Search forums

Forums

Export thread

PA now requires State ID to vote

Aug 15, 2012#1

Silent Bob

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-pa-voter-id-20120816,0,2346712.story

What a crock of shit.

If you register, you should be able to vote. Period. Absolutely no voter fraud to support this requirement; just an easy way for the republican run PA government of Tom Corbett to suppress the Philadelphia and Pittsburgh minority democratic vote.

Aug 16, 2012#2

PatrThom

Not really. Now they just need to enact the ability to get your ID through the mail without having to personally go to a building and present yourself and everything will be OK, right?

--Patrick

Aug 16, 2012#3

blotsfan

I really don't see the problem with this. Its not like people have to go to the ID place every week, its basically one trip every 10 years. If you really care about voting that badly, finding out how to arrange that one trip shouldn't be an issue. I could understand the argument that doing it this election might be too short notice, but I wouldnt see an issue with 2013.

Aug 16, 2012#4

GasBandit

I've had this discussion before. The argument that being able to show ID to vote is an undue burden on the lower class is beneath consideration.

Aug 16, 2012#5

Silent Bob

GasBandit said:
I've had this discussion before. The argument that being able to show ID to vote is an undue burden on the lower class is beneath consideration.

Voter fraud is non existent in PA. If anything the new law could potentially hinder someone from voting that wants to vote. Denying just one person the ability to vote is unconstitutional. What is the purpose of this law if not to target large urban areas?

Aug 16, 2012#6

sixpackshaker

If the wait at the DMV is an hour for a DL; what will the wait time be when you add all the people too poor to drive to those lines? I know Texas just shut down a fair percentage of the DPS offices that do the photos and testing for DL's. There are 3 counties adjacent to mine, if not more that have to DRIVE up to 60 miles to take advantage of these services.

No undue burden on the poor there.[DOUBLEPOST=1345117914][/DOUBLEPOST]Half our counties in TX have reduced hours or no Drivers License offices at all.

Aug 16, 2012#7

Bowielee

GasBandit said:
I've had this discussion before. The argument that being able to show ID to vote is an undue burden on the lower class is beneath consideration.

I've come to the conclusion that you've never actually met any real poor people.

Aug 16, 2012#8

DarkAudit

Bowielee said:
I've come to the conclusion that you've never actually met any real poor people.

Like he said, they're beneath consideration.

Aug 16, 2012#9

GasBandit

Silent Bob said:
Voter fraud is non existent in PA. If anything the new law could potentially hinder someone from voting that wants to vote. Denying just one person the ability to vote is unconstitutional. What is the purpose of this law if not to target large urban areas?

Actually, there is nothing in the U.S. constitution about having a right to vote - there are amendments forbidding disenfranchisement for specific reasons, but so long as it isn't for those specific reasons it's left entirely up to the states to determine how they handle their vote. Legislation could be passed denying the left handed the vote, and it would be constitutional. The only way anybody ever manages to even slightly connect voter ID law with unconstitutionality is by calling the cost of getting one a poll tax, and that's a stretch that fewer and fewer people are buying (here in Texas, you can get an ID for this purpose for less than $10). It should be simple common sense that to do something as important as vote - to exercise influence on the direction the country is going, the very least we should require is proof that someone is who they say they are. And even though a given pool might never have had a drowning doesn't mean a lifeguard is unnecessary.

sixpackshaker said:
If the wait at the DMV is an hour for a DL; what will the wait time be when you add all the people too poor to drive to those lines? I know Texas just shut down a fair percentage of the DPS offices that do the photos and testing for DL's. There are 3 counties adjacent to mine, if not more that have to DRIVE up to 60 miles to take advantage of these services.

No undue burden on the poor there.[DOUBLEPOST=1345117914][/DOUBLEPOST]Half our counties in TX have reduced hours or no Drivers License offices at all.

Like I said, you don't need a full on Driver's License in TX, there's a regular ID available too. But you want to talk about how we need more places to issue that ID, or make it even cheaper, I'm all ears. And if you show me a piece of paper that says "we need more places issuing IDs" I'll sign it.

Bowielee said:
Ad Hominem

DarkAudit said:
Ad Hominem

Hey fellas, good to see you too. Grab a pitchfork and give me a hand, I'm just stoking my mansion's furnace with the dead babies of the poor who couldn't feed them! BWA HA HA HA HA HA! :rolleyes:

Aug 16, 2012#10

sixpackshaker

GasBandit said:
Like I said, you don't need a full on Driver's License in TX, there's a regular ID available too. But you want to talk about how we need more places to issue that ID, or make it even cheaper, I'm all ears. And if you show me a piece of paper that says "we need more places issuing IDs" I'll sign it.

I know you don't need a full DL to vote, but the places that pass out State ID's have been greatly curtailed, just in time for the voter ID bill.

