• 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!

Is requiring voter photo ID a type of disenfranchisement?

Is requiring voter photo ID a type of disenfranchisement?


  • Total voters
    83
  • Poll closed .
they won't be able to fly, get passports or buy guns either. If you believe stuff that stupid you probably shouldn't vote or own guns or be on airplanes

Should people incapable of recognizing sacrasm be on airplanes?
 
Its no different than the many GOP people who claim a home state but don't actually reside there to avoid tax laws. Which is very common in the Midwest. After all if you don't cheat on your residency taxes what is the point of being part of the GOP? ;)

I couldn't tell.....I'm in Chicago home of the Corruption and that Democratic Outfit that excels oh so very well in Ethics. :lol:
 
I couldn't tell.....I'm in Chicago home of the Corruption and that Democratic Outfit that excels oh so very well in Ethics. :lol:
Again, nothing they are doing is unethical other than in your own personal bias mind.

There is nothing wrong with thinking it is unethical but you'd have to prove it if you want to change anything. I'm not in Chicago so I can't help you with that, but I'm sure if you wanted to do something about it you could.
 
Yeah that was it.....not double voting. Out of residency.....like you said. It was an easy matter to deal with.

It got blown way out of proportion. I think that was in North Carolina. It was never a case of disenfranchisement.
 
No it really shouldn't they meet the residency requirements even if you don't think they do. I'm pretty sure you could file complaints with the local magistrate if you were that concerned about their residency qualifications.


If you are referring to college students.

Most states have residency requirements that are along the lines of establishing a permanent residence and show in intent to stay in the state.

However many college students don't meet this because:

(a) If they live in the dorm, then that is considered transient housing and does not establish a residence. Schools will often require students to check out of the dorm for various breaks including fall, winter, and spring and to totally move out over the summer breaks. After each year they may be reassigned to a different dorm building/room. Those that live off campus are slightly different because they typically enter into an apartment rental agreement.

(b) They typically retain ID issued by their home state (when attending out of state universities). Someone attending school in Virginia but who retains a Florida drivers license is indicating that their permanent residence is in Florida and not Virginia.

(c) They typically retain the parents permanent address on all official documents including those filed with the school and for FAFSA.

(d) They typically file (when attending out of state universities) tax returns based on their home state and not the state they are attending school in.​


For any other individual, they would not be considered transient and therefore would be required to vote absentee where they were truly a resident.

Now if a college student want's to change their permanent address to a permanent (non-transient) address in the state, change their State ID to that State's ID, and file tax returns in the state - go for it. Otherwise vote absentee at your permanent place of residence.



>>>>
 
Last edited:
In my state, you show your license or some other ID unless the poll workers know you and then you sign by your name

In my state, each county's Supervisor of Elections can set the rules. In my county our SOE is a great guy who is fair and liked by people of both parties.

You can vote with:

- Your voter ID card his office issues. It does not have a photo, but I wish it did.
- Your driver's license.
- Your state ID issued by the DMV.
- Your passport.
- Your military ID.
- Your state employee ID.
- A major credit/debit card provided its signed.
- A Senior citizen ID (enrolled in a city operated senior citizen program.)
- No ID at all, however your ballot will be placed in a "provisional ballot box" until your signature can be matched with the one they have on file.
- By mail aka absentee voting, provided your signature can be matched with the one they have on file.
 
For any other individual, they would not be considered transient and therefore would be required to vote absentee where they were truly a resident.

That should have read...

"For any other individual, they would be considered transient and therefore would be required to vote absentee where they were truly a resident."


>>>>
 
This serves no purpose but to make it harder for college students to vote.
 
Unless a guardian is something different in Canada, someone with a guardian should not be allowed to vote because they have been deemed legally incompetent or are a minor.

Uh, why? My brother votes in every election. He has his own mind.
 
I honestly believe that the intent of these laws is to do partisan disenfranchisement. It can be used by Repubs or Dems and is about who is controlling local politics. It would be disproportionately biased against low income voters. The 10 nuns are an excellent example of flawed law. I also worry about corrupted code in the electronic voting process. Let's address that before we disenfranchise.
Agree and disagree. The way it is being done in many places at the moment, and especially with some of the other peripheral ideas being proposed and passed, I agree that intentional disenfranchisement is the goal.

