Should voters be required to show ID? (1 Viewer)

[dparker713]

I think letting felons vote on policies (or representatives who will enact policies) that affect the rest of us is inherently bad. After all, we're talking about people who, by definition, have shown disprespect for and an inability to live under the laws that the rest of us are expected to obey. It should be extremely easy to see why a person like me would argue for disenfranchising them on those grounds. You might not agree, but it's not a "ridiculous" position.

Guilty of insider trading? Sorry, but you permently lose your right to seek employment in the financial industry.

Guilty of bank robbery? Sorry, but you permanently lose your right to participate in governance.

The last two Presidents of the United States have both committed felonies. Should they be allowed to participate in governance?ETA: The last three actually. Forgot about that whole perjury thing.

What was Bush convicted of?

War crimes.

Not a felony.

 

[medium aristotle]

WOW

[Racine, Wisc...] A Racine County Sheriff's Department official confirmed to the MacIver News Service that it is investigating the discovery of discarded election-related documents in the city of Racine.

At issue are election registration forms and partisan political literature found in a dumpster behind the Cesar Chavez Community Center in the City of Racine.

Upon hearing the allegations, the MacIver News Service contacted the Racine County Sheriff's department to confirm that they were looking into the matter.

Captain Thomas Lamke from the Racine County Sheriff's Office responded to our inquiry and confirmed an investigation was ongoing. The department provided no other comment on the matter.

According to a source familiar with the allegations who wishes to remain anonymous, multiple voter registration forms were discovered, including mostly-blank forms that had been pre-certified by an election official

"There were some registration forms that were partially filled out, paperwork that could have possibly been used for same day voter registration," the source told MNS.

What concerns the person who spoke to MNS is "the fact that these documents aren't supposed to be signed in advance. "

The Cesar Chavez Community Center, located at 221 Douglas Avenue, is an official polling location in the City of Racine.

MacIver News Service will have more on this story as it develops.

Voter fraud doesn't happen... yeah right

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Voter fraud doesn't happen... yeah right

Can you quote somebody saying that voter fraud doesn't happen? If not, whom are you arguing with?

 

[medium aristotle]

Voter fraud doesn't happen... yeah right

Can you quote somebody saying that voter fraud doesn't happen? If not, whom are you arguing with?

Oh, apparently you've missed the argument that's been made throughout this thread against voter id because voter fraud is not an issue.

 

[pantagrapher]

"Hey, Breitbart. Come over here. You've gotta see this. This Dumpster is full of voter fraud!"

 

[medium aristotle]

"Hey, Breitbart. Come over here. You've gotta see this. This Dumpster is full of voter fraud!"

hey pantagrapher, your post makes no sense... but somehow you still manage to come off as a doosh. congrats.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Voter fraud doesn't happen... yeah right

Can you quote somebody saying that voter fraud doesn't happen? If not, whom are you arguing with?

Oh, apparently you've missed the argument that's been made throughout this thread against voter id because voter fraud is not an issue.

Can you quote someone making that argument?I know people have said that voter fraud of the type likely to be prevented by voter IDs seems not to happen very much. I don't think anyone has said that voter fraud doesn't happen.

 

[BoneYardDog]

You can't go and buy condoms without showing a drivers license to cash the check...

Isn't that odd you can't get laid without showing a drivers license but the country sure can get ####ed by letting illegals and felons vote without showing one...

 

[Ursa M]

You can't go and buy condoms without showing a drivers license to cash the check...Isn't that odd you can't get laid without showing a drivers license but the country sure can get ####ed by letting illegals and felons vote without showing one...

Some states issue drivers licenses to illegal immigrants and photo ID does little or nothing to stop felons voting.

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

You can't go and buy condoms without showing a drivers license to cash the check...Isn't that odd you can't get laid without showing a drivers license but the country sure can get ####ed by letting illegals and felons vote without showing one...

Wait, people are buying their condoms with checks now? Crazy world we live in.

 

[pantagrapher]

You can't go and buy condoms without showing a drivers license to cash the check...Isn't that odd you can't get laid without showing a drivers license but the country sure can get ####ed by letting illegals and felons vote without showing one...

