Voter I.D. Law

Post Reply New Topic

My state recently passed a law requiring all registered voters to present a photo I.D. upon voting in any election. The new voter I.D. law was put in place to prevent voter fraud. Anyway, what are your opinions on such a law? As for me, I'm personally in favor of it. My town had a list of all the registered voters in the town at every election, but there was no way of knowing if someone was who they really said they were. With the new law, a photo I.D. has to be properly matched up to its holder. I'll include a poll for general yes/no answers, but more detailed input can be in the form of a reply.

The only way I could support such a law that demands picture I.D. is if the state shoulders the cost for voters.
The fact of the matter is, voter fraud more often than not is used as a pretext to disenfranchise blacks, the poor, the elderly, etc. in order to keep liberal candidates from getting elected. Very often, these voters are not able to acquire proper picture I.D. for financial reasons (which amounts to a poll tax - which became illegal with civil rights legislation), while in many cases, licensing departments have been closed down in poor areas (it's happened in Wisconsin). In Wisconsin, such I.D's are supposed to be available free of charge to the poor, but department of licensing workers had been told not to tell that to applicants. One such worker who had sent emails to his fellow state employees telling them to give poorer applicants this information had been fired.
Incidentally, voter fraud is in fact almost non-existent. And when it has happened, it's been committed by private firms hired by state level Republican leaders to register voters, who then destroy registrations to vote Democrat.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Considering you need a picture ID to work and do just about anything else important in life, I seriously doubt people do not have a picture ID.

In my state, you are required to have a picture ID on you at all times. If you are not a licensed driver, a walking ID can be had for $5. Sorry, but there is no reason not to have some form of ID unless you are doing something illegal, like voting multiple times. It's important to the legitimacy of the process that all people legally allowed to vote vote only once. The way to ensure that outcome is by an official form of identification presented at the time of voting. The same should also be true of anyone having dealings with the government, including heath clinics, food stamps, tuition assistance, and government housing.

You'd be surprised that there are many people without it.
One case includes an elderly black lady who found she had to apply for proper I.D. in order to vote - after a lifetime of voting. As she was elderly, she had not had a drivers license for years, and was told she was not eligible because she could not produce her marriage certificate! Going on MSNBC got the bureaucratic wheels greased for her.
Another case involved the father of TV money consultant and personality, Jim Cramer. Cramer's father had been forced to jump through so many hoops - including finding the licensing office miles away having been closed on the only day he could get a ride - had almost discouraged him from getting proper picture I.D. (I think he hadn't driven for years, as well, and had allowed his license to expire). Going on TV and bitching about his father's travails had gotten the process sped up for his Dad. Sadly, most people don't have a famous son like Jim Cramer.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

In order that the cost of obtaining an I.D. not be construed as a poll tax, the government would have to provide photo I.D.s to everyone at no extra cost. The total cost of the program would be borne by the total tax base, not the people getting the I.D.s.

There is nothing wrong with requiring people to prove that they are who they say they are at the polling place when their names are checked against the registration lists. And there is nothing wrong with registering would be voters carefully to make sure that no illegal alien ringers or convicted felons are registered.

In Boston, Chicago and New York it is said the dead vote early and often.

ruveyn

Many states that require an ID to vote also make it possible to get a photo ID for free... This is just a red herring to divert attention away from people voting multiple times in an election. Heck a Democrat was even caught on video recently giving instructions on how to cast a fraudulent ballot (the son of a sitting elected official I might add).

I favor the law, too. Especially after I visited my local polling place on election day and discovered that someone had already voted for me.

I'm not a fan of having government issues photo IDs for every little thing but voting seems one of the few things where it actually is applicable. I'm not sure how much fraud on a grand scale happens but after this GOP primary season, I have to say it certainly is not a myth. The argument that is disenfranchises people is pretty laughable to me. Canada has voter ID laws, are they disenfranchising people there? People that don't have an ID probably don't have IDs because they don't need them so if they did they would.

Just election year politics and fear mongering for the most part.

Isn't that where the same people who are currently against voter I.D. laws threatened to take themselves if California's Proposition 8 was passed a few years back?

^^ That's CRAZY!

I'd never had a problem voting until the 2008 election. I didn't vote in the primary so I was dropped from the rolls. I had received and cast a midterm mail-in ballot in 2006, but apparently that wasn't enough to prove I wasn't an inactive voter. (I cast a provisional ballot) This time around I made sure to vote in the primary even though, as a Democrat, the main nominee was already chosen. I totally valued the opportunity to vote for the nominee for chancellor of my local state University that I will never attend.

I don't support the voter ID laws. I used to live in Pennsylvania and yeah, even though you can get a "walking" license from the state the DMV is always ridiculously packed, PT isn't guaranteed from everywhere, and it does cost. ($9 in 2000, so I'm assuming more now) That might not seem like a huge deal unless you're disabled or elderly and have to rely on SEPTA or some shady cab driver who never shows up to get you to the office. Or if you can't afford the cost. Being poor doesn't make you a non-citizen just persona non grata.
I think signing the big book was working just fine. Obviously Fnord was able to pick out a fraud and if MORE PEOPLE FRIGGIN' VOTED... it wouldn't be a problem. Self correcting. All I'm sayin.

Agreed.

That's why I favor voter I.D. laws -- because of all the crazy people stealing other people's votes.

^^
We need more sharp eyed citizens to volunteer at polling places. Since the big book has your signature pre-printed for comparison, maybe we just need younger, sighted volunteers.

^^ That wouldn't help. There is no verification at all in California, other than the voter's own word.

"Yep! That's me!" is all the verification needed. No one looks at my I.D. when I show it, either; they act instead like I'm trying to insinuate that they are either incompetent or outright dishonest.

There have been more Republican activists caught destroying voters registrations after asking people what party they would vote for - while this dumb kid had only been talking about it.
And I reiterate: even when I.D. cards are free, department employees are instructed not to tell applicants that fact - under pain of firing. Not to mention again how Department of Licensing offices have been closed down in more impoverished areas - officially for budget cuts - making it more difficult to get proper picture identification. And, no, it's not a red herring. This is all being directed at places where there are more Democratic voters. If this wasn't so, why haven't offices in upscale Republican areas been closed down?

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

<*COUGH*>conspiracy theory<*COUGH*>