Aug 16, 2012#11

GasBandit

sixpackshaker said:
I know you don't need a full DL to vote, but the places that pass out State ID's have been greatly curtailed, just in time for the voter ID bill.

GasBandit said:
If you show me a piece of paper that says "we need more places issuing IDs" I'll sign it.

Aug 16, 2012#12

sixpackshaker

Is motor-voter still on the books? If so, I feel like starting a busing campaign, and overrunning a couple of DL Offices.

Aug 16, 2012#13

Espy

Are there numbers to support how minorities don't have id's? I guess that seems to me like a real problem with the system if true.

Aug 16, 2012#14

sixpackshaker

Espy said:
Are there numbers to support how minorities don't have id's? I guess that seems to me like a real problem with the system if true.

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-kno...ver-wanted-to-know-about-voter-id-laws/14358/

According to a study from NYU’s Brennan Center, 11 percent of voting-age citizens lack necessary photo ID while many people in rural areas have trouble accessing ID offices. During closing arguments in a recent case over Texas’s voter ID law, a lawyer for the state brushed aside these obstacles as the “reality to life of choosing to live in that part of Texas.”

[DOUBLEPOST=1345128740][/DOUBLEPOST]We are only disenfranchising 11% of the voters.[DOUBLEPOST=1345129105][/DOUBLEPOST]

Aug 16, 2012#15

Espy

11% is pretty damn big number if thats correct.

Aug 16, 2012#16

GasBandit

What do the X'd out areas on that map indicate?

Aug 16, 2012#17

Charlie Don't Surf

Could be not enough people live there for data? I'm no Texas expert (Texpert????), but those look like uh. Godforsaken, no population parts of the state.

Aug 16, 2012#18

GasBandit

Charlie Don't Surf said:
Could be not enough people live there for data? I'm no Texas expert (Texpert????), but those look like uh. Godforsaken, no population parts of the state.

I suppose it could be, but they still color in the areas to varying degrees even with the Xs over them.

Aug 16, 2012#19

PatrThom

GasBandit said:
It should be simple common sense that to do something as important as vote - to exercise influence on the direction the country is going, the very least we should require is proof that someone is who they say they are.

Totally and completely on board with this. My only beef with these sorts of requirements boils down to just two things:
1) These requirements tend to pop up just before the most hotly contested elections, leaving little time for the "fringe people*" to get their papers in order. Undue burden? Not really, but the lead time could be a lot better, or else it just starts to sound like one of those 80's 'bad guy' tactics where the good guys show up with their entry fee for the contest only to be told that a new rule was just introduced and has to be completed by 5pm tomorrow or else you and your friends are out of the competition. MUHAAHAAA! If there's such concern over voter fraud, then the countermeasures should be announced and awareness created immediately following the 'spoiled 'election.
2) I'm against the idea that proof can be shown in one and only one way. If I produce an expired driver's license, a phone bill, an auto registration, a birth certificate, a pay stub, my department store nametag, and a recent property tax bill, that preponderance of evidence should be sufficient to allow me to vote in my district. I have verified my likeness, my residence, and my legitimacy with my evidence, and being refused solely because my license doesn't have the new red border just sounds like weaseling out on a technicality.

--Patrick
*"Fringe people" being those whose qualifications to vote used to be sufficient, but now they have to go get whatever required upgrade was just introduced.

Aug 16, 2012#20

GasBandit

PatrThom said:
Totally and completely on board with this. My only beef with these sorts of requirements boils down to just two things:
1) These requirements tend to pop up just before the most hotly contested elections, leaving little time for the "fringe people*" to get their papers in order. Undue burden? Not really, but the lead time could be a lot better, or else it just starts to sound like one of those 80's 'bad guy' tactics where the good guys show up with their entry fee for the contest only to be told that a new rule was just introduced and has to be completed by 5pm tomorrow or else you and your friends are out of the competition. MUHAAHAAA! If there's such concern over voter fraud, then the countermeasures should be announced and awareness created immediately following the 'spoiled 'election.
2) I'm against the idea that proof can be shown in one and only one way. If I produce an expired driver's license, a phone bill, an auto registration, a birth certificate, a pay stub, my department store nametag, and a recent property tax bill, that preponderance of evidence should be sufficient to allow me to vote in my district. I have verified my likeness, my residence, and my legitimacy with my evidence, and being refused solely because my license doesn't have the new red border just sounds like weaseling out on a technicality.

--Patrick
*"Fringe people" being those whose qualifications to vote used to be sufficient, but now they have to go get whatever required upgrade was just introduced.

In my opinion, the item used should have a photo. ID, Passport, school ID, whatever. But I do agree that an expired drivers' license should still be a valid photo ID.

And heck, in SOME areas of the country, I think we could do worse than doing the whole "dip your finger in the ink" thing that Iraq was doing, just to make sure people aren't voting more than once.

