[subego]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

More evidence that the left wants to enslave minorities to keep patronizing them for their votes. What person in their right mind would want to continue a policy that allows such a disproportionate number of minorities to not have the same tools that "white Americans" have, which many employers require just to accept an applicant for a job?
Again, if the ID's are free and you just have to show reasonable documentation, then there's no excuse for this kind of disproportionate lack of ID unless people just really aren't that interested in voting and those in charge want to keep them from accessing the same things that "white Americans" do. I have to show my BIRTH CERTIFICATE now just when I renew my license due to new government regulations. To suggest that I have to do this to remain a productive citizen but someone who wants to vote should be able to just walk in and do it - EVEN ILLEGALLY, without any evidence that they are legally eligible to do so is insulting and pathetic.
The only way I can see this stopping anyone who legally has the right to vote, is for some who have NO INTENTION of voting and have no interest in doing so and have no plans to do so. The Democrats round them up at the last minute with their big VOTE DEMOCRAT buttons on their shirts and their van with a picture of their chosen candidate, offers to take them to the voting place and gives them cigarettes and other niceties in order to secure their vote. They register them at the last minute if they aren't already and the chances of them voting Republican are slim. This has happened in the past with the homeless and mentally challenged - groups probably least likely to provide a valid ID. The Democrats choose to take advantage of the vulnerable for political gain without a care if they have the tools necessary for being productive citizens. I see nothing wrong with stopping this sort of vote bribery.

The first term of your proof is "if IDs are free".

IDs aren't free.

[The Final Dakar]

I'd like to see our system move to a place where everyone can register same day if it suits their fancy, and IDs are free. Zero impediment.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Ugh. Maybe it's because the latter can be achieved through legal means that irks me so.

It took a while for it to settle, but the reason i despise it is it's an obvious abuse of power. Not unlike redistricting, an also controversial matter that comes up every decade.

Originally Posted by OAW 

Eric Holder Dubs Texas Voter ID Law a ‘Poll Tax’ - ABCNews.com
OAW

No offense, but Holder isn't exactly at the top of my list for people who's opinion I care about.

[subego]

I've always thought it was a little jive you have to pay for an ID.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

I've always thought it was a little jive you have to pay for an ID.

[subego]

Golly.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by subego 

The first term of your proof is "if IDs are free".
IDs aren't free.

Then there's your solution.

However, I doubt that would placate the opponents to ID laws, since they really aren't likely all that worried about this aspect.

Though, in order to get my government issued ID which was required to hold my current job, buy alcohol or cigarettes, fly in a plane and to do many other basic life functions, I had to pay a fee.

Where are the charges of racism at convenience stores and airports?

[subego]

Little old ladies don't get carded for smokes.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

What if Bob is dead? A common practice in vote fraud, one which is historically noted in corrupt cities like Chicago, is for the dead to come out and vote Democrat. It would be pretty hard for Billy to vote for dead Bob if he didn't have Bob's driver's license or SS card.

If Bob is dead then Bob should be removed from the voter rolls. Most states already periodically scan their voter registration database and purge those entries that have a match in the death certificate database.

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Also, people would be much less likely to show up somewhere with a fake ID that could be inspected, where there are people who may actually care if they are here illegally and do something about it.

Stu I really think you are starting to let your imagination run wild here. Poll workers tend to be little old ladies looking for something to do so they can get out of the house. These people are by no means trained to "inspect" a "fake ID". Get real man! Even if a photo ID requirement was in place, all that would be done is the poll worker would check the name on the voter roll with the name on the ID to see if it matched. And then they would look at the person in front of them to see if they were the person on the ID. They aren't going to be examining it with a UV light like they are TSA or some kind of bouncer looking to keep underage kids out of the club.

And again, all that would accomplish is show that the person with the ID is most likely the person whose name is on the voter roll. It does not ... I repeat ... it does NOT in any way, shape, form, or fashion ensure that the person whose name is on the voter roll is actually ELIGIBLE to vote in the first place!

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Make ID's easy to get as long as you have the proper documentation, and it hurts no one but those trying to do something illegal. If we can make registration itself so easy, there should be no reason we can't take the extra step to ensure that fraud is not taking place and require some kind of free identification. The excuses not to do so make no sense and are obvious ploys to keep methods for fraud open and available.

