• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Photo ID to vote?

Photo ID to vote?


  • Total voters
    92
The point is...to stop those almost non-existent cases of voter fraud...you'd make it so that millions of Americans will have problems voting. This is why those laws are being passed...

Citizens with comparatively low incomes are less likely to possess documentation proving their citizenship. Citizens earning less than $25,000 per year are more than twice as likely to lack ready documentation of their citizenship as those earning more than $25,000.4 Indeed, the survey indicates that at least 12 percent of voting-age American citizens earning less than $25,000 per year do not have a readily available U.S. passport, naturalization document, or birth certificate

Elderly citizens are less likely to possess government-issued photo identification. Survey results indicate that seniors disproportionately lack photo identification. Eighteen percent of American citizens age 65 and above do not have current government-issued photo ID.9 Using 2005 census estimates, this amounts to more than 6 million senior citizens.

Minority citizens are less likely to possess government-issued photo identification. According to the survey, African-American citizens also disproportionately lack photo identification. Twenty-five percent of African-American voting-age citizens have no current government-issued photo ID, compared to eight percent of white voting-age citizens.10 Using 2000 census figures, this amounts to more than 5.5 million adult African-American citizens without photo identification. Our survey also indicated that sixteen percent of Hispanic voting-age citizens have no current government-issued photo ID, but due to a low sample size, the results did not achieve statistical significance

http://www.debatepolitics.com/editpost.php?p=1060033887&do=editpost
So you are saying that all those people that want to vote and get ID card would be better served by having them and we manage to help people out ALONG with ensuring they are legally able to cast votes. Good points!
 
Voting should be a duty...a responsibility. We expect people to take responsibility when they are cashing a check, using a credit card, buying popcord at a theater with a debit card, buy cigarettes, buy alcohol, apply for and pick up government assistance, drive a vehicle go to the doctor, get medicine, get entry into bars, clubs, dancehalls, installations, federal buildings...on and on. It is not unrealistic or unreasonable to expect people to show a picture ID when voting. The only people that are opposed to that are people that know fraud is being committed, know who is committing it, and knows who benefits from it. Sure...its very sad that we have vermin that would cheat, lie, commit fraud. Thats tragic but a reality. It happens all across the country. It can be effectively managed with the simple act of showing that same card that every elderly person has and has to show to get services, that every poor person has and has to show to get services. No disenfranchisement. No downside.
You keep saying the bold for the same reasons you always do - to quell disagreement by trying to discredit the valid arguments of those who disagree. It's a weak and desperate debate tactic that gives you permission to ignore other people's arguments rather than just simply disagree with them.

You continue to ignore the fact that there is no benefit for any party from less than 86 people in 5 years committing fraud. None. Consequently, your claim goes out of the window because the people who you are claiming will benefit from fraud can't benefit from it - it's 86 people in 5 years. That has zero effect on election outcomes.

Furthermore, it doesn't matter if you think it should be a duty or responsibility. Voting is a right and if the government has certain conditions for people exercising their right, then they sure as better make sure that everyone in the country meets those conditions and they aren't.
 
I didn't say it should be ignored. I said the problem is exaggerated and inconsequential and usually the fault of mistakes rather than organized fraud.

You are right, you said you don't care. That really is a huge leap to ignore.

I already said, I don't care if IDs are required as long as the government ensures that everyone gets an ID. And it's clear that they aren't doing that.

The Indiana Supreme Court said Wednesday that the photo ID requirement was not a "substantive voter qualification."It cited the U.S. Supreme Court's 2008 ruling in a federal court challenge by the state Democratic Party to the Indiana law that said a photo ID is required to enter federal buildings and board planes and voting was equally important."The voter ID law's requirement that an in-person voter present a government-issued photo identification card containing an expiration date is merely regulatory in nature," Dickson wrote. - Supreme Court Upholds Indiana Voter ID Law - Indiana News Story - WRTV Indianapolis

It's clear that is not the states responsibly.
 
You keep saying the bold for the same reasons you always do - to quell disagreement by trying to discredit the valid arguments of those who disagree. It's a weak and desperate debate tactic that gives you permission to ignore other people's arguments rather than just simply disagree with them.

