The only valid objection against introducing voter ID requirement I can imagine is a combination of: (a) electoral fraud is not a significant problem, and (b) the measure will cost a lot of money (the IDs are provided to those who doesn't have them free of charge, naturally, to avoid a de facto poll tax situation).
These anti-VRA laws are disingenuous at best..
The devil is in the details..
Very few objections are from the ID itself..
The other 21st century Jim Crow laws are simply too numerous to state, and that's just for North Carolina, let alone Texas .
Chemists Have Solutions .
Who are these people who don't have photo identification? And how are they living their lives?
Chemists Have Solutions .
It's nice that he is admitting his mistake. So many people will not do that.
With voter registration and the requirement to sign the voter log, why would you need a picture of yourself when you are standing right there? I'm pretty sure that we currently have a voter ID law (for the first time) here in Texas. In my DL photo I have a short haircut and a short small goatee. In person, my full beard and long hair bear no resemblance to that picture. A couple of months ago I was allowed by TSA to board a flight to Nebraska. I guess I'll be allowed to vote. But why do I need to show my ID? It makes no sense to me as people voting multiple times is a GOP myth.
A few years back I needed to present my birth certificate to get a new social security card. They demanded a copy of my DL or State ID card. Now how does one get DL or state ID if they do not have a birth certificate to get the DL or state ID. Now for my birth certificate, they did have options, but a lot of the options would depend on having a stable address that the BC would be mailed to - and having copies of bills that were mailed to that address.
That being said, it took money to get my out of state birth certificate. And if I didn't have a state ID/DL in the first place and lacked a stable address, it would have been very difficult.
I have no problem with the ID as long as everyone that wants one can get one easily.
There are also a lot of assumptions about the accessibility of places to get IDs.
Many people make like it is just an issue of going to the DMV and getting your ID, but there is a bit more to it than that.
BTW, to get to the 2 closest DMVs in my area it is about 2-3 buses...and I live in a very well populated area. And I have a computer to research what I need.
I am not saying no to IDs, I am just saying that most of us posting on this board likely have lives that we individually would never come close to understanding how complex a seemingly simple task can be for someone of little means.
I would normally say no but currently its a maybe and here's why.
1. A swing state Republican official testified under oath that the republican party in his state held party strategy meetings on measures that could be legally taken to limit minority voting. I think its fair to reason the various state GOP organizations have occasion to confer with one another to participate in national strategy pow wows. In 2012 in states where republican officials held power but with significant minority populations, NEW rules were enacted that just so happen to make registering to vote and voting itself, not impossible but disproportionally less convenient for MINORITIES.
2. The most common form of ID is a driver's license. However, today there is less of a practical necessity of having a driver's license.
- At one time, a driver's license was needed to cash checks - Toady most people have direct deposit.
- Major urban centers have adequate public transportation systems; subways, light rail, buses, etc. In Atlanta for example, MARTA promises to get commuters form any any point in the metro area to any point in the metro area within 1 mile in under 60 minutes. It just so happens major urban centers are made up of large minority populations and further, the people more likely to use public transportation than non-minorities.
3. For quite some time now but especially after 9/11, the federal government has been pushing for a national ID system, albeit unsuccessfully over "Big Brother" arguments. As a result of numerous failed attempts to roll out a national ID, the federal government got cleaver and decided to sneak it in under the radar by superimposing the National ID on an ID most people already had, their driver's license. The new joint Driver's License/National ID is called the Real ID. You may have heard of it. If you haven't done so recently, the next time you get your driver's license renewed you'll be required to present an assortment of documentation unusual to past driver's license renewal. In addition, you're fee to renew will be between $50 and $60, cost prohibitive for the poor.
If your check is directly deposited, you use public transportation and to renew you license you'll have to do without maybe as much food for a week; why bother? Its more likely the person making that decision is a minority.
Having opinions all over the map is a good sign of a person capable of autonomous thinking. Felix -2011
I have little problem with voter ID law. People are required to have photo ID for lots of things in life today. Why should having a photo ID be a problem for something as important as voting?
How widespread voter fraud is really cannot be said. If there is no means of know if it occurs then how can you know if it does or not? To prove or disprove it would take tracking down every voter and checking that they indeed had lawfully voted. In states with large illegal populations, where even false ID is easily available to them, these laws may help. May even help prove that voter fraud is occurring. Is it a total solution, no. But until we get control of immigration, it is a step forwards.
Be sure to work hard and get lots of overtime. People on welfare want more steaks and free upgrades to smart phones with unlimited data packages.