I've already explained to you just above the fundamental issue with a Photo ID requirement. Earlier in the thread I went into even further detail. If you choose to ignore that then it's on you. All I will say here is to look into that part I bolded in your comment above. You see therein lies the rub. Sure a lot of these GOP controlled states instituting these requirements offer a "free" photo ID. What they do NOT do is offer free access to the supporting documentation you need to get that photo ID! That copy of your birth certificate is NOT free. That copy of your Social Security Card is NOT free. That copy of your Marriage License is NOT free. If you don't own a vehicle the cost to get to the umpteen different government offices you have to visit by public transportation to obtain all this supporting document is damned sure NOT free. If ... and I repeat ... IF you are even fortunate enough to have a bus or subway line drop you off in the general vicinity of one of said offices. And that's assuming you can take off work to even get to said offices which generally keep banker's hours. And again, this is assuming that such supporting documentation is even available. Care to guess how many former or current New Orleans would be hard pressed to produce a birth certificate or marriage license after Hurricane Katrina because the official copies were destroyed?

You see these are the types of things that real people deal with on a regular basis that in all honesty may not even occur to some of us around here. I'd venture to say that most of us around here are middle class or above. Most likely working a professional job. Probably own a vehicle or have some access to public transportation or ground service. So gathering up such supporting documentation if need be is little more than a hassle. An inconvenience at best. More than likely not even necessary at all because it's a safe bet that most of us already have drivers license. And it's all too easy to get caught up into thinking that it's like that for everybody. But it most certainly is not. Imagine a guy that's born and raised in the US of A, but he can't afford a car and his only options for a job are those that are located near a bus line that serves his neighborhood. Subject to the availability of a bus service that is always the first to be cut when the city is facing budget issues. He's not working a professional, corporate type salaried job where he can take a long lunch or leave a bit early one day to run an errand. No he works in a warehouse and punches a clock. For a company that is loathe to even give such employees time off to go vote let alone run around town gathering up supporting documentation for a Photo ID. My point here is that there are MILLIONS of people in such circumstances that live in the US. They may not live in your neck of the woods. But they do exist and they are US citizens. So when it comes to a matter of public policy involving a constitutional right like voting ... the question becomes does the policy disenfranchise more legitimate voters than it prevents illegitimate voters from voting? And given the statistics on voter impersonation ... which is the only thing a Photo ID would address ... the answer to that is a no brainer. Again, such cases are virtually non-existent when compared to the hundreds of millions of votes cast each election cycle.

OAW

[OAW]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

I'd like to see our system move to a place where everyone can register same day if it suits their fancy, and IDs are free. Zero impediment.

Well we now have GOP controlled states like Florida have getting rid of such policies where they were in place. Imagine that.

OAW

[OAW]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Though, in order to get my government issued ID which was required to hold my current job, buy alcohol or cigarettes, fly in a plane and to do many other basic life functions, I had to pay a fee.

Where are the charges of racism at convenience stores and airports?

The last time I checked the 24th Amendment to the US Constitution outlawed "paying a fee" in order to VOTE. It did not in any way cover "convenience stores and airports".

On another note, while such policies disproportionately impact minorities ... let's put aside this notion that it's rooted in "racism". Which, for the record, no one has even claimed other than some of our good friends on the right. Let me remind you of what I said from the very beginning with regard to this topic:

Originally Posted by OAW

When the reality is that it's all about "voter suppression" among key demographics (i.e. the elderly, the poor, college students, minority groups) that are more likely to vote for Democrats.

Do you know what these four different demographics have in common with respect to this issue? They are all less likely to own a car! And if they don't own a car, they are less likely to have the primary form of government issued photo ID .... a drivers license. So if you can systematically put your finger on the scales and prevent 3-5% of these key demographics from voting that are more likely to vote for Democrats ... you can sway a close election in crucial swing states with a seemingly "innocuous" photo ID requirement. On the surface it's quite "legal" (though the Justice Department is rightfully challenging them in federal court as a violation of the Voting Rights Act). But it is far from "above board".

OAW

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Do you know what these four different demographics have in common with respect to this issue? They are all less likely to own a car! And if they don't own a car, they are less likely to have the primary form of government issued photo ID .... a drivers license.

So the solution is just to come up with a system for a free ID card with proper identification. Again, problem solved.

Do you really think that would remove the opposition to the law from Democrats? I do not.