You continue to ignore the fact that there is no benefit for any party from less than 86 people in 5 years committing fraud. None. Consequently, your claim goes out of the window because the people who you are claiming will benefit from fraud can't benefit from it - it's 86 people in 5 years. That has zero effect on election outcomes.

Furthermore, it doesn't matter if you think it should be a duty or responsibility. Voting is a right and if the government has certain conditions for people exercising their right, then they sure as better make sure that everyone in the country meets those conditions and they aren't.
Thats right...I keep saying the same thing because it comes down to the same basic simple fact...anyone that opposes the simple act of showing an ID card is doing so for one reason...they know who commits fraud ahnd who benefits from fraud. Anything else is bull****. Back to square one.
 
The point is...to stop those almost non-existent cases of voter fraud...you'd make it so that millions of Americans will have problems voting. This is why those laws are being passed...

Citizens with comparatively low incomes are less likely to possess documentation proving their citizenship. Citizens earning less than $25,000 per year are more than twice as likely to lack ready documentation of their citizenship as those earning more than $25,000.4 Indeed, the survey indicates that at least 12 percent of voting-age American citizens earning less than $25,000 per year do not have a readily available U.S. passport, naturalization document, or birth certificate

Elderly citizens are less likely to possess government-issued photo identification. Survey results indicate that seniors disproportionately lack photo identification. Eighteen percent of American citizens age 65 and above do not have current government-issued photo ID.9 Using 2005 census estimates, this amounts to more than 6 million senior citizens.

Minority citizens are less likely to possess government-issued photo identification. According to the survey, African-American citizens also disproportionately lack photo identification. Twenty-five percent of African-American voting-age citizens have no current government-issued photo ID, compared to eight percent of white voting-age citizens.10 Using 2000 census figures, this amounts to more than 5.5 million adult African-American citizens without photo identification. Our survey also indicated that sixteen percent of Hispanic voting-age citizens have no current government-issued photo ID, but due to a low sample size, the results did not achieve statistical significance

http://www.brennancenter.org/page/-/d/download_file_39242.pdf

So I don't care if a homeless crackhead gets to vote or not, I wonder how many of those actually registered to vote? Funny how they leave that out. If you want to vote get an ID.

So far still no reason. The being unconstitutional has already been beaten on every front, so saying people will be disfranchised will not cut it.
 
I say yes. You need a photo ID to get a drivers license, board a plane, purchase alcohol....

Why shouldn't you have to show your ID when making the most important decisions for our country?

you need a photo id to get a driver's license? huh? no, a photo id should not be required. it's not necessary.
 
You are right, you said you don't care. That really is a huge leap to ignore.
I don't care. I don't care about a lot of things, but I wouldn't argue that the government should ignore them.

The Indiana Supreme Court said Wednesday that the photo ID requirement was not a "substantive voter qualification."It cited the U.S. Supreme Court's 2008 ruling in a federal court challenge by the state Democratic Party to the Indiana law that said a photo ID is required to enter federal buildings and board planes and voting was equally important."The voter ID law's requirement that an in-person voter present a government-issued photo identification card containing an expiration date is merely regulatory in nature," Dickson wrote. - Supreme Court Upholds Indiana Voter ID Law - Indiana News Story - WRTV Indianapolis

It's clear that is not the states responsibly.
It actually is the state's responsibility to ensure that people can use their rights. When a voter ID law is accompanied by a state making it difficult to get an ID, then there is a problem. I support it if they ensure people get IDs. If they don't, whatever.
 
Thats right...I keep saying the same thing because it comes down to the same basic simple fact...anyone that opposes the simple act of showing an ID card is doing so for one reason...they know who commits fraud ahnd who benefits from fraud.
But how do they benefit from fraud of only (less than) 86 people in 5 years commit it? LOL.
 
So I don't care if a homeless crackhead gets to vote or not, I wonder how many of those actually registered to vote? Funny how they leave that out. If you want to vote get an ID.

