Yup. Through legislation or otherwise. It becomes a new way of gerrymandering.
Gas Bandit's Political Thread V: The Vampire Likes Bats
- Thread starter GasBandit
- Start date
Prove it. Voter fraud isn't the as prevalent as it is constantly made out to be. More often efforts to curb voter fraud end up restricting eligible voters.
The biggest problem with disenfranchisement is how hard it is to prove. Unless the person out and out says they are trying to disenfranchise a voter block. That doesn't really happen.
GasBandit
Staff member
I would think that the kind of people who can be bought off with a pittance (after all, welfare isn't enough to live comfortably) might not be the best ones to decide the nation's course, after all.
Prove what? You provided the links in your post that brought it up!
No, you aren't following. It's so hard to prove disenfranchisement it rarely gets addressed. I would wager we disagree on what constitutes disenfranchisement as well.
GasBandit
Staff member
Ah, I see what you're saying. That they're trying to pull the "whoops, we really thought they were felons, our bad" card, right?
Necronic
Staff member
I think Texas is undergoing a very good example of potential disenfranchisement at the moment. We put in a voter ID law here last year, but it's been put on hold by the Justice Department. However there are a lot of emails/etc going out telling people that they won't be able to vote. This is enough of a problem that our Secretary of State (or whatever she's called) has had to go out and actively tell people that they can vote.
There will be some people that will not vote because of this.
There will be some people that will not vote because of this.
GasBandit
Staff member
Personally, I'm flabbergasted that ID isn't required to vote, or that it's even an issue to make it so. You need an ID to do anything else, from rent a car, fly a plane, pay with a check, get a job (which for me required both driver's license AND social security card).. yet not to vote?
You need a driver's license (or other government ID, since there are ID cards you can get that are not drivers licenses if you don't drive) to vote in Canada. And if you're not already on the voter list, you need something with your name on it proving that you live in the area you're voting in. Was actually a real pain in the ass last federal election, in that my wife wasn't on the list (i was for some reason), and we didn't have a bill with her name on it with us (who brings that?). Luckily, they also allow you to make a sworn declaration there (I vouch for her, and she also makes a written declaration), so you can still vote.
I've never understood the argument against requiring photo ID to vote. I don't know anybody who doesn't bring it with them by default everywhere, so why wouldn't you have it in something government-related? Hell, what government office (or anything else, as Gas already said) have you been in lately that did not ask for ID?
I've never understood the argument against requiring photo ID to vote. I don't know anybody who doesn't bring it with them by default everywhere, so why wouldn't you have it in something government-related? Hell, what government office (or anything else, as Gas already said) have you been in lately that did not ask for ID?
GasBandit
Staff member
Asking for ID is racist because it makes mexicans think you're trying to get them deported.
S
SeraRelm
Too bad.
Right. What's really sad is even after all those people were shown to not be felons/illegal aliens, they plan to send out another round of names. These instances of eligible voters is what bothers me when considering new restrictions on voting.
No, you have to make sure they are available for free to those who don't have a driver's license or else it is considered a poll tax.
Why is it I have to keep telling people this?
I can see the link in that interpretation, but I don't agree with it. I think it's taking it too far. If you can't afford $70 (or thereabouts, it varies in Canada per-province) then you're also in a position to be denied virtually every other thing due to not having a verifiable identity. I don't think it's onerous at all.
I agree with your solution though. If government makes ID mandatory for enfranchisement, then make it free for a basic ID card that is acceptable.
S
SeraRelm
It's about half that in the US.
The bolded part is why it is so onerous what they are doing with voter purges in states like Florida. A lot of people don't have long form birth certificates, and even though they've been voting for decades they suddenly find they can't vote.
You start moving that bar, though, and then it is people taking power rather than receiving it.
Not me. Although I think the LOWV here in Wisconsin is trying to tie the Poll Tax amendment with the disenfranchisement clause of the 14th Amendment.
GasBandit
Staff member
That's a pretty thin thread of logic. By that rationale, the price of the clothes you had to buy to go to vote are a poll tax (because you'll get arrested if you show up naked)... never mind that you ALSO have to own clothes to do pretty much anything else.
