Total Posts:63|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Voter ID Law Help Please

MakeSensePeopleDont
Posts: 1,106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2016 11:01:18 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
So once again, the time is almost upon us to go out and submit our votes for another government position. As if we are stuck in a Groundhog's Day perpetual loop, the voter ID law controversy has revved back up, right on queue.

I ask this with the utmost sincerity...to those who truly believe that requiring a photo ID to vote disenfranchises voters. Could you please help me to understand the reasoning here?

Let's keep in mind the following definition:

Disenfranchised -- To prevent (a person or group of people) from having the right to vote.

I'm a logical thinker, so following the logical thought model, I decided to perform a direct apples to apples comparison to see if any other Constitutionally protected rights currently require a photo ID:

Amendment 1 -- The right to peaceful assembly and protest -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to apply for a permit which legally allows you to exercise this right. Without this permit, you are in violation of the law.

Amendment 2 -- The right to bear arms -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to pass a background check, purchase a firearm, register your firearm, purchase ammunition, even purchase a BB Gun.

If we apply the same logic and arguments to the first and second amendments as we do to our right to vote; we can say that apples to apples, Americans are being disenfranchised from exercising their first and second amendment rights.

I decided to take this a step further, and generate a list of situations in which photo identification is required in the U.S. Here is the list I came up with in about 15 minutes:

1.Alcohol
2.Tobacco Products
3.Bank Account
4.Applying for a job
5.Unemployment
6.Welfare
7.Medicaid
8.Food Stamps
9.Social Security
10.Purchase a home
11.Apply for a mortgage
12.Rent a home, apartment, hotel, motel
13.Drive a car
14.Purchase a car
15.Rent a car
16.Fly
17.Marriage
18.Buy a gun
19.Buy a BB gun
20.Hunting license
21.Fishing license
22.Adopt a pet
23.Fill a prescription
24.Donate Blood
25.Purchase cold and flu medication
26.Gambling
27.Lottery tickets
28.Purchase a video game rated "M"
29.See a movie rated NC-17
30.Purchase a cell phone plan
31.Holding a rally or protest"such as protesting against voter ID laws
32.Writing a check
33.Using a credit or debt card
34.Cashing a check
35.Applying for a business license
36.Initially registering a vehicle
37.Applying for a building permit
38.Serving on Jury duty
39.Sales tax exemption age 80+
40.Performing a cash transaction of $5,000 or more
41.Join the military
42.Pickup mail at the post office
43.Pickup package at UPS, FEDEX, etc.
44.Entering a bar or club
45.Applying for a library card
46.Go to school

I truly don't understand the whole argument from the left, it's complete double speak. Please explain the left's argument on how voter ID law would completely deny people the right to vote.
Snazzy
Posts: 117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 12:29:41 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
It prevents the liberals' imaginary friends from voting.
Disclaimer: This post in no way reflects the views of NBC or any of its affiliates.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 1:01:03 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/14/2016 11:01:18 PM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
So once again, the time is almost upon us to go out and submit our votes for another government position. As if we are stuck in a Groundhog's Day perpetual loop, the voter ID law controversy has revved back up, right on queue.

I ask this with the utmost sincerity...to those who truly believe that requiring a photo ID to vote disenfranchises voters. Could you please help me to understand the reasoning here?

Let's keep in mind the following definition:

Disenfranchised -- To prevent (a person or group of people) from having the right to vote.

I'm a logical thinker, so following the logical thought model, I decided to perform a direct apples to apples comparison to see if any other Constitutionally protected rights currently require a photo ID:

Amendment 1 -- The right to peaceful assembly and protest -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to apply for a permit which legally allows you to exercise this right. Without this permit, you are in violation of the law.

Amendment 2 -- The right to bear arms -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to pass a background check, purchase a firearm, register your firearm, purchase ammunition, even purchase a BB Gun.

If we apply the same logic and arguments to the first and second amendments as we do to our right to vote; we can say that apples to apples, Americans are being disenfranchised from exercising their first and second amendment rights.

I decided to take this a step further, and generate a list of situations in which photo identification is required in the U.S. Here is the list I came up with in about 15 minutes:

1.Alcohol
2.Tobacco Products
3.Bank Account
4.Applying for a job
5.Unemployment
6.Welfare
7.Medicaid
8.Food Stamps
9.Social Security
10.Purchase a home
11.Apply for a mortgage
12.Rent a home, apartment, hotel, motel
13.Drive a car
14.Purchase a car
15.Rent a car
16.Fly
17.Marriage
18.Buy a gun
19.Buy a BB gun
20.Hunting license
21.Fishing license
22.Adopt a pet
23.Fill a prescription
24.Donate Blood
25.Purchase cold and flu medication
26.Gambling
27.Lottery tickets
28.Purchase a video game rated "M"
29.See a movie rated NC-17
30.Purchase a cell phone plan
31.Holding a rally or protest"such as protesting against voter ID laws
32.Writing a check
33.Using a credit or debt card
34.Cashing a check
35.Applying for a business license
36.Initially registering a vehicle
37.Applying for a building permit
38.Serving on Jury duty
39.Sales tax exemption age 80+
40.Performing a cash transaction of $5,000 or more
41.Join the military
42.Pickup mail at the post office
43.Pickup package at UPS, FEDEX, etc.
44.Entering a bar or club
45.Applying for a library card
46.Go to school

I truly don't understand the whole argument from the left, it's complete double speak. Please explain the left's argument on how voter ID law would completely deny people the right to vote.

It is a solution to an imaginary problem.

While you are right, getting a gun is a good example of a right that require you to show ID, and voting COULD be the same, but why? It does reduce turnout, and inconvenience a segment of the population all to address an issue that simply does not exist.
Snazzy
Posts: 117
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 1:06:35 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 1:01:03 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/14/2016 11:01:18 PM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
So once again, the time is almost upon us to go out and submit our votes for another government position. As if we are stuck in a Groundhog's Day perpetual loop, the voter ID law controversy has revved back up, right on queue.

I ask this with the utmost sincerity...to those who truly believe that requiring a photo ID to vote disenfranchises voters. Could you please help me to understand the reasoning here?

Let's keep in mind the following definition:

Disenfranchised -- To prevent (a person or group of people) from having the right to vote.

I'm a logical thinker, so following the logical thought model, I decided to perform a direct apples to apples comparison to see if any other Constitutionally protected rights currently require a photo ID:

Amendment 1 -- The right to peaceful assembly and protest -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to apply for a permit which legally allows you to exercise this right. Without this permit, you are in violation of the law.

Amendment 2 -- The right to bear arms -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to pass a background check, purchase a firearm, register your firearm, purchase ammunition, even purchase a BB Gun.

If we apply the same logic and arguments to the first and second amendments as we do to our right to vote; we can say that apples to apples, Americans are being disenfranchised from exercising their first and second amendment rights.

I decided to take this a step further, and generate a list of situations in which photo identification is required in the U.S. Here is the list I came up with in about 15 minutes:

1.Alcohol
2.Tobacco Products
3.Bank Account
4.Applying for a job
5.Unemployment
6.Welfare
7.Medicaid
8.Food Stamps
9.Social Security
10.Purchase a home
11.Apply for a mortgage
12.Rent a home, apartment, hotel, motel
13.Drive a car
14.Purchase a car
15.Rent a car
16.Fly
17.Marriage
18.Buy a gun
19.Buy a BB gun
20.Hunting license
21.Fishing license
22.Adopt a pet
23.Fill a prescription
24.Donate Blood
25.Purchase cold and flu medication
26.Gambling
27.Lottery tickets
28.Purchase a video game rated "M"
29.See a movie rated NC-17
30.Purchase a cell phone plan
31.Holding a rally or protest"such as protesting against voter ID laws
32.Writing a check
33.Using a credit or debt card
34.Cashing a check
35.Applying for a business license
36.Initially registering a vehicle
37.Applying for a building permit
38.Serving on Jury duty
39.Sales tax exemption age 80+
40.Performing a cash transaction of $5,000 or more
41.Join the military
42.Pickup mail at the post office
43.Pickup package at UPS, FEDEX, etc.
44.Entering a bar or club
45.Applying for a library card
46.Go to school

I truly don't understand the whole argument from the left, it's complete double speak. Please explain the left's argument on how voter ID law would completely deny people the right to vote.