Aug 16, 2012#21

Soliloquy

There's one thing that bugged me about making such an issue about photo ID. Because unless I'm mistaken, the only people who wouldn't have photo ID are those who:

don't drive
don't have a bank account
don't own a home/rent an apartment
don't cash checks or write checks
don't use a credit card
don't buy alcohol or cigarettes
don't receive welfare, social security, or food stamps.

I admit, I grew up in a fairly well-off family, so I have very little context to work from here -- but is not having an ID really that common?

Aug 16, 2012#22

Charlie Don't Surf

GasBandit said:
And heck, in SOME areas of the country, I think we could do worse than doing the whole "dip your finger in the ink" thing that Iraq was doing, just to make sure people aren't voting more than once.

this crazy idea of widespread voter fraud in the US is a conservative pipe dream

Aug 16, 2012#23

GasBandit

Charlie Don't Surf said:
this crazy idea of widespread voter fraud in the US is a conservative pipe dream

Is that you, Mayor-For-Life Daley?

Aug 16, 2012#24

Charlie Don't Surf

"widespread voter fraud in the US presidential election" != voter fraud in one city

Aug 16, 2012#25

GasBandit

Charlie Don't Surf said:
"widespread voter fraud in the US presidential election" != voter fraud in one city

Whup, my mistake. Sorry, Bill Stinson.

Do I even need to repost the video of the guy who passed himself off as Eric Holder at the voting booth? Even if it isn't rampant, do we need to keep it easy to do so until it is? When the whole "undue burden" thing is a total crock? Silly question, I know, when those votes would presumably favor Democrat candidates.

The fact of the matter is you have to have a photo ID to function in american society. Not a single person who's won something at my radio station has failed to produce a photo ID to claim their prizes won on-air. Thing is, a great many of those IDs are mexican consular IDs.

Aug 16, 2012#26

sixpackshaker

The majority of voter fraud happens at the county clerk's level and up from there. This photo ID requirement is what it is a way to disenfranchise the poor and the rural.

Aug 16, 2012#27

GasBandit

sixpackshaker said:
This photo ID requirement is what it is a way to disenfranchise the criminal and/or the lazy.

FTFY.

Not an undue burden.

Aug 16, 2012#28

sixpackshaker

GasBandit said:
FTFY.

Not an undue burden.

What burden is due to disenfranchise people? At what point is it acceptable to force legal voters not to vote? If they go to the polls then they are not too lazy to vote.

Aug 16, 2012#29

Hailey Knight

Nothing I have to say about this is going to contribute to the discussion, so I'll just say that Republicans don't want low income minorities who don't usually vote to kill them in another presidential election, and then go back to the Skyrim thread.

Aug 16, 2012#30

Eriol

We've needed ID to vote in Canada for years now, and I've never ever heard anybody say that it's disenfranchising people.

Get over it.

Aug 16, 2012#31

drifter

Does it count as disenfranchising when state employees have been instructed to charge people unless they ask for free ID's?

Aug 16, 2012#32

Espy

Eriol said:
We've needed ID to vote in Canada for years now, and I've never ever heard anybody say that it's disenfranchising people.

Get over it.

Pff, in Canada you can bring in a bottle of maple syrup as ID.

Aug 16, 2012#33

GasBandit

sixpackshaker said:
What burden is due to disenfranchise people? At what point is it acceptable to force legal voters not to vote? If they go to the polls then they are not too lazy to vote.

Constitutionally, any burden is due other than the ones explicitly enumerated as unacceptable. But even from a common sense standpoint, professed inability to get an ID is extremely suspect. I used to have to ask for ID as part of my duties. A great many of our prizewinners were, and are, poor and/or minorities. And I never, ever had one not able to produce some form of photo ID on demand. It's just, like I said - not all of them were issued by a government agency of the United States.

Aug 16, 2012#34

Sparhawk

I always see that people claim there is not much voter fraud occurring. How, without a photo id, can you verify that the person that shows up to vote is that person? How can somebody that is registered, but has no intention of voting in a particular cycle, know that somebody voted in their name? How can an election judge at a polling station know that the name that someone is giving is actually their name? How can their be a complaint of voter fraud if there is no check to see if "you" are "you"?

Aug 16, 2012#35

Zappit

Why not just copy Ohio, and simply distribute more voting machines to rich, white, affluent areas, and send very few to urban areas, preventing voting for many due to long lines? They know how to rig an election, folks!

Aug 16, 2012#36

drifter

Hey, at least they eventually decided to not cut voting hours for Democratic districts.

Aug 16, 2012#37

papachronos

What would you guys think about this:

1) Enable the poor/rural to register for a reduced cost or free voter ID through the mail, much like passports are handled. Go get a passport-style photo at Walgreen's or wherever, and send in your documentation. Receive your ID in 4-6 weeks. Yes, I know the photos cost money, but they could be subsidized to reduce or eliminate the initial outlay.

