Photo ID to Vote - Yes or No

[Arjay81]

If you were truly concerned by the appearance of a political power grab, you would be wondering why an all-Republican-led state specifically created bills that targeted demographics that were exclusively known to be typically Democrat.

And you would be concerned when the democrats do the same thing that you accuse the republicans. But you are not. Shows a certain lack of consistency in your views.

 

[Arjay81]

Because my argument changed with new information that was provided later in the discussion. I was unaware that there were free ways to get a voter ID (I just used a driver's liscence to register), and when new facts are revealed to me, my opinion changes to match the reality of the situation.

So you admit that your initial argument was flawed?

 

[Cardinal]

And you would be concerned when the democrats do the same thing that you accuse the republicans. But you are not. Shows a certain lack of consistency in your views.

Really? Which Democratically controlled state government enacted voting laws that "coincidentally" targeted Republican voting demographics? I can assure you that if you provided evidence of that I would oppose such a policy ardently.

 

[Brochacholomigo]

So you admit that your initial argument was flawed?

If by flawed you mean it allowed for a variable I was uncertain of, then yes, it was flawed.

 

[Sherman123]

Forget all the other crap that's typically rolled into such laws.
Boil this down to it's most simplistic, and verbatim question.

Should each person who votes, in any national and/or regional election, be required to verify their identity through a state approved photo ID card?

Nothing else is being asked or inferred here. A photo ID is all I'm asking about.

Yes or no?

Yes. But the ID's should be provided over several years, at cost to the state, and only be required when a certain very high percentage of eligible voters have them. If other developed countries can do it I don't see why we cant.

 

[Mr Person]

Yes, so long as mechanisms are in place first to get everyone a "voter's ID" free of charge....which probably works out to a "no" in practical reality.



I'm distrustful of these laws because they usually only get talked about right before an election, and you have situations such as in WI (places to get ID closed in Dem-heavy areas, hours extended in R-heavy areas) or NC (legislature researches how to hit black voters the hardest, then passes a law tailored to that research).

Maybe if the right didn't keep trying to play dirty games with voter ID laws, they'd have more success. But then, they don't actually care about "vote fraud"



Which brings me to the next point: I only really care to the extent of shutting down this fabricated wedge issue. The Bush DOJ spent 2003-2007 looking for it and found roughly 83 ballots cast in technically the wrong polling station, in national elections, not even vote fraud. Everytime someone starts a thread and hyperventilates about voter ID, they'll rely on statistics of dead people on vote rolls. But that's not vote fraud unless someone is actually casting votes in their name.

And you know what? It typically takes a hell of a lot of votes to affect a result. How many people are we supposing are willing to risk federal prison do that?

 

[FieldTheorist]

The only reason people wouldn't have one, is because they don't want one.
Now why would that be I wonder?

This is an obvious tautology followed by a vague rhetorical question. I'm not sure what you want me to respond with.

What the constitution plainly says is, "the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED".

Your hypocrisy is noted.

As is your inability to be intellectually honest. The full Second Amendment reads:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."​

You can read about the early historical as well as modern interpretations of "well-regulated" here. It has been accepted since the beginning that the access to arms was to be regulated. Which is consistent --if not verbatim-- with what I said.

 

[clownboy]

You just defeated your own argument by saying that "there are IDs that you can access for voter ID without paying for it".

This being the case, where does that leave your argument of it being a poll tax?

Because the "tax" is zero if you can't afford it. So it is absolutely no bar to voting. Look, in vote by mail states like my own, they don't pay for the postage, YOU have to supply the stamp. Is that a poll tax in your mind?

 

[cpgrad08]

You don't have a Constitutionally-protected right to get into your favorite club or drink your favorite beer, so probably not, unless you want to make those "other purposes" clear.

You do have a right to own firearms and you must show id to buy a gun.

 

[Arjay81]

Really? Which Democratically controlled state government enacted voting laws that "coincidentally" targeted Republican voting demographics? I can assure you that if you provided evidence of that I would oppose such a policy ardently.

Actually, the DNC has done so. Many attempts to restrict republicans from voting. Look it up.

 

[Arjay81]

If by flawed you mean it allowed for a variable I was uncertain of, then yes, it was flawed.

The way you stated it first, left no room for doubt. But you seem to have recovered some balance on the subject.

 

[Arjay81]

Because the "tax" is zero if you can't afford it. So it is absolutely no bar to voting. Look, in vote by mail states like my own, they don't pay for the postage, YOU have to supply the stamp. Is that a poll tax in your mind?

If you truly think this, why not a postage paid returns. Zero poll tax in that way.

Remember, you claim that so many cannot afford to get registered, how can they afford to go out and get postage?

 

[Cardinal]

Actually, the DNC has done so. Many attempts to restrict republicans from voting. Look it up.

The DNC doesn't make laws, genius. Care to try again, or would you like to admit you were making up bull****?