WAT

 

[Jackstraw]

You can't go and buy condoms without showing a drivers license to cash the check...Isn't that odd you can't get laid without showing a drivers license but the country sure can get ####ed by letting illegals and felons vote without showing one...

Voting is pretty explicit in the consitution. Boner bags not so much.

 

[Rayderr]

You can't go and buy condoms without showing a drivers license to cash the check...Isn't that odd you can't get laid without showing a drivers license but the country sure can get ####ed by letting illegals and felons vote without showing one...

Voting is pretty explicit in the consitution. Boner bags not so much.

BYD's weird comparison aside, you're saying that if it's a constitutional right, we can't ask for ID from people looking to exercise that right?

 

[tommyGunZ]

We already knew why Republicans have become so enamored with voter ID laws recently, at least they're finally admitting it:

 

[Bamboo Bill]

You can't go and buy condoms without showing a drivers license to cash the check.

WHAT??

 

[IvanKaramazov]

You can't go and buy condoms without showing a drivers license to cash the check...Isn't that odd you can't get laid without showing a drivers license but the country sure can get ####ed by letting illegals and felons vote without showing one...

Voting is pretty explicit in the consitution. Boner bags not so much.

BYD's weird comparison aside, you're saying that if it's a constitutional right, we can't ask for ID from people looking to exercise that right?

I'm sure Jackstraw adamantly opposes background checks on gun buyers.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Edited.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

~Pa. House Republican Leader Mike Turzai speaks on June 23, 2012~

 

[IvanKaramazov]

It's pretty sad that Obama stands no chance of winning this state when the opportunity to cheat is taken away.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

You cant be that ignorant. You're just goofin', right?

 

[Rayderr]

I was going to ask you the same thing.

 

[BigSteelThrill]

Fair enough on some topics.But he is trying to act like the "allow Romney to win" wasnt about voter suppression. And he knows it.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

A little more detail on PA

More than 758,000 registered voters in Pennsylvania do not have photo identification cards from the state Transportation Department, putting their voting rights at risk in the November election, according to data released Tuesday by state election officials.

The figures - representing 9.2 percent of the state's 8.2 million voters - are significantly higher than prior estimates by the Corbett administration. Secretary of the Commonwealth Carol Aichele has repeatedly said that 99 percent of Pennsylvania's voters already had the photo ID they will need at the polls in November.

The new numbers, based on a comparison of voter registration rolls with PennDot ID databases, shows the potential problem is much bigger, particularly in Philadelphia, where 186,830 registered voters - 18 percent of the city's total registration - do not have PennDot ID.

They've got four months to get an ID. That shouldn't be a big deal, although one thing I've learned from this thread is that a visit to the DMV is apparently the equivalent of the moon landing for a large number of otherwise-capable voters.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

They've got four months to get an ID. That shouldn't be a big deal, although one thing I've learned from this thread is that a visit to the DMV is apparently the equivalent of the moon landing for a large number of otherwise-capable voters.

This should be an area where you, at least, would be doing the Cost-Benefit/Expected Benefit analysis and realize your position is wrong.

I was being sarcastic before -- shocking I know -- but in all seriousness, if there's one thing we ALL should have learned from this thread, it's that some of us assign radically different values to the "cost" side of getting an ID and the "benefit" side of improving public confidence in electoral results.

 

[Rayderr]

They've got four months to get an ID. That shouldn't be a big deal, although one thing I've learned from this thread is that a visit to the DMV is apparently the equivalent of the moon landing for a large number of otherwise-capable voters.

This should be an area where you, at least, would be doing the Cost-Benefit/Expected Benefit analysis and realize your position is wrong.

I was being sarcastic before -- shocking I know -- but in all seriousness, if there's one thing we ALL should have learned from this thread, it's that some of us assign radically different values to the "cost" side of getting an ID and the "benefit" side of improving public confidence in electoral results.

Of course, having an ID has benefits beyond just being able to vote.