2) Open the polls for voting, worldwide, at midnight EST on Tuesday and close them at midnight EST on Wednesday. This allows everyone the equal chance to vote, regardless of work schedule, and without requiring a vacation day or PTO. I can think of two elections in a row where I was not able to vote due to working 7-7 and not having any vacation days left. Also, this would also reduce the lines for the busy periods before 9 and after 5.

Aug 16, 2012#38

Hailey Knight

Crap, that reminds me I need to put in PTO so I can vote. Thanks.

Aug 16, 2012#39

AshburnerX

Zappit said:
Why not just copy Ohio, and simply distribute more voting machines to rich, white, affluent areas, and send very few to urban areas, preventing voting for many due to long lines? They know how to rig an election, folks!

Yeah, this is pretty messed up. My polling place has half as many voting machines these days.

Aug 17, 2012#40

Bubble181

...Or (some) Americans could just get it through their head that a state ID isn't "infringing on rights" or "destroying privacy". A government-issued card with such useful information as blood type, picture, date of birth, possibly endangering medical issues, SS number, and for all I care rolled into one with driver's license isn't the end of the world, would make voting a lot easier, would prevent deaths due to mistreatment, and would help census data.
But OH NO THE GUBMINT. *shrug*

Aug 17, 2012#41

GasBandit

Bubble181 said:
...Or (some) Americans could just get it through their head that a state ID isn't "infringing on rights" or "destroying privacy". A government-issued card with such useful information as blood type, picture, date of birth, possibly endangering medical issues, SS number, and for all I care rolled into one with driver's license isn't the end of the world, would make voting a lot easier, would prevent deaths due to mistreatment, and would help census data.
But OH NO THE GUBMINT. *shrug*

... that's not the objections they generally raise. It's more along the lines of what's been said in this thread.

Aug 17, 2012#42

sixpackshaker

I did object to most of those points in the previous thread. But this issue is just a straight up attempt to keep a sizable number of people from voting this year.

Aug 17, 2012#43

GasBandit

sixpackshaker said:
I did object to most of those points in the previous thread. But this issue is just a straight up attempt to keep a sizable number of people from voting this year.

Hrm, well, you're the first person I've heard to make the privacy issue... well, an issue.

And I'm just gonna keep saying nuh-uh to the latter sentence as long as you keep saying yuh-huh.

Aug 17, 2012#44

sixpackshaker

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/08/pennsylvania-court-upholds-voter-id-law/

Republican House Majority Leader Mike Turzai made waves in June when he said at the Republican State Committee meeting that the voter ID law “is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania.”

Aug 17, 2012#45

GasBandit

Couldn't possibly be because he thought there was democrat donor fraud, right? Had to be a slip of the mask saying "MUAHAHA NOW THE POOR CANNOT VOTE!"

Aug 17, 2012#46

sixpackshaker

He said he felt that it leveled the playing field. He should be able to win on ideas and policy, not some 19th century chicanery.

Aug 17, 2012#47

Soliloquy

sixpackshaker said:
He said he felt that it leveled the playing field. He should be able to win on ideas and policy, not some 19th century chicanery.

"level the playing field" could very well mean "not allow the other side to vote fraudulently, thus skewing the results."

Aug 17, 2012#48

sixpackshaker

Soliloquy said:
"level the playing field" could very well mean "not allow the other side to vote fraudulently, thus skewing the results."

let me repeat, for this state, IT NEVER HAPPENED, EVER!

The Republican's own attorneys admitted as much.

Aug 17, 2012#49

Soliloquy

sixpackshaker said:
let me repeat, for this state, IT NEVER HAPPENED, EVER!

The Republican's own attorneys admitted as much.

So... it's impossible for a Republican candidate to believe otherwise? Or believe that it could potentially be a problem in the upcoming election?

Aug 17, 2012#50

sixpackshaker

And aliens could invade the Earth before the next election. It never happened but there is no reason to think it is impossible...

Aug 17, 2012#51

AshburnerX

Which is more likely, especially considering past events? That they wanted to prevent a handful of (nonexistent) fraudulent voting cases or that they wanted to largely suppress the vote of groups that traditionally vote for their opposition? Which provides them with greater advantage?

Aug 17, 2012#52

Soliloquy

I dunno, I just have a healthy skepticism towards the "there is no voter fraud" angle ever since my hyper-conservative religious mom was mysteriously registered as a Democrat through Acorn right after her purse was stolen a few years ago.

Something was clearly going on, I don't know what. And it wouldn't surprise me if something still is going on.

Anecdotal evidence and all that, I know. But still.

Aug 17, 2012#53

sixpackshaker

At least she was registered.

Aug 17, 2012#54

Soliloquy

sixpackshaker said:
At least she was registered.

You know, speaking of which... isn't it already required to have a valid photo ID to register to vote? Why all the hoopla about needing a photo ID for the actual voting, but not about needing it to register?[DOUBLEPOST=1345236494][/DOUBLEPOST]
Ah, never mind, looks like you don't need that in PA. Need it in my state though, and have for as long as I can remember.