It is a solution to an imaginary problem.

While you are right, getting a gun is a good example of a right that require you to show ID, and voting COULD be the same, but why? It does reduce turnout, and inconvenience a segment of the population all to address an issue that simply does not exist.

Some would argue that the reduced turnout would happen due to voter fraud being eradicated. *I am not suggesting that voter fraud is happening as I have received no evidence of this being true* The question was, however, how requiring voter ID would deny someone the right to vote, not if it was an inconvenience.
Disclaimer: This post in no way reflects the views of NBC or any of its affiliates.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 1:30:08 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 1:06:35 AM, Snazzy wrote:
At 9/15/2016 1:01:03 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/14/2016 11:01:18 PM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
So once again, the time is almost upon us to go out and submit our votes for another government position. As if we are stuck in a Groundhog's Day perpetual loop, the voter ID law controversy has revved back up, right on queue.

I ask this with the utmost sincerity...to those who truly believe that requiring a photo ID to vote disenfranchises voters. Could you please help me to understand the reasoning here?

Let's keep in mind the following definition:

Disenfranchised -- To prevent (a person or group of people) from having the right to vote.

I'm a logical thinker, so following the logical thought model, I decided to perform a direct apples to apples comparison to see if any other Constitutionally protected rights currently require a photo ID:

Amendment 1 -- The right to peaceful assembly and protest -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to apply for a permit which legally allows you to exercise this right. Without this permit, you are in violation of the law.

Amendment 2 -- The right to bear arms -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to pass a background check, purchase a firearm, register your firearm, purchase ammunition, even purchase a BB Gun.

If we apply the same logic and arguments to the first and second amendments as we do to our right to vote; we can say that apples to apples, Americans are being disenfranchised from exercising their first and second amendment rights.

I decided to take this a step further, and generate a list of situations in which photo identification is required in the U.S. Here is the list I came up with in about 15 minutes:

1.Alcohol
2.Tobacco Products
3.Bank Account
4.Applying for a job
5.Unemployment
6.Welfare
7.Medicaid
8.Food Stamps
9.Social Security
10.Purchase a home
11.Apply for a mortgage
12.Rent a home, apartment, hotel, motel
13.Drive a car
14.Purchase a car
15.Rent a car
16.Fly
17.Marriage
18.Buy a gun
19.Buy a BB gun
20.Hunting license
21.Fishing license
22.Adopt a pet
23.Fill a prescription
24.Donate Blood
25.Purchase cold and flu medication
26.Gambling
27.Lottery tickets
28.Purchase a video game rated "M"
29.See a movie rated NC-17
30.Purchase a cell phone plan
31.Holding a rally or protest"such as protesting against voter ID laws
32.Writing a check
33.Using a credit or debt card
34.Cashing a check
35.Applying for a business license
36.Initially registering a vehicle
37.Applying for a building permit
38.Serving on Jury duty
39.Sales tax exemption age 80+
40.Performing a cash transaction of $5,000 or more
41.Join the military
42.Pickup mail at the post office
43.Pickup package at UPS, FEDEX, etc.
44.Entering a bar or club
45.Applying for a library card
46.Go to school

I truly don't understand the whole argument from the left, it's complete double speak. Please explain the left's argument on how voter ID law would completely deny people the right to vote.

It is a solution to an imaginary problem.

While you are right, getting a gun is a good example of a right that require you to show ID, and voting COULD be the same, but why? It does reduce turnout, and inconvenience a segment of the population all to address an issue that simply does not exist.

Some would argue that the reduced turnout would happen due to voter fraud being eradicated. *I am not suggesting that voter fraud is happening as I have received no evidence of this being true* The question was, however, how requiring voter ID would deny someone the right to vote, not if it was an inconvenience.

There has been no evidence of any type of fraud that these laws would solve.

To the question, I answered honestly. It is an inconvenience, it effects a few targeted demographics, and is still not something I could call strictly call unreasonable - just unnecessary or unwarranted.
MakeSensePeopleDont
Posts: 1,106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 1:33:00 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 1:01:03 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/14/2016 11:01:18 PM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
So once again, the time is almost upon us to go out and submit our votes for another government position. As if we are stuck in a Groundhog's Day perpetual loop, the voter ID law controversy has revved back up, right on queue.

I ask this with the utmost sincerity...to those who truly believe that requiring a photo ID to vote disenfranchises voters. Could you please help me to understand the reasoning here?

Let's keep in mind the following definition:

Disenfranchised -- To prevent (a person or group of people) from having the right to vote.

I'm a logical thinker, so following the logical thought model, I decided to perform a direct apples to apples comparison to see if any other Constitutionally protected rights currently require a photo ID:

Amendment 1 -- The right to peaceful assembly and protest -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to apply for a permit which legally allows you to exercise this right. Without this permit, you are in violation of the law.

Amendment 2 -- The right to bear arms -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to pass a background check, purchase a firearm, register your firearm, purchase ammunition, even purchase a BB Gun.

If we apply the same logic and arguments to the first and second amendments as we do to our right to vote; we can say that apples to apples, Americans are being disenfranchised from exercising their first and second amendment rights.

I decided to take this a step further, and generate a list of situations in which photo identification is required in the U.S. Here is the list I came up with in about 15 minutes:

1.Alcohol
2.Tobacco Products
3.Bank Account
4.Applying for a job
5.Unemployment
6.Welfare
7.Medicaid
8.Food Stamps
9.Social Security
10.Purchase a home
11.Apply for a mortgage
12.Rent a home, apartment, hotel, motel
13.Drive a car
14.Purchase a car
15.Rent a car
16.Fly
17.Marriage
18.Buy a gun
19.Buy a BB gun
20.Hunting license
21.Fishing license
22.Adopt a pet
23.Fill a prescription
24.Donate Blood
25.Purchase cold and flu medication
26.Gambling
27.Lottery tickets
28.Purchase a video game rated "M"
29.See a movie rated NC-17
30.Purchase a cell phone plan
31.Holding a rally or protest"such as protesting against voter ID laws
32.Writing a check
33.Using a credit or debt card
34.Cashing a check
35.Applying for a business license
36.Initially registering a vehicle
37.Applying for a building permit
38.Serving on Jury duty
39.Sales tax exemption age 80+
40.Performing a cash transaction of $5,000 or more
41.Join the military
42.Pickup mail at the post office
43.Pickup package at UPS, FEDEX, etc.
44.Entering a bar or club
45.Applying for a library card
46.Go to school

I truly don't understand the whole argument from the left, it's complete double speak. Please explain the left's argument on how voter ID law would completely deny people the right to vote.

It is a solution to an imaginary problem.

While you are right, getting a gun is a good example of a right that require you to show ID, and voting COULD be the same, but why? It does reduce turnout, and inconvenience a segment of the population all to address an issue that simply does not exist.

That's just not true. With our polling stations being upgraded from punch cards and check boxes, to the modern computerized systems; in addition, states are beginning to compare their voter data with each other slowly; we are starting to figure out some ways that voting fraud is and has been taking place. Persons casting early ballots in one state, then driving to a neighboring state and voting in person. People in comas somehow voting, dead people voting. We are starting to uncover the crazy schemes people pull off just to vote multiple times.

http://cleveland.cbslocal.com...

http://www.foxnews.com...

Where is this "segment of the population" who are unable to vote if they need an ID? All arguments point to this weasel phrase "segment of the population", but we have yet to see it.

Let's think about this 100% logically.

1) You can't rent or own any sort of living quarters without ID
2) You can't get a job
3) You can't cash your paycheck or put it in the bank
4) You can't get government assistance

So you can't do even the most basic things required to survive; what's left?

Illegal Immigrants? They aren't legally allowed to vote

Homeless people? The homeless population which is so lazy and careless about EVERYTHING that they don't have identification are out worrying about where their next meal is coming from, and whether or not they have enough change to grab another 40 before the corner store closes.

So who are these people in the "Segment of the population?"
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 1:41:02 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 1:33:00 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
At 9/15/2016 1:01:03 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/14/2016 11:01:18 PM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
So once again, the time is almost upon us to go out and submit our votes for another government position. As if we are stuck in a Groundhog's Day perpetual loop, the voter ID law controversy has revved back up, right on queue.

