5 ms·

The problem with enforcing voter ID laws is that it's a solution to a non-existent problem. If you want to increase the bar for people to vote, you HAVE to dem

The problem with enforcing voter ID laws is that it's a solution to a non-existent problem. If you want to increase the bar for people to vote, you HAVE to demonstrate that the current system is problematic. There have been multiple attempts to find ANY significant voter fraud that would have been at all affected by forcing voter-ID requirements. They have universally found nothing. As such, there's no real reason to support voter-ID laws, aside from deliberately trying to disenfranchise low-income voters.

lkschubert8 8y ago
I don't think you HAVE to demonstrate that the current system is problematic. You have to demonstrate the current system is potentially problematic. You are describing a reactionary approach to something that definitely should be thought about proactively.
- rectang 8y ago
  So, to remedy a problem that you have no evidence exists, you would disenfranchise millions of people.
- specialist 8y ago
  Voter fraud has been exhaustively researched. The occurrences are negligible. Certainly much lower than most other forms of errors in voting systems. The entire issue is manufactured outrage.
  - sgc 8y ago
    I think there is too much hubris in that opinion. Before the recent election there was very little evidence of the vote being gamed by foreign powers. But if there had been proactive safeguards in place, the attempt could have been nipped in the bud.
    - cbsmith 8y ago
      If the foreign powers had actually manipulated actual votes (and if you think this is the first time...), their manipulation would have been nearly impossible to hide. That's not what they did.
      - sgc 8y ago
        Nor did I say so. But the point was it is ridiculous to fail to plan for something that has never happened if it could happen and there is a reasonable motive for someone to attempt to do it.
        cbsmith 8y ago
        Yes, but being mindful of the negative consequences of employing mitigation strategies has to be kept in mind.
    - specialist 8y ago
      What kind of safe guards would prevent a third party from influencing our elections?
      - sgc 8y ago
        There are myriad legal, diplomatic, and technological solutions to reduce their impact. You can never stop them from trying.
remarkEon 8y ago
>As such, there's no real reason to support voter-ID laws, aside from deliberately trying to disenfranchise low-income voters. This is a common point, but I think it assumes too much about low-income voters. You need an ID to access essentially all of the government services that low-income folks would need. I'm really skeptical that mandating voter ID would have any real effect on these groups (understand that we do sound a bit Elitist talking about what's good for the proles ... I like to err on the side of them being competent enough to use their ID to both get access to welfare programs and, also, vote).
- chc 8y ago
  There are more people who lack ID for one reason or another (e.g. over 600,000 registered voters in Texas lacked the necessary types of ID to vote under its voter-ID law in 2014) than there are fraudulent voters, so if you're going to address one problem or the other, I think the one that actually happens is the better direction to err.
  - specialist 8y ago
    My proposed solution is somewhat more simple: Universal, automatic voter registration moots this entire sideshow. Just like every other mature democracy.
- secabeen 8y ago
  >As such, there's no real reason to support voter-ID laws, aside from deliberately trying to disenfranchise low-income voters. This is a common point, but I think it assumes too much about low-income voters. You need an ID to access essentially all of the government services that low-income folks would need. That's not generally the case, as I understand it. Imagine a low-income senior, with a paid off home (or an inexpensive apartment or public housing unit) and a family that help take care of them. What do they need ID for? They don't drive. They may need medical care, but that only requires a medicare card, which is not valid ID (no picture, and just printed on plain paper). Social Security comes as a direct deposit to their bank account, which they opened years ago, before ID was required, or when they did have ID, since lost (or as a US Treasury check that they deposit or cash). Checks don't require ID. State SNAP/EBT/Food Stamp cards don't have a picture, and aren't valid ID.

lkschubert8 8y ago

I don't think you HAVE to demonstrate that the current system is problematic. You have to demonstrate the current system is potentially problematic. You are describing a reactionary approach to something that definitely should be thought about proactively.

rectang 8y ago
So, to remedy a problem that you have no evidence exists, you would disenfranchise millions of people.
specialist 8y ago
Voter fraud has been exhaustively researched. The occurrences are negligible. Certainly much lower than most other forms of errors in voting systems. The entire issue is manufactured outrage.
- sgc 8y ago
  I think there is too much hubris in that opinion. Before the recent election there was very little evidence of the vote being gamed by foreign powers. But if there had been proactive safeguards in place, the attempt could have been nipped in the bud.
  - cbsmith 8y ago
    If the foreign powers had actually manipulated actual votes (and if you think this is the first time...), their manipulation would have been nearly impossible to hide. That's not what they did.
    - sgc 8y ago
      Nor did I say so. But the point was it is ridiculous to fail to plan for something that has never happened if it could happen and there is a reasonable motive for someone to attempt to do it.
      - cbsmith 8y ago
        Yes, but being mindful of the negative consequences of employing mitigation strategies has to be kept in mind.
  - specialist 8y ago
    What kind of safe guards would prevent a third party from influencing our elections?
    - sgc 8y ago
      There are myriad legal, diplomatic, and technological solutions to reduce their impact. You can never stop them from trying.

remarkEon 8y ago

>As such, there's no real reason to support voter-ID laws, aside from deliberately trying to disenfranchise low-income voters. This is a common point, but I think it assumes too much about low-income voters. You need an ID to access essentially all of the government services that low-income folks would need. I'm really skeptical that mandating voter ID would have any real effect on these groups (understand that we do sound a bit Elitist talking about what's good for the proles ... I like to err on the side of them being competent enough to use their ID to both get access to welfare programs and, also, vote).

chc 8y ago
There are more people who lack ID for one reason or another (e.g. over 600,000 registered voters in Texas lacked the necessary types of ID to vote under its voter-ID law in 2014) than there are fraudulent voters, so if you're going to address one problem or the other, I think the one that actually happens is the better direction to err.
- specialist 8y ago
  My proposed solution is somewhat more simple: Universal, automatic voter registration moots this entire sideshow. Just like every other mature democracy.
secabeen 8y ago
>As such, there's no real reason to support voter-ID laws, aside from deliberately trying to disenfranchise low-income voters. This is a common point, but I think it assumes too much about low-income voters. You need an ID to access essentially all of the government services that low-income folks would need. That's not generally the case, as I understand it. Imagine a low-income senior, with a paid off home (or an inexpensive apartment or public housing unit) and a family that help take care of them. What do they need ID for? They don't drive. They may need medical care, but that only requires a medicare card, which is not valid ID (no picture, and just printed on plain paper). Social Security comes as a direct deposit to their bank account, which they opened years ago, before ID was required, or when they did have ID, since lost (or as a US Treasury check that they deposit or cash). Checks don't require ID. State SNAP/EBT/Food Stamp cards don't have a picture, and aren't valid ID.