6 ms·

I think you're replying to a different point than the GP was making -- the "major party" you are (I assume) referencing is also the party that backs Voter ID la

I think you're replying to a different point than the GP was making -- the "major party" you are (I assume) referencing is also the party that backs Voter ID laws, which the GP was explicitly pointing out as a solution to the problem.

slg 7y ago
It is fundamentally the same point since that party doesn't want to make it easy and free to get a voter ID. If you have to take a day off work to go to the DMV or need to pay some fee to get your ID, then requiring ID is in practice making it harder to vote. If you want to require a voter ID, it is the duty of the government to assure that everyone citizen who wants one has one.
- andrewla 7y ago
  Everybody has an ID. Find a study that shows differently (for example [1]) and you'll be able to see how obviously synthetic it is. I have no doubt that the people who are opposing Voter ID have no nefarious motive, but there's a lot of confirmation bias at work that creates a false narrative that getting a photo ID is "difficult" and that people without photo IDs are common and disproportionately minorities. [1] https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/d/download_file_39242.pdf https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/d/d...
  - bearcobra 7y ago
    I'm not sure I understand what objections would be to the study you cite.
    - andrewla 7y ago
      A telephone survey of 982 people called on landlines. How many total calls were made -- what was the response rate, and what has been done to de-bias any correlation between response rate and the outcome? And a self-reporting survey, over the phone, about government photo ids, without any mention being made of how they convinced people that the survey was genuine? And then there's just the standard phone survey stuff, where you up-multiply based on (once again, self-reported) attributes to match population demographics, causing everything to be wildly out of whack. This level of obfuscation of methodology is pretty high even by the standards of regular polling.
  - slg 7y ago
    Did you legitimately just link to a study disproving your point as if that is evidence that supposedly proves your point?
    - CompanionCuuube 7y ago
      It helps if you read the entire comment, as it would be obvious that the objection was to the "obviously synthetic" nature of the study.
      - slg 7y ago
        I read that comment and it had zero explanation or any examples of how the report is "obviously synthetic".
  - wahern 7y ago
    Everybody in your world has an ID. In some impoverished and elderly communities not everyone has an ID. You don't run into these people in your day-to-day life as they manifestly don't have the same work and living habits as you do. Millions of these people do exist. I've had family members in this boat. Renewals, name changes (especially for women), DUIs, homelessness (which encompasses much more than literally not having a roof over your head), lack of mobility, a DMV that's 30+ miles away, and the simple fact that successfully voting isn't exactly high on the list of priorities for people facing these issues--these are just a few of the myriad random barriers that conspire to hold back people from voting. I've personally seen them among acquaintances; if you haven't, consider yourself fortunate. I don't see why it needs to be denied. The level of effort the state should expend to address these issues, what sort personal investment and initiative we should expect of people, and such burdens relative to the risk of fraud--these questions are worthy of debate. But nobody wants to argue these things fairly because, for better or worse, the facts are uncomfortable, especially if you cling to the principle of universal suffrage, which we're all expected to do. And maybe that's unfair--it is difficult for certain political perspectives, such as that we should recognize some aspect of voting as an earned privilege requiring some modicum of initiative, to be voiced these days. But that's no excuse for denying facts.
- weberc2 7y ago
  I'm totally fine with requiring an ID _and_ making it easy for legitimate voters to get one. I don't understand why there are people who are opposed to voter ID requirements (full stop), as though they are inherently racist.
  - jandrese 7y ago
    The latter is where Voter ID laws tend to bite. They make it difficult for certain communities to obtain an ID via a variety of underhanded tricks. What you typically see is a Voter ID go into effect, and then whoops, the state budget is too tight this year so we're closing down a whole bunch of DMV locations and restricting hours on the rest.
    - crooked-v 7y ago
      For example, there's that one DMV that's open only four days per year (!), with the closest alternative being 20 miles away and only open 7 to 5 two days a week (have a fun time managing that if you're a working stiff without a car). https://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2016/feb/19/john-oliver/office-provides-id-voting-one-wisconsin-burg-open-/ https://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2016/feb/19/...
      - weberc2 7y ago
        Is that inherent to voter ID systems, or could you imagine a world where ID issuing authorities are required to keep better hours? Perhaps we could check out Europe’s model to see how they keep their voter ID systems from regressing into a racist dystopia?
    - weberc2 7y ago
      So require ID-issuing authorities to keep certain hours. This is a trivial problem; I don't understand the compulsion to paint this as a dichotomy--there's lots of middleground between Evil Racist voter ID requirements and no voter ID requirements at all; it's not even a slippery slope.
- neonIcon 7y ago
  To do a laundry list[1] of other things that I would consider less important than voting requires an ID, which in turn requires you to go to the dreaded DMV. Is it the duty of the government to provide the ID for these people? Nope. [1]] https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/24-things-that-require-a-photo-id https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/24-things-that-require-a-... Almost every single one of which is either illegal, or very difficult to do without an ID.
  - slg 7y ago
    None of these things listed are constitutional rights like voting and most of the things listed are more difficult but not impossible without ID.
    - neonIcon 7y ago
      Clearly you haven't tried to do half of these things without an ID.. and a good portion of the other half would likely be illegal. You are correct about the constitutional right however.
      - slg 7y ago
        Most times people say ID is "required" is because they are lazy and don't want to go through the effort of confirming identity using other means. There are certainly things that do legally require ID like opening a bank account, but others just have a strong preference for ID such as flying which can be done without ID if you are committed to fighting through the difficulties.
        neonIcon 7y ago
        I am not sure where you live but in the U.S. flying without an ID of some sort is impossible, and an accepted ID other than a drivers license all have an arguably larger barrier to entry than going to the DMV and paying the ~$10 and an hour+ of your time. That or you are someone with an inordinate amount of resources available to you and are looking at this problem through rose colored glasses.

