• 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
My wife had a social security card back in the late Fifties - no photo required. No photo required to go to the hospital either. You can buy liquor in my state without a photo ID as long as you can prove your are 21.

If I am registered to vote and they have my signature which matches when I sign in - why is that not enough?

Not everyone gets thier registration card days/weeks/months in advance. Some people sign up to vote on the day of the election.
 
Not everyone gets thier registration card days/weeks/months in advance. Some people sign up to vote on the day of the election.

I would have no problem with a different rule for those who do same day election and registration to prove who they say they are and so we know they belong in that precinct.
 
I would have no problem with a different rule for those who do same day election and registration to prove who they say they are and so we know they belong in that precinct.

Hmm...sounds like a perfect opportunity to require a state ID to me.
 
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?

Photo ID... no. When I got my first drivers license, I only had to show my social security card and my birth certificate. I think that should be enough. I don't think photo id should be required. The thing about a photo id is that the most common one is the divers license, and most older people don't carry valid drivers licenses.
 
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?

Voting is a constitutional right, boarding a plane is not.
 
IT won't and many liberals have no problem making anyone trying to exercise their second amendment rights to do far more than merely SHOW a photo ID

seriously, in this day and age if you don't have a photo ID you are probably someone I really don't trust to be voting.

My grandpa doesn't have a drivers license or valid photo ID... his passport is expired. He is 80 and physically disabled. Why in God's name do you not him to vote?
 
If my signature matches the signature on my voters registration card,why should that not be enough? It has been since 1972.

Are there some huge examples of voter fraud convictions that I am not aware of?
 
My grandpa doesn't have a drivers license or valid photo ID... his passport is expired. He is 80 and physically disabled. Why in God's name do you not him to vote?

Some here are on record as willing to use all manner of excuses if they feel the voter in question will not vote for the Republican Party candidate. Perhaps they suspect your grandfather of being in that hated group?
 
While voter fraud isn't a huge problem, it sounds really damn desperate and largely unbelievable when people say, "it's a difficult or disenfranchising burden."
The overwhelming, vast majority of people, already have a state issued photo ID.
 
While voter fraud isn't a huge problem, it sounds really damn desperate and largely unbelievable when people say, "it's a difficult or disenfranchising burden."
The overwhelming, vast majority of people, already have a state issued photo ID.
 
My grandpa doesn't have a drivers license or valid photo ID... his passport is expired. He is 80 and physically disabled. Why in God's name do you not him to vote?

Then I don't see him getting out to vote.

The way that I understand it the voter ID bit is only for when you show up at the voting area. I doubt that it would apply to those that vote via mail.
 
Owning a firearm is a constitutional right, yet I have to fill out a government questionnaire, pass a background check and show a photo ID, to purchase one.
The risks of a firearm going to the wrong person have far more severe consequences than a vote going to the wrong person.
 
The risks of a firearm going to the wrong person have far more severe consequences than a vote going to the wrong person.

That wasn't the reasoning.
The reasoning was that it is a Constitutional right, although even that is debatable, but none the less, so is firearm ownership.

I disagree that a vote going to the wrong person is a lesser evil.
 
The risks of a firearm going to the wrong person have far more severe consequences than a vote going to the wrong person.

So? A right is a right is a right. They are ALL important and should be held to the same standards.
 
While voter fraud isn't a huge problem, it sounds really damn desperate and largely unbelievable when people say, "it's a difficult or disenfranchising burden."
The overwhelming, vast majority of people, already have a state issued photo ID.
It's not the most extreme burden, but I'm not a fan of restricting rights unless a significant problem becomes apparent that requires a restriction Voter fraud in federal elections is negligible with less than 86 people being convicted of it in five years. That's not worth restricting rights even further, particularly when it will affect some people.
 
So? A right is a right is a right. They are ALL important and should be held to the same standards.
Actually, that's not true. Each right is different and must be restricted in different ways. It makes zero sense to treat freedom of speech the same way you would treat the right to bear arms. Zero sense.
 
It's not the most extreme burden, but I'm not a fan of restricting rights unless a significant problem becomes apparent that requires a restriction Voter fraud in federal elections is negligible with less than 86 people being convicted of it in five years. That's not worth restricting rights even further, particularly when it will affect some people.

The amount of people it will negatively effect, is about the same as the amount of people that get convicted of voter fraud.
It's a ridiculous charge, that getting an ID is a hardship.
 
It's not the most extreme burden, but I'm not a fan of restricting rights unless a significant problem becomes apparent that requires a restriction Voter fraud in federal elections is negligible with less than 86 people being convicted of it in five years. That's not worth restricting rights even further, particularly when it will affect some people.

ThePlayDrive, correcto mundo.

What I see in this thread is a lot of bigotry and paranoia.
 
Actually, that's not true. Each right is different and must be restricted in different ways. It makes zero sense to treat freedom of speech the same way you would treat the right to bear arms. Zero sense.

I don't agree. You say that requireing ID to get a gun, a constitutional right, is a good thing because guns can kill. Would you apply the same logic to freedom of speech even though it can kill also?

Mass. High School Girl Commits Suicide after being Cyber-Bullied
 
It's not the most extreme burden, but I'm not a fan of restricting rights unless a significant problem becomes apparent that requires a restriction Voter fraud in federal elections is negligible with less than 86 people being convicted of it in five years. That's not worth restricting rights even further, particularly when it will affect some people.

As I keep mentioning their were only 2 Federal elections in that time frame so 86, is allot. You are trying desperately to make it sound like it is much less than it really is. You are also desperately trying to leave out state and local elections.

That is also convictions only, how many were arrested and then went to trial? How many got off?

Your reasoning is flawed.
 
The amount of people it will negatively effect, is about the same as the amount of people that get convicted of voter fraud.
It's a ridiculous charge, that getting an ID is a hardship.
And this still doesn't change my position that rights should only be restricted, no matter how small the restriction, if a significant problem affects itself. I find it funny that libertarians and conservatives are willing to add restrictions on rights for negligible problems.
 
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?

I already do. It's a means of verifying that you are who you say you are so they don't cross the wrong name off the list - really.
 
Owning a firearm is a constitutional right, yet I have to fill out a government questionnaire, pass a background check and show a photo ID, to purchase one.

Cannot the director of your local militia process that for you? ;)
 
Back
Top Bottom