Aug 17, 2012#55

GasBandit

Let me also be the devil's advocate and point out if somebody is voting as somebody else, the previous state of Pennsylvania would make it fairly easy to cover up with no paper trail whatsoever.

Aug 18, 2012#56

@Li3n

I don't get this photo ID thing... over here we get one at 14 and it's mandatory...only way you can skip getting one is if you don't have a birth certificate either (so it's mostly gypsies here).

Also, seems like by passing that law they made photo ID's free even if they didn't plan to: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/...n-from-offering-information-on-free-voter-IDs

Aug 21, 2012#57

Tiger Tsang

To the non US folks,

All of these "OMG we need Voter ID's and the purging of Voter Rolls!!!!' activities are coming up very close to elections when a lot of folks, that the far right doesn't want voting this cycle, won't have the time or opportunity to fix.

In ~~some~~ districts where this is happening, you're going to have old folks, rural folks, minorities, students . . . go to the poles and find out they can't vote.

At the end of the day, had it been put in place reasonably, I don't think most people would have a problem with Voter ID's.

All of the recent legislation, is ALL ABOUT suppressing votes for the current election cycle.

http://www.nytime s.com/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...ow-the-gop-plans-to-block-the-black-vote.html

It's fucking sad, and it's fucking un-American to pull this last minute shit to suppress a lot of peoples votes.

*edited a bit for easier parsing*

Aug 21, 2012#58

AshburnerX

Tsang, that's kind of the point some of us are making: This is an intentional step to suppress the ability for eligible voters to vote. The Republicans are trying to prevent demographics they aren't popular with from having a voice because they can't win their approval without displeasing their base.

Aug 22, 2012#59

GasBandit

And some of us are saying it's baloney, that you already have to have a picture ID to function in American life, and the only possible reason to be opposed to Voter picture ID requirements is because you want people to be able to vote under a false identity.

Aug 22, 2012#60

MindDetective

GasBandit said:
And some of us are saying it's baloney, that you already have to have a picture ID to function in American life, and the only possible reason to be opposed to Voter picture ID requirements is because you want people to be able to vote under a false identity.

LOL! I certainly do not want people to vote under a false identity! The republicans flaunting it as a calculated tactic is pretty irritating, though.

Aug 22, 2012#61

GasBandit

I remember watching videos, seeing pictures, of Iraqi citizens voting for the first time in their lives, proudly displaying their ink-stained fingers as proof that they voted, having braved the spectre of terrorist attack, shootings, bombings, the intimidation tactics of militant islamism... and the last shred of commiseration I have for an American whining about how hard it is to get a goddamned picture ID to vote vanishes like rubbing alcohol on the surface of Mercury.

Aug 22, 2012#62

sixpackshaker

Did the Iraqis have photo ID's?

Aug 22, 2012#63

Tress

Here's how this discussion should have gone on a national scale:

Person A: People should need to show ID to vote. There could be fraud.

Person B: But there are people who don't have IDs and it may be hard for them get an ID.

A: Oh, right. Okay, let's make getting a simple government ID free. Let's set up a huge campaign to get people to register, bus rural folks in to the city, and set up mobile registration centers in poor areas so people don't have to deal with travel costs.

B: Great idea! Now we can do a better job making sure there's no voter fraud, and people will have IDs they need to navigate modern society. Hooray!

Here's how it actually went:

Person A: People should to show ID to vote. There could be fraud.

Person B: You evil racist fuck! There wasn't much fraud last time, so there never will be! You're just trying to steal the election! I fucking hate you! You're just out to screw over poor people and minorities!

A: Fuck you too, stupid liberals! You're only against this because Democrats can't win without voter fraud! I don't give a shit if poor people or minorities can't get these IDs! I've got mine, so fuck 'em!

A & B: *RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE*

Aug 22, 2012#64

Ravenpoe

GasBandit said:
I remember watching videos, seeing pictures, of Iraqi citizens voting for the first time in their lives, proudly displaying their ink-stained fingers as proof that they voted, having braved the spectre of terrorist attack, shootings, bombings, the intimidation tactics of militant islamism... and the last shred of commiseration I have for an American whining about how hard it is to get a goddamned picture ID to vote vanishes like rubbing alcohol on the surface of Mercury.

What if, once they had gotten there, they were told that due to last minute changes, they now require a thumb print and a special issue ID that they could have easily gotten, but due to time constraints were not able to get before the deadline?

Aug 22, 2012#65

GasBandit

Ravenpoe said:
What if, once they had gotten there, they were told that due to last minute changes, they now require a thumb print and a special issue ID that they could have easily gotten, but due to time constraints were not able to get before the deadline?

Last minute my ass, there's 11 weeks to go before the election. That's a long time to get something done that should have been done years ago.