[ghporter]

Here in Texas, the records for election fraud include a startlingly small incidence of people attempting to fraudulently cast a vote at the poling place. And those records seem to indicate that such people get caught with current safeguards in almost all cases. On the other hand, almost all the confirmed election fraud (and a bunch of "really strongly suspected" fraud, including the infamous "ballot box 13" which miraculously appeared and put LBJ over the top for his 1948 senate race) has been done "behind the scenes" with shady absentee ballots and fake ballots that never saw a voter.

In contrast, we here in Texas have counties that are as large as several Northeastern states, and it can be exceptionally difficult to get to the one or two offices in such counties that issue state ID, whether it's free or not. Interestingly, the populations in such counties seem to be more heavily weighted toward non-white (and non-Republican) than any of the "smaller" counties with many ID offices. Further, the documentation required to apply for the state ID can be difficult and expensive to obtain - and the state police here have a nasty track record for discounting valid birth certificates signed by midwives (who are a very popular choice for low income and minority folks), especially in "certain areas" where some white guy in Austin figures non-hospital birth certificates are just a dodge to get an illegal an honest-looking birth certificate.

Make no mistake, I have been impacted by illegals here. My wife has actually cared for babies born in San Antonio to "visiting" mothers from south of the border who found a way to get themselves a legal way to enter the States by simply being here when that pesky 9 months is up. I pay extra for car insurance because Texas does not in any way offer driver licenses to immigrants who are not fully documented (and it's hard for well documented immigrants too) so the folks who come here to work their tails off to send money home to Mexico cannot get insurance. But... I am firmly convinced that the number of actual cases of illegals trying to vote in Texas is infinitesimal, especially compared to the number of people who vote overall. I do not feel that MY franchise is endangered by undocumented aliens attempting to vote here. In fact, I think CITIZEN voter apathy is a far bigger problem than anything else.

If the point is to make it simpler to manage elections through streamlining the ballot verification process, then I would think our Esteemed Legislature should have actually put up the money to have ID offices opened all over the place, or at least set up mobile ID issuing teams to go to the larger towns in those huge counties with only one office, just to show that they were "trying" to be inclusive. Oops, they didn't.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

So the solution is just to come up with a system for a free ID card with proper identification. Again, problem solved.
Do you really think that would remove the opposition to the law from Democrats? I do not.

We'll just note how you continue to ignore the inescapable fact that a "system for a free ID card" does NOT address the issue that the supporting documentation is NOT free as I pointed out above. And we'll just leave it at that.

OAW

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by OAW 

Well we now have GOP controlled states like Florida have getting rid of such policies where they were in place. Imagine that.
OAW

Florida has/had same-day voter registration?

[OAW]

ghporter has provided a specific example of what I've been trying to say in general. These Photo ID laws are attempting to solve a virtually non-existent problem. They will disproportionately impact people who tend not to vote for the GOP. And the assumption that many in the Fox News crowd make that the supporting documentation needed to get state issued Photo ID is a trivial endeavor for everybody just because it's easy for them is bogus. So when such things are pointed out time and time again and continue to be dismissed, is it any wonder why I said this way back in the beginning of this thread?

Originally Posted by OAW

When the impact of these Voter ID laws is explained, the only way to keep supporting them is to play dumb or simply be willfully obtuse.

OAW

[OAW]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Florida has/had same-day voter registration?

I believe I misspoke on that. When I cited Florida I was thinking of the curtailing of early voting and the voter purges that are taking place there. I don't believe they have same-day voter registration. But other states such as Maine and Ohio do and the GOP has attempted to eliminate it there. It was blocked by a "citizen's veto" in Maine. I'm not sure where it stands in Ohio.

OAW

[subego]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

So the solution is just to come up with a system for a free ID card with proper identification. Again, problem solved.
Do you really think that would remove the opposition to the law from Democrats? I do not.

You offer a solution the Republicans have no interest in following, yet somehow end up knocking Decocrats for hypothetically complaining about the policy you suggest.

A policy which doesn't even exist.

Good show. 8.7/10.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by subego 

You offer a solution the Republicans have no interest in following, yet somehow end up knocking Decocrats for hypothetically complaining about the policy you suggest.
A policy which doesn't even exist.
Good show. 8.7/10.

OAW

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by OAW 

I But other states such as Maine and Ohio do and the GOP has attempted to eliminate it there. It was blocked by a "citizen's veto" in Maine. I'm not sure where it stands in Ohio.
OAW

I would love to hear the justification for this.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar

I would love to hear the justification for this.

As I would love to hear the justification for this ....

When Floridians head to church on the Sunday before Election Day in November, they might hear sermons about voting. But unlike 2008, they won’t be able to head straight to the polls afterward.

