4 ms·

This is a good question, but you should realize that it's a very contentious issue in the US. Most people will assume that you are "trolling" even though you a

by nkurz 8y ago

This is a good question, but you should realize that it's a very contentious issue in the US. Most people will assume that you are "trolling" even though you are likely asking genuinely. Explaining from scratch, the US has two approximately equally dominant political parties. It is presumed (by both sides, and probably correctly) that reducing the ID requirements will primarily benefit the more urban Democratic Party, and that making the requirements more stringent will benefit the more rural Republican party. Possibly motivated by self-interest, the result is that about half the population believes that requiring greater voter ID is "obviously" a good thing, and about half believes that it is equally "obviously" a bad thing. The side in favor ID expresses this with concerns about fraudulent voting, and the side against ID talks about disenfranchisement.

pas 8y ago
Any other form of ID? Is there some sort of proactive movement that tries to make this a non-issue by making people get usable IDs?
- nkurz 8y ago
  The problem is that anything that changes the number of voters is going to change election outcomes, and both sides think they know in advance the direction of the change. Thus rather than making it a "non-issue", any movement toward or away from universal ID is correctly perceived to have disparate partisan impact. This doesn't mean it's impossible, but makes it much more likely to be opposed by side who thinks it will hurt them politically. A change to the situation will likely involve either one side getting sufficiently far ahead to be able to change the rules further toward their advantage, or will involve a change in the perception such that both sides think that the same change will be to their side's benefit. But since these decisions are made on a state-by-state basis, any change will likely be incremental rather than all at once.
  - pas 8y ago
    I especially meant a movement within the Dem Party, to make them more resilient to potential upcoming voter ID laws?
    - nkurz 8y ago
      Yes, it seems like it would make sense for the Democratic party to sponsor efforts to get more voter ID's for more potential voters in states where such laws exist or are likely to exist. No, I'm not really aware of any major efforts concentrated on helping people get appropriate ID. Voter registration drives are common, but the ones I've noticed put the emphasis on registering otherwise eligible voters rather than increasing the pool of eligible voters. I wonder how cost effective a "free driver's license" charity would be at creating eligible voters. It wouldn't even have to be directly supported by a political party, but by targeting a particular demographic it would likely be quite effective in creating new voters of a particular type. And unlike straight voter registration drives, getting a driver's license gives other direct benefits to the recipient.

by nkurz 8y ago

pas 8y ago

Any other form of ID? Is there some sort of proactive movement that tries to make this a non-issue by making people get usable IDs?

nkurz 8y ago
The problem is that anything that changes the number of voters is going to change election outcomes, and both sides think they know in advance the direction of the change. Thus rather than making it a "non-issue", any movement toward or away from universal ID is correctly perceived to have disparate partisan impact. This doesn't mean it's impossible, but makes it much more likely to be opposed by side who thinks it will hurt them politically. A change to the situation will likely involve either one side getting sufficiently far ahead to be able to change the rules further toward their advantage, or will involve a change in the perception such that both sides think that the same change will be to their side's benefit. But since these decisions are made on a state-by-state basis, any change will likely be incremental rather than all at once.
- pas 8y ago
  I especially meant a movement within the Dem Party, to make them more resilient to potential upcoming voter ID laws?
  - nkurz 8y ago
    Yes, it seems like it would make sense for the Democratic party to sponsor efforts to get more voter ID's for more potential voters in states where such laws exist or are likely to exist. No, I'm not really aware of any major efforts concentrated on helping people get appropriate ID. Voter registration drives are common, but the ones I've noticed put the emphasis on registering otherwise eligible voters rather than increasing the pool of eligible voters. I wonder how cost effective a "free driver's license" charity would be at creating eligible voters. It wouldn't even have to be directly supported by a political party, but by targeting a particular demographic it would likely be quite effective in creating new voters of a particular type. And unlike straight voter registration drives, getting a driver's license gives other direct benefits to the recipient.