Aug 22, 2012#66

Ravenpoe

GasBandit said:
Last minute my ass, there's 11 weeks to go before the election. That's a long time to get something done that should have been done years ago.

That's assuming the people this effects know about it. The department in spreading the information is the same department that doesn't want these people to vote, and not everyone gets breaking news in their twitter feed.

Aug 22, 2012#67

GasBandit

Ravenpoe said:
That's assuming the people this effects know about it. The department in spreading the information is the same department that doesn't want these people to vote, and not everyone gets breaking news in their twitter feed.

If only there were media sources trumpeting this requirement far and wide as if they had some kind of problem with it.

Aug 22, 2012#68

MindDetective

GasBandit said:
Last minute my ass, there's 11 weeks to go before the election. That's a long time to get something done that should have been done years ago.

On a 4 year time scale, 11 weeks is last-minute.

Aug 22, 2012#69

AshburnerX

Honestly, I think I'm mainly hardcore about the voter Id stuff because I've nearly been denied voting more than once. The pollsters here in Ohio are hardcore about finding reasons to keep you out, ever since the 2004 election. I suppose someone could think differently if they've never had that problem.

Aug 22, 2012#70

GasBandit

MindDetective said:
On a 4 year time scale, 11 weeks is last-minute.

On any given time scale, it's years overdue.

Aug 23, 2012#71

Tiger Tsang

GasBandit said:
Last minute my ass, there's 11 weeks to go before the election. That's a long time to get something done that should have been done years ago.

Last minute to you, is not last minute to the folks that are going to be affected by this.

That was the whole point of slamming through all of the recent legislation. Like in my earlier post, THEY BRAG ABOUT IT!!, and the Florida guy admits it. They are ACTIVELY seeking to suppress voters.

Aug 23, 2012#72

AshburnerX

The simple truth is most voter fraud occurs before the vote or as they are being tallied, like the infamous cases of dead people voting in elections, the ballot boxes that keep going "missing" in Clark County, FL (or the times they counted votes more than once). Why aren't we running investigations against those people as opposed to restricting voter access?

Aug 23, 2012#73

GasBandit

AshburnerX said:
The simple truth is most voter fraud occurs before the vote or as they are being tallied, like the infamous cases of dead people voting in elections, the ballot boxes that keep going "missing" in Clark County, FL (or the times they counted votes more than once). Why aren't we running investigations against those people as opposed to restricting voter access?

Obviously those guys are getting caught. How do you catch people voting under false identities without voter ID laws? How do you even know it's being committed without them?

Tiger Tsang said:
Last minute to you, is not last minute to the folks that are going to be affected by this.

That was the whole point of slamming through all of the recent legislation. Like in my earlier post, THEY BRAG ABOUT IT!!, and the Florida guy admits it. They are ACTIVELY seeking to suppress voters.

The "bragging" you refer to I've already addressed in a previous reply, and "the florida guy" is under criminal investigation and could be looking to save his skin by throwing people under busses. But all this is beside my point - legitimate republics need voter ID laws like large public swimming pools need lifeguards. Maybe nobody ever drowned thus far, maybe nobody ever will, but it's madness to go without. And furthermore, if you can't get a picture ID in 11 weeks, I'm sorry to say maybe you need to address getting your shit together. No sympathy from me - remember, I'm the guy who also says that enfranchisement should be suspended for those on public assistance until they are no longer on them.

Aug 23, 2012#74

sixpackshaker

It already takes at least 2 weeks to get your photo ID back from the DMV. That is with just the regular expiration of DL's. What is going to happen when each state faces half a million voters each trying to get their ID's in time for the election?

Aug 23, 2012#75

GasBandit

sixpackshaker said:
It already takes at least 2 weeks to get your photo ID back from the DMV. That is with just the regular expiration of DL's. What is going to happen when each state faces half a million voters each trying to get their ID's in time for the election?

Where are the statistics showing that each state has half a million voters with no picture ID?

Also, I don't know about you, but I remember at 16 (which was some years ago mind you) walking out of the DMV with my driver's license in my hand, no 2 week wait. But maybe colorado's just awesome like that.

Aug 23, 2012#76

Charlie Don't Surf

GasBandit said:
I remember at 16 (which was some years ago mind you) walking out of the DMV with my driver's license in my hand.

congratulations on your privilege

Aug 23, 2012#77

GasBandit

Charlie Don't Surf said:
congratulations on your privilege

Yeah, I totally had to grease palms and huff out "Don't you know who I am? I know the Mayor! I'm WHITE! TREAT ME SPECIAL!"

Or, you know, just wait around for an hour then get my picture taken like everybody else. See, they use these new fangled things called computers to create, print and laminate them rather quickly.

Aug 23, 2012#78

Bubble181

GasBandit said:
Or, you know, just wait around for an hour then get my picture taken like everybody else. See, they use these new fangled things called computers to create, print and laminate them rather quickly.