 

[RCon]

They've got four months to get an ID. That shouldn't be a big deal, although one thing I've learned from this thread is that a visit to the DMV is apparently the equivalent of the moon landing for a large number of otherwise-capable voters.

This should be an area where you, at least, would be doing the Cost-Benefit/Expected Benefit analysis and realize your position is wrong.

I was being sarcastic before -- shocking I know -- but in all seriousness, if there's one thing we ALL should have learned from this thread, it's that some of us assign radically different values to the "cost" side of getting an ID and the "benefit" side of improving public confidence in electoral results.

I'm not sure why you would be comparing unlike things. If there's a million dollars in public funding, it doesn't matter why people's motivations are what they are. It only matters what's the highest-efficiency return that money could be put to. Here, instead of comparing outcomes, you're comparing process. You're viewing the "cost" of getting an ID in terms of how you perceive the difficulty (ignoring how others tell you how difficult it is for them) instead of properly viewing the social cost of the votes lost as a result. On the "benefits" side, the benefit is that you have a more accurate count of properly qualified voters making their choice.I understand others muddling this up. But not you.

I think IvanK was pointing out that different people assign radically different values to the two items I bolded above. You and I, for instance, assign very different values to the benefit in having more people vote in general; and an even greater difference in value to the benefit in having additional marginally motivated people vote.

 

[The Commish]

You're viewing the "cost" of getting an ID in terms of how you perceive the difficulty (ignoring how others tell you how difficult it is for them) instead of properly viewing the social cost of the votes lost as a result. On the "benefits" side, the benefit is that you have a more accurate count of properly qualified voters making their choice.

I understand others muddling this up. But not you.

Aren't the people telling us how difficult it is simply viewing "cost" from their own perceptions as well? It's all relative thus not very compelling and why I've had trouble empathizing with that position especially given the relatively easy solutions that could be implemented to help with their "difficulty". If they can get to a voting area, the problem can be remedied, but this has become a completely partisan issue so the hacks won't recognize that.

 

[pantagrapher]

A little more detail on PA

More than 758,000 registered voters in Pennsylvania do not have photo identification cards from the state Transportation Department, putting their voting rights at risk in the November election, according to data released Tuesday by state election officials.

The figures - representing 9.2 percent of the state's 8.2 million voters - are significantly higher than prior estimates by the Corbett administration. Secretary of the Commonwealth Carol Aichele has repeatedly said that 99 percent of Pennsylvania's voters already had the photo ID they will need at the polls in November.

The new numbers, based on a comparison of voter registration rolls with PennDot ID databases, shows the potential problem is much bigger, particularly in Philadelphia, where 186,830 registered voters - 18 percent of the city's total registration - do not have PennDot ID.

They've got four months to get an ID. That shouldn't be a big deal, although one thing I've learned from this thread is that a visit to the DMV is apparently the equivalent of the moon landing for a large number of otherwise-capable voters.

I understand the need to exaggerate, but really. Not everyone can just take a day off at will to go to the DMV. Some people work for low hourly wages and missing a day of work is a big deal. Some people don't have easy access to transportation (and even have to be driven to their polling place!). Some people don't have the supporting documents they need to get an ID. Sure, four months is nothing to us. We have good jobs. We can take a day off. It's no big deal. But there are people for whom it's no cake walk.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I'd quote the whole thing, but it's pretty long: The Dog That Voted and Other Election Fraud Yarns. As you'd expect from a Mother Jones article, it's pretty one-sided. But it gives a good run-down of the reasons for opposing voter-ID requirements (aside from just the fact that such laws tend to hurt Democrats).

 

[RCon]

I'd quote the whole thing, but it's pretty long: The Dog That Voted and Other Election Fraud Yarns. As you'd expect from a Mother Jones article, it's pretty one-sided. But it gives a good run-down of the reasons for opposing voter-ID requirements (aside from just the fact that such laws tend to hurt Democrats).

A decent summary of the reasons some people oppose these laws. The end, in which the article pretty much states that anyone in favor of voter ID laws is a racist, seemed more than a bit over the top.

 

[ericttspikes]

This isn't new. Republicans have been working at suppressing the vote for over 20 years. It's their not so secret strategy.