I ask this with the utmost sincerity...to those who truly believe that requiring a photo ID to vote disenfranchises voters. Could you please help me to understand the reasoning here?

Let's keep in mind the following definition:

Disenfranchised -- To prevent (a person or group of people) from having the right to vote.

I'm a logical thinker, so following the logical thought model, I decided to perform a direct apples to apples comparison to see if any other Constitutionally protected rights currently require a photo ID:

Amendment 1 -- The right to peaceful assembly and protest -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to apply for a permit which legally allows you to exercise this right. Without this permit, you are in violation of the law.

Amendment 2 -- The right to bear arms -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to pass a background check, purchase a firearm, register your firearm, purchase ammunition, even purchase a BB Gun.

If we apply the same logic and arguments to the first and second amendments as we do to our right to vote; we can say that apples to apples, Americans are being disenfranchised from exercising their first and second amendment rights.

I decided to take this a step further, and generate a list of situations in which photo identification is required in the U.S. Here is the list I came up with in about 15 minutes:

1.Alcohol
2.Tobacco Products
3.Bank Account
4.Applying for a job
5.Unemployment
6.Welfare
7.Medicaid
8.Food Stamps
9.Social Security
10.Purchase a home
11.Apply for a mortgage
12.Rent a home, apartment, hotel, motel
13.Drive a car
14.Purchase a car
15.Rent a car
16.Fly
17.Marriage
18.Buy a gun
19.Buy a BB gun
20.Hunting license
21.Fishing license
22.Adopt a pet
23.Fill a prescription
24.Donate Blood
25.Purchase cold and flu medication
26.Gambling
27.Lottery tickets
28.Purchase a video game rated "M"
29.See a movie rated NC-17
30.Purchase a cell phone plan
31.Holding a rally or protest"such as protesting against voter ID laws
32.Writing a check
33.Using a credit or debt card
34.Cashing a check
35.Applying for a business license
36.Initially registering a vehicle
37.Applying for a building permit
38.Serving on Jury duty
39.Sales tax exemption age 80+
40.Performing a cash transaction of $5,000 or more
41.Join the military
42.Pickup mail at the post office
43.Pickup package at UPS, FEDEX, etc.
44.Entering a bar or club
45.Applying for a library card
46.Go to school

I truly don't understand the whole argument from the left, it's complete double speak. Please explain the left's argument on how voter ID law would completely deny people the right to vote.

It is a solution to an imaginary problem.

While you are right, getting a gun is a good example of a right that require you to show ID, and voting COULD be the same, but why? It does reduce turnout, and inconvenience a segment of the population all to address an issue that simply does not exist.

That's just not true. With our polling stations being upgraded from punch cards and check boxes, to the modern computerized systems; in addition, states are beginning to compare their voter data with each other slowly; we are starting to figure out some ways that voting fraud is and has been taking place. Persons casting early ballots in one state, then driving to a neighboring state and voting in person. People in comas somehow voting, dead people voting. We are starting to uncover the crazy schemes people pull off just to vote multiple times.

http://cleveland.cbslocal.com...

http://www.foxnews.com...

Where is this "segment of the population" who are unable to vote if they need an ID? All arguments point to this weasel phrase "segment of the population", but we have yet to see it.

Let's think about this 100% logically.

1) You can't rent or own any sort of living quarters without ID
2) You can't get a job
3) You can't cash your paycheck or put it in the bank
4) You can't get government assistance

So you can't do even the most basic things required to survive; what's left?

Illegal Immigrants? They aren't legally allowed to vote

Homeless people? The homeless population which is so lazy and careless about EVERYTHING that they don't have identification are out worrying about where their next meal is coming from, and whether or not they have enough change to grab another 40 before the corner store closes.

So who are these people in the "Segment of the population?"

https://www.washingtonpost.com...
31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast
a 0.0000031% fraud rate.

To the segments. It effects the elderly and poor disproportionately.
SolonKR
Posts: 4,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 1:47:48 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
Voter ID isn't wrong because of the principle; it's wrong because of the implementation. If you've heard about North Carolina, their law was specifically designed to restrict all the forms of voting that minorities disproportionately used. For example, they required ID for in person voting, but not absentee ballots, because the latter were used mainly by white people. It's the same strategy that, say, leaving only one polling place in a state would support--it's meant to make voting as inconvenient as possible as only rich people with cars could afford to vote in that instance. Same principle, and I'd encourage you to read the court decision that struck down that law. If Republicans weren't overtly trying to manipulate elections with ID, it wouldn't be an issue.

The only reasonable stance is to support free, automatic voter registration to every citizen when they either turn 18 or gain citizenship, and send them a card in the mail.
SO to Bailey, the love of my life <3
lannan13
Posts: 23,111
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 1:48:05 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
I'm registered to vote and that's all I really care about there.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt

Topics I want to debate. (http://tinyurl.com...)
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 1:55:37 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 1:47:48 AM, SolonKR wrote:
Voter ID isn't wrong because of the principle; it's wrong because of the implementation. If you've heard about North Carolina, their law was specifically designed to restrict all the forms of voting that minorities disproportionately used. For example, they required ID for in person voting, but not absentee ballots, because the latter were used mainly by white people. It's the same strategy that, say, leaving only one polling place in a state would support--it's meant to make voting as inconvenient as possible as only rich people with cars could afford to vote in that instance. Same principle, and I'd encourage you to read the court decision that struck down that law. If Republicans weren't overtly trying to manipulate elections with ID, it wouldn't be an issue.

The only reasonable stance is to support free, automatic voter registration to every citizen when they either turn 18 or gain citizenship, and send them a card in the mail.

What is sad is the active campaign Republicans have mounted to dissuade registration. Motor voter etc.
MakeSensePeopleDont
Posts: 1,106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 2:12:49 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 1:41:02 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 1:33:00 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
At 9/15/2016 1:01:03 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/14/2016 11:01:18 PM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
So once again, the time is almost upon us to go out and submit our votes for another government position. As if we are stuck in a Groundhog's Day perpetual loop, the voter ID law controversy has revved back up, right on queue.

I ask this with the utmost sincerity...to those who truly believe that requiring a photo ID to vote disenfranchises voters. Could you please help me to understand the reasoning here?

Let's keep in mind the following definition:

Disenfranchised -- To prevent (a person or group of people) from having the right to vote.

I'm a logical thinker, so following the logical thought model, I decided to perform a direct apples to apples comparison to see if any other Constitutionally protected rights currently require a photo ID:

Amendment 1 -- The right to peaceful assembly and protest -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to apply for a permit which legally allows you to exercise this right. Without this permit, you are in violation of the law.

Amendment 2 -- The right to bear arms -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to pass a background check, purchase a firearm, register your firearm, purchase ammunition, even purchase a BB Gun.

If we apply the same logic and arguments to the first and second amendments as we do to our right to vote; we can say that apples to apples, Americans are being disenfranchised from exercising their first and second amendment rights.

I decided to take this a step further, and generate a list of situations in which photo identification is required in the U.S. Here is the list I came up with in about 15 minutes:

1.Alcohol
2.Tobacco Products
3.Bank Account
4.Applying for a job
5.Unemployment
6.Welfare
7.Medicaid
8.Food Stamps
9.Social Security
10.Purchase a home
11.Apply for a mortgage
12.Rent a home, apartment, hotel, motel
13.Drive a car
14.Purchase a car
15.Rent a car
16.Fly
17.Marriage
18.Buy a gun
19.Buy a BB gun
20.Hunting license
21.Fishing license
22.Adopt a pet
23.Fill a prescription
24.Donate Blood
25.Purchase cold and flu medication
26.Gambling
27.Lottery tickets
28.Purchase a video game rated "M"
29.See a movie rated NC-17
30.Purchase a cell phone plan
31.Holding a rally or protest"such as protesting against voter ID laws
32.Writing a check
33.Using a credit or debt card
34.Cashing a check
35.Applying for a business license
36.Initially registering a vehicle
37.Applying for a building permit
38.Serving on Jury duty
39.Sales tax exemption age 80+
40.Performing a cash transaction of $5,000 or more
41.Join the military
42.Pickup mail at the post office
43.Pickup package at UPS, FEDEX, etc.
44.Entering a bar or club
45.Applying for a library card
46.Go to school

I truly don't understand the whole argument from the left, it's complete double speak. Please explain the left's argument on how voter ID law would completely deny people the right to vote.