So far still no reason. The being unconstitutional has already been beaten on every front, so saying people will be disfranchised will not cut it.
Oh but they ARE Registered to vote...because the voter registration people are signing them up on the spot then voting for them.

No reason whatsoever. No one freaks about the simple act of showing an ID card to buy cigarettes...but lord no...we cant have responsible citizens showing who they are before they go in and cast a legal lawful ballot that influences the government of the country. Its ALWAYS telling who shows up in the voter fraud arrests, who keeps popping up for illegally registering voters, and which party they always seem to be affiliated with. And shockingly...guess who it is that is always opposed to the simple act of verifying the legal right to vote.
 
So I don't care if a homeless crackhead gets to vote or not, I wonder how many of those actually registered to vote? Funny how they leave that out. If you want to vote get an ID.

So far still no reason. The being unconstitutional has already been beaten on every front, so saying people will be disfranchised will not cut it.
You haven't shown any reason why ID should be required. Most "fraud" issues are found out to be mistakes and less than 86 people in 5 years commit it. That's not a significant problem. New requirements that make it more difficult to vote should only be added when an actual problem is apparent. 86 people in 5 years (most of which were mistakes) is not an actual problem.
 
But how do they benefit from fraud of only (less than) 86 people in 5 years commit it? LOL.
You arent reading. You keep missing the illegal votes in Texas, New Mexico, Illinois, FLorida...etc etc etc. Of course...you dont WANT to see it. 'Lol'
 
You arent reading. You keep missing the illegal votes in Texas, New Mexico, Illinois, FLorida...etc etc etc. Of course...you dont WANT to see it. 'Lol'
What do you mean, I'm not reading? LESS THAN 86 PEOPLE CONVICTED IN 5 YEARS. LOL. So much benefit, I can hardly handle myself.
 
What do you mean, I'm not reading? LESS THAN 86 PEOPLE CONVICTED IN 5 YEARS. LOL. So much benefit, I can hardly handle myself.
I cited articles showing numerous instances of illegal votes. You honestly believe every illegal vote cast (including the dead woman in Texas that come back from the other side to cast her ballot) is being prosecuted and arrested? Put an arrest behind every illegal vote and see what happens to those numbers. Put a separate arrest behind the 10 poll workers in Florida who were casting ballots for numerous other people and see what happens. You know why I believe people are opposed to the simple act of showing who you are and what I think about the stand of those who fight to defend fraud...ooops...I mean are against showing an ID card for buying smokes...dangit...I mean voting.

Dead horse sufficiently beat.
 
You haven't shown any reason why ID should be required. Most "fraud" issues are found out to be mistakes and less than 86 people in 5 years commit it.

Only 2 federal elections happened within that period. One of them was not even for president as it was midterm. The first year was not even included. So I would say that is nothing but an opinion on your part.

That's not a significant problem. New requirements that make it more difficult to vote should only be added when an actual problem is apparent.

It is a problem and should be addressed. Fortunately it is already being done in some states with more jumping in.

86 people in 5 years (most of which were mistakes) is not an actual problem.

Again how many were affected by the fraud? If even one persons vote was changed or fraudulent, it's a problem.
 
I cited articles showing numerous instances of illegal votes. You honestly believe every illegal vote cast (including the dead woman in Texas that come back from the other side to cast her ballot) is being prosecuted and arrested? Put an arrest behind every illegal vote and see what happens to those numbers. Put a separate arrest behind the 10 poll workers in Florida who were casting ballots for numerous other people and see what happens. You know why I believe people are opposed to the simple act of showing who you are and what I think about the stand of those who fight to defend fraud...ooops...I mean are against showing an ID card for buying smokes...dangit...I mean voting.

Dead horse sufficiently beat.
You've posted "instances" and I've posted actual convictions. Apparently, the federal government doesn't agree with your lawyer skillz. When you can actually demonstrate that the problem is more than 86 people in 5 years and that the courts were totally wrong, then you've got nothing. Sorry buddy.
 