The Goo Goo Syndrome

 

[pantagrapher]

GOP lobbyist hired to publicize Pennsylvania voter ID law.

I confess I didn't see this coming. But I guess it shouldn't be surprising that they use their own ID law as a way to send a nice thank you to their friends.

 

[Rayderr]

This isn't new. Republicans have been working at suppressing the vote for over 20 years. It's their not so secret strategy.

The Goo Goo Syndrome

Worked at his cable network (NET) for 3 months. Guy was a total ****. Although he did say my name on air once. He'd close his show by mentioning 3 members of the crew (chosen by the producer. He had no idea who we actually were.) "I'd like to thank camera operator Bob Smith, Audio Operator Bill Jones and CG Operator Rayderr. I'll see you all next week."

 

[ericttspikes]

GOP lobbyist hired to publicize Pennsylvania voter ID law.

I confess I didn't see this coming. But I guess it shouldn't be surprising that they use their own ID law as a way to send a nice thank you to their friends.

$30k for a $240k job. That's how you do it. Nice return there. Thanks PA tax payers!Love the warm fuzzy tagline “Your right to vote: it’s one thing you never want to miss out on.”

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

Here's a story from the AP.

 

[parasaurolophus]

A little more detail on PA

More than 758,000 registered voters in Pennsylvania do not have photo identification cards from the state Transportation Department, putting their voting rights at risk in the November election, according to data released Tuesday by state election officials.

The figures - representing 9.2 percent of the state's 8.2 million voters - are significantly higher than prior estimates by the Corbett administration. Secretary of the Commonwealth Carol Aichele has repeatedly said that 99 percent of Pennsylvania's voters already had the photo ID they will need at the polls in November.

The new numbers, based on a comparison of voter registration rolls with PennDot ID databases, shows the potential problem is much bigger, particularly in Philadelphia, where 186,830 registered voters - 18 percent of the city's total registration - do not have PennDot ID.

They've got four months to get an ID. That shouldn't be a big deal, although one thing I've learned from this thread is that a visit to the DMV is apparently the equivalent of the moon landing for a large number of otherwise-capable voters.

I understand the need to exaggerate, but really. Not everyone can just take a day off at will to go to the DMV. Some people work for low hourly wages and missing a day of work is a big deal. Some people don't have easy access to transportation (and even have to be driven to their polling place!). Some people don't have the supporting documents they need to get an ID. Sure, four months is nothing to us. We have good jobs. We can take a day off. It's no big deal. But there are people for whom it's no cake walk.

If they don't have an ID how did they get a job legally?

 

[parasaurolophus]

If they don't have an ID how did they get a job legally?

What part do you not believe? That X people don't have IDs? Or that of all the people who don't have IDs, none of them have jobs?

How did they get a job legally without an ID?

 

[kutta]

GOP lobbyist hired to publicize Pennsylvania voter ID law.

I confess I didn't see this coming. But I guess it shouldn't be surprising that they use their own ID law as a way to send a nice thank you to their friends.

$30k for a $240k job. That's how you do it. Nice return there. Thanks PA tax payers!Love the warm fuzzy tagline “Your right to vote: it’s one thing you never want to miss out on.”

So Republicans get bashed for passing voter ID laws. Then they get bashed for making it public and telling people to go get an ID so they can vote? That seems weird. I would think you would be happy they are reminding people to go get an ID.

 

[RCon]

In any case, I've noticed the strong trend for the people pushing for IDs to continue to mischaracterize and misconstrue how a society should properly decide public policy. As far as public policy is concerned, it doesn't matter how easy or difficult it is to get an ID. What matters are the outcomes that are derived from your policies.

Of course it matters. You're the one that keeps telling us it's about cost versus benefit. If the only method for obtaining a valid ID was to fly to San Francisco and wait six hours in line, I wouldn't be advocating it.

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

So Republicans get bashed for passing voter ID laws. Then they get bashed for making it public and telling people to go get an ID so they can vote? That seems weird. I would think you would be happy they are reminding people to go get an ID.

