Voter ID laws

[Dirty Penguin]

How does anyone know they ARE eligible? Just because they say they are?

Asking for a photo ID that says who you say you are isn't asking for too much.

I see where you're coming from but one of the issues is that there are many people with various forms of ID that under various situations would be fine but these won't do. The laws are specific on what type of ID will be accepted.

 

[Harmonious]

I see where you're coming from but one of the issues is that there are many people with various forms of ID that under various situations would be fine but these won't do. The laws are specific on what type of ID will be accepted.

Okay. Which IDs are proposed to be accepted?

 

[Alceste]

Stolen Identities, Stolen Votes: A Case Study in VoterImpersonation



Stolen Identities, Stolen Votes: A Case Study in VoterImpersonation

The Heritage Foundation is another right wing propaganda outfit, FYI. The quality of this article is slightly better, but this still isn't a study. It's an extremely long-winded kvetch about one single fraud convictions in 1986, followed by five anecdotes. Anecdotal evidence is of inferior quality to any effort to empirically research and analyze the prevalence of a phenomenon and its impact on elections.

 

[Alceste]

Okay. Which IDs are proposed to be accepted?

Government issued, non-expired photo ID showing your current name and address. Driver's license, passport, or army ID.

 

[Harmonious]

Look - you may pass them off as anecdotal, but they were cases of identity theft and voter fraud.

Would anything actually satisfy you?

 

[Harmonious]

Government issued, non-expired photo ID showing your current name and address. Driver's license, passport, or army ID.

Driver's licenses and non-driver's ID aren't so hard to get. Passports are a bit more difficult, but still doable. Army ID requires a person to be in the Military, so I wouldn't advocate people to run out and get those.

But between driver's licenses, non-driver's ID, and passports, they aren't too hard or too expensive to get.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

Policy Brief on Voter Identification | Brennan Center for Justice

I think they could have initiated this years ago after the 2008 presidential election considering that isn't the only type of voting going on but now it seems to be big deal with republicans in an election year is telling.

 

[Alceste]

Driver's licenses and non-driver's ID aren't so hard to get. Passports are a bit more difficult, but still doable. Army ID requires a person to be in the Military, so I wouldn't advocate people to run out and get those.

But between driver's licenses, non-driver's ID, and passports, they aren't too hard or too expensive to get.

That's not the point. WHY should at least five million Americans have to scramble to get a passport or driving license before election day, and how are they going to know they need it with so little warning? Passports in Canada aren't cheap ($80 last time I did it) though I don't know about the US, and some people don't drive.

If you can't demonstrate a pressing need to require everyone to have a passport on voting day, then why cause ANY inconvenience to the millions of American citizens who will be turned away at the voting booth if they don't jump through some hoops?

 

[Harmonious]

That's not the point. WHY should at least five million Americans have to scramble to get a passport or driving license before election day, and how are they going to know they need it with so little warning? Passports in Canada aren't cheap ($80 last time I did it) though I don't know about the US, and some people don't drive.

If you can't demonstrate a pressing need to require everyone to have a passport on voting day, then why cause ANY inconvenience to the millions of American citizens who will be turned away at the voting booth if they don't jump through some hoops?

It has been bantered about for months, and it is STILL months away.

This not should be a "last minute scramble." If it is for anyone who couldn't be bothered until now, there is still time.

In order to get a U.S. passport, you can go to any post office.
A U.S. Passport book and card for an adult is $140 with an execution fee of $25.
A U.S. Passport book for an adult is $110 with an execution fee of $25.
A U.S. Passport card for an adult is $30 with an execution fee of $25.

The least expensive method takes 4-6 weeks from the application to be processed and delivery.

Driver's licenses vary in cost per state. In order to get one, or a non-driver's ID, you can go to any DMV.

In New York, the cost varies from $52.50 to $80, depending on how old the applicant is.

In New York, a non-driver's ID costs between $9 and $14, depending on whether it is a long-term or short term ID. If you are over 62 years or are on SSI, it costs $6.50. And if you are both 62 or older and on SSI, there is no cost.

I imagine that in other states, the cost is comparable.

 

[Alceste]

It has been bantered about for months, and it is STILL months away.

This not should be a "last minute scramble." If it is for anyone who couldn't be bothered until now, there is still time.