It is a solution to an imaginary problem.

While you are right, getting a gun is a good example of a right that require you to show ID, and voting COULD be the same, but why? It does reduce turnout, and inconvenience a segment of the population all to address an issue that simply does not exist.

That's just not true. With our polling stations being upgraded from punch cards and check boxes, to the modern computerized systems; in addition, states are beginning to compare their voter data with each other slowly; we are starting to figure out some ways that voting fraud is and has been taking place. Persons casting early ballots in one state, then driving to a neighboring state and voting in person. People in comas somehow voting, dead people voting. We are starting to uncover the crazy schemes people pull off just to vote multiple times.

http://cleveland.cbslocal.com...

http://www.foxnews.com...

Where is this "segment of the population" who are unable to vote if they need an ID? All arguments point to this weasel phrase "segment of the population", but we have yet to see it.

Let's think about this 100% logically.

1) You can't rent or own any sort of living quarters without ID
2) You can't get a job
3) You can't cash your paycheck or put it in the bank
4) You can't get government assistance

So you can't do even the most basic things required to survive; what's left?

Illegal Immigrants? They aren't legally allowed to vote

Homeless people? The homeless population which is so lazy and careless about EVERYTHING that they don't have identification are out worrying about where their next meal is coming from, and whether or not they have enough change to grab another 40 before the corner store closes.

So who are these people in the "Segment of the population?"

https://www.washingtonpost.com...
31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast
a 0.0000031% fraud rate.


His "investigation" has taken place from like 2000 through 2014. Could you tell me, in 2000, what was the process employed nationally in order to combat voter fraud and interstate voter fraud? Then how has that process evolved through the 14 years of his "investigation"?

I mean, how do you catch people committing crimes that you have no system in use in order to catch them?

Even the standard crimes that take place daily, do you know how many are closed annually?

Less than 47% of violent crimes each year are closed.
15.3% of property crimes each year are closed

https://ucr.fbi.gov...

And that doesn't account for the more than 50% of violent crimes annually that aren't even reported.

http://www.bjs.gov...

To the segments. It effects the elderly and poor disproportionately.

The elderly? So the elderly population without photo ID......which in turn means they are unable to apply for and cash their social security checks each month...or acquire any cash from any other source, even their life savings sitting in the bank? How exactly are these elderly surviving?

How exactly does it effect the poor?
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 2:21:16 AM
Posted: 2 months ago

Let's keep in mind the following definition:

Disenfranchised -- To prevent (a person or group of people) from having the right to vote.

I'm a logical thinker, so following the logical thought model, I decided to perform a direct apples to apples comparison to see if any other Constitutionally protected rights currently require a photo ID:

Amendment 1 -- The right to peaceful assembly and protest -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to apply for a permit which legally allows you to exercise this right. Without this permit, you are in violation of the law.

Amendment 2 -- The right to bear arms -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to pass a background check, purchase a firearm, register your firearm, purchase ammunition, even purchase a BB Gun.

If we apply the same logic and arguments to the first and second amendments as we do to our right to vote; we can say that apples to apples, Americans are being disenfranchised from exercising their first and second amendment rights.

I decided to take this a step further, and generate a list of situations in which photo identification is required in the U.S. Here is the list I came up with in about 15 minutes:

1.Alcohol
2.Tobacco Products
3.Bank Account
4.Applying for a job
5.Unemployment
6.Welfare
7.Medicaid
8.Food Stamps
9.Social Security
10.Purchase a home
11.Apply for a mortgage
12.Rent a home, apartment, hotel, motel
13.Drive a car
14.Purchase a car
15.Rent a car
16.Fly
17.Marriage
18.Buy a gun
19.Buy a BB gun
20.Hunting license
21.Fishing license
22.Adopt a pet
23.Fill a prescription
24.Donate Blood
25.Purchase cold and flu medication
26.Gambling
27.Lottery tickets
28.Purchase a video game rated "M"
29.See a movie rated NC-17
30.Purchase a cell phone plan
31.Holding a rally or protest"such as protesting against voter ID laws
32.Writing a check
33.Using a credit or debt card
34.Cashing a check
35.Applying for a business license
36.Initially registering a vehicle
37.Applying for a building permit
38.Serving on Jury duty
39.Sales tax exemption age 80+
40.Performing a cash transaction of $5,000 or more
41.Join the military
42.Pickup mail at the post office
43.Pickup package at UPS, FEDEX, etc.
44.Entering a bar or club
45.Applying for a library card
46.Go to school

I truly don't understand the whole argument from the left, it's complete double speak. Please explain the left's argument on how voter ID law would completely deny people the right to vote.

It is a solution to an imaginary problem.

While you are right, getting a gun is a good example of a right that require you to show ID, and voting COULD be the same, but why? It does reduce turnout, and inconvenience a segment of the population all to address an issue that simply does not exist.

That's just not true. With our polling stations being upgraded from punch cards and check boxes, to the modern computerized systems; in addition, states are beginning to compare their voter data with each other slowly; we are starting to figure out some ways that voting fraud is and has been taking place. Persons casting early ballots in one state, then driving to a neighboring state and voting in person. People in comas somehow voting, dead people voting. We are starting to uncover the crazy schemes people pull off just to vote multiple times.

http://cleveland.cbslocal.com...

http://www.foxnews.com...

Where is this "segment of the population" who are unable to vote if they need an ID? All arguments point to this weasel phrase "segment of the population", but we have yet to see it.

Let's think about this 100% logically.

1) You can't rent or own any sort of living quarters without ID
2) You can't get a job
3) You can't cash your paycheck or put it in the bank
4) You can't get government assistance

So you can't do even the most basic things required to survive; what's left?

Illegal Immigrants? They aren't legally allowed to vote

Homeless people? The homeless population which is so lazy and careless about EVERYTHING that they don't have identification are out worrying about where their next meal is coming from, and whether or not they have enough change to grab another 40 before the corner store closes.

So who are these people in the "Segment of the population?"

https://www.washingtonpost.com...
31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast
a 0.0000031% fraud rate.


His "investigation" has taken place from like 2000 through 2014. Could you tell me, in 2000, what was the process employed nationally in order to combat voter fraud and interstate voter fraud? Then how has that process evolved through the 14 years of his "investigation"?

I mean, how do you catch people committing crimes that you have no system in use in order to catch them?

Even the standard crimes that take place daily, do you know how many are closed annually?

Less than 47% of violent crimes each year are closed.
15.3% of property crimes each year are closed

https://ucr.fbi.gov...

And that doesn't account for the more than 50% of violent crimes annually that aren't even reported.

http://www.bjs.gov...


Look. As I noted from post one on. These laws don't do much of anything to fix the imaginary problem. In most cases, like the one of someone voting 13x for Scott Walker, they are using absentee ballots. ID laws do nothing to address that, and the rate of multi-voting is basically statistically zero.

Tie yourself in knots about this if you like, but it is nothing more than thinly veiled attempt to suppress votes of demographics that Republicans lose.

To the segments. It effects the elderly and poor disproportionately.

The elderly? So the elderly population without photo ID......which in turn means they are unable to apply for and cash their social security checks each month...or acquire any cash from any other source, even their life savings sitting in the bank? How exactly are these elderly surviving?
Deny it if you like, but it is true that many elderly don't have photo IDs, and have difficulty getting new IDs.

P.S. Your list of things is repetitive, and wrong. Just because you have no idea how the poor operate their daily life does not mean they don't.


How exactly does it effect the poor?
By not allowing them to vote.
MakeSensePeopleDont
Posts: 1,106
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 2:53:19 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 2:21:16 AM, TBR wrote:

That's just not true. With our polling stations being upgraded from punch cards and check boxes, to the modern computerized systems; in addition, states are beginning to compare their voter data with each other slowly; we are starting to figure out some ways that voting fraud is and has been taking place. Persons casting early ballots in one state, then driving to a neighboring state and voting in person. People in comas somehow voting, dead people voting. We are starting to uncover the crazy schemes people pull off just to vote multiple times.

http://cleveland.cbslocal.com...

http://www.foxnews.com...