The country clubs and symphony are sure to be plastered with these signs. Keep up the good work, guys!

 

[parasaurolophus]

If they don't have an ID how did they get a job legally?

What part do you not believe? That X people don't have IDs? Or that of all the people who don't have IDs, some of them have jobs?

How did they get a job legally without an ID?

Maybe they're working for someone who isn't fussy about the paperwork. Maybe they had an ID when they started and it expired. Maybe they used one of the I-9 IDs that was expired or non-photo. I'm sure there's all sorts of possibilities.

Now, other than trying to be a dogmatic #####, what's your point? Do you believe that X people don't have IDs? Or do you believe that everybody who lacks an ID is unemployed? Or do you believe that if someone IS unemployed and doesn't have ready access to go to the DMV and/or their foundational records (birth certificate, etc) that it's ok that we don't let them vote?

Try getting your head out of your rear for once and instead of snipping the posts above you might want to read them as well as the actual post. The post you snipped used an excuse that it was too hard to take off of work. Even if the employer isn't "fussy", it still makes it illegal. You know that little word I added up there LEGALLY. I understand reading comprehension has never been your strong suit because you are usually too busy trying to figure out how you can get yourself more of other people's money, but please just try.

Secondly the list you linked doesn't really provide any room for not having an ID that would work for voter ID laws. If you are standing up for the people that got their current job when they were still in high school and used their high school photo ID and their birth certificate and can't get off of work to go get an ID well, you kind of just shot your whole argument in the foot as that is a miniscule amount of people. Would love to see the data that shows there are more of those people than there are people that vote illegally.

If they are unemployed I see no reason they can't get an ID. You have yet to make a compelling argument about it being difficult or costly. An ID is required for tons of things in this world. Not having one is ridiculous.

I would have zero issues with these laws if they weren't free. The fact that they are free makes it even more absurd to argue that it is difficult.

 

[RCon]

In any case, I've noticed the strong trend for the people pushing for IDs to continue to mischaracterize and misconstrue how a society should properly decide public policy. As far as public policy is concerned, it doesn't matter how easy or difficult it is to get an ID. What matters are the outcomes that are derived from your policies.

Of course it matters. You're the one that keeps telling us it's about cost versus benefit. If the only method for obtaining a valid ID was to fly to San Francisco and wait six hours in line, I wouldn't be advocating it.

It doesn't matter if it only requires a phone call. That's not how you measure outcomes and judge policy.Say you're trying to decrease the number of highway accidents. You have two proposals. Each costs $2MM to implement.

Proposal A: You can retrofit 100,000 cars, moving the brake pedal 1/4" to the left, and prevent 10,000 deaths.

Proposal B: You can install more guardrails at dangerous curves and prevent 500 deaths.

It doesn't matter how easy or how trivial it should be for someone to move their foot over. It doesn't matter that the mountain roads are extremely dangerous and even safe drivers can have problems. All that matters are the outcomes. And Proposal A has superior outcomes.

In the Voting ID arena, you essentially have to custom-build your model specifications for what you want out of a voting outcome to even come close to a positive public policy event.

I really have no idea what you're trying to say here. The positive event is that we know that voters are who they claim to be. That's plenty positive enough for me to make it worth a phone call, not positive enough to make it worth a trip by every citizen to San Fran.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I don't think I've ever shown anyone my ID to get work.

 

[parasaurolophus]

I don't think I've ever shown anyone my ID to get work.

It was probably not memorable to you because you have an ID and have been asked to show it countless times in your life. It's the law.

 

[Wrighteous Ray]

I don't think I've ever shown anyone my ID to get work.

It was probably not memorable to you because you have an ID and have been asked to show it countless times in your life. It's the law.

I think Maurile works for his dad's law firm or something. So they didn't really need to confirm his identity when he started there.

 

[humpback]

I really have no idea what you're trying to say here. The positive event is that we know that voters are who they claim to be. That's plenty positive enough for me to make it worth a phone call, not positive enough to make it worth a trip by every citizen to San Fran.