In 2011, the state Legislature passed an election bill signed by Gov. Rick Scott that, among other changes, eliminated early voting on the last Sunday before Election Day.

Critics argued that the moves were partisan and that the Republican-controlled Legislature and Republican governor wanted to block Democrats and churches from geting out the vote. Dubbed "Souls to the Polls," Democratic-friendly groups sometimes bussed voters to election sites on that final Sunday.

And getting rid of that final Sunday affects minorities, said U.S. Rep. Corrine Brown, D-Jacksonville.

"Statistics show that in the 2008 general election in Florida, 33.2 percent of those who voted early on the last Sunday before Election Day were African-American, while 23.6 percent were Hispanic," Brown wrote in a June 15 press release.

Brown’s precise percentages caught our attention, so we decided to check out her numbers.

.......


Researchers examined the race of voters on the final Sunday

Brown’s spokesman said that the statistics about minority voting on the final Sunday came from the NAACP, and we found several researchers have cited similar statistics to Brown’s claim.

They arrive at those numbers by obtaining statewide early vote data and then matching voters’ information with registration records which list self-reported race and ethnicity.

Here is what professors and lawyers found for who voted early on Sunday Nov. 2, 2008

The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law:
• African-American: 33.2 percent
• Hispanic: 23.6 percent

The Brennan Center was focused on the impact of minorities and didn’t list a percentage for whites.

University of Florida political science professor Daniel A Smith and Michael Herron, professor of government at Dartmouth:

• Whites: 40 percent
• African American: 34 percent
• Hispanics: 24 percent
• Asian: 2 percent

"We find that Democratic, African-American, Hispanic, younger, and first-time voters were
disproportionately likely to vote early in 2008 and in particular on weekends, including the final Sunday of early voting," wrote the professors in a paper.

Justin Levitt of Loyola Law School:
• White: 37.2 percent
• African-American: 31.5 percent
• Hispanic: 22.4 percent
• Unknown: 5.1 percent
• Other: 3.8 percent

Levitt told us in an email that those percentages represent conservative estimates: Voters of unknown race or ethnicity were treated for purposes of this analysis as white.

The three sets of research reached similar conclusions for the turnout on the final Sunday of early voting: About one-third were black and about one-quarter were Hispanic.

That’s higher than their representation in the overall electorate that year: Blacks comprised 13 percent of total voters and Hispanics 11 percent, Levitt wrote.

'Souls to the Polls' Sunday drew high numbers of African-Americans and Hispanics - Politfact.com

Again, with very high turnout the lines at polling stations can be extremely long. A lot of people ... especially minorities ... don't work jobs that allow them to take off work on a Tuesday (which begs the question of why Election Day is in the middle of the week in the first place ... but I digress). So their opportunity to vote is often restricted to a window of a couple of hours that the polls are open before they have to be at work or after they get off. So early voting ... especially on a weekend ... is critical for a lot of people to be able to cast their vote. President Obama won Florida with 51% of the vote in 2008. President Bush won Florida by less than 600 votes in 2000 under a shroud of controversy ... including thousands of eligible voters being purged from the voting rolls in a state where his own brother was Governor. And he became President because the conservative majority on the Supreme Court chose to let such shenanigans stand. So is it really a surprise that the GOP is once again trying to suppress the vote among likely Democratic constituencies?


Another interesting read .....


Testimony at House Hearing on Restrictive Voting Laws - Brennan Center For Justice


OAW

[The Final Dakar]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electio...r_registration

Eight states have some form of Election Day voter registration: Idaho, Iowa, Maine, Minnesota, Montana, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Wyoming and Washington DC.

Seems to be all types of states, though perhaps more midwestern overall.

North Dakota, unique among the states, has no voter registration requirement at all

What?! How is this possible? And no one complains?

Voter turnout is much higher in states using Election Day registration than in states that did not. In the 2004 presidential election, voter turnout in same-day voter registration states was 12 percent higher than states that did not;[2] in the 2006 midterm elections, states with same-day voter registration had turnout rates 10-12 percent higher than in other states.

Considering how apathetic our system is, this seems like a good thing.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by OAW 

We'll just note how you continue to ignore the inescapable fact that a "system for a free ID card" does NOT address the issue that the supporting documentation is NOT free as I pointed out above. And we'll just leave it at that.
OAW

It's my experience that everyone is issued a birth certificate. Myself, and my children received one at no charge. I didn't have to pay for a social security card either. What more would be necessary?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by subego 

You offer a solution the Republicans have no interest in following, yet somehow end up knocking Decocrats for hypothetically complaining about the policy you suggest.
A policy which doesn't even exist.
Good show. 8.7/10.