Where is this "segment of the population" who are unable to vote if they need an ID? All arguments point to this weasel phrase "segment of the population", but we have yet to see it.

Let's think about this 100% logically.

1) You can't rent or own any sort of living quarters without ID
2) You can't get a job
3) You can't cash your paycheck or put it in the bank
4) You can't get government assistance

So you can't do even the most basic things required to survive; what's left?

Illegal Immigrants? They aren't legally allowed to vote

Homeless people? The homeless population which is so lazy and careless about EVERYTHING that they don't have identification are out worrying about where their next meal is coming from, and whether or not they have enough change to grab another 40 before the corner store closes.

So who are these people in the "Segment of the population?"

https://www.washingtonpost.com...
31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast
a 0.0000031% fraud rate.


His "investigation" has taken place from like 2000 through 2014. Could you tell me, in 2000, what was the process employed nationally in order to combat voter fraud and interstate voter fraud? Then how has that process evolved through the 14 years of his "investigation"?

I mean, how do you catch people committing crimes that you have no system in use in order to catch them?

Even the standard crimes that take place daily, do you know how many are closed annually?

Less than 47% of violent crimes each year are closed.
15.3% of property crimes each year are closed

https://ucr.fbi.gov...

And that doesn't account for the more than 50% of violent crimes annually that aren't even reported.

http://www.bjs.gov...


Look. As I noted from post one on. These laws don't do much of anything to fix the imaginary problem. In most cases, like the one of someone voting 13x for Scott Walker, they are using absentee ballots. ID laws do nothing to address that, and the rate of multi-voting is basically statistically zero.

Basically zero? Is that right? So we are constantly hearing all about how over packed the jails in America are, how racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, etc. we are, how violent we are, how horrible we are, how we have to end all this systemic oppression that leads to all those non white males getting harrassed by cops daily and thrown in jail so much, and blah blah blah...

...but for one single day every two years, over 120 million Americans come together, putting down their lives of crime, cheating, stealing, and anarchy...to somehow show the goodness within mankind, and run a crime free election?

So how's that one work?

It definitely couldn't be the zero dollars invested in identifying and combating voter fraud right?


Tie yourself in knots about this if you like, but it is nothing more than thinly veiled attempt to suppress votes of demographics that Republicans lose.


Yeah, I'm tying myself in knots. You can't see the absolutely IMPOSSIBLE polar opposite in crime statistics between voter fraud and crime every other day of the year.....and I'm tying myself in knots.


To the segments. It effects the elderly and poor disproportionately.

The elderly? So the elderly population without photo ID......which in turn means they are unable to apply for and cash their social security checks each month...or acquire any cash from any other source, even their life savings sitting in the bank? How exactly are these elderly surviving?
Deny it if you like, but it is true that many elderly don't have photo IDs, and have difficulty getting new IDs.

P.S. Your list of things is repetitive, and wrong. Just because you have no idea how the poor operate their daily life does not mean they don't.


Yeah, cuz I definitely didn't learn about being poor....growing up in section 8....or living in motels and working day labor.


How exactly does it effect the poor?
By not allowing them to vote.

How? And what poor people? Show me.
SolonKR
Posts: 4,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 3:40:14 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 2:53:19 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:

Here's the court ruling. http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov...

Quote (emphasis added): "In this one statute, the North Carolina legislature imposed a number of voting restrictions. The law required in-person voters to show certain photo IDs, beginning in 2016, which African Americans disproportionately lacked, and eliminated or reduced registration and voting access tools that African Americans disproportionately used . . . Moreover, as the district court found, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, the legislature requested and received racial data as to usage of the practices changed by the proposed law . . . This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Id. The pre-Shelby County version of SL 2013-381 provided that all government-issued IDs, even many that had been expired, would satisfy the requirement as an alternative to DMV-issued photo IDs. J.A. 2114-15. After Shelby County, with race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans . . . As amended, the bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess . . . The district court found that, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, legislators also requested data as to the racial breakdown of early voting usage. Id. at *136-37. Early voting allows any registered voter to complete an absentee application and ballot at the same time, in person, in advance of Election Day. Id. at *4-5. Early voting thus increases opportunities to vote for those who have difficulty getting to their polling place on Election Day. The racial data provided to the legislators revealed that African Americans disproportionately used early voting in both 2008 and 2012 . . . (trial evidence showing that 60.36% and 64.01% of African Americans voted early in 2008 and 2012, respectively, compared to 44.47% and 49.39% of whites). In particular, African Americans disproportionately used the first seven days of early voting. Id. After receipt of this racial data, the General Assembly amended the bill to eliminate the first week of early voting, shortening the total early voting period from seventeen to ten days."

And that's just part of it.
SO to Bailey, the love of my life <3
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 4:03:10 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 2:53:19 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
At 9/15/2016 2:21:16 AM, TBR wrote:

That's just not true. With our polling stations being upgraded from punch cards and check boxes, to the modern computerized systems; in addition, states are beginning to compare their voter data with each other slowly; we are starting to figure out some ways that voting fraud is and has been taking place. Persons casting early ballots in one state, then driving to a neighboring state and voting in person. People in comas somehow voting, dead people voting. We are starting to uncover the crazy schemes people pull off just to vote multiple times.

http://cleveland.cbslocal.com...

http://www.foxnews.com...

Where is this "segment of the population" who are unable to vote if they need an ID? All arguments point to this weasel phrase "segment of the population", but we have yet to see it.

Let's think about this 100% logically.

1) You can't rent or own any sort of living quarters without ID
2) You can't get a job
3) You can't cash your paycheck or put it in the bank
4) You can't get government assistance

So you can't do even the most basic things required to survive; what's left?

Illegal Immigrants? They aren't legally allowed to vote

Homeless people? The homeless population which is so lazy and careless about EVERYTHING that they don't have identification are out worrying about where their next meal is coming from, and whether or not they have enough change to grab another 40 before the corner store closes.

So who are these people in the "Segment of the population?"

https://www.washingtonpost.com...
31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast
a 0.0000031% fraud rate.


His "investigation" has taken place from like 2000 through 2014. Could you tell me, in 2000, what was the process employed nationally in order to combat voter fraud and interstate voter fraud? Then how has that process evolved through the 14 years of his "investigation"?

I mean, how do you catch people committing crimes that you have no system in use in order to catch them?

Even the standard crimes that take place daily, do you know how many are closed annually?

Less than 47% of violent crimes each year are closed.
15.3% of property crimes each year are closed

https://ucr.fbi.gov...

And that doesn't account for the more than 50% of violent crimes annually that aren't even reported.

http://www.bjs.gov...


Look. As I noted from post one on. These laws don't do much of anything to fix the imaginary problem. In most cases, like the one of someone voting 13x for Scott Walker, they are using absentee ballots. ID laws do nothing to address that, and the rate of multi-voting is basically statistically zero.

Basically zero? Is that right? So we are constantly hearing all about how over packed the jails in America are, how racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic, etc. we are, how violent we are, how horrible we are, how we have to end all this systemic oppression that leads to all those non white males getting harrassed by cops daily and thrown in jail so much, and blah blah blah...

...but for one single day every two years, over 120 million Americans come together, putting down their lives of crime, cheating, stealing, and anarchy...to somehow show the goodness within mankind, and run a crime free election?

So how's that one work?

It definitely couldn't be the zero dollars invested in identifying and combating voter fraud right?


Tie yourself in knots about this if you like, but it is nothing more than thinly veiled attempt to suppress votes of demographics that Republicans lose.


Yeah, I'm tying myself in knots. You can't see the absolutely IMPOSSIBLE polar opposite in crime statistics between voter fraud and crime every other day of the year.....and I'm tying myself in knots.


To the segments. It effects the elderly and poor disproportionately.

The elderly? So the elderly population without photo ID......which in turn means they are unable to apply for and cash their social security checks each month...or acquire any cash from any other source, even their life savings sitting in the bank? How exactly are these elderly surviving?
Deny it if you like, but it is true that many elderly don't have photo IDs, and have difficulty getting new IDs.

P.S. Your list of things is repetitive, and wrong. Just because you have no idea how the poor operate their daily life does not mean they don't.


Yeah, cuz I definitely didn't learn about being poor....growing up in section 8....or living in motels and working day labor.