What I'm getting at is that you're mixing and intermingling the nuisance/value decision of an individual, which is a question of micro-economics, and the sum effects of everyone responding to that policy, which would be a question of macro-economics/public policy. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter one whit why the public make the choices which they do or what they decide on. What society cares about is maximizing its own social goals.So let me try a different tact. If the IRS spent $5,000,000 collecting on a $100 debt owed by someone evading taxes, would this be a good use of the public's time/money?

Your analogies are completely flawed. What you can't seem to admit is that there isn't one set of values for the pro's and con's of requiring ID. Your values aren't better than someone else's.

 

[humpback]

I really have no idea what you're trying to say here. The positive event is that we know that voters are who they claim to be. That's plenty positive enough for me to make it worth a phone call, not positive enough to make it worth a trip by every citizen to San Fran.

What I'm getting at is that you're mixing and intermingling the nuisance/value decision of an individual, which is a question of micro-economics, and the sum effects of everyone responding to that policy, which would be a question of macro-economics/public policy. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter one whit why the public make the choices which they do or what they decide on. What society cares about is maximizing its own social goals.So let me try a different tact. If the IRS spent $5,000,000 collecting on a $100 debt owed by someone evading taxes, would this be a good use of the public's time/money?

Your analogies are completely flawed. What you can't seem to admit is that there isn't one set of values for the pro's and con's of requiring ID. Your values aren't better than someone else's.

Well, yah, I think they are. But even if someone wants to use their own values, I expect them to have consistent values between the costs and the benefits expressed in some form of voters or votes. And if someone is trying to frame the costs as a personal cost on the individual, then they're just not doing the public policy right. That's not a matter of opinion.

No surprise that you'd think so, but they aren't. It absolutely is an opinion, just like the number of people who will be unable to vote because of ID laws is only an opinion. The entire debate is filled with opinions.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

I don't think I've ever shown anyone my ID to get work.

It was probably not memorable to you because you have an ID and have been asked to show it countless times in your life. It's the law.

I think Maurile works for his dad's law firm or something. So they didn't really need to confirm his identity when he started there.

Yes, but I've also worked at a grocery store, a summer camp, a high school, a deli, a private golf & tennis club, and a mortgage company. Now that I think about it, I do remember the mortgage company photocopying my license. I don't remember anyone else ever wanting to see any ID. (Maybe the grocery store did; that was during high school, so I can't remember that far back.) It's possible that some of the other places did and it just didn't make an impression on me. In any case, now I'm self-employed and I'm quite sure that none of my clients have ever asked to see any ID, and neither have Joe and David. It's certainly possible to make a living without having ID.

 

[pantagrapher]

I don't think I've ever shown anyone my ID to get work.

It was probably not memorable to you because you have an ID and have been asked to show it countless times in your life. It's the law.

I think Maurile works for his dad's law firm or something. So they didn't really need to confirm his identity when he started there.

Yes, but I've also worked at a grocery store, a summer camp, a high school, a deli, a private golf & tennis club, and a mortgage company. Now that I think about it, I do remember the mortgage company photocopying my license. I don't remember anyone else ever wanting to see any ID. (Maybe the grocery store did; that was during high school, so I can't remember that far back.) It's possible that some of the other places did and it just didn't make an impression on me. In any case, now I'm self-employed and I'm quite sure that none of my clients have ever asked to see any ID, and neither have Joe and David. It's certainly possible to make a living without having ID.

Your employment history is just one big illegal outrage of rampant voter fraud.

 

[humpback]

GOP lobbyist hired to publicize Pennsylvania voter ID law.

I confess I didn't see this coming. But I guess it shouldn't be surprising that they use their own ID law as a way to send a nice thank you to their friends.

$30k for a $240k job. That's how you do it. Nice return there. Thanks PA tax payers!Love the warm fuzzy tagline “Your right to vote: it’s one thing you never want to miss out on.”

So Republicans get bashed for passing voter ID laws. Then they get bashed for making it public and telling people to go get an ID so they can vote? That seems weird. I would think you would be happy they are reminding people to go get an ID.

You would think that would be the case, but not when you consider the source of the bashing.