4 ms·

The argument against is simply to ask: what real problem is being solved? And more: the argument consists of digging deeper and asking why, in the past decade,

The argument against is simply to ask: what real problem is being solved? And more: the argument consists of digging deeper and asking why, in the past decade, such a sudden, incredible, apocalyptically urgent need has arisen for in-person checks at polling places, with no equivalent need for ID checks with absentee/mail-in ballots. Fraud with mail-in ballots would be orders of magnitude easier to pull off. Why don't states with draconian polling-place ID laws also have draconian ID laws for mailed-in ballots? Why, in those states, don't you need to bring multiple proofs of identity, residence and citizenship to a notary to stamp your ballot in triplicate before mailing it in? If fraud really was what they were worried about, they'd be consistent across these types of ballots. They aren't. Also it's worth looking into the whole package of policies that usually comes with these rules. It's not just ID rules; it's a particular kind of ID, and a particular set of paperwork requirements, and closing down ID-issuance offices in certain locations, and closing down polling places in certain locations, and reducing hours for voting at the locations that remain open, and... well, let's just say meditate on that and you'll figure out what "problem" is being solved. If you're still not convinced, just go read the defenders of these policies, in their own words, in court filings, explaining why they're doing this. Voting is fundamental enough that it should only be restricted in the event of pressing, urgent, demonstrated, proven issues, and only the absolute minimum restrictions should be put in place. Voter ID doesn't "solve" any such issue, and is not the minimum necessary restriction in any event (there are already mechanisms for challenging suspected fraudulent voting, if you're truly worried about that).

VLM 8y ago
"Fraud with mail-in ballots would be orders of magnitude easier to pull off." As recent bombers have discovered, this isn't the 70s Unibomber era anymore, and every piece of mail is individually bar code tracked and enormous computerized fingerprint databases exist along with CCTV footage and cell phone monitoring databases. Using the US mail to commit a crime in a general sense (not strictly election fraud) would have been fairly untraceable in 1970 but half a century later it would be an extremely foolish strategy. The USPS is slightly less locked down than my bank, but much more locked down than my local food store, for example.
- nathan_long 8y ago
  How does any of that prevent someone from looking at the voting records, seeing that Bob never votes, filling out an absentee ballot in Bob's name, and dropping it in the nearest mail pickup box?
  - ubernostrum 8y ago
    So, I lived for almost a decade in Kansas, home of Kris Kobach and his never-ending quest to restrict voting and prevent "fraud". At one point his office was forced to actually investigate and look for fraud, and what they found... were wealthy people -- typically Republican voters -- who owned properties in multiple locations and were voting at each of those locations. Absentee/mail-in ballots make that kind of fraud much easier, but despite it being the only fraud he ever found, Kobach never pushed for any kind of purge of multiple-property-owning voters from the rolls, or ID checks for mailed-in ballots. Wonder why...

VLM 8y ago

"Fraud with mail-in ballots would be orders of magnitude easier to pull off." As recent bombers have discovered, this isn't the 70s Unibomber era anymore, and every piece of mail is individually bar code tracked and enormous computerized fingerprint databases exist along with CCTV footage and cell phone monitoring databases. Using the US mail to commit a crime in a general sense (not strictly election fraud) would have been fairly untraceable in 1970 but half a century later it would be an extremely foolish strategy. The USPS is slightly less locked down than my bank, but much more locked down than my local food store, for example.

nathan_long 8y ago
How does any of that prevent someone from looking at the voting records, seeing that Bob never votes, filling out an absentee ballot in Bob's name, and dropping it in the nearest mail pickup box?
- ubernostrum 8y ago
  So, I lived for almost a decade in Kansas, home of Kris Kobach and his never-ending quest to restrict voting and prevent "fraud". At one point his office was forced to actually investigate and look for fraud, and what they found... were wealthy people -- typically Republican voters -- who owned properties in multiple locations and were voting at each of those locations. Absentee/mail-in ballots make that kind of fraud much easier, but despite it being the only fraud he ever found, Kobach never pushed for any kind of purge of multiple-property-owning voters from the rolls, or ID checks for mailed-in ballots. Wonder why...