Voter I.D. = Disenfranchising?

[dreadfulpenny81]

Wisconsin recently passed legislation requiring voters to present I.D. when voting. Starting in 2012, Wisconsin voters will be required to produce a state-issued photo I.D. or other acceptable form of photo I.D. when voting. This is nothing that's unheard of and it's already being done in several states. Here's a map from 2008 discussing I.D.

Comments

[udoswald]

And if they want to vote, they can get one.

I know some states provide these forms of ID free to try to stop the controversy, though cost is hardly the only hurdle that this new requirement presents to perfectly legal voting. However, not every state does provide it free. I know NJ charges an amount that, while probably not that much for most people, is prohibitively expensive for someone living off welfare or who has a lot of kids and a small amount of income.

Also, some people (mostly the elderly) have no way of getting the proper forms in order to even get these forms of ID (not everyone has a birth certificate).

These unnecessary impediments against voting (voter fraud is extremely rare if not non-existent and is not a problem in any stretch of the term) are designed for one thing and one thing only, to keep people from voting. They're slightly more inventive versions of the poll tests and taxes that were instituted to keep African-Americans from voting. If you want evidence of this, just look at which states are instituting these laws and which ones are not. I think even you could recognize the pattern.

[udoswald]

I know of no proponents of an ID requirement who want to put up roadblocks that actively keep people from getting a voter ID. This concern is valid, but doesn't really mesh with what people are looking for.

The ID requirement itself is the roadblock. The very act of forcing people to obtain the ID is a roadblock. The laws are designed for one purpose, to stop likely Democratic voters (the poor elderly, poor people in general, minorities) from voting. If that wasn't the motivation, why did they wait until now? Why didn't they institute these laws decades ago? Why is it just happening in GOP controlled states? You may live a life of leisure and wealth and consider having to take off work and find transportation to an ID issuing center and forking over money to be relatively easy but not everyone lives the life you live.

And no, NJ shouldn't charge.

Personally, I have no problem with NJ charging. They have to generate revenue to run the MVC centers. However, NJ also doesn't have an absurd voter ID law, if they did I would feel differently.

Why isn't identification necessary? Why do you doubt the scenario I outlined elsewhere here?

Voter identification isn't necessary because there is absolutely no evidence that voter fraud is a problem. You can't just say "well, I totally think it's probably a problem though I have no evidence of that so we should totally overreact anyway." Creating unnecessary impediments to stop people from exercising their constitutional rights, based on nothing but wild speculation, is absurd. Also, as I said before, it's abundantly clear that the motive here has nothing to do with stopping voter fraud.

I'm not sure what "scenario" you're referring to. Regardless, I think I've addressed your comments in the previous paragraph.

Some states appear to be more serious about secure voting. I think this continued attempt to make it about race is the bigger problem.

It's not solely about race, though it certainly is partially about race, it's just that African-Americans are a voting block that almost exclusively votes Democratic so they're an obvious target for anti-Democratic voting laws.

This isn't about "secure voting" and never has been. Voting in New Jersey (without a law) is just as secure as any state with or without these laws. There is absolutely no evidence that voter fraud is a problem in any of the states regardless of whether or not the state has a anti-Democratic voting law (I'm going to start calling the Voter ID laws this from now on, it's far more accurate for those who may not know everything about the issue). NJ requires a voter to sign their signature as it appears on the registration book. This method is secure and yet doesn't provide a serious impediment to voting.

[udoswald]

I'm sure that's for the best.

[mrbogey]

Thanks for reminding us all how LJ isn't the only thing that can eat it.

[udoswald]

Another county heard from.

[udoswald]

Is registering to vote a roadblock?

Yes, unfortunately it's an unavoidable roadblock. Requiring ID is a roadblock that is avoidable.

No, they're designed to decrease the possibility of fraud.

But there is absolutely no evidence of fraud. This is a non-issue created by Republicans to justify something they want to do for nefarious purposes. They're claiming to solve a problem that doesn't exist to accomplish a goal that has nothing to do with that non-existent problem in order to increase their chances in future elections.

Like Washington, Delaware, CT, Rhode Island, Hawaii...

Those states have had Republican Governors/Legislatures in the past/present.

The Republicans have always been more serious about secure voting.

Bull. The Republicans have always been more serious about disenfranchising voters from the other party. There, I fixed your sentence for you.

We could say the exact same thing about voter registration.

Except that there's no way to avoid the necessity of voter registration. The fact that there are unavoidable impediments to voting doesn't justify creating unnecessary impediments.

There are absolutely ways to get the IDs to people of limited means. We do it for everything else, after all.

There is not a single other case where someone is required to get an ID in order to exercise a constitutional right. There is absolutely no reason to create this new and extremely expensive rule (this isn't cheap for states that enact it, especially the ones who try to dodge the issue by making the ID free) since fraud is a completely non-existent problem. It's funny how your supposed small government, more freedom, ideals go bye-bye when the big government, less freedom, laws benefit the Republicans or yourself in some way.