How exactly does it effect the poor?
By not allowing them to vote.

How? And what poor people? Show me.

You aren't addressing that the laws do nothing to actually stop any cases of voter fraud. Logical speaking, this type of fraud is difficult, time consuming, and had little value. Further, penalty's are stiff. So, the chance that ID laws don't fix the problem coupled with the lack.of any evidence it happens at all makes all the work to do it pointless, while we know for certain that it will disenfranchise some voters.
FourTrouble
Posts: 12,777
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 5:54:48 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
@MakeSense

The argument against voter ID laws is simple. Roughly 11 percent of Americans don't have state-issued ID. Voter ID laws place a burden on these voters that provably (via numerous studies) depress voter turnout. This is a significant harm to the integrity of our political system.

Now, why do voter ID laws effectively stop these folks from voting? Because getting a state-issued ID is expensive. The cost isn't simply the cost of the ID itself but the transportation costs and the lost income from taking off work. Voter ID laws increase the cost of voting. And when the cost of voting increases, voter turnout decreases.

Now, you might ask why voter turnout decreases when the cost increases? Because voting is a low reward activity. In other words, any given individual knows that elections aren't decided by one vote. So, the rewards of voting are low, incredibly low, such that even a small increase on the cost on voting will depress voter turnout.

So, that's the harm. What's the benefit of these laws? The perception among a group of people that voter fraud will decrease. Notably, this is only a "perception," because study after study has shown that voter ID laws don't actually decrease voter fraud. How could they? They only thing they could stop is in-person voter fraud, and in-person voter fraud is non-existent.

Why don't we need to worry about in-person voter fraud? Because, well, in-person voter fraud is an insanely irrational way to go about altering the outcome of an election, so much so that literally nobody does it. To actually influence an election with in-person voter fraud, you'd need to conduct a massive campaign. You'd need a massive number of co-conspirators. The costs would be massive. The risks, massive. The potential punishments, massive. Nobody actually engages in in-person voter fraud. So, it's a non-worry.

So, what do you end up with? A large segment of the population (primarily minorities and low-income individuals) who don't have state-issued ID end up not voting when they otherwise would have (i.e. a massive harm to the integrity of our political system). Meanwhile, there aren't any benefits.

This leaves most anyone who has looked into these laws wondering why anyone supports them. The obvious answer is that the political party that supports voter ID laws supports voter ID laws because they suppress voting by the opposing party. Turns out that is precisely the case. Republicans support the laws because they suppress voting by Democrats. Democrats oppose the laws because they suppress voting by Democrats. There's the actual reason anyone talks about these laws.

If they're looked at objectively, they're only harmful.
FourTrouble
Posts: 12,777
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 6:01:15 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
Also, for the record, I currently don't have a state-issued ID. I'm also a minority and generally vote Democrat. I'm precisely the sort of person these laws affect. I can also attest that getting a state-issued ID is a massive pain, and completely unnecessary for a large portion of people, including myself.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 10:55:32 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 1:47:48 AM, SolonKR wrote:
Voter ID isn't wrong because of the principle; it's wrong because of the implementation. If you've heard about North Carolina, their law was specifically designed to restrict all the forms of voting that minorities disproportionately used. For example, they required ID for in person voting, but not absentee ballots, because the latter were used mainly by white people. It's the same strategy that, say, leaving only one polling place in a state would support--it's meant to make voting as inconvenient as possible as only rich people with cars could afford to vote in that instance. Same principle, and I'd encourage you to read the court decision that struck down that law. If Republicans weren't overtly trying to manipulate elections with ID, it wouldn't be an issue.

The only reasonable stance is to support free, automatic voter registration to every citizen when they either turn 18 or gain citizenship, and send them a card in the mail.

Ridiculous. One can register at so many venues that your point is offensive. I'm not republican and your class warfare contention would be comical if it weren't so wrong.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 11:01:02 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 3:40:14 AM, SolonKR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 2:53:19 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:

Here's the court ruling. http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov...

Quote (emphasis added): "In this one statute, the North Carolina legislature imposed a number of voting restrictions. The law required in-person voters to show certain photo IDs, beginning in 2016, which African Americans disproportionately lacked, and eliminated or reduced registration and voting access tools that African Americans disproportionately used . . . Moreover, as the district court found, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, the legislature requested and received racial data as to usage of the practices changed by the proposed law . . . This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Id. The pre-Shelby County version of SL 2013-381 provided that all government-issued IDs, even many that had been expired, would satisfy the requirement as an alternative to DMV-issued photo IDs. J.A. 2114-15. After Shelby County, with race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans . . . As amended, the bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess . . . The district court found that, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, legislators also requested data as to the racial breakdown of early voting usage. Id. at *136-37. Early voting allows any registered voter to complete an absentee application and ballot at the same time, in person, in advance of Election Day. Id. at *4-5. Early voting thus increases opportunities to vote for those who have difficulty getting to their polling place on Election Day. The racial data provided to the legislators revealed that African Americans disproportionately used early voting in both 2008 and 2012 . . . (trial evidence showing that 60.36% and 64.01% of African Americans voted early in 2008 and 2012, respectively, compared to 44.47% and 49.39% of whites). In particular, African Americans disproportionately used the first seven days of early voting. Id. After receipt of this racial data, the General Assembly amended the bill to eliminate the first week of early voting, shortening the total early voting period from seventeen to ten days."

And that's just part of it.

Try again fool.

http://www.ncsbe.gov...
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 11:05:42 AM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 6:01:15 AM, FourTrouble wrote:
Also, for the record, I currently don't have a state-issued ID. I'm also a minority and generally vote Democrat. I'm precisely the sort of person these laws affect. I can also attest that getting a state-issued ID is a massive pain, and completely unnecessary for a large portion of people, including myself.

What's so difficult about it? I've been homeless twice in my life, with my dl suspended for transgressions and I still got a legal Id.

Your contention and everyone else's indicating it's difficult is absolutely full of s.it. And I'll compare my situations to anyone's.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 12:11:04 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 11:01:02 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/15/2016 3:40:14 AM, SolonKR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 2:53:19 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:

Here's the court ruling. http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov...

Quote (emphasis added): "In this one statute, the North Carolina legislature imposed a number of voting restrictions. The law required in-person voters to show certain photo IDs, beginning in 2016, which African Americans disproportionately lacked, and eliminated or reduced registration and voting access tools that African Americans disproportionately used . . . Moreover, as the district court found, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, the legislature requested and received racial data as to usage of the practices changed by the proposed law . . . This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Id. The pre-Shelby County version of SL 2013-381 provided that all government-issued IDs, even many that had been expired, would satisfy the requirement as an alternative to DMV-issued photo IDs. J.A. 2114-15. After Shelby County, with race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans . . . As amended, the bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess . . . The district court found that, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, legislators also requested data as to the racial breakdown of early voting usage. Id. at *136-37. Early voting allows any registered voter to complete an absentee application and ballot at the same time, in person, in advance of Election Day. Id. at *4-5. Early voting thus increases opportunities to vote for those who have difficulty getting to their polling place on Election Day. The racial data provided to the legislators revealed that African Americans disproportionately used early voting in both 2008 and 2012 . . . (trial evidence showing that 60.36% and 64.01% of African Americans voted early in 2008 and 2012, respectively, compared to 44.47% and 49.39% of whites). In particular, African Americans disproportionately used the first seven days of early voting. Id. After receipt of this racial data, the General Assembly amended the bill to eliminate the first week of early voting, shortening the total early voting period from seventeen to ten days."

And that's just part of it.

Try again fool.

http://www.ncsbe.gov...

He is giving you the rulings, not the current status of the law. If you look at your own link it says.

"On July 29, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit struck down photo ID requirements and associated laws in North Carolina (S.L. 2013-381, as amended by S.L. 2015-103). The state is considering its options. Barring a different outcome on appeal, photo ID will not be required in the upcoming general election. Further details will be posted as they become available."

and goes on to say what can be used at this moment.
kevin24018
Posts: 1,952
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 12:50:05 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 6:01:15 AM, FourTrouble wrote:
Also, for the record, I currently don't have a state-issued ID. I'm also a minority and generally vote Democrat. I'm precisely the sort of person these laws affect. I can also attest that getting a state-issued ID is a massive pain, and completely unnecessary for a large portion of people, including myself.

please elaborate and what it takes to get one.
so you don't drive and pay cash for everything? that must be incredibly difficult, I couldn't do it.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 1:08:51 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 12:11:04 PM, TBR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 11:01:02 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/15/2016 3:40:14 AM, SolonKR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 2:53:19 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:

Here's the court ruling. http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov...

