3 ms·

This is not surprising. After Blair/Blunket failed to get the ID card introduced in the late noughties, the voter registration procedure started to require one

This is not surprising. After Blair/Blunket failed to get the ID card introduced in the late noughties, the voter registration procedure started to require one's National Insurance number (never intended for this purpose), all very handy for a de facto national database. I know quite a few people who stopped registering to vote then. Now the Tories have introduced an ID requirement (passport or similar) in the polling stations in addition to the voting card sent to your address. Obviously intended to dissuade the poor and marginal, but rather backfired in also disproportionately discouraging the old, their natural electoral base.

mytailorisrich 3y ago
It's perfectly reasonable to ask for proof of identity when casting a ballot. The specificity is that the UK hasn't got ID cards and some have complained that not everyone has a driving licence or passport, which are not free. Hence why they have created free voter IDs so that no-one is excluded, and of course it is in any case possible to vote by post.
- YawningAngel 3y ago
  Why is it reasonable? It seems to me that there is a cost (disenfranchising some people) and no clear benefit.
  - mytailorisrich 3y ago
    There is no cost, as explained. The benefit is obvious... to ensure the person casting a ballot is really who they claim to be. It's odd that people are fine providing ID for many things but that voting should somehow be exempt.
    - jjgreen 3y ago
      There is no cost, as explained The linked article reports an increase in differential engagement. Do you deny that, or have some other explanation?
      - mytailorisrich 3y ago
        The article is about a gap growing since the 60s. The first election to require voters to show an ID was the local election in England this year. So whatever is the cause of the growing gap discussed in the article it is not voter IDs.
- amanaplanacanal 3y ago
  The US has the same problem. Some parties want voters to show ID, but also won’t allow a national ID card. So it’s up to individual states to determine their own requirement for ID, and parties have great incentive to mess with that process in one way or another to favor their voters. And vote by post is also a very contentious issue.
- shermozle 3y ago
  > It's perfectly reasonable to ask for proof of identity when casting a ballot. If it discourages or prevents people from voting, it has an impact on the outcome. Surely any new requirements should come in to solve an actual problem. Voter fraud is significantly NOT a problem in UK elections. But then, disenfranchising the wrong voters is the whole point. Same reason elections are held on a work day and you can only vote in a single location unless you organise a postal ballot in advance. Retirees and the idle wealthy don't have a problem with these barriers. As an Australian used to compulsory voting held on a Saturday where you can vote at any ballot location in the country, I found the way voting is run in the UK baffling. (Also, the fact I could vote!)

mytailorisrich 3y ago

It's perfectly reasonable to ask for proof of identity when casting a ballot. The specificity is that the UK hasn't got ID cards and some have complained that not everyone has a driving licence or passport, which are not free. Hence why they have created free voter IDs so that no-one is excluded, and of course it is in any case possible to vote by post.

YawningAngel 3y ago
Why is it reasonable? It seems to me that there is a cost (disenfranchising some people) and no clear benefit.
- mytailorisrich 3y ago
  There is no cost, as explained. The benefit is obvious... to ensure the person casting a ballot is really who they claim to be. It's odd that people are fine providing ID for many things but that voting should somehow be exempt.
  - jjgreen 3y ago
    There is no cost, as explained The linked article reports an increase in differential engagement. Do you deny that, or have some other explanation?
    - mytailorisrich 3y ago
      The article is about a gap growing since the 60s. The first election to require voters to show an ID was the local election in England this year. So whatever is the cause of the growing gap discussed in the article it is not voter IDs.
amanaplanacanal 3y ago
The US has the same problem. Some parties want voters to show ID, but also won’t allow a national ID card. So it’s up to individual states to determine their own requirement for ID, and parties have great incentive to mess with that process in one way or another to favor their voters. And vote by post is also a very contentious issue.
shermozle 3y ago
> It's perfectly reasonable to ask for proof of identity when casting a ballot. If it discourages or prevents people from voting, it has an impact on the outcome. Surely any new requirements should come in to solve an actual problem. Voter fraud is significantly NOT a problem in UK elections. But then, disenfranchising the wrong voters is the whole point. Same reason elections are held on a work day and you can only vote in a single location unless you organise a postal ballot in advance. Retirees and the idle wealthy don't have a problem with these barriers. As an Australian used to compulsory voting held on a Saturday where you can vote at any ballot location in the country, I found the way voting is run in the UK baffling. (Also, the fact I could vote!)