But now you're just making this a racial issue when it clearly is not.

Just because you don't want to admit it, doesn't mean it's not a racial issue. It's clearly a racial issue. This disproportionately affects racial minorities. That much is extremely clear. Furthermore, beyond this, it's abundantly clear that it's designed to disproportionately affect racial minorities. That makes it a racial issue.

I disagree completely. There is nothing secure about me being able to go to my polling place, assert I'm someone I'm not, and then vote.

Unless you sign your signature with an X, and maybe you do, I don't see how it's not secure.

Have you perhaps heard of fake IDs? They can be quite convincing. A person determined to commit fraud could produce a fake drivers license with your name on it just as easily as they could forge a reasonably good signature. It's not like they're going to have police officers reviewing peoples' IDs. It's going to be the same retired people who currently review your signature on the book. They're not likely to be able to spot a reasonably good fake.

This is a solution in search of a problem designed to accomplish a covert goal.

[udoswald]

Why not just issue the ID when they register, then?

Because currently voter registration is free and issuing a useless ID would either cost the registrant money, discouraging the very act of registration, or create a huge, unnecessary and expensive waste of taxpayer money.

Because, again, this type of fraud has not been investigated.

Yes, it has. There have been investigations, they've yielded no evidence of fraud. Several states with partisan Republican administrations investigated ACORN in order to destroy that innocent and necessary service. They found NOTHING. Even if it hadn't been investigated, suspicions without evidence are still just suspicions. You can't just declare that lack of evidence is evidence in itself and do what you want anyway.

How? Are minorities less capable of registering to vote and getting an ID?

Minorities are more likely not to have sufficient documentation to obtain an ID. They are more likely to be in poverty and therefore less likely to be able to travel to a regional center to obtain the ID. As it is, it's hard enough on those groups to register at all (ACORN used to alleviate that somewhat but we all know what your fellow travelers did about that). Either way, I doubt they'll let the kinds of registration organizations who go door to door in poor neighborhoods registering voters branch out into issuing these IDs too (especially since the whole point is to prevent such voters from voting in the first place).

How so?

See above. I suppose you think poll taxes and tests weren't aimed at minorities either.

I don't sign anything when I vote.

Good for you.

The barrier to entry in making a useful fake ID is much higher than simply going to a polling place and stating someone else's name.

Obtaining a fake ID is not difficult, especially if you are determined enough. Every college student with some ambition to get plastered before his/her 21st has a source for a fake ID.

I'm sure you could figure all this out on your own. Unfortunately, it's easier for you to continue to believe the lie since it serves your purposes.

[udoswald]

It can still be free and reduce the probability of fraud.

There would have to be evidence of fraud before you could actually launch an effort to stop it. Since there is absolutely no evidence of fraud, trying to prevent it is like trying to prevent unicorn infestations.

Prove it, then. I want proof that this type of fraud has been investigated.

I don't need to prove a negative (that there's no fraud). The obligation is on you (and those of your cohort in government who are passing these laws) who claim there is fraud.

So, in other words, no, they're not less capable.

I sympathize with you because I know your mental block caused by your ideological extremism prevents you from reading things with an eye towards comprehension, so I will repeat for you.

Obviously minorities are not less capable due to their being minorities, to suggest otherwise would be racist. I'm sure there are rich minorities who would have no problem taking off work to jump through a bunch of unnecessary hoops so they can vote.

The problem arises because minorities are more likely to be adversely affected by these laws, and the laws are designed to adversely impact minorities, due to their higher numbers among those who are poor and who have inadequate forms of documentation (birth certificates for instance).

So no, they're not "less capable" and I never said they were. I'm sure if they were all wealthy, and had jobs where they could take vacation days, they'd have no more difficulty than you do. Unfortunately, they are not any of those things. Therefore, these factors that are largely beyond their control prevent them from exercising their rights (and, as I've said previously, the law is designed so the factors prevent them from exercising their rights).

Seriously, if you want to know the particulars why don't you just go get some Republican state legislator drunk and I'm sure he'll tell you all about it (or you could ask your buddies the Koch brothers who write all the legislation anyway).

[udoswald]

What I'm asking you to do is prove your assertion that such fraud has been investigated...

The Justice Department has resources devoted non-stop to investigating voter fraud. Are you suggesting they just sit on their hands? Several states launched witch hunts against ACORN to try to prove voter fraud, they uncovered nothing (though they still destroyed ACORN anyway). Are you suggesting they didn't really want to find fraud? Your argument has no basis in fact and is nothing but a fantasy designed by you to excuse your support for these heinous actions by your favored party.

...preferably without being rude about it.

I find that extending courtesy to those who don't deserve it is nothing but a waste of time. I will stop being rude when you start making coherent arguments.