an ID, but I hope I have helped to demonstrate that it isn't as simple as just making sure it is free. It's way more complicated to get these people IDs and until that problem has been sorted through, requirements to have an ID to vote does encourage those people to not even bother.

Edited to include these links:

ID hard to obtain for 84 year old

Elderly woman finds it hard to vote

Again, it's worth mentioning that placing a undue burden on people in these unique situations is akin to taking away their right to vote.

Note to the snarky on this board:

If you want to argue a point that has the ability to persuade someone like me to change my perspective on an issue, THIS IS THE WAY TO DO IT! Exceptionally well stated and explained my friend!

Thank you very much, I am touched by the compliment.

[Weegle777 78]

That is the one thing I never considered, and the one thing that hasn't been discussed yet, is the difficulty of having to prove that you are who you say you are when a birth certificate isn't readily available. Excellent argument.

[tgr4lfe 220]

I will reiterate my stance: I am all for making sure someone can prove they are who they are. I don't have a big problem with requiring a picture ID. My issue is that the stated issue of Voter Fraud is a smoke screen to hide a more nefarious movement. I'd be equally as pissed in examples of voter suppression engineered by Democrats.

Gerrymandering and voter suppression makes me physically nauseous, no matter what country it is or who is doing it.

So, instead of fixing the issues of voter fraud that you don't disagree with are true, and occurring more on the democratic side, let's just twist it to talk of the "smoke screen to hide a more nefarious movement." and disregard the other nefarious movement of voter fraud. I see........you'd rather see voter fraud (in favor of your party), b/c you are ok with that, rather than voter suppression (that you think is in favor of the other party). I get your stance now.

[homersapien 12,172]

I bet the people who are arguing there is an actual need for these efforts are the same people who declare regulations designed to shut down abortion clinics are needed to protect women seeking an abortion. :-\/>

Seriously. You can't really believe that. Can you?

Abortion has nothing to do with voting rights, that analogy doesn't make sense. ;D/>

Au contraire.

The comparison is not between voting and abortion. It's between the disingenuous arguments being made between the need for voter ID and the need to "upgrade" abortion clinics which are conceptually very much alike.

My argument in the Ruby Ridge thread is as valid as yours here.

Sorry, I don't see the connection. You will have to explain it.

Neither do I see the connection between abortion and voting rights.

Please see above.

I am comparing the style of argument in both cases. Both involve characterizing proposals which seem on the surface to be common sense appeals for making (non-needed) fixes to the process. In actuality, the real motivation involves a more nefarious goal which would otherwise be rejected politically, if it were "up-front".

In the case of voter ID, the fake argument is we need to stop voter fraud; real goal is to reduce the voter participation for supporters of the opposing party.

In the case of abortion, the fake argument is we need to protect women who seek abortions; the real goal is to make abortion much less available and difficult to obtain.

Did you really not get my intent?

[Auburnfan91 1,408]

]

Again, cost is only one of the barriers, and in my opinion, probably the most easily solved. I will try to answer your questions as best that I can.

1. So getting to a voting place on voting day is much easier than getting an ID on a day that works for your work schedule. On voting day, there are almost always caravans getting people to polling places, churches and a variety of other organizations that work on GOTV. So conceivably, this is one of the easiest days to get transportation-- to a place where lots of others are already headed. Getting a ride to the DMV on a date/time that works for my work schedule... probably much more difficult, especially given the hardship of someone then having to wait around for you to be done and get you back to either home or work. As far as having neighborhoods set up to issue IDs. That would likely be costly, but certainly a solution to explore, but probably unlikely given that ID issuance is up to the state... so we are talking more state employees, a building that's open in the neighborhood to be leased by the state, etc. It gets complicated.

Again, I think the other thing you are missing, is that you assume that once these people get to a place to get an ID they will get one. What happens if you don't have your birth certificate? Well, now you have to not only track that down, which takes enormous amounts of time (again, for people who are living on the brink this is hugely problematic), but it also requires money to get a certified copy-- sometimes as much as $100. What if you don't have your social security card? What if you don't have any bills in your name at the place where you live (i.e. living with a relative or a friend) and are living without a lease? How do you go about proving you actually live there? Again, getting an ID sounds simple for those of us who have readily had access to this information all of our lives and it is just a matter of taking the time and paying (for us) a relatively low fee. For these people, it can be weeks of process-- tracking down a birth certificate, paying for that, picking it up, getting proof of address, etc. Just to be able to walk in that door and get an ID.

2. Registration. Currently, some polling places offer same day registration. Also, there are organizations that do GOTV activities which involve door-to-door registrations. Requiring an ID then becomes much more difficult to have rolling registrations. For example, are we now going to require training on which IDs are acceptable, and how to spot counterfit IDs?

3. Voting is a right, and while I would love to think everyone who goes to the polls have researched the issues and are making what I think is an intelligent vote, but that is just simply not reality. It also starts making the right to vote subjective-- which is hugely dangerous territory, a slippery slope I just flat out do not want to go down. (Much like the innocent until proven guilty...in this case, I gladly take the bad with the overarching good). Who determines who is smart enough to vote? Is there some sort of test? At the end of the day, this is a basic right given to us by the Constitution. There should not be any major hurdles to allowing someone to exercise that right, whether or not I agree with how they vote, or why they vote for a particular candidate or another or whether or not I think they have made "an intelligent" vote.

Thank you for your input.

I understand there are those who have very little and live in poverty. How do these people gets jobs? Everywhere you apply at nowadays requires ID, background check, etc.... It seems that anything these less advantaged folks do would be a major obstacle to get any services or government assistance.

How do these folks sign up for ObamaCare then with no ID? Why aren't Democrats rasing issues with ObamaCare and how folks can't get it without an ID?

I would think that those most affected by a photo ID would be elderly poor folks. Would an age requirement be any help? Anyone 65 and older wouldn't need a FREE ID to vote?

[homersapien 12,172]

I bet the people who are arguing there is an actual need for these efforts are the same people who declare regulations designed to shut down abortion clinics are needed to protect women seeking an abortion. :-\/>

Seriously. You can't really believe that. Can you?

Abortion has nothing to do with voting rights, that analogy doesn't make sense. ;D/>

Au contraire.

The comparison is not between voting and abortion. It's between the disingenuous arguments being made between the need for voter ID and the need to "upgrade" abortion clinics which are conceptually very much alike.

My argument in the Ruby Ridge thread is as valid as yours here.

Sorry, I don't see the connection. You will have to explain it.

Neither do I see the connection between abortion and voting rights.

BTW, you evaded my question (above). I will give you the benefit of doubt and not assume you meant to.