However, a simple ID requirement, applied equally and across the board, is not. As long as there are reasonable measures to allow people who have no birth certificates to get an ID, I'm fine with it. With reasonable mitigation measures in place, as well as a five year phase-in period, then there is really no reason that a person cannot obtain an ID.

I do not accept cost as a barrier, and if you cannot figure out location logistics in 5 years, then the truth is it's really not as important to you as you say.
 
“What I have used for voter registration and for identification for the last 52 years was not sufficient yesterday when I went to vote,” 117th District Court Judge Sandra Watts said.

Watts has voted in every election for the last forty-nine years. The name on her driver’s license has remained the same for fifty-two years, and the address on her voter registration card or driver’s license hasn’t changed in more than two decades. So imagine her surprise when she was told by voting officials that she would have to sign a “voters affidavit” affirming she was who she said she was.

“Someone looked at that and said, ‘Well, they’re not the same,’” Watts said.

The difference? On the driver’s license, Judge Watts’s maiden name is her middle name. On her voter registration, it’s her actual middle name. That was enough under the new, more strict voter fraud law, to send up a red flag.

Under the the section of the voter rights law that the USSC threw out this summer, this law was blocked. Once the USSC threw out that portion of the VRA Texas promptly passed it and this is the result. A judge was not allowed to vote.

I'm sorry I cannot get the link to copy (I'm on my phone) but that quote us from The Nation.
 
“What I have used for voter registration and for identification for the last 52 years was not sufficient yesterday when I went to vote,” 117th District Court Judge Sandra Watts said.

Watts has voted in every election for the last forty-nine years. The name on her driver’s license has remained the same for fifty-two years, and the address on her voter registration card or driver’s license hasn’t changed in more than two decades. So imagine her surprise when she was told by voting officials that she would have to sign a “voters affidavit” affirming she was who she said she was.

“Someone looked at that and said, ‘Well, they’re not the same,’” Watts said.

The difference? On the driver’s license, Judge Watts’s maiden name is her middle name. On her voter registration, it’s her actual middle name. That was enough under the new, more strict voter fraud law, to send up a red flag.
Under the the section of the voter rights law that the USSC threw out this summer, this law was blocked. Once the USSC threw out that portion of the VRA Texas promptly passed it and this is the result. A judge was not allowed to vote.

I'm sorry I cannot get the link to copy (I'm on my phone) but that quote us from The Nation.


You should read your own quote. Yes she was allowed to vote - she simply had to sign an affidavit as to who she was because the names didn't match on her ID's (which is her fault).


>>>>
 
The voter can sign an affidavit attesting to her true identity in some cases. If the election official deems the ID insufficient, the voter can fill out a provisional ballot – but that ballot will only be counted if he (or in this case, more likely she) comes back with an ID that matches.

If it sounds like that would never happen, it already did. And remarkably, it happened to a Texas judge, Sandra Watts, who was voting inside her own courthouse.

I'm on my phone. I chose the wrong story. The affidavit is only part of it, if you read above. My apologies. They have to come back with one that matches. There are many women who won't have the time for that and why should they if they are in the situation that the judge is.
 
I'm on my phone. I chose the wrong story. The affidavit is only part of it, if you read above. My apologies. They have to come back with one that matches. There are many women who won't have the time for that and why should they if they are in the situation that the judge is.


Women don't have time to get an ID with their proper legal name?

I think pretty much all states now have Motor Voter Registration where you can register to vote at your DMV. The solution isn't saying Voter ID laws apply to men - but oh women they don't have time to have proper ID's so we'll exempt the from the law, the solution is providing an easy and smooth name change process so that when you update your ID at a DMV it cross links into voter registration and updates the legal name their. Then to make it even easier, have the county clerks, those who issue marriage licenses - once the license is returned - register the name change into the same system which updates both the DMV record and the voter registration.