Well, those weren't around for everyone when they got their driver's license. I mean, Dave had to sit still for 6 months waiting for them to chisel his likeness out of stone. That's hard to pull off in 11 weeks

Aug 23, 2012#79

sixpackshaker

GasBandit said:
Yeah, I totally had to grease palms and huff out "Don't you know who I am? I know the Mayor! I'm WHITE! TREAT ME SPECIAL!"

Or, you know, just wait around for an hour then get my picture taken like everybody else. See, they use these new fangled things called computers to create, print and laminate them rather quickly.

Dude it's Colorado, everybody is white and entitled.

Really it seems more like a Camera to take the Picture, a computer to select the Picture, a Printer to print the Picture and then a Laminater to put the plastic on it...
But 11 years ago 19 assholes crashed 4 planes and caused a lot of loss of life and then the congress went all wacky and centralized the printing of ID's.

Aug 23, 2012#80

Sparhawk

sixpackshaker said:
congress went all wacky and centralized the printing of ID's.

Just worded some searches in different ways, but I can't find anything about this. Care to cite a source?

Aug 23, 2012#81

sixpackshaker

http://www.dmv.state.va.us/webdoc/general/news/dlci.asp

I can't find which act centralized ID's for most states. But all states had to comply with new counterfeiting standards, and what I remember is that printing of the ID's had to be centralized at least on a state by state basis.[DOUBLEPOST=1345759074][/DOUBLEPOST]

Preventing terrorists from obtaining state-issued identification documents is critical to securing America against terrorism. As the 9/11 Commission noted, "For terrorists, travel documents are as important as weapons." The 9/11 Commission Report: Final Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks upon the United States, at 384 (2004).
Secure driver's licenses and identification documents are a vital component of a holistic national security strategy. Law enforcement must be able to rely on government-issued identification documents and know that the bearer of such a document is who he or she claims to be. Obtaining fraudulent identification documents presents an opportunity for terrorists to board airplanes, rent cars, open bank accounts, or conduct other activities without being detected. The 9/11 Commission recommended that the Federal Government work with other layers of government to solidify the security of government-issued documents. Securing state-issued identification documents is a common-sense national security and law enforcement imperative, which also helps to combat identity fraud and illegal immigration.

[DOUBLEPOST=1345759107][/DOUBLEPOST]http://www.dhs.gov/secure-drivers-licenses#1

Aug 23, 2012#82

AshburnerX

Maybe it's different for State ID's and Temp Permits, but I have NEVER walked out of the DMV without a card. They do all the printing on site.

Aug 23, 2012#83

blotsfan

When I got mine I got a paper license and my real one in the
Mail 2 weeks later. I understand the concerns about people
Having issues, but why can't they just enact this for 2013? Yeah this election would
Be open to risk, but no one can legitimately claim they can't get an ID with a year of knowledge.

Aug 23, 2012#84

Troll

blotsfan said:
I understand the concerns about people having issues, but why can't they just enact this for 2013?

Because if they did it properly and waited until 2013 the GOP couldn't rig the election for Romney.

Aug 23, 2012#85

Eriol

And i thought this "discussion" has been going on for well over a year? Like I thought it came up prior to your elections 2-ish years ago too, with the same accusation of "they're just trying to rig elections!" Well it has to happen at SOME point, and since you guys elect people ALL THE FUCKING TIME, there's NO time it won't impact SOMEBODY.

Aug 23, 2012#86

Silent Bob

Eriol said:
And i thought this "discussion" has been going on for well over a year? Like I thought it came up prior to your elections 2-ish years ago too, with the same accusation of "they're just trying to rig elections!" Well it has to happen at SOME point, and since you guys elect people ALL THE FUCKING TIME, there's NO time it won't impact SOMEBODY.

If only the founding fathers were smart enough to set up DMV's in 1786.

Aug 24, 2012#87

tegid

Eriol said:
And i thought this "discussion" has been going on for well over a year? Like I thought it came up prior to your elections 2-ish years ago too, with the same accusation of "they're just trying to rig elections!" Well it has to happen at SOME point, and since you guys elect people ALL THE FUCKING TIME, there's NO time it won't impact SOMEBODY.

Well, you COULD enact it with a long period in which it doesn't have an effect. Like, pass the law now, have it without effect for one or two years, for instance. Use the elections in the meantime to do make sure everyone knows in the *next* election they'll need this ID.

Aug 24, 2012#88

Covar

tegid said:
Well, you COULD enact it with a long period in which it doesn't have an effect. Like, pass the law now, have it without effect for one or two years, for instance. Use the elections in the meantime to do make sure everyone knows in the *next* election they'll need this ID.

So you're just trying to sabotage the midterms!