 

[WorldWatcher]

The problem is that the wider the range of ID documents permitted then the less apt that they are mutually exclusive. I can have tax records, library cards and paychecks in (from?) multiple districts/states. The validity of a DL (or state ID equivalent) is much easier to verify and much more likely to be unique.

I didn't say a wide range of ID's, I said a wide range of government ID's meaning those government ID's where identify is actually verified before issuing.


State Drivers License
State Non-Driver ID
Military ID
Military Retiree/Dependent ID
Veterans Affairs ID
Passport
...


Those types of things. An employer ID from McDonalds or a School ID? Not so much.



>>>>

 

[countryboy]

This is an obvious tautology followed by a vague rhetorical question. I'm not sure what you want me to respond with.



As is your inability to be intellectually honest. The full Second Amendment reads:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."​

You can read about the early historical as well as modern interpretations of "well-regulated" here. It has been accepted since the beginning that the access to arms was to be regulated. Which is consistent --if not verbatim-- with what I said.

We're you "intellectually honest" when you quoted only the first part of the 2A?
Hypocrisy again noted.

 

[FieldTheorist]

We're you "intellectually honest" when you quoted only the first part of the 2A?
Hypocrisy again noted.

Your arguments are turning into inane banter. I'll be moving along.

 

[Unitedwestand13]

Would a drivers license, state I.d card, college i.d. Card, or passport be sufficient?

 

[Arjay81]

The DNC doesn't make laws, genius. Care to try again, or would you like to admit you were making up bull****?

The DNC supports those who try to prevent voters at the polling place. See the Black Panthers and BLM groups outside of polling places, genius. Even you can't deny that they were there and no democrat spoke up in condemnation of their actions. Kind of speaks of support, no?

 

[NonoBadDog]

Forget all the other crap that's typically rolled into such laws.
Boil this down to it's most simplistic, and verbatim question.

Should each person who votes, in any national and/or regional election, be required to verify their identity through a state approved photo ID card?

Nothing else is being asked or inferred here. A photo ID is all I'm asking about.

Yes or no?

I think people should have a photo ID to register. If a person wants to vote and doesn't have their ID they should be allowed to vote and the precinct should hold that vote in a signed envelope and not count it until voting is closed. Then the precinct should be required to compare the signature on the vote to verify that signatures match between the registration and the ballot envelope match. At that time the ballot should be counted.

 

[Cardinal]

The DNC supports those who try to prevent voters at the polling place. See the Black Panthers and BLM groups outside of polling places, genius. Even you can't deny that they were there and no democrat spoke up in condemnation of their actions. Kind of speaks of support, no?

So in other words absolutely no example of Democrat-controlled state governments creating voter id laws that "coincidentally" target exclusively Republican demographics, and in fact all you have are some Fox News/Breitbart bull**** stories targeted to easily frightened white people over the scaaaaarrrrry negroes. That's about what I figured.

If a Democratic state did what these Republican states did I would have the decency to condemn what was an obvious, undemocratic power grab more appropriate to some backwater Banana republic. Point is, have some goddamn decency. Scoring some little victory isn't worth sacrificing all of your credibility.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Would a drivers license, state I.d card, college i.d. Card, or passport be sufficient?

In my opinion...


Yes, Yes, No, Yes


But then I think State ID's should indicate voter eligibility status as part of the information provided.

Student ID is issued to foreign nationals.


>>>>

 

[Smeagol]

Forget all the other crap that's typically rolled into such laws.
Boil this down to it's most simplistic, and verbatim question.

Should each person who votes, in any national and/or regional election, be required to verify their identity through a state approved photo ID card?

Nothing else is being asked or inferred here. A photo ID is all I'm asking about.

Yes or no?

Worded that way, yes. A state approved photo ID card should be required to vote.

That said, I oppose requiring ID to vote for reasons I won't get into. :lamo

 

[Bodi]

Yes. And the Rangers will win the Cup next year. (oops sorry, I forgot nothing else was being asked)

Nothing else WAS asked...

 

[Bodi]

In a world where everyone was issued a government ID card? Yes. In a world where they aren't? This law largely exists to discriminate against people. I know numerous people in liberal precincts --in one case, a white young person-- who was refused the right to vote, even though he followed the ID laws. These laws exist for poll persons to discriminate against people, and Republican law makers have literally said as much. If I believed that this was about stopping election rigging, I would reconsider, but as they are currently written and as they currently function, they are harming US democracy, not helping it.

The real question is why are Democrats not getting ID cards and Republicans are...

 

[ecofarm]

In a world where everyone was issued a government ID card? Yes. In a world where they aren't? This law largely exists to discriminate against people. I know numerous people in liberal precincts --in one case, a white young person-- who was refused the right to vote, even though he followed the ID laws. These laws exist for poll persons to discriminate against people, and Republican law makers have literally said as much. If I believed that this was about stopping election rigging, I would reconsider, but as they are currently written and as they currently function, they are harming US democracy, not helping it.

How about in states that provide free state/voter ID to anyone receiving food stamps (or even to anyone at all)?