Could you show me where they refused this middle ground, offered by the Dems?

[subego]

I'm not sure it's been offered by either side. AFAIK, the best that's out there is you get a "free" ID by paying for different documents.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by subego 

I'm not sure it's been offered by either side. AFAIK, the best that's out there is you get a "free" ID by paying for different documents.

I'm pretty sure that you only have to pay if you've went and lost the originals you got for free and that would be no one's fault other than those needing them.

[subego]

That would be a good point if the free copy of your birth certificate was distributed to you. It's distributed to your parents.

My parents lost mine BTW.

[stupendousman]

Then surely your parents would pay for the documents they irresponsibly lost, if you wished to vote and couldn't afford the VERY SMALL fee to get duplicates? I don't think it costs anything to get a duplicate SS card. Really, the excuses are getting absurd, given that there's a vast amount of things you can't do in life without a photo ID or a valid birth certificate.

- Most decent jobs require a photo ID and SS card.
- Air Travel
- Border crossing
- Purchase of alcohol
- Purchase of cigarettes
- Attendance to certain NAACP events
- Certain bank transactions
- A free birthday meal at selected eating establishments

,, and that's just off the top of my head, the things not paying a one time fee of maybe $15 after someone losing a birth certificate, that limits someone's opportunities in ways that far exceeds that cost. What's next? In order to be able to have the strength to go vote you have to be able to eat healthy, and without paying for groceries for less well to do voters, you are "taxing" them buy forcing them to pay for food?

These types of excuses are just further examples of the left enabling people to continue not to be able to succeed at life or have the things "the rich" have due to their own choices. If you can't invest in $15 so that you're going to be able to go get a job that requires a photo ID and a SS card or simply buy a six pack of beer, then you really aren't interested in being a productive member of society in the first place, and you surely aren't likely to be interested in taking the time to go vote. Especially since in most areas of the country you have to travel at least some distance away from your home, incurring gas expenses if you have a car (a poll tax on car owners?), bus fees, or expend the effort to walk to wherever the polling place is.

[ghporter]

I find I was inaccurate earlier when I said some Texas counties had only one office that could issue IDs. In fact, some counties have NO such offices. Lengthy wait times in the offices that are available in those areas are the norm. Can someone who is employed at minimum wage afford several hours off from work for travel to such offices, followed by several more hours of waiting? Probably not.

Further, the required documentation for an ID card is difficult for some to obtain - it can include certified birth certificate copies AND military records/school records/professional licenses/government issued immunization records/etc. (at least two from this list). A laborer whose family has not had a consistent address over time might have difficulty getting a birth certificate to begin with. The gist of the "required documentation" list is that the State of Texas prefers to have "reliable" documents to use for identification of individuals, reducing the burden on the state to investigate individuals' identity. The system is built around an urban and/or "established" family's ability to produce records. Not everyone can do that, despite being very much a "natural born Texan."

[stupendousman]

Most places require at least a birth certificate (which can be requested via mail) and another form of ID (a free government issued SS card being one) and you can get a photo ID at the same place everyone else gets their driver's license.

Going to the Texas link, it appears you just need your birth certificate, a SS card and you can also just provide GASP, your voter registration card. All documentation a person should have gotten free of charge, and already had in order to engage in all the normal activities productive Americans enjoy.

Not really that big of a burden for just about anyone unless you are REALLY looking to find one because you oppose the idea in the first place.

[subego]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Then surely your parents would pay for the documents they irresponsibly lost, if you wished to vote and couldn't afford the VERY SMALL fee to get duplicates? I don't think it costs anything to get a duplicate SS card. Really, the excuses are getting absurd, given that there's a vast amount of things you can't do in life without a photo ID or a valid birth certificate.
- Most decent jobs require a photo ID and SS card.
- Air Travel
- Border crossing
- Purchase of alcohol
- Purchase of cigarettes
- Attendance to certain NAACP events
- Certain bank transactions
- A free birthday meal at selected eating establishments
,, and that's just off the top of my head, the things not paying a one time fee of maybe $15 after someone losing a birth certificate, that limits someone's opportunities in ways that far exceeds that cost. What's next? In order to be able to have the strength to go vote you have to be able to eat healthy, and without paying for groceries for less well to do voters, you are "taxing" them buy forcing them to pay for food?
These types of excuses are just further examples of the left enabling people to continue not to be able to succeed at life or have the things "the rich" have due to their own choices. If you can't invest in $15 so that you're going to be able to go get a job that requires a photo ID and a SS card or simply buy a six pack of beer, then you really aren't interested in being a productive member of society in the first place, and you surely aren't likely to be interested in taking the time to go vote. Especially since in most areas of the country you have to travel at least some distance away from your home, incurring gas expenses if you have a car (a poll tax on car owners?), bus fees, or expend the effort to walk to wherever the polling place is.

