Justice Department vs. photo IDs for voting

Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by CalWizrd, Jan 18, 2012.

  1. CalWizrd Suspended

    CalWizrd

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Location:
    NYC/Raleigh, NC
    #1
    Can someone please enlighten me as to why the Justice Department is so vehemently opposed to various states enacting voting laws requiring photo IDs? I know it certainly can't be because the Justice Department wants to enable voter fraud, or at least make it easier. Can it?

    In addition to the obvious drivers license as valid ID, most states provide a free or very low cost state photo ID availability.

    So explain to me, please, how this requirement would discriminate against (Democratic) voters.

    P.S. Of course, this would make it harder for dead people to vote in Chicago, but I'm sure they would find a way around it.
     
  2. Peace macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
  3. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #3
    Voter fraud is a republican meme that provides support to their 'culture of fear' platform. In reality, proven cases of voter fraud are few and far between.

    Link

    Oops! I'm sure the Republicans were a little upset having to pay for a study that invalidated their claims.
     
  4. KingYaba macrumors 68040

    KingYaba

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2005
    Location:
    Up the irons
    #4
    Okay, me. The argument is a photo id is a barrier to voting no matter how small you may think it is. It's not just the cost but the time it takes to get the id as well.

    It's also an issue of whether it's necessary. Is voter fraud that big of an issue in Texas? I bring up Texas because this state passed a voter id bill.
     
  5. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #5
    In most states, non-driver IDs are not free. Even if the ID itself is free, you still need some sort of proof of identification such as a birth certificate, passport or utility bill. If you're poor, you most likely don't have a passport. You might not have your BC (and it costs to get copies of one). And if you're homeless, you certainly don't have utility bills. So they can't prove their identity, can't get an ID, and therefore, can't vote.

    This discriminates against poor voters who are overwhelmingly Democratic.
     
  6. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #6
    I'm not against requiring ID to vote (I've never been asked for ID in NY) but I am against trying to make it harder for large swaths of the population to vote. And let's be real here, this is about Republicans trying to disenfranchise elderly, students and minorities. You don't see Democrats passing these laws nor do you have any meaningful proof that voter fraud exists.

    Some of these laws don't allow student IDs as proof to vote but accept things like hunting licenses. And in many states, it isn't easy or free to obtain a photo ID. Why accept driver's licenses when they don't prove citizenship? We still have millions who were born at home and have no birth certificate.

    Why not make getting these photo IDs easy? Let people vote in 2012 with the stipulation that they need to obtain a photo ID to vote in subsequent elections and allow people to request them at polling places.

    I'd also point out that some of these laws have reduced early voting and stopped same day registration. We should be making it easier for more people to vote, not excluding people from voting.
     
  7. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #7
    Do you really want to increase the amount of ID-flashing we have to put up with in the modern world? Especially when, as Ugg demonstated above, the data indicates that it is unnecessary?

    I think the low amount of voter fraud is a credit to our nation - we should be proud to show it off rather than imply there is a problem by instituting an uneccessary clampdown.
     
  8. obeygiant macrumors 68040

    obeygiant

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Location:
    totally cool
    #8
    Actually the fee for getting a ID to vote is waived, so now whats the excuse?

    link
     
  9. yg17 macrumors G5

    yg17

    Joined:
    Aug 1, 2004
    Location:
    St. Louis, MO
    #9
    I listed out the so-called "excuses". You even quoted them. But apparently you didn't bother reading them.

    All of the things you listed are things that a homeless person probably isn't doing anytime soon. Except perhaps buying alcohol and tobacco, but I'm only 25 and can't remember the last time I was carded for buying booze.
     
  10. CalWizrd thread starter Suspended

    CalWizrd

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Location:
    NYC/Raleigh, NC
    #10
    Somehow, basing an argument on a lack of convictions for voter ID fraud seems rather tenuous to me. And for the arguments saying "Oh well, voter fraud isn't that big a deal", I don't buy that as a reason. "Oh well, how many people get killed by firearms with large capacity magazines? No big deal". I'll bet you folks would be all over that one.

    I would certainly be in favor of making it as easy/low cost as possible to obtain a valid photo ID. However, I don't think it is so terrible to verify a person's identity prior to allowing them to exercise their voting right (voting results are, after all, based on a count of votes, making it kind of important to make sure the count is real).
     
  11. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #11
    I don't see this as a compelling argument. There is plenty of evidence of under-age drinking or bank fraud, for example. But there is no evidence supporting the idea that we suffer from widespread voter fraud.

    In this country, one is innocent until proven guilty. What would you suggest would be a better way of tracking voter fraud? By tallying allegations or accusations rather than convictions? That's pretty tenuous.
     
