Plan B Forum

As it happens every year on Martin Luther King Day, there are hundreds of protests going on around the country.

One that I found interesting is going on in South Carolina today. The protest is against Voter ID Laws, read about it here.

The law passed, but not yet enacted in South Carolina and a few other states, requires that voters present a photo ID at the polling place.

Protesters are against having to show photo ID when voting because they say it prevents people of lower income from voting. They call it a discriminatory law.

I'm not sure what to think of this one. Is the cost of a photo ID really enough to stop people who want to vote from voting?

I believe proving your identity, proof of residency and legal citizenship should be required of all voters. If you can't prove who you are, why should you be allowed to vote?

Apparently, there are a lot of people that disagree with me.

I haven't read a good opposing argument to voter ID laws.

Does anyone here oppose the law, and if so, why?

Yopu have to have ID to cash a check, do any banking, get any government benefits, visit the doctor, many times to use a credit/debit card. This is just an excuse for those who would like to promote voter fraud.

I beleive the supreme court has ruled that this is leaqgal as long as you can get a state ID ofr relatively cheap (if not free)

There are something like 3 million people in NYC alone who do not have a driver's licence. Obviously, most of them have managed to get through life until now without photo ID.

Much of the claim that photo ID requirement would not be much of a barrier for those who don't currently have rests on the assumption that it would be easy and cheap to obtain. But, think about this for a sec, if it were easy for people without ID to get ID, wouldn't that pretty much defeat the purpose of an ID requirement?

Let's look at an example that would not be at all uncommon - someone born in the U.S., without a driver's licence or passport, not in the military, school, or on the dole, who doesn't own a gun, isn't a member of a union, has no health or life insurance, and lives someplace where the utility bills are in someone else's name. In New York State, that person would be hard pressed to come up with the necessary "points requirement" from the documents they would possess in order to provide proof of name. Even if they did, they would still have to provide proof of date of birth, and since they don't have a driver's licence, passport, etc., the only option is a birth certificate. What if they don't have a copy of their birth certificate? What are the ID requirements to get one?:

A.One (1) of the following forms of valid photo-ID:
•Driver license
•State issued non-driver photo-ID card
•Passport
•U.S. Military issued photo-ID


B.Two (2) of the following showing the applicant's name and address:
•Utility or telephone bills
•Letter from a government agency dated within the last six (6) months

Anyone seeing the catch-22 yet?

It's never been about stopping voter fraud. It's all about trying to put roadblocks in the way of people who are unlikely to vote Republican.

Liberty1 wrote:Yopu have to have ID to cash a check, do any banking, get any government benefits, visit the doctor, many times to use a credit/debit card. This is just an excuse for those who would like to promote voter fraud.

What kind of weird-ass places do you people live in? I've lived in some of the largest cities and metro areas in the country, and not once have I had to show ID to use a credit or debit card, do most banking, or visit the doctor. I haven't "cashed" a check in some time, but I don't show ID for that either - even if I go inside the bank for the transaction.

The ID rules are nothing more than a sham, to place barriers to voting. As Scooter said, mostly to people who are unlikely to vote Republican. Shameful.

Joe Guy wrote:I believe proving your identity, proof of residency and legal citizenship should be required of all voters. If you can't prove who you are, why should you be allowed to vote?

You do that at the time you register to become a voter. Why should you have to prove it all over again every time there's an election? As a practical matter alone, in busy (read "urban") polling stations, it's likely to cause significant delays and (surprise!) discourage voting. Just the process of getting ID can be difficult for low-income and elderly people.

As has been pointed out already, the whole purpose of requiring additional identification is to suppress the vote particularly among the young, the poor, urban minorities and those otherwise disenfranchised by society. Anyone claiming the motivation is "voter fraud" should first demonstrate that there is actually a voter fraud problem that needs to be addressed and that would justify such impositions.

Scooter wrote:It's never been about stopping voter fraud. It's all about trying to put roadblocks in the way of people who are unlikely to vote Republican.

It does appear to be what you say. There are other ways to verify eligibility to vote besides a photo ID.

Guinevere wrote:I've lived in some of the largest cities and metro areas in the country, and not once have I had to show ID to use a credit or debit card, do most banking, or visit the doctor. I haven't "cashed" a check in some time, but I don't show ID for that either - even if I go inside the bank for the transaction.

When a store or bank checks your ID they are helping to prevent others from using your credit card or other benefit. Many stores in my area of the country ask for ID with a credit card. The bank always asks me for ID when I do banking. Of course that could be because I'm a suspicious looking character.

Sue U wrote: You do that at the time you register to become a voter. Why should you have to prove it all over again every time there's an election? As a practical matter alone, in busy (read "urban") polling stations, it's likely to cause significant delays and (surprise!) discourage voting. Just the process of getting ID can be difficult for low-income and elderly people.