I don't have an issue with the use of provisional ballots, it's the individual responsibility to make sure they are properly registered to vote. You'd think a Judge would know better. The law should allow, and if it doesn't I disagree with it, that when processing a name change the individual presents proof of identity and the legal instrument implementing a name change to complete the process. Let's say my name is Mark James Smith and I get married, I choose to adopt my wife's name (which men can do in many states) and I change my name to Mark Smith Wojahowitz (maybe my new wife is a corporate executive and makes big bucks so I take her name). I present my old ID showing "Mark James Smith", the legal instrument changing the name (the completed Marriage License) DMV issues me a new ID and electronically updates the voter rolls. One stop, new ID and ID and voter rolls match.


>>>>
 
I see. From what I understand Obamacare does not require those who let their driver's licenses lapse get then reinstated because use public transportation and have no cars, have direct deposit and don't want to spend the additional money or hassle with rounding up extensive documentation in compliance with the Real ID Act as some states try to do in order to vote in 2012. What Obamacare does is require people to have private health insurance. I have health insurance and I don't remember having to show my insurance company an original (no photo copies allowed) copy of my birth certificate issued by the state where I was born, my social security card plus a passport issued by the State Department, a military ID or soon to expire driver's license and if a married female a copy of her marriage license. I don't recall providing any ID to my insurance company. I might have but I don't recall it. Good question.

Every state I have checked provides a non-drivers license ID at no charge for those who qualify. In most cases, a birth certificate is not required. I haven't checked every state, but I've checked enough to conclude it must be universal.

As to Obamacare, one of the new agencies set up outside of Obamacare itself is the Office of Health Information Technology. This new bureaucracy created when Democrats invented Obamacare is the new central clearing house for all patient medical records. The idea is all private medical records will be stored in "one data base" administered by the Federal Government, and will enable medical staff to gain access to patient medical records from anywhere. This means it will be critical for medical care providers to know precisely who it is they are providing care to.

With potential lethal results should drugs or other forms of care conflict, proper medical identification will be crucial. With fines for not obtaining Obamacare coverage, and precise identification an obvious requirement, how does this fully supported fact square against the accusations of purposeful voter disenfranchisment mearly for asking that someone present the apparently impossible to get photo ID?
 
Women don't have time to get an ID with their proper legal name?

I think pretty much all states now have Motor Voter Registration where you can register to vote at your DMV. The solution isn't saying Voter ID laws apply to men - but oh women they don't have time to have proper ID's so we'll exempt the from the law, the solution is providing an easy and smooth name change process so that when you update your ID at a DMV it cross links into voter registration and updates the legal name their. Then to make it even easier, have the county clerks, those who issue marriage licenses - once the license is returned - register the name change into the same system which updates both the DMV record and the voter registration.

I don't have an issue with the use of provisional ballots, it's the individual responsibility to make sure they are properly registered to vote. You'd think a Judge would know better. The law should allow, and if it doesn't I disagree with it, that when processing a name change the individual presents proof of identity and the legal instrument implementing a name change to complete the process. Let's say my name is Mark James Smith and I get married, I choose to adopt my wife's name (which men can do in many states) and I change my name to Mark Smith Wojahowitz (maybe my new wife is a corporate executive and makes big bucks so I take her name). I present my old ID showing "Mark James Smith", the legal instrument changing the name (the completed Marriage License) DMV issues me a new ID and electronically updates the voter rolls. One stop, new ID and ID and voter rolls match.


>>>>
This is exhausting using a phone.

1. Texas requires women to have their maiden name on their DL since 1964.
2. Women of her generation use their maiden as their middle name.
3. It doesn't match their voter ID card.

That's the problem though it's clear it's her. This is a problem loads of married, divorced or separated women will deal with. Including those who use hyphenated names.

As to your motor voter suggestion, obviously that is not the case in Texas. The voter id she was using was not adequate though she's been married for 49 years.
"I don't think most women know that this is going to create a problem," Watts said. That their maiden name is on their driver's license, which was mandated in 1964 when I got married, and this. And so why would I want to use a provisional ballot when I've been voting regular ballot for the last 49 years?"

And again, they have to return with an exact id in order for their vote to count. Why should a woman like this be put through a second trip when her id was sufficient all those years. Or any woman?
 
This is exhausting using a phone.