You've posted "instances" and I've posted actual convictions. Apparently, the federal government doesn't agree with your lawyer skillz. When you can actually demonstrate that the problem is more than 86 people in 5 years and that the courts were totally wrong, then you've got nothing. Sorry buddy.
Never pretended to be a lawyer...but you ARE correct...I posted actual instances that PROVE there are disgusting scumbags out there that vote illegally. And they always seem to be...what party again? Oh yeah. cus thats the way uh huh uh huh you LIKE it...uh huh...
 
So I don't care if a homeless crackhead gets to vote or not, I wonder how many of those actually registered to vote? Funny how they leave that out. If you want to vote get an ID.

Why not provide an ID card for voting? Because the issue isn't "voter fraud" it's limiting votes from groups that normally don't vote Republican. Also...all elderly are not homeless crackheads. All Minorities are not homeless crackheads. All low income individuals are not crack heads.
So far still no reason. The being unconstitutional has already been beaten on every front, so saying people will be disfranchised will not cut it.
Of course...power through any means for conservative eh?
 
So you are saying that all those people that want to vote and get ID card would be better served by having them and we manage to help people out ALONG with ensuring they are legally able to cast votes. Good points!

My point is those people not have ID. If we're going to require voter ID then make a damn voter ID card with a picture. Obviously voter fraud is not the issue because a voter ID card with a pic would solve any problems with disenfranchisement.
 
Only 2 federal elections happened within that period. One of them was not even for president as it was midterm. The first year was not even included. So I would say that is nothing but an opinion on your part.
Uhhh...how is it an opinion? I just relayed what the government said.

It is a problem and should be addressed. Fortunately it is already being done in some states with more jumping in.
I don't support restrictions on rights for negligible problems. If someone thinks I should support restricting rights, then they should demonstrate a significant problem. That hasn't been demonstrated.

Again how many were affected by the fraud? If even one persons vote was changed or fraudulent, it's a problem.
An incredibly small problem that you haven't shown will be fixed by requiring IDs.
 
Never pretended to be a lawyer...but you ARE correct...I posted actual instances that PROVE there are disgusting scumbags out there that vote illegally. And they always seem to be...what party again? Oh yeah. cus thats the way uh huh uh huh you LIKE it...uh huh...
Yeah, but I didn't disagree with your instances. I just said that less than 86 people were convicted which means that I agree there are people out there who commit fraud. LOL. But until you demonstrate that there is a significant problem, I don't care.
 
My point is those people not have ID. If we're going to require voter ID then make a damn voter ID card with a picture. Obviously voter fraud is not the issue because a voter ID card with a pic would solve any problems with disenfranchisement.
Sure...sounds good. Voter ID cards for all registered voters. Free for those that cant afford it, unncessary for people already in posession of an official state ID card. Limit ONE per customer. Problem solved. Because really EVERYONE wants a free and fair election with no fraud.
 
Why not provide an ID card for voting? Because the issue isn't "voter fraud" it's limiting votes from groups that normally don't vote Republican. Also...all elderly are not homeless crackheads. All Minorities are not homeless crackheads. All low income individuals are not crack heads.

That has nothing to do with it. It is about voter fraud. As I already pointed out it is not unconstitutional according to 2 federal courts now. So you have no argument.

Of course...power through any means for conservative eh?

Well most voter fraud has been found to be on the Democratic party's head, you do the math.

It's all about power...

Push to register felons to vote could aid Obama - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/27023034/#.Tut4PNTOwrk
 
Last edited:
Without the ID requirement, the person is still committing two felonies, if not more, so I don't see your point.
With an ID requirement it's easier to catch them if the fake is discovered.
 
Since another Presidential election is coming up, how about this topic again?

Should people have to show their photo ID in order to vote in US presidential elections? Why or why not?

Some issues are a lot less complex than others. This one is just common sense. Yes, photo ID should be required. The integrity/purity of election results are a foundaton of our government. Photo IDs won't make the process perfect but it will eliminate one more gap.

In the case of someone who has no ID and has evidence they can't afford one, the State should provide one without cost. Believe most states already provide "non-driving" photo IDs at the DMV. Wouldn't be much stress on the budget to make those free for the indigent.
 
Back
Top Bottom