In order to get a U.S. passport, you can go to any post office.
A U.S. Passport book and card for an adult is $140 with an execution fee of $25.
A U.S. Passport book for an adult is $110 with an execution fee of $25.
A U.S. Passport card for an adult is $30 with an execution fee of $25.

The least expensive method takes 4-6 weeks from the application to be processed and delivery.

Driver's licenses vary in cost per state. In order to get one, or a non-driver's ID, you can go to any DMV.

In New York, the cost varies from $52.50 to $80, depending on how old the applicant is.

In New York, a non-driver's ID costs between $9 and $14, depending on whether it is a long-term or short term ID. If you are over 62 years or are on SSI, it costs $6.50. And if you are both 62 or older and on SSI, there is no cost.

I imagine that in other states, the cost is comparable.

This does not explain WHY five million people should have to buy a photo ID just to vote if there is no voter impersonation fraud problem.

 

[Harmonious]

This does not explain WHY five million people should have to buy a photo ID just to vote if there is no voter impersonation fraud problem.

I'm not convinced that there's NOT a problem. And I don't see why people shouldn't have one to prove who they say they are.

I was asked. I provided my ID. Why can't they?

 

[Alceste]

I'm not convinced that there's NOT a problem. And I don't see why people shouldn't have one to prove who they say they are.

I was asked. I provided my ID. Why can't they?

Because twelve million Americans don't have current, accurate, valid, government issued photo ID. When they're asked, they can't provide it. Because they don't have it. I'm not sure why that is difficult to grasp.

There still hasn't been any evidence presented in this thread showing the prevalence and impact of voter impersonation fraud except mine, which says there have been ten cases in the last twelve years.

If you want to pass sweeping legislation to disenfranchise twelve million eligible voters, don't you think you should be willing and able to demonstrate there is a valid reason for doing so?

 

[Harmonious]

Because twelve million Americans don't have current, accurate, valid, government issued photo ID. When they're asked, they can't provide it. Because they don't have it. I'm not sure why that is difficult to grasp.

Because there is time for them to get it if they were willing to do so. Fourteen dollars isn't a killer expense, and it doesn't take that long to get.

Twelve million people who know where their local post office or DMV is have no excuse to not get some form of ID. It is August now. Election Day is in November. They can get accurate, valid, government issued photo ID. It isn't impossible. It isn't necessarily a devastating hardship. If $160 dollars is too much, I get that. $14 dollars isn't.

There still hasn't been any evidence presented in this thread showing the prevalence and impact of voter impersonation fraud except mine, which says there have been ten cases in the last twelve years.

Most can't be proven because there is nothing to check it against. I'm sure that there was more than was recorded, but you can't catch what you can't see, and you can't see it if you can't prove it. And you can't prove it without ID.

If you want to pass sweeping legislation to disenfranchise twelve million eligible voters, don't you think you should be willing and able to demonstrate there is a valid reason for doing so?

I think the validity is proof in itself.

Twelve million eligible voters can get off their butts and get ID. And if they need to be wheeled to a post office or DMV, they can still get it.

 

[Alceste]

Because there is time for them to get it if they were willing to do so. Fourteen dollars isn't a killer expense, and it doesn't take that long to get.

Twelve million people who know where their local post office or DMV is have no excuse to not get some form of ID. It is August now. Election Day is in November. They can get accurate, valid, government issued photo ID. It isn't impossible. It isn't necessarily a devastating hardship. If $160 dollars is too much, I get that. $14 dollars isn't.

Most can't be proven because there is nothing to check it against. I'm sure that there was more than was recorded, but you can't catch what you can't see, and you can't see it if you can't prove it. And you can't prove it without ID.

I think the validity is proof in itself.

Twelve million eligible voters can get off their butts and get ID. And if they need to be wheeled to a post office or DMV, they can still get it.

I think I'm following your logic. You are saying that if something is possible, it should also be mandatory. How about this: We pass a law requiring that everybody's glasses prescription be current, and there's an eye test at the polling booth. Anybody whose prescription is out of date doesn't get to vote. Anybody can get their glasses updated by November, right? And although we don't know for a fact that people are screwing up their ballots because they can't see them properly, it MIGHT be a problem, so it's definitely worth passing a law like this. Right?

I have a few other suggestions that are possible for voters, therefore by your reasoning should be mandatory.

- Anybody arriving on a bike has to have one of those squeeze horns attached and honk "shave and a haircut" before they dismount, then wait to hear an answering "two bits" from the election volunteers before entering the polling station.