You wanted an example of middle ground refused by the Republicans? You just made one. Along with a sweeping, bile filled attack at those who would suggest it.

Nice.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Really, the excuses are getting absurd, given that there's a vast amount of things you can't do in life without a photo ID or a valid birth certificate.
- Most decent jobs require a photo ID and SS card.
- Air Travel
- Border crossing
- Purchase of alcohol
- Purchase of cigarettes
- Attendance to certain NAACP events
- Certain bank transactions
- A free birthday meal at selected eating establishments

This list is head scratching considering the context of the conversation.

Most "decent" jobs. Why the qualifier decent? Should I assume this means that if we include all jobs, most of them no longer require ID?

Air Travel - The poor do this?

Border Crossing - Highly localized option, isn't it?

Purchase of alcohol - I haven't been carded in years

Certain bank transactions - That's if they even use a bank. But then again, you used the qualifier "certain"

A free birthday meal - Real outlier. BTW, I've gone out on a few guy's nights and we started telling the waitress that it's the same person's birthday every time. Over the course of the same year. At the same venue. He gets his cake without being carded. They don't know or care.

The only one of these I see coming up with any frequency is cigarettes and alcohol, the latter of which I don't see carding often. I'd make a supposition about the frequency of following the letter of the law in carding cigarette purchases in lower income areas, but it's irrelevant. In the day-to-day life most of those example don't apply or are extremely unlikely.


Edit: BTW, I really love this:

Then surely your parents would pay for the documents they irresponsibly lost

Yup, no irresponsible asshole people out there who might screw you over on that one...

[The Final Dakar]

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/07/13/...cism-at-trial/

Another judge, Robert Wilkins, questioned how it could be fair to require people in certain remote parts of the state to drive more than 100 miles to get a driver’s license in order to vote, while the rules of federal court say it is an undue burden to subpoena someone to travel that far to appear in court.

Heh.

[OAW]

^^^^^^

There is that.

OAW

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Most places require at least a birth certificate (which can be requested via mail) and another form of ID (a free government issued SS card being one) and you can get a photo ID at the same place everyone else gets their driver's license.
Going to the Texas link, it appears you just need your birth certificate, a SS card and you can also just provide GASP, your voter registration card. All documentation a person should have gotten free of charge, and already had in order to engage in all the normal activities productive Americans enjoy.
Not really that big of a burden for just about anyone unless you are REALLY looking to find one because you oppose the idea in the first place.

On top of the requirement to get all of this stuff together, you then might have to drive several hundred miles to wait several hours at the DPS office... The documentation issue isn't exactly horrendous (though it can be for many, as it takes MULTIPLE items that may not be available...for example it is far more common to register to vote in Texas while getting or renewing a driver license than going to some local county office to register), but putting that on top of the time out of work, the cost for gas, etc. makes it a problem.

Say you have a copy of your birth certificate and your Social Security card. You've never been in college, didn't keep your high school ID (if you got one), and aren't up to date on your vaccinations. You probably didn't keep the Selective Service card they sent you (if you bothered or knew about registering), and you've also never been in prison. That leaves other documents you're probably not going to have, like professional licenses, pilots licenses, DD214 or VA cards. What now? These are trivial for some of us (I can just show my retired AF ID, my passport, my OT license, etc. if I like) but for others of lower economic strata who haven't been able to get go to college, serve in the military, etc., the third or fourth item is going to be very hard.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by subego 

You wanted an example of middle ground refused by the Republicans? You just made one. Along with a sweeping, bile filled attack at those who would suggest it.
Nice.

Could you please show me where such a "middle ground" was offered?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

This list is head scratching considering the context of the conversation.
Most "decent" jobs. Why the qualifier decent? Should I assume this means that if we include all jobs, most of them no longer require ID?