Aug 24, 2012#89

tegid

Ugh. You're being ironic, right? Right???
Saying that 11 weeks is too short notice and smells fishy is perfectly compatible with, even leads to, saying that 2 years is enough.

Aug 24, 2012#90

Sparhawk

Considering how long some of these laws have been being challenged in court... Don't think it's ironic, and is exactly the thing that we'd hear then, jut like when the over the air broadcast switch occurred a few years back. "We're not ready even though you've been telling us about it for 5 years."

Aug 24, 2012#91

Covar

tegid said:
Ugh. You're being ironic, right? Right???
Saying that 11 weeks is too short notice and smells fishy is perfectly compatible with, even leads to, saying that 2 years is enough.

Yes, but that is something you would hear. That or you're deliberately creating confusion which would make voters think they need an id for current election. You could have this debate in January and you would still see the same arguments.

Aug 24, 2012#92

Charlie Don't Surf

How about same-day voter registration?

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/co...chive/2012/08/judge_dismisses_4.shtml?refid=0

Aug 24, 2012#93

GasBandit

I hold no strong opinions about same day registration.

Aug 25, 2012#94

Bubble181

GasBandit said:
I hold no strong opinions about same day registration.

Ladies and gentlemen! (Yeah, the rest of you too)
Come see this, a political topic that GasBandit holds no strong opinions on! A once-in-a-lifetime occurence! Be able to tell your grandchildren you were there! Come one, come all!

:awesome:

Aug 25, 2012#95

Cajungal

I'm picturing an owl in a red and white striped jacket and a paper hat. ^_^ That amuses me on Saturday morning.

Aug 30, 2012#96

jwhouk

Texas Voter ID struck down by Feds

Aug 30, 2012#97

AshburnerX

South Carolina's is probably next. Hopefully they get around to Ohio before the election.

Aug 30, 2012#98

GasBandit

AshburnerX said:
South Carolina's is probably next. Hopefully they get around to Ohio before the election.

I thought they'd already done south carolina in december... and Ohio isn't subject to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, so they're more likely to be left alone, like Philadelphia. It's just us southern states that have to get super secret special permission to change our voting laws from the federal Justice Dept.

Aug 30, 2012#99

AshburnerX

GasBandit said:
I thought they'd already done south carolina in december... and Ohio isn't subject to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, so they're more likely to be left alone, like Philadelphia. It's just us southern states that have to get super secret special permission to change our voting laws from the federal Justice Dept.

From the article.

The decision comes the same week that South Carolina's strict photo ID law is on trial in front of another three-judge panel in the same federal courthouse. A court ruling in the South Carolina case is expected before the November election.

So no, it's still being decided. However, there is now precedent, so it's unlikely to stand. Precedent is everything in law.

Aug 30, 2012#100

Covar

GasBandit said:
I thought they'd already done south carolina in december... and Ohio isn't subject to the Voting Rights Act of 1965, so they're more likely to be left alone, like Philadelphia. It's just us southern states that have to get super secret special permission to change our voting laws from the federal Justice Dept.

Did you know it's racist to remove the party affiliation from the ballot? Kinston, North Carolina knows that now. Because according to an un-elected Judge in DC a) Black people wouldn't know who to vote for, and b) all black people vote democrat. White Knighting racism at it's finest.

Aug 30, 2012#101

Hailey Knight

There's same day registration? What the hell am I doing taking time off work to go to the DMV to do it? I'll just procrastinate like a real man of my generation.

Aug 31, 2012#102

GasBandit

Covar said:
Did you know it's racist to remove the party affiliation from the ballot? Kinston, North Carolina knows that now. Because according to an un-elected Judge in DC a) Black people wouldn't know who to vote for, and b) all black people vote democrat. White Knighting racism at it's finest.

Heh, I remember that. If I had my way, there'd be a quick political awareness quiz to vote - IE, "Name either your district's current representative in the house, one of your state's senators, or the current secretary of state." And that's setting the bar pretty dang low.

Sep 1, 2012#103

Hailey Knight

GasBandit said:
Heh, I remember that. If I had my way, there'd be a quick political awareness quiz to vote - IE, "Name either your district's current representative in the house, one of your state's senators, or the current secretary of state." And that's setting the bar pretty dang low.

6% voter turnout.

Sep 1, 2012#104

GasBandit

Quotemander Prime said:
6% voter turnout.

Sounds good to me. I've always said too many people are voting.[DOUBLEPOST=1346508079][/DOUBLEPOST]But, on the subject of Ohio, they got an injunction.

Sep 1, 2012#105

Bowielee

I'm not opposed to the principal of needing photo IDs for proof of voter identity, in fact, I'm incredibly FOR it. The issue is that they need to make photo IDs readily accessible to those who are poverty level or below.

Sep 27, 2012#106

Covar

Interesting and tangentally related article by the Verge.

http://www.theverge.com/2012/9/26/3384416/social-security-numbers-national-ID-identity-theft-nstic

Forums