4 ms·
Because we make getting an ID cost money, and make it difficult for poor people. If you live in a rural place, or are poor, getting an ID is hard, it costs mon
by Aloha 5y ago
Because we make getting an ID cost money, and make it difficult for poor people.
If you live in a rural place, or are poor, getting an ID is hard, it costs money to get the underlying proof of identity, then costs time (which is money) to get the ID itself, because you often must travel vast distances to the office that issues photo ID's.
If we solved the issuance problem, so everyone could get a free copy birth certificate and made passports free (which can be obtained via an appointment at most post offices), then this problem would be easily solved, and my objections to voter ID would pretty much instantly fall away.
That said, as a former polling place worker, the amount of voter fraud is.. vastly overstated, its a basically non-existent problem, and is mostly an issue of people making good faith mistakes.
However, if it makes folks feel better, its a societal good to get everyone some form of free and easy photo ID, so for me its a two birds with one stone policy, I'll give on this issue, to get the other one solved.
The issue is conservatives seem hell bent on passing voter ID laws without doing enough (or sometimes anything) to solve the (ID) supply side of the equation.
- systemvoltage 5y agoMake IDs free. These are all weasle arguments for not attempting to improve and gives ammunition to Republicans to question election integrity (even though it didn't stand up in the courts).
- Aloha 5y agoI'm 100% with you man, I think its a net social good to give everyone a free ID, while I think voter ID not needed as a policy, once everyone has an ID it causes little if any harm. I'm generally opposed to anything that smacks of 'papers please', thats my personal root of opposition, but its very weak, and if someone promised a policy that gave everyone a free passport but mandated voter ID requirements, I would gladly show up and vote for them.
- malnourish 5y agoMake IDs free _and_ do not tie them to an address. The address requirement needlessly disenfranchises some 500k people from a litany of opportunities.
- Volundr 5y agoIf that were true surely Republican's would be proposing making IDs free themselves no? If the purpose is to protect the integrity of our elections and not to disenfranchise voters, surely that would be step 1 right? I'm not aware of any such proposals, are you?
- systemvoltage 5y ago32 states already require IDs for voting.
- Volundr 5y agoThat number is a bit misleading. For example Idaho is counted in that 32, and here we are required to show ID OR sign an affidavit. Also are those IDs free? Otherwise I'm not sure what that changes about my point.
- jandrese 5y agoIn many cases the ID is free, and available to anybody who can spend multiple hours during the workday standing in a line in the county seat an hour away from home. This is how it is used to disenfranchise people. Add a small clause to the rule that says "every county has 1 location" and it is zero burden for rural voters while urban voters are locked out of the process because no single government office can handle 10 million people. Then the legislators will blame the people in the urban counties for being "lazy" and not voting. We saw in 2020 that the voting rate discrepancies are almost entirely the effect of longstanding voter restrictions that just happened to not work that year, which is why so many state governments have worked overtime to double down on voting restrictions to avoid making the same mistake of allowing people to vote.