I'm just not sure what the requirements are for lower rung jobs. I can only speak to the jobs I've held, and all of them required me to provide a photo ID and my SS card. You may be correct. You may need them for ANY job, which makes it inexcusable for any American not to have one unless they were born with some kind of disability which would prevent them from working.

Air Travel - The poor do this?
Border Crossing - Highly localized option, isn't it?
Purchase of alcohol - I haven't been carded in years
Certain bank transactions - That's if they even use a bank. But then again, you used the qualifier "certain"
A free birthday meal - Real outlier. BTW, I've gone out on a few guy's nights and we started telling the waitress that it's the same person's birthday every time. Over the course of the same year. At the same venue. He gets his cake without being carded. They don't know or care.
The only one of these I see coming up with any frequency is cigarettes and alcohol, the latter of which I don't see carding often. I'd make a supposition about the frequency of following the letter of the law in carding cigarette purchases in lower income areas, but it's irrelevant. In the day-to-day life most of those example don't apply or are extremely unlikely.

I'm well above 21, and have been carded often. It's the law where I live.

As to "do the poor do this?" Not likely if they are living off the public dole, not even attempting to be gainfully employed by investing in the one tool that is required - a photo ID. Again, we aren't talking about a large burden here - one that as responsible Americans they should not have already overcome.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by OAW 

^^^^^^
There is that.
OAW

It should be an undue burden on ANY CITIZEN to have to travel that far to get a license.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Say you have a copy of your birth certificate and your Social Security card. You've never been in college, didn't keep your high school ID (if you got one), and aren't up to date on your vaccinations. You probably didn't keep the Selective Service card they sent you (if you bothered or knew about registering), and you've also never been in prison. That leaves other documents you're probably not going to have, like professional licenses, pilots licenses, DD214 or VA cards. What now? These are trivial for some of us (I can just show my retired AF ID, my passport, my OT license, etc. if I like) but for others of lower economic strata who haven't been able to get go to college, serve in the military, etc., the third or fourth item is going to be very hard.

I already explained that the list seems to make it clear that a birth certificate (which was given free), SS card (which is free, even duplicates) and your voter registration card (which is free and is required to vote) is all that would be required to get a photo ID. All you should either already have, or can be gotten from filling out forms and sending them out in the mail, with only the duplicate for your LOST birth certificate possibly requiring a ONE TIME fee for a duplicate copy, and there are MANY instances where a birth certificate is legally required as identification that a person shouldn't be without one anyways.

[subego]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Could you please show me where such a "middle ground" was offered?

The post you replied to.

The post where I offered the middle ground of a free birth certificate, and then you excoriated it.



Not really sure how else one is supposed interpret the statement "you want an example... you just made one [with quote provided]".

[subego]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

As to "do the poor do this?" Not likely if they are living off the public dole, not even attempting to be gainfully employed by investing in the one tool that is required - a photo ID. Again, we aren't talking about a large burden here - one that as responsible Americans they should not have already overcome.

I'm curious. Would you rather these people didn't vote?

[OAW]

New laws in 10 states requiring voters to show IDs could present serious challenges to voters without financial resources and transportation, according to a report released Wednesday.

The study by the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law, which opposes the new laws, found several obstacles that could keep voters from being able to cast ballots, including limited access to offices that issue the IDs required under the new measures.

“The advocates of these laws kept saying we’re going to provide these IDs for free and that’s going to eliminate all of the problems,” said Keesha Gaskins, co-author of the report. “We found the ability to get documents isn’t that simple. The documents are costly for many, many voters and there are serious transportation barriers for many voters. We just found really significant problems.”

.....


Echoing the Justice Department’s argument that the laws are burdensome, the Brennan Center report found nearly half a million eligible voters in the 10 states do not have access to a vehicle and live more than 10 miles from their nearest state ID-issuing office.

In some areas, the offices that issue IDs maintain limited business hours. Rural areas in Alabama, Georgia, Mississippi, and Texas are served by part-time ID offices. And in an extreme example, the researchers found the office in Sauk City, Wis., is open only on the fifth Wednesday of any month. That would limit the office to being open just four days this year.

Voters who do not have their birth certificates or marriage licenses may have to pay additional costs because those documents are required to obtain a photo ID in some cases.

The report said birth certificates can cost between $8 and $25. Marriage licenses, required in some states for married women whose birth certificates include a maiden name, can cost between $8 and $20. “By comparison, the notorious poll tax — outlawed during the civil rights era — cost $10.64 in current dollars,” the report states.