GasBandit
Staff member
So now having to pay your tickets is racism by association?
S
SeraRelm
Yep.
Well for one there's no required voter ID. For another I just had that one point to bring up, and didn't want to rewrite the statement.
Wisconsin has their Voter ID law on hold right now because a state judge ruled it unconstitutional.
Necronic
Staff member
I don't really see where race comes in. It's not a white thing or a black thing. It's a money thing. Not being able to vote because you couldn't afford to pay a ticket is wrong.
GasBandit
Staff member
ANY thing that is a "money thing" is de facto racist to those inclined to play the racism card, because minorities are more disproportionately poor.
Wait wait wait, who are we talking about? I think I'm in the wrong thread.
For Adam:
- Several states in the US are attempting to enact a "voter ID" law that requires voters to present identification in order to cast a ballot.
- Because of the 24th Amendment, no state can enact a law that requires a person to pay a "poll tax" prior to voting.
- Acceptable voting ID under the laws enacted do not have a way of dealing with getting ID that does not require payment - which, under the 24th Amendment, would be considered a poll tax.
- The US Supreme court also determined that paying a "poll tax" would also be a violation of the 14th Amendment's "Equal Protection Clause."
- In 2008, the Supreme Court (in Crawford vs. Marion County Electons Board) ruled that as long as the state makes voter ID's free of charge - and that the person seeking one has appropriate paperwork to get one - such a law does not violate either the 24th or 14th Amendments.
- In 2011, the state of Wisconsin enacted a Voter ID law, but despite the fact that the ID was supposed to be "free", it was not clearly outlined by the department issuing the ID's (the DMV of WiDOT) that a person seeking such an ID would be able to do so without paying a fee.
- The League of Women Voters has filed suit against the state of Wisconsin (along with several other states enacting this legislation) that it would be a violation of the 14th Amendment, as it creates an undue burden on several classes of people (the poor and the elderly, for example).
Necronic
Staff member
Yeah but I'm not playing the race card (because it's stupid.) And simply responding to that part of the argument seems a bit evasive.
I still maintain that the 3rd point there is a logical leap I don't agree with, but hey, if that's the ruling of your court, OK. You have to deal with it from there. Given that, the rest makes perfect sense except the last point.
The last point makes no sense. It's an undue burden to GET identification now? Even if it's free? Do they actually believe that?
Yes, because travel is difficult and would require a day trip to the DMV to get the ID card (a requirement to get the card is to get it at the DMV). Most nursing homes have polling at them, so the people there don't have to travel to vote.
I know the closest DMV to my location is like 10-15 miles away at least (and there's no bus service out that way ether). I could see why it's hard for some people to get there, let alone pay for it.
EDIT: Actually, I just remembered that I only go to that one because it's the only one in my area that does the testing. Their are closer ones that are renew only.
EDIT: Actually, I just remembered that I only go to that one because it's the only one in my area that does the testing. Their are closer ones that are renew only.
You should see the density of places that do such in the city I live in. It's everywhere. If they are an insurance broker, they probably do government ID as well. Probably because it's privatized. I remember when that happened in the province I grew up in, that it went from extremely few in the city I lived in (about 1M people) to massive numbers of them.
The polling station thing Krisken is a good point, though it also shows a failure in co-ordination. Obviously polling stations could potentially be NOT in senior's homes, and thus they'd have to travel. Somebody who had a good idea put them there. Great. Now have a similarly good idea and put up an ID service there a week or two (or however long is needed if the IDs need to be mailed) before the polling. Both temporary, but both useful too.
Basically I think that the polling in nursing homes shows a solution that can work for others too, and is not a reason to ditch an ID requirement.
The polling station thing Krisken is a good point, though it also shows a failure in co-ordination. Obviously polling stations could potentially be NOT in senior's homes, and thus they'd have to travel. Somebody who had a good idea put them there. Great. Now have a similarly good idea and put up an ID service there a week or two (or however long is needed if the IDs need to be mailed) before the polling. Both temporary, but both useful too.
Basically I think that the polling in nursing homes shows a solution that can work for others too, and is not a reason to ditch an ID requirement.