I use my phone to read, but rarely respond using it. I agree responding on a phone can be tough. When responding maybe you should use a real computing device (tablet, laptop, or desktop) - Just a suggestion.[/quote]

1. Texas requires women to have their maiden name on their DL since 1964.

TRANSPORTATION CODE CHAPTER 521. DRIVER'S LICENSES AND CERTIFICATES
TxDPS - Change Information on Your Driver License or ID Card
TxDPS - Identification Requirements

The first link is to the official State of Texas Statutes on Transportation, specifically the section on Driver's Licenses and Certificate. I actually read it while out running errands and waiting for my wife, then I did separate a text searches for "Name" and "Maiden". No where did it require a woman to list a maiden name. Texas lists the full legal name of the person on Driver's Licenses and ID Certificates. The other two links show that if the names on identification documents don't match, then the individual must provide legal documentation of a name change (Marriage License, Divorce Decree, etc.) The ID is then amended and reissued with the new legal name.

2. Women of her generation use their maiden as their middle name.

Understood and acknowledged, however what her legal name is and what she may have chosen in everyday life to use can be two completely different things. An individual only has one legal name and a Marriage Certificate is one way to execute a name change - others being a divorce decree and court approved.

When a couple get married they have 4 basic options, lets apply them to Linda Lynn Lemore and John James Jones

#1 Retain original name (yes people can and do to do that). With this choice the couple is married and their legal names are Linda Lynn Lemore and John James Jones.

#2 Name change - Maiden Name. In this case the individual replaces their legal middle name with their maiden name creating a new legal name. So we have Linda Lemore James and John James Jones.

#3 Name change - Original Middle Name. In this case the individual keeps their legal middle name replaces the last name to create a new legal name. So we have Linda Lynn Jones and John James Jones.

#4 Name change - Hyphenated Name. In this case the individual keeps their legal middle name replaces the last name to create a new legal name. So we have Linda Lynn Lemore-James James and John James Jones.​


My wife and I have been married for close to 30 years, we discussed and she adopted option #3. Once the name change because final (i.e. the license was registered with the County Clerk) she began the process of changing her name at her employer, on her ID's, on her voter registration, Social Security, and all the other myriad places it needed to be changed.


3. It doesn't match their voter ID card.

Yep that's the problem, she didn't use her legal name where she needed to.

Listen I'm a reasonable guy, a cross check of State ID and Voter registration will show the same SSN. Shouldn't be that big a deal in this day and ag


That's the problem though it's clear it's her. This is a problem loads of married, divorced or separated women will deal with. Including those who use hyphenated names.

Yep, it's a problem. The individual is responsible to ensure they use their legal name for legal purposes.


As to your motor voter suggestion, obviously that is not the case in Texas. The voter id she was using was not adequate though she's been married for 49 years.

Actually it was. She voted on a provisional ballot and was given an opportunity to correct the problem. If she is a responsible individual (and one would hope a Judge is a responsible individual) she corrected the problem and it shouldn't occur again.

And again, they have to return with an exact id in order for their vote to count. Why should a woman like this be put through a second trip when her id was sufficient all those years. Or any woman?

What good is the common sense idea of someone needing to show proof of identify to cast their ballot and then say that the individual is not required to have an ID? That makes no sense.

The ID wasn't sufficient because the law changed. I receive notification and a replacement Voter Registration card before each election from the County Clerk with a summary of any changes to the law and what requirements must be met to cast my ballot. If she received such information and choose to ignore it then the problem is with her, not with the system.


>>>>
 
The actual voter ID is a straw man.
The rest of the story would make Trickie Dickie proud.
 
Why is it wrong to need ID when you vote ,but it isn't wrong to show ID to buy a firearm which are both rights as Americans
 
I'm on my phone. I chose the wrong story. The affidavit is only part of it, if you read above. My apologies. They have to come back with one that matches. There are many women who won't have the time for that and why should they if they are in the situation that the judge is.

But that's really ridiculous. If voting is important enough for them, they will make time. It's like saying that people are disenfranchised because they're too lazy to get off the couch so we should send people to carry them out to a car, drive them to the polling place, move their finger, then take them back home. There's a point where the individual has to be personally responsible for their vote.
 
Back
Top Bottom