Discussing American politics as civil human beings

Unfortunately, while Voter ID sounds great, it doesn't actually work that way in real life.

There are 2 problems with Voter ID laws:

• They are a deterrent to voting; if you are pro-democracy, you should be trying to make it EASIER to vote, not harder
• They are fighting a phantom menace - there's been no credible study or research showing that it is a problem at any significant scale at all
  • And what problems actually exist, aren't fixable by Voter ID laws, because the fraud is not at an individual voter level

The reality is that Voter ID laws have been crafted by Republican legistators for the express purpose of voter suppression - they have said so, publically.

This is especially damning when you see that many states with Voter ID laws have also decreased voting hours and closed or reduced hours at locations such as DMV offices where you can even obtain said IDs. In some states, the majority of such closings have been in counties and regions that mostly vote Democrat.

 

Incidentally, in Hong Kong and China, EVERYONE gets a government issued-ID when they are voting age. It is your identity card - free of charge. I have one, and I don't even live there anymore (and haven't since I was 10 years old).

In such a scenario, I would okay with Voter ID laws (though I'd still think it's largely an inefficient waste of money), because it would no longer be a deterrent to voting, nor would it more severely impact certain segments of the population.

 

No one said this. We are talking specifically about Voter ID laws right now, which is absolutely a Republican thing.

 

The thing is that you already register to vote (which is ridiculous and inefficient).

As a proponent of small, efficient government, why would you want time and money wasted on efforts that are not known to actually provide any benefits? And it seems very odd to me that you'd be ok with people attempting to prevent people from voting.

And what exactly do you disagree with? Do you believe voter fraud is a huge problem? Do you believe that voter ID laws without providing easy access to IDs are NOT a deterrent to voting?

~

If you want to do Voter ID, do it RIGHT and in such a way that doesn't DISENFRANCHISE people.

Provide everyone with a valid ID, free of charge, or allow the use of already issued IDs such as a Social Security card, and remove the registration process. Allow anyone to go to a voting booth as long as they have the government provided ID. Then take the money you save from no longer doing registrations to extend voting hours so everyone has more time and ability to exercise their democratic rights.

Changes should IMPROVE the system, not make it worse for no tangible benefit.

 

My understanding is that most do take "standard" photo ID such as Driver's Licenses, but obviously that has several hurdles if you do not already have one, and many states require frequent updating of these IDs as well (collecting fees each time). Arizona is nice, it basically lasts forever

 

I did not intend to assume anything about you, only replying based on what you said.

I am against the type of Voter ID laws (and other associated policies) currently being adopted and pushed in various parts of the US, because, the reality is that they are, in many cases, used in conjunction with making said IDs difficult to acquire (or not expanding access in any way) and am mostly arguing against that.

I have made it clear that I have no problem with Voter ID in general (other than the fact that I believe voter fraud isn't a legitimate issue), as long it is implemented in a way that is fair.

Thus, if you are supporting current Voter ID pushes (which you seemed to be), but agree with me that such IDs should be accessible, then saying "completely disagree" to most of my post wherein I outline such issues would give me the wrong impression of your stance.

 

Here are what aren't just hypothesis:

1. Introduction of friction in any process decreases conversion rates; this is true in all areas, thus why places like Amazon have one-click purchasing
   • For people who already have valid IDs (whatever is constituted as such), this isn't an issue, and clearly not a friction point, thus having no effect on that segment of the population
   • But for people who do not already have IDs, it introduces yet another friction point, besides mandatory registration, limited voting hours, and other existing hurdles
2. Voter Fraud hasn't been shown to be a real problem
   • You can argue that you do not believe it's been properly accounted for, and that's fine, but I would say, "There is cool and nifty hypothesis from DJ, and then there is the reality of how these things have currently been investigated, studied and researched"
3. Republican politicians have said that such laws are designed to give their party an edge

~

But I think at the heart of it, I see voting as a right (15th Amendment: "The right of citizens of the United States to vote..."), and you see it as a privilege, thus there'll always be a divide between us on this issue.

~

Also, I agree that it sucks that some people can't be bothered to do X or Y (heck, even people with IDs might not bother to vote, or they might vote without actually finding out anything about the candidates or issues).

Personally, I think low-information voting and the voting system itself is a far bigger problem than any fraud that might currently exist.

~

Also, I do see the irony in the fact that I would probably choose not to vote, combined with this stance

 

A bit of a tangent.

A friend of mine, about 15 years ago, had undiagnosed Celiac. She also had some back problems, thus was not working. She desperately wanted to do something with her life, but was basically bedridden 20+ hours a day. She was being told by doctors
she was making it all up, because they couldn't find anything wrong with her (the symptoms related to Celiac).

When she WAS diagnosed, she started to feel better, and wanted to goto school. Unfortunately, doing so at any reasonable pace would mean that she'd not receive certain benefits (i.e. she was not allowed to take more than X credit hours and still be considered disabled so she could receive medical benefits for her back issues).

Working would also be the same problem. If you can work, you aren't disabled right?

She was also not able to save money, because her bank accounts were being monitored and if her savings exceeded a certain amount she would be cut off as well (which basically meant she was forced to spend the benefits she was receiving, even if she didn't need anything).

If you look at the individual aspects, it all kind of makes sense to prevent fraud and people taking advantage of the system, but as a whole, the systems appears to be designed to keep you in it.

Anyway, she ended up marrying a guy who had money and a good job with good medical benefits. PROBLEM SOLVED.

 

Sample sounds so dirty.