  12. Peace macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #12
    Any government that requires a voter I.D. and charges for it is in essence creating a poll tax. This is unconstitutional.
     
  13. rdowns macrumors Penryn

    rdowns

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2003
    #13

    But that's the point, it is not easy for many to obtain these IDs. When I needed an original birth certificate to get a passport, I had to go to lower Manhattan (2 trains), wait in line for hours, pay a $30 fee and take 2 trains back home. Basically a whole day lost. Now explain to me how students in school out of town, the poor and elderly are supposed to do that?
     
  14. leekohler macrumors G5

    leekohler

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2004
    Location:
    Chicago, Illinois
    #14
    Bingo- and that is the biggest reason to oppose this kind of law.
     
  15. CalWizrd thread starter Suspended

    CalWizrd

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Location:
    NYC/Raleigh, NC
    #15
    I can't really give you an intelligent answer for that, as I really don't have one. However, on the other side of the coin, there are any number of reasons for not bringing charges even when a prosecutor has good reason to believe a crime has occurred. Most of them center on expense, rather than the pure pursuit of justice.
     
  16. mkrishnan Moderator emeritus

    mkrishnan

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2004
    Location:
    Grand Rapids, MI, USA
    #16
    Yes, at a minimum, this sort of thing should be evaluated on some kind of likelihood ratio in the sense of how many fraudulent votes are being cast now to how many legitimate votes are likely to be prevented with the new system. All evidence I have ever seen suggests that ratio does not favor enacting this kind of legislation.

    Plus, this is clear hypocrisy on the part of politicians who claim to want small government except they want to expand government's role in preventing people from voting, disrupting free speech, spying on its own citizens, preventing women from undergoing abortions, stopping gays from marrying, establishing religion, etc. God help us when we have a government big enough to undertake all the expansions of power they are advocating.
     
  17. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #17
    If we base judgments on accusations rather than convictions we will undo 500 years of hard-earned political progress. Ever heard of the Spanish Inquisition? Or the writings of Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn?
     
  18. CalWizrd thread starter Suspended

    CalWizrd

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Location:
    NYC/Raleigh, NC
    #18
    CAUTION: The following post will probably result in a flurry of indignant responses. You have been warned.

    I happen to believe that voting is, paradoxically, both a right and a privilege. Yes, it is every citizens right to vote. However, I firmly believe that exercising that right requires one to have some knowledge or opinion about that which they cast a vote. Satisfying that privilege means that one must invest some, no matter how minimal, effort.

    Blind, uninformed voting, whether cast by Republican morons or Democratic morons, is how this country got into the miserable state it is currently in. I really don't think it is too much to ask for the electorate to be willing to invest even the most minimal effort with regard to voting... and getting a damn valid photo ID should fall into that category.

    OK, fire away.
     
  19. Peace macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #19

    I could get a voter I.D. and still be clueless about the candidate.

    And if the government charged me for the I.D it would STILL be a poll tax which is unconstitutional .


    ;)
     
  20. Lord Blackadder macrumors G5

    Lord Blackadder

    Joined:
    May 7, 2004
    Location:
    Sod off
    #20
    And yet gun ownership should be a right? I'd rather have a vote than a gun. your views would never fly with conservatives.
     
  21. mcrain macrumors 68000

    mcrain

    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2002
    Location:
    Illinois
    #21
    Instead of people trying to defend the Justice Department trying to defeat an unconstitutional effort to disenfranchise voters, can you or anyone else explain why voter id laws are necessary?

    (edit) DO NOT start by pointing to voter fraud when that has already been debunked.
     
  22. Blue Velvet Moderator emeritus

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2004
    #22

    Would you then support a return to the literacy tests?
     
  23. CalWizrd thread starter Suspended

    CalWizrd

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Location:
    NYC/Raleigh, NC
    #23
    I think gun ownership is both a right and a privilege as well, but that's another argument altogether.

    As for whether my views would never fly with conservatives... I really couldn't give a crap whether they do or not. There are many views I hold which conflict with traditional conservative positions. I'm a thinking individual, not a member of a rigid position espousing group.
     
  24. Peace macrumors P6

    Peace

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2005
    Location:
    Space--The ONLY Frontier
    #24
    Boy. that sig of your's sure backs up that statement.

    Get real. Accept that you just don't like Obama and you will do whatever it takes to remove him. When you accept that you will feel much better. :)
     
  25. CalWizrd thread starter Suspended

    CalWizrd

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Location:
    NYC/Raleigh, NC
    #25
    It's not debunked to me... just not particularly subject to prosecution. My lack of faith in humanity tells me if voter fraud is easy (no photo ID makes it that much easier), then it will happen.

    As a resident of the State of Illinois... I'm curious if you think that voter fraud happens with great regularity in the city of Chicago.
     

Share This Page