Study finds costs associated with voter IDs - Washington Post

OAW

[The Final Dakar]

I've read a few articles on the subject but I can't quite understand the law.

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2012/07/18/...y-voting-days/

The campaign says the election-law changes made by Ohio’s Republican-controlled legislature and signed by Gov. John Kasich, a Republican, unfairly ends in-person early voting for most people on the Friday evening before Election Day — a Tuesday — but allows military and overseas voters to cast ballots in person until Monday, AP reported.

Sounds crazy right?


http://www.washingtonpost.com/politi...NtW_story.html

Before the changes to the law, local election boards had the discretion to set their own hours for such voting on the days before the election. And in-person voting on the weekend varied among the state’s 88 counties.

The state’s elections chief, Secretary of State Jon Husted, has argued that all counties should have the same early-voting hours and be open on the same days. Husted and his fellow Republicans contend it is unfair that a voter in one county can cast an early ballot on a day when a voter in a neighboring county cannot.

Sounds reasonable.

Officially confused.

[subego]

It looks like there are different rules for people in the military.

I'm guessing the rub is if you are keeping the early polling places open for the military, what is the purpose in closing them for everyone else.

[The Final Dakar]

Can't find info on that here. But here's what the law did before the (partial?) repeal:

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.ph...erendum_(2012)

• Reduce by mail absentee voting to 3 weeks. Current mail absentee voting window is 5 weeks.
• Reduce in person absentee voting to 2 weeks.
• Ban in person absentee voting on Sundays as well as Saturday after 12 noon.
• Ban in person early voting during the last weekend before an election takes place.



The question, as always, why?

[subego]

The only one I can spin is reducing in-person voting as a cost cutting measure.

I can't see a rationale for reducing mail-in voting or closing early voting on the weekend before the election (assuming you have early voting on other weekends). The last one is especially difficult for me to fathom other than straight-up voter suppression.

[OAW]

Originally Posted by subego 

I can't see a rationale for reducing mail-in voting or closing early voting on the weekend before the election (assuming you have early voting on other weekends). The last one is especially difficult for me to fathom other than straight-up voter suppression.

It is fairly obvious isn't it?

OAW

[subego]

These things can often be more complicated than they seem at first blush.

I also often naively assume politicians have better things to do than suppress voters.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

I already explained that the list seems to make it clear that a birth certificate (which was given free), SS card (which is free, even duplicates) and your voter registration card (which is free and is required to vote) is all that would be required to get a photo ID. All you should either already have, or can be gotten from filling out forms and sending them out in the mail, with only the duplicate for your LOST birth certificate possibly requiring a ONE TIME fee for a duplicate copy, and there are MANY instances where a birth certificate is legally required as identification that a person shouldn't be without one anyways.

I have to point out that not everybody has the opportunity to maintain all their "vital records" with them, nor does everyone value having such documentation readily available without some good reason. Up until recently, it did not require birth certificates to go to work doing manual labor just about anywhere. Further, a lot of low income families have little in the way of "formal documentation," nor do they have a family history of maintaining such documentation readily available. I did a study on rural South Texas families while in graduate school, and I found that there is a strong correlation between second- and subsequent generation low income and lack of parenting skills - which correlates to a lack of preplanning and maintenance of documents (these families basically needed hand-holding to work through the process of getting their children's birth certificates to enroll them in the program I was working with). While my study was focused on the striking lack of preparation for parenting in these multi-generation low income families, it brought to light a number of important issues that they needed assistance with, family documentation being one of them. A family where the parents need to be explicitly told that "keeping the kids up all night watching movies with mom" was a bad thing has other organizational challenges, with "where are the birth certificates stored?" being lower on the priority list than "did the kids get a nutritious dinner?" being much higher.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

The only one I can spin is reducing in-person voting as a cost cutting measure.

That would be my first assumption as well. Except that isn't mentioned in the article. They say things are unfair because different counties have different poll times/access. I'm fine with this, but when I present arguments like this about states you hear "but, but, states rights!"

What bothers me is you have two choices here: To expand voter access, or to limit it. And they chose the latter. I hear that Democrats supposedly took more advantage of this early voting, but I wonder how they determine that.

Originally Posted by subego 

I also often naively assume politicians have better things to do than suppress voters.

There is that old saying about people making sure they stay in power. However our system is supposed to be set-up so things aren't so easy to rig. (And to a certain degree, I guess that's true with the partial repeal and the injunction, whatever).