slg 7y ago

It is fundamentally the same point since that party doesn't want to make it easy and free to get a voter ID. If you have to take a day off work to go to the DMV or need to pay some fee to get your ID, then requiring ID is in practice making it harder to vote. If you want to require a voter ID, it is the duty of the government to assure that everyone citizen who wants one has one.

andrewla 7y ago
Everybody has an ID. Find a study that shows differently (for example [1]) and you'll be able to see how obviously synthetic it is. I have no doubt that the people who are opposing Voter ID have no nefarious motive, but there's a lot of confirmation bias at work that creates a false narrative that getting a photo ID is "difficult" and that people without photo IDs are common and disproportionately minorities. [1] https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/d/download_file_39242.pdf https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/d/d...
- bearcobra 7y ago
  I'm not sure I understand what objections would be to the study you cite.
  - andrewla 7y ago
    A telephone survey of 982 people called on landlines. How many total calls were made -- what was the response rate, and what has been done to de-bias any correlation between response rate and the outcome? And a self-reporting survey, over the phone, about government photo ids, without any mention being made of how they convinced people that the survey was genuine? And then there's just the standard phone survey stuff, where you up-multiply based on (once again, self-reported) attributes to match population demographics, causing everything to be wildly out of whack. This level of obfuscation of methodology is pretty high even by the standards of regular polling.
- slg 7y ago
  Did you legitimately just link to a study disproving your point as if that is evidence that supposedly proves your point?
  - CompanionCuuube 7y ago
    It helps if you read the entire comment, as it would be obvious that the objection was to the "obviously synthetic" nature of the study.
    - slg 7y ago
      I read that comment and it had zero explanation or any examples of how the report is "obviously synthetic".
- wahern 7y ago
  Everybody in your world has an ID. In some impoverished and elderly communities not everyone has an ID. You don't run into these people in your day-to-day life as they manifestly don't have the same work and living habits as you do. Millions of these people do exist. I've had family members in this boat. Renewals, name changes (especially for women), DUIs, homelessness (which encompasses much more than literally not having a roof over your head), lack of mobility, a DMV that's 30+ miles away, and the simple fact that successfully voting isn't exactly high on the list of priorities for people facing these issues--these are just a few of the myriad random barriers that conspire to hold back people from voting. I've personally seen them among acquaintances; if you haven't, consider yourself fortunate. I don't see why it needs to be denied. The level of effort the state should expend to address these issues, what sort personal investment and initiative we should expect of people, and such burdens relative to the risk of fraud--these questions are worthy of debate. But nobody wants to argue these things fairly because, for better or worse, the facts are uncomfortable, especially if you cling to the principle of universal suffrage, which we're all expected to do. And maybe that's unfair--it is difficult for certain political perspectives, such as that we should recognize some aspect of voting as an earned privilege requiring some modicum of initiative, to be voiced these days. But that's no excuse for denying facts.
weberc2 7y ago
I'm totally fine with requiring an ID _and_ making it easy for legitimate voters to get one. I don't understand why there are people who are opposed to voter ID requirements (full stop), as though they are inherently racist.
- jandrese 7y ago
  The latter is where Voter ID laws tend to bite. They make it difficult for certain communities to obtain an ID via a variety of underhanded tricks. What you typically see is a Voter ID go into effect, and then whoops, the state budget is too tight this year so we're closing down a whole bunch of DMV locations and restricting hours on the rest.
  - crooked-v 7y ago
    For example, there's that one DMV that's open only four days per year (!), with the closest alternative being 20 miles away and only open 7 to 5 two days a week (have a fun time managing that if you're a working stiff without a car). https://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2016/feb/19/john-oliver/office-provides-id-voting-one-wisconsin-burg-open-/ https://www.politifact.com/wisconsin/statements/2016/feb/19/...
    - weberc2 7y ago
      Is that inherent to voter ID systems, or could you imagine a world where ID issuing authorities are required to keep better hours? Perhaps we could check out Europe’s model to see how they keep their voter ID systems from regressing into a racist dystopia?
  - weberc2 7y ago
    So require ID-issuing authorities to keep certain hours. This is a trivial problem; I don't understand the compulsion to paint this as a dichotomy--there's lots of middleground between Evil Racist voter ID requirements and no voter ID requirements at all; it's not even a slippery slope.
neonIcon 7y ago
To do a laundry list[1] of other things that I would consider less important than voting requires an ID, which in turn requires you to go to the dreaded DMV. Is it the duty of the government to provide the ID for these people? Nope. [1]] https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/24-things-that-require-a-photo-id https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/24-things-that-require-a-... Almost every single one of which is either illegal, or very difficult to do without an ID.
- slg 7y ago
  None of these things listed are constitutional rights like voting and most of the things listed are more difficult but not impossible without ID.
  - neonIcon 7y ago
    Clearly you haven't tried to do half of these things without an ID.. and a good portion of the other half would likely be illegal. You are correct about the constitutional right however.
    - slg 7y ago
      Most times people say ID is "required" is because they are lazy and don't want to go through the effort of confirming identity using other means. There are certainly things that do legally require ID like opening a bank account, but others just have a strong preference for ID such as flying which can be done without ID if you are committed to fighting through the difficulties.
      - neonIcon 7y ago
        I am not sure where you live but in the U.S. flying without an ID of some sort is impossible, and an accepted ID other than a drivers license all have an arguably larger barrier to entry than going to the DMV and paying the ~$10 and an hour+ of your time. That or you are someone with an inordinate amount of resources available to you and are looking at this problem through rose colored glasses.