If they require a photo ID every time people vote, wouldn't that eliminate absentee voting?

Joe Guy wrote:If they require a photo ID every time people vote, wouldn't that eliminate absentee voting?

Most of the time, absentee ballots aren't even counted -- it's just not worth the effort unless the vote is so close that absentee votes could swing it one way or the other. If you really want your vote to not count, vote absentee.

You do that at the time you register to become a voter.

I guess you missed the discussion we had which shows that the registration process (at least in CA in PA I'd be very surprised if it's much different anywhere else) has become a complete joke in terms of requiring proof of citizenship.

To my mind, it's this complete lack of requirement to prove citizenship at the time of registration that makes the ID requirement at the time of voting essential. Its become the last firewall left to assure the integrity of the voting process.

Most of the time, absentee ballots aren't even counted

They're always counted in California; in fact the absentee ballot totals frequently get reported on election night before the same day totals start coming in. I believe this is the case in many other states that have extensive early voting as well.

Joe Guy wrote:

Guinevere wrote:I've lived in some of the largest cities and metro areas in the country, and not once have I had to show ID to use a credit or debit card, do most banking, or visit the doctor. I haven't "cashed" a check in some time, but I don't show ID for that either - even if I go inside the bank for the transaction.

When a store or bank checks your ID they are helping to prevent others from using your credit card or other benefit. Many stores in my area of the country ask for ID with a credit card. The bank always asks me for ID when I do banking. Of course that could be because I'm a suspicious looking character.

The only places I am ever asked for ID are the federal courthouse and the airport.

Lord Jim wrote:I guess you missed the discussion we had which shows that the registration process (at least in CA in PA I'd be very surprised if it's much different anywhere else) has become a complete joke in terms of requiring proof of citizenship.

To my mind, it's this complete lack of requirement to prove citizenship at the time of registration that makes the ID requirement at the time of voting essential. Its become the last firewall left to assure the integrity of the voting process.

Is there some reason to believe "the integrity of the voting process" is under threat? Is there a genuine problem with non-citizens registering to vote? How would a photo ID guarantee citizenship of the voter any more than the initial voter registration process? It's just bullshit.

Sue U wrote: Most of the time, absentee ballots aren't even counted -- it's just not worth the effort unless the vote is so close that absentee votes could swing it one way or the other. If you really want your vote to not count, vote absentee.

That doesn't sound likely to me.

The only possible reason not to count absentee votes would be if there was only one proposition or one election on the ballot and there were, for example, 1000 absentee ballots cast and the 'in-person' votes had one side ahead by a lot more than 1000 votes.

Sue U wrote: Is there some reason to believe "the integrity of the voting process" is under threat? Is there a genuine problem with non-citizens registering to vote? How would a photo ID guarantee citizenship of the voter any more than the initial voter registration process? It's just bullshit.

I believe requiring a photo ID would help prevent voter fraud, but that's because I don't believe the current laws are secure enough to prevent it.

However, I doubt there are enough fraudulent voters to make a significant difference in any election.

I also believe it makes no sense to think that a stricter voter registration process somehow does something to increase homeland security (but that thought may have been more appropriate in that other thread).

My mom hasn't driven since 1967, but somehow has managed to obtain a picture ID.

And why you think people without IDs would vote Dem and not republican I'm not real sure. Maybe that says something about the "type" of people who vote dem.

Joe Guy wrote:

Sue U wrote: Most of the time, absentee ballots aren't even counted -- it's just not worth the effort unless the vote is so close that absentee votes could swing it one way or the other. If you really want your vote to not count, vote absentee.

That doesn't sound likely to me.

I may be misinformed on the counting issue (I was told this many years ago), but I do know the law in my state says that because absentee voting is a privilege, not a right, the state may impose conditions on how and when such votes are allowed. I don't have time right now to look up the specific Adminsitrative Code provisions that either require or do not require absentee-ballot counting.

Liberty1 wrote:My mom hasn't driven since 1967, but somehow has managed to obtain a picture ID.

And I would bet it does absolutely nothing to prove she is a citizen.

And why you think people without IDs would vote Dem and not republican I'm not real sure. Maybe that says something about the "type" of people who vote dem.

It's no secret that people who live in urban areas (who are less likely to drive) and people who are poor are more likely to vote Democrat. Unlike you I don't anything disparaging about either "type" that would cause me to make a negative judgment about them.

You do that at the time you register to become a voter. Why should you have to prove it all over again every time there's an election?

Actually, no, you frequently DON'T. When I registered, I had to show...nothing. No ID, no proof of residence, NOTHING. I had to sign a statement saying I was whi I said I was & lived where I said I did. That's it.

ID should be required to vote. Vote fraud of any kind should be punished with death.

And what would ID prove, other than you had managed to get yourself on the voter's list? Certainly not that you were eligible to register in the first place.