3 ms·

Just by the pure fact that you have to invest time and effort to get the necessary documentation, voter ID laws introduce another barrier that will disproportio

by esarbe 6y ago

Just by the pure fact that you have to invest time and effort to get the necessary documentation, voter ID laws introduce another barrier that will disproportionately affect poor people that might not have the option of just not going to work for half a day to clear the necessary bureaucratic hurdles. If you want voter IDs; that's fine. And if you can really just walk to any grocery and get a voter ID, that's fine too. But let's take Iowa's planned voter ID law of 2007 as an example; this requires a drivers license or a passport or a US birth certificate. If you don't have such documentation (and surprise; poor people are more often lacking such documentation) then you have to invest time and effort. You seem to think that voter impersonation seems to be a problem. It has been shown that this is not the case[0]. So, what problem exactly are voter IDs supposed to solve? [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_impersonation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_impersonation

syshum 6y ago
>> you have to invest time and effort to get the necessary documentation you have to invest time and energy into everything in life (including voting itself), this is not a valid argument at all in my opinion. If you can not invest the very small amount of time and energy needed to get an ID, then you certainly are not investing the time and energy to research and understand the people you are voting for and/or the initiatives that appear on the ballot >But let's take Iowa's planned voter ID law of 2007 I am not sure what the "planned" law in 2007 was, nor do I really care what is was since you use the terminology of "planned" I assume it did not actually pass. Looking at the actual law of Iowa[1] any voter that does not have a Drivers License is automatically mailed a voter ID card when they Register to vote, and Iowa also allows for Election Day Registration for which you can use an Existing ID or Proof of Residency [2] such as Residential lease, Utility bill (including a cell phone bill), Bank statement, Paycheck, Government check or other government document So again I do not find this law, that is actually on the books to be burdensome Can you point to an Actual law, on the books today and activity enforced, that has the burdens you claim to be sure deterrents to raise to the level of suppression or are you just reading too many NYTimes stories about the evils of Voter ID to actually research the topic yourself? >>You seem to think that voter impersonation seems to be a problem Point to any statement I have made that says or even implies that? Every other interaction I have with the government requires ID I fail to see why Voting should be exempt from this requirement. [1] https://sos.iowa.gov/elections/voterinformation/voterIDfaq.html https://sos.iowa.gov/elections/voterinformation/voterIDfaq.h... [2] https://sos.iowa.gov/elections/voterinformation/edr.html https://sos.iowa.gov/elections/voterinformation/edr.html
- esarbe 6y ago
  > So again I do not find this law, that is actually on the books to be burdensome You might consider yourself privileged, then. Because there is extensive research about the costs that are associated with voter id laws[0]. > or are you just reading too many NYTimes stories about the evils of Voter ID NYT is fine, although not my favorite. I prefer The Intercept. > Point to any statement I have made that says or even implies that? It was my impression, that's why I wrote "You seem" instead of "You say [...]" or "You write [...]". So; what is the problem do you want to solve with voter ids? [0] https://today.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/FullReportVoterIDJune20141.pdf https://today.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Ful...
  - syshum 6y ago
    >>You might consider yourself privileged This is all subjective and not even really worthy of response as the entire concept of "privilege" is itself political. Every single person in the US would be considered privileged by people in nations with extreme poverty (living on less than $1 per day). The "costs" your study talks about has been mitigated in any number of ways I have outlined in at least 4 comments now. you seem to simply want to ignore these things to push your political cause, that is fine but I am not going to keep addressing the same point over and over again >NYT is fine NYT is political biased to an extreme degree to authoritarian and collectivist ideologies and has been for decades though the last few years or so it is gotten a lot more bias dropping even the appearance of subjectivity as the bias as spread from its isolated section of the opinion pages to the actual "news" reporting >So; what is the problem do you want to solve with voter ids? it is not a matter of solving a problem. The need for ID happens in all facets of life and fail to see a compelling reason that voting should be excluded from this. You need an ID for all manner of other government and private interactions, you need an ID to rent a car, open a bank account, stay in a hotel, collect government / social services, and a whole host of other things It is implausible to me that a large number functioning adult in modern society does not have any of the forms of ID allowed under Voter ID laws, and to the extent that a person does not have said ID the solution is to make obtaining an ID easier and less costly not to simply prohibit voter ID. You believe Voter ID laws disenfranchise poor people, I think poor people not having access to an ID is far far far more likely to disenfranchise them, therefore providing easier and greater access to ID's for the poor, disabled and other groups will in the end be a net positive for people not a negative

by esarbe 6y ago

syshum 6y ago

>> you have to invest time and effort to get the necessary documentation you have to invest time and energy into everything in life (including voting itself), this is not a valid argument at all in my opinion. If you can not invest the very small amount of time and energy needed to get an ID, then you certainly are not investing the time and energy to research and understand the people you are voting for and/or the initiatives that appear on the ballot >But let's take Iowa's planned voter ID law of 2007 I am not sure what the "planned" law in 2007 was, nor do I really care what is was since you use the terminology of "planned" I assume it did not actually pass. Looking at the actual law of Iowa[1] any voter that does not have a Drivers License is automatically mailed a voter ID card when they Register to vote, and Iowa also allows for Election Day Registration for which you can use an Existing ID or Proof of Residency [2] such as Residential lease, Utility bill (including a cell phone bill), Bank statement, Paycheck, Government check or other government document So again I do not find this law, that is actually on the books to be burdensome Can you point to an Actual law, on the books today and activity enforced, that has the burdens you claim to be sure deterrents to raise to the level of suppression or are you just reading too many NYTimes stories about the evils of Voter ID to actually research the topic yourself? >>You seem to think that voter impersonation seems to be a problem Point to any statement I have made that says or even implies that? Every other interaction I have with the government requires ID I fail to see why Voting should be exempt from this requirement. [1] https://sos.iowa.gov/elections/voterinformation/voterIDfaq.html https://sos.iowa.gov/elections/voterinformation/voterIDfaq.h... [2] https://sos.iowa.gov/elections/voterinformation/edr.html https://sos.iowa.gov/elections/voterinformation/edr.html

esarbe 6y ago
> So again I do not find this law, that is actually on the books to be burdensome You might consider yourself privileged, then. Because there is extensive research about the costs that are associated with voter id laws[0]. > or are you just reading too many NYTimes stories about the evils of Voter ID NYT is fine, although not my favorite. I prefer The Intercept. > Point to any statement I have made that says or even implies that? It was my impression, that's why I wrote "You seem" instead of "You say [...]" or "You write [...]". So; what is the problem do you want to solve with voter ids? [0] https://today.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/FullReportVoterIDJune20141.pdf https://today.law.harvard.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Ful...
- syshum 6y ago
  >>You might consider yourself privileged This is all subjective and not even really worthy of response as the entire concept of "privilege" is itself political. Every single person in the US would be considered privileged by people in nations with extreme poverty (living on less than $1 per day). The "costs" your study talks about has been mitigated in any number of ways I have outlined in at least 4 comments now. you seem to simply want to ignore these things to push your political cause, that is fine but I am not going to keep addressing the same point over and over again >NYT is fine NYT is political biased to an extreme degree to authoritarian and collectivist ideologies and has been for decades though the last few years or so it is gotten a lot more bias dropping even the appearance of subjectivity as the bias as spread from its isolated section of the opinion pages to the actual "news" reporting >So; what is the problem do you want to solve with voter ids? it is not a matter of solving a problem. The need for ID happens in all facets of life and fail to see a compelling reason that voting should be excluded from this. You need an ID for all manner of other government and private interactions, you need an ID to rent a car, open a bank account, stay in a hotel, collect government / social services, and a whole host of other things It is implausible to me that a large number functioning adult in modern society does not have any of the forms of ID allowed under Voter ID laws, and to the extent that a person does not have said ID the solution is to make obtaining an ID easier and less costly not to simply prohibit voter ID. You believe Voter ID laws disenfranchise poor people, I think poor people not having access to an ID is far far far more likely to disenfranchise them, therefore providing easier and greater access to ID's for the poor, disabled and other groups will in the end be a net positive for people not a negative