- Aspiring voters have to know at least one verse of "Bohemian Rhapsody" and sing it to be allowed admission to the polling station.

- Everyone must wear shoes WITH laces, and those laces must matching, properly fitted, and firmly tied in neat little symmetrical bows, with no filthy, trailing ends.

- All redheads must enter the polling station walking backwards in slow motion.

These are all POSSIBLE, and they each might also solve some kind of problem I could dream up that may or may not exist. So should they all be made mandatory?

 

[Revoltingest]

Dueling studies, conflicting facts, battling experts, accusations of fraud, gaming the system for votes, etc, etc.
What it boils down to is that we need ID in a modern society to drive, fly, collect welfare, etc, etc....& now to vote.
Big deal. This is a burden that the poor can bear. The effect would be on few & the cost low, despite Democrat's &
their Canuckistanian allies' histrionic hand waving & convenient 'studies'. Voter impersonation would be a difficult
(if not impossible) thing to measure anyway. So the Dems lose the votes of a few illegal aliens & people who can't
afford a birth certificate. Meh....it's an invented controversy for the single occasion the poor actually matter to Dems.

There! That'll get some blood boiling.

 

[freethinker44]

Dueling studies, conflicting facts, battling experts, accusations of fraud, gaming the system for votes, etc, etc.
What it boils down to is that we need ID in a modern society to drive, fly, collect welfare, etc, etc....& now to vote.
Big deal. This is a burden that the poor can bear. The effect would be on few & the cost low, despite Democrat's &
their Canuckistanian allies' histrionic hand waving & convenient 'studies'. Voter impersonation would be a difficult
(if not impossible) thing to measure anyway. So the Dems lose the votes of a few illegal aliens & people who can't
afford a birth certificate. Meh....it's an invented controversy for the single occasion the poor actually matter to Dems.

There! That'll get some blood boiling.

:computer:

 

[Revoltingest]

:computer:

Cute little fellow there!

 

[tytlyf]

How about a system that requires everyone to have an ID and that ID gives you the right to vote? You don't need to register to vote, your registration is built-into the ID? Just show up with the picture ID and vote.

What people fail to realize is that the current system requires a citizen to Register to actually be able to vote. Millions of Americans with ID's don't even register to vote. So they sit on Nov 6.

So would you prefer that a new ID law go into effect that will give every American the immediate right to show up and vote? Whereas in the past they had never registered nor wanted to vote?

 

[Harmonious]

I think I'm following your logic. You are saying that if something is possible, it should also be mandatory. How about this: We pass a law requiring that everybody's glasses prescription be current, and there's an eye test at the polling booth. Anybody whose prescription is out of date doesn't get to vote. Anybody can get their glasses updated by November, right? And although we don't know for a fact that people are screwing up their ballots because they can't see them properly, it MIGHT be a problem, so it's definitely worth passing a law like this. Right?

I have a few other suggestions that are possible for voters, therefore by your reasoning should be mandatory.

Now you are being senselessly ridiculous, and I won't acknowledge your listed silliness beyond that.

Proof of who a voter is when they vote is not unreasonable. Your claim that voter fraud is negligible is silly, as you can't prove statistically something that leaves no papertrail. That's like saying you can prove how many murders didn't take place because of a preventative measure. How would you know?

You can't read people's minds, so you would never know. Voter ID is NOT unreasonable, nor is it unprecedented.

And there is no reason the people who don't have ID can't go out and get it.

 

[Alceste]

Dueling studies, conflicting facts, battling experts, accusations of fraud, gaming the system for votes, etc, etc.
What it boils down to is that we need ID in a modern society to drive, fly, collect welfare, etc, etc....& now to vote.
Big deal. This is a burden that the poor can bear. The effect would be on few & the cost low, despite Democrat's &
their Canuckistanian allies' histrionic hand waving & convenient 'studies'. Voter impersonation would be a difficult
(if not impossible) thing to measure anyway. So the Dems lose the votes of a few illegal aliens & people who can't
afford a birth certificate. Meh....it's an invented controversy for the single occasion the poor actually matter to Dems.

There! That'll get some blood boiling.

Correction. Only one study has been presented relating to the prevalence of live voter impersonation. The rebuttal evidence is anecdotal. Apples and oranges.

Shall I put you in the "anything that's possible should be mandatory" camp then? Funny opinion for a libertarian.