Quote (emphasis added): "In this one statute, the North Carolina legislature imposed a number of voting restrictions. The law required in-person voters to show certain photo IDs, beginning in 2016, which African Americans disproportionately lacked, and eliminated or reduced registration and voting access tools that African Americans disproportionately used . . . Moreover, as the district court found, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, the legislature requested and received racial data as to usage of the practices changed by the proposed law . . . This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Id. The pre-Shelby County version of SL 2013-381 provided that all government-issued IDs, even many that had been expired, would satisfy the requirement as an alternative to DMV-issued photo IDs. J.A. 2114-15. After Shelby County, with race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans . . . As amended, the bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess . . . The district court found that, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, legislators also requested data as to the racial breakdown of early voting usage. Id. at *136-37. Early voting allows any registered voter to complete an absentee application and ballot at the same time, in person, in advance of Election Day. Id. at *4-5. Early voting thus increases opportunities to vote for those who have difficulty getting to their polling place on Election Day. The racial data provided to the legislators revealed that African Americans disproportionately used early voting in both 2008 and 2012 . . . (trial evidence showing that 60.36% and 64.01% of African Americans voted early in 2008 and 2012, respectively, compared to 44.47% and 49.39% of whites). In particular, African Americans disproportionately used the first seven days of early voting. Id. After receipt of this racial data, the General Assembly amended the bill to eliminate the first week of early voting, shortening the total early voting period from seventeen to ten days."

And that's just part of it.

Try again fool.

http://www.ncsbe.gov...

He is giving you the rulings, not the current status of the law. If you look at your own link it says.

"On July 29, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit struck down photo ID requirements and associated laws in North Carolina (S.L. 2013-381, as amended by S.L. 2015-103). The state is considering its options. Barring a different outcome on appeal, photo ID will not be required in the upcoming general election. Further details will be posted as they become available."

and goes on to say what can be used at this moment.

I read what he wrote and that link posted. I posted the current statute, not the court ruling.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 1:33:07 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 1:08:51 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/15/2016 12:11:04 PM, TBR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 11:01:02 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/15/2016 3:40:14 AM, SolonKR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 2:53:19 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:

Here's the court ruling. http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov...

Quote (emphasis added): "In this one statute, the North Carolina legislature imposed a number of voting restrictions. The law required in-person voters to show certain photo IDs, beginning in 2016, which African Americans disproportionately lacked, and eliminated or reduced registration and voting access tools that African Americans disproportionately used . . . Moreover, as the district court found, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, the legislature requested and received racial data as to usage of the practices changed by the proposed law . . . This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Id. The pre-Shelby County version of SL 2013-381 provided that all government-issued IDs, even many that had been expired, would satisfy the requirement as an alternative to DMV-issued photo IDs. J.A. 2114-15. After Shelby County, with race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans . . . As amended, the bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess . . . The district court found that, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, legislators also requested data as to the racial breakdown of early voting usage. Id. at *136-37. Early voting allows any registered voter to complete an absentee application and ballot at the same time, in person, in advance of Election Day. Id. at *4-5. Early voting thus increases opportunities to vote for those who have difficulty getting to their polling place on Election Day. The racial data provided to the legislators revealed that African Americans disproportionately used early voting in both 2008 and 2012 . . . (trial evidence showing that 60.36% and 64.01% of African Americans voted early in 2008 and 2012, respectively, compared to 44.47% and 49.39% of whites). In particular, African Americans disproportionately used the first seven days of early voting. Id. After receipt of this racial data, the General Assembly amended the bill to eliminate the first week of early voting, shortening the total early voting period from seventeen to ten days."

And that's just part of it.

Try again fool.

http://www.ncsbe.gov...

He is giving you the rulings, not the current status of the law. If you look at your own link it says.

"On July 29, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit struck down photo ID requirements and associated laws in North Carolina (S.L. 2013-381, as amended by S.L. 2015-103). The state is considering its options. Barring a different outcome on appeal, photo ID will not be required in the upcoming general election. Further details will be posted as they become available."

and goes on to say what can be used at this moment.

I read what he wrote and that link posted. I posted the current statute, not the court ruling.

Right. And you jumped down his throat for posting accurate information.

Try again fool.
vortex86
Posts: 572
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 1:38:16 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 1:41:02 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 1:33:00 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
At 9/15/2016 1:01:03 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/14/2016 11:01:18 PM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
So once again, the time is almost upon us to go out and submit our votes for another government position. As if we are stuck in a Groundhog's Day perpetual loop, the voter ID law controversy has revved back up, right on queue.

I ask this with the utmost sincerity...to those who truly believe that requiring a photo ID to vote disenfranchises voters. Could you please help me to understand the reasoning here?

Let's keep in mind the following definition:

Disenfranchised -- To prevent (a person or group of people) from having the right to vote.

I'm a logical thinker, so following the logical thought model, I decided to perform a direct apples to apples comparison to see if any other Constitutionally protected rights currently require a photo ID:

Amendment 1 -- The right to peaceful assembly and protest -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to apply for a permit which legally allows you to exercise this right. Without this permit, you are in violation of the law.

Amendment 2 -- The right to bear arms -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to pass a background check, purchase a firearm, register your firearm, purchase ammunition, even purchase a BB Gun.

If we apply the same logic and arguments to the first and second amendments as we do to our right to vote; we can say that apples to apples, Americans are being disenfranchised from exercising their first and second amendment rights.

I decided to take this a step further, and generate a list of situations in which photo identification is required in the U.S. Here is the list I came up with in about 15 minutes:

1.Alcohol
2.Tobacco Products
3.Bank Account
4.Applying for a job
5.Unemployment
6.Welfare
7.Medicaid
8.Food Stamps
9.Social Security
10.Purchase a home
11.Apply for a mortgage
12.Rent a home, apartment, hotel, motel
13.Drive a car
14.Purchase a car
15.Rent a car
16.Fly
17.Marriage
18.Buy a gun
19.Buy a BB gun
20.Hunting license
21.Fishing license
22.Adopt a pet
23.Fill a prescription
24.Donate Blood
25.Purchase cold and flu medication
26.Gambling
27.Lottery tickets
28.Purchase a video game rated "M"
29.See a movie rated NC-17
30.Purchase a cell phone plan
31.Holding a rally or protest"such as protesting against voter ID laws
32.Writing a check
33.Using a credit or debt card
34.Cashing a check
35.Applying for a business license
36.Initially registering a vehicle
37.Applying for a building permit
38.Serving on Jury duty
39.Sales tax exemption age 80+
40.Performing a cash transaction of $5,000 or more
41.Join the military
42.Pickup mail at the post office
43.Pickup package at UPS, FEDEX, etc.
44.Entering a bar or club
45.Applying for a library card
46.Go to school

I truly don't understand the whole argument from the left, it's complete double speak. Please explain the left's argument on how voter ID law would completely deny people the right to vote.

It is a solution to an imaginary problem.

While you are right, getting a gun is a good example of a right that require you to show ID, and voting COULD be the same, but why? It does reduce turnout, and inconvenience a segment of the population all to address an issue that simply does not exist.

That's just not true. With our polling stations being upgraded from punch cards and check boxes, to the modern computerized systems; in addition, states are beginning to compare their voter data with each other slowly; we are starting to figure out some ways that voting fraud is and has been taking place. Persons casting early ballots in one state, then driving to a neighboring state and voting in person. People in comas somehow voting, dead people voting. We are starting to uncover the crazy schemes people pull off just to vote multiple times.

http://cleveland.cbslocal.com...

http://www.foxnews.com...

Where is this "segment of the population" who are unable to vote if they need an ID? All arguments point to this weasel phrase "segment of the population", but we have yet to see it.

Let's think about this 100% logically.

1) You can't rent or own any sort of living quarters without ID
2) You can't get a job
3) You can't cash your paycheck or put it in the bank
4) You can't get government assistance

So you can't do even the most basic things required to survive; what's left?

Illegal Immigrants? They aren't legally allowed to vote

Homeless people? The homeless population which is so lazy and careless about EVERYTHING that they don't have identification are out worrying about where their next meal is coming from, and whether or not they have enough change to grab another 40 before the corner store closes.

So who are these people in the "Segment of the population?"

https://www.washingtonpost.com...
31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast
a 0.0000031% fraud rate.

To the segments. It effects the elderly and poor disproportionately.

It's okay if gun laws would help save 1 life.. but voter ID common sense laws that would possibly stop a known 31 credible incidents is somehow off limits? I'd call that hypocrisy. Honestly, the get out and vote campaigns that are targeting the same individuals that would be "disenfranchised" could assist people with the ability to get an ID. There are logical ways to get these individuals an ID for the purposes of voting.
Stymie13
Posts: 2,162
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 1:46:55 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 1:33:07 PM, TBR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 1:08:51 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/15/2016 12:11:04 PM, TBR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 11:01:02 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/15/2016 3:40:14 AM, SolonKR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 2:53:19 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:

Here's the court ruling. http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov...

Quote (emphasis added): "In this one statute, the North Carolina legislature imposed a number of voting restrictions. The law required in-person voters to show certain photo IDs, beginning in 2016, which African Americans disproportionately lacked, and eliminated or reduced registration and voting access tools that African Americans disproportionately used . . . Moreover, as the district court found, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, the legislature requested and received racial data as to usage of the practices changed by the proposed law . . . This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Id. The pre-Shelby County version of SL 2013-381 provided that all government-issued IDs, even many that had been expired, would satisfy the requirement as an alternative to DMV-issued photo IDs. J.A. 2114-15. After Shelby County, with race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans . . . As amended, the bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess . . . The district court found that, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, legislators also requested data as to the racial breakdown of early voting usage. Id. at *136-37. Early voting allows any registered voter to complete an absentee application and ballot at the same time, in person, in advance of Election Day. Id. at *4-5. Early voting thus increases opportunities to vote for those who have difficulty getting to their polling place on Election Day. The racial data provided to the legislators revealed that African Americans disproportionately used early voting in both 2008 and 2012 . . . (trial evidence showing that 60.36% and 64.01% of African Americans voted early in 2008 and 2012, respectively, compared to 44.47% and 49.39% of whites). In particular, African Americans disproportionately used the first seven days of early voting. Id. After receipt of this racial data, the General Assembly amended the bill to eliminate the first week of early voting, shortening the total early voting period from seventeen to ten days."

And that's just part of it.

Try again fool.

http://www.ncsbe.gov...

He is giving you the rulings, not the current status of the law. If you look at your own link it says.

"On July 29, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit struck down photo ID requirements and associated laws in North Carolina (S.L. 2013-381, as amended by S.L. 2015-103). The state is considering its options. Barring a different outcome on appeal, photo ID will not be required in the upcoming general election. Further details will be posted as they become available."

and goes on to say what can be used at this moment.

I read what he wrote and that link posted. I posted the current statute, not the court ruling.

Right. And you jumped down his throat for posting accurate information.

Try again fool.

No I jumped down his throat for the racial connotation that is bs. Every state has hardship contingencies for obtaining Id when economic hardship is the case. Buying into media contrived talking points, right or left, is offensive and quite frankly, needs to be challenged at every turn.

I could care less about a person's politics,ethnicity, age, or religion. I do care about someone victimizing them self and then projecting that perception to curry not only credibility but also persuasion.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 1:57:26 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 1:46:55 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/15/2016 1:33:07 PM, TBR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 1:08:51 PM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/15/2016 12:11:04 PM, TBR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 11:01:02 AM, Stymie13 wrote:
At 9/15/2016 3:40:14 AM, SolonKR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 2:53:19 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:

Here's the court ruling. http://www.ca4.uscourts.gov...

Quote (emphasis added): "In this one statute, the North Carolina legislature imposed a number of voting restrictions. The law required in-person voters to show certain photo IDs, beginning in 2016, which African Americans disproportionately lacked, and eliminated or reduced registration and voting access tools that African Americans disproportionately used . . . Moreover, as the district court found, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, the legislature requested and received racial data as to usage of the practices changed by the proposed law . . . This data showed that African Americans disproportionately lacked the most common kind of photo ID, those issued by the Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Id. The pre-Shelby County version of SL 2013-381 provided that all government-issued IDs, even many that had been expired, would satisfy the requirement as an alternative to DMV-issued photo IDs. J.A. 2114-15. After Shelby County, with race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans . . . As amended, the bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess . . . The district court found that, prior to enactment of SL 2013-381, legislators also requested data as to the racial breakdown of early voting usage. Id. at *136-37. Early voting allows any registered voter to complete an absentee application and ballot at the same time, in person, in advance of Election Day. Id. at *4-5. Early voting thus increases opportunities to vote for those who have difficulty getting to their polling place on Election Day. The racial data provided to the legislators revealed that African Americans disproportionately used early voting in both 2008 and 2012 . . . (trial evidence showing that 60.36% and 64.01% of African Americans voted early in 2008 and 2012, respectively, compared to 44.47% and 49.39% of whites). In particular, African Americans disproportionately used the first seven days of early voting. Id. After receipt of this racial data, the General Assembly amended the bill to eliminate the first week of early voting, shortening the total early voting period from seventeen to ten days."

And that's just part of it.

Try again fool.

http://www.ncsbe.gov...

He is giving you the rulings, not the current status of the law. If you look at your own link it says.

"On July 29, a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit struck down photo ID requirements and associated laws in North Carolina (S.L. 2013-381, as amended by S.L. 2015-103). The state is considering its options. Barring a different outcome on appeal, photo ID will not be required in the upcoming general election. Further details will be posted as they become available."

and goes on to say what can be used at this moment.

I read what he wrote and that link posted. I posted the current statute, not the court ruling.

Right. And you jumped down his throat for posting accurate information.

Try again fool.

No I jumped down his throat for the racial connotation that is bs. Every state has hardship contingencies for obtaining Id when economic hardship is the case. Buying into media contrived talking points, right or left, is offensive and quite frankly, needs to be challenged at every turn.

I could care less about a person's politics,ethnicity, age, or religion. I do care about someone victimizing them self and then projecting that perception to curry not only credibility but also persuasion.

But wait. The black population is ~26% below the poverty line, Hispanic just a little less. Only 11% of the white population is below the poverty line. Simply stating that these sort of issues will disproportionately affect the minority populations is rational.

There is no value in tossing a data point in this argument just because it is race.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 2:09:01 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 1:38:16 PM, vortex86 wrote:
At 9/15/2016 1:41:02 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/15/2016 1:33:00 AM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
At 9/15/2016 1:01:03 AM, TBR wrote:
At 9/14/2016 11:01:18 PM, MakeSensePeopleDont wrote:
So once again, the time is almost upon us to go out and submit our votes for another government position. As if we are stuck in a Groundhog's Day perpetual loop, the voter ID law controversy has revved back up, right on queue.

I ask this with the utmost sincerity...to those who truly believe that requiring a photo ID to vote disenfranchises voters. Could you please help me to understand the reasoning here?

Let's keep in mind the following definition:

Disenfranchised -- To prevent (a person or group of people) from having the right to vote.

I'm a logical thinker, so following the logical thought model, I decided to perform a direct apples to apples comparison to see if any other Constitutionally protected rights currently require a photo ID:

Amendment 1 -- The right to peaceful assembly and protest -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to apply for a permit which legally allows you to exercise this right. Without this permit, you are in violation of the law.

Amendment 2 -- The right to bear arms -- REQUIRES a photo ID in order to pass a background check, purchase a firearm, register your firearm, purchase ammunition, even purchase a BB Gun.

If we apply the same logic and arguments to the first and second amendments as we do to our right to vote; we can say that apples to apples, Americans are being disenfranchised from exercising their first and second amendment rights.

I decided to take this a step further, and generate a list of situations in which photo identification is required in the U.S. Here is the list I came up with in about 15 minutes:

1.Alcohol
2.Tobacco Products
3.Bank Account
4.Applying for a job
5.Unemployment
6.Welfare
7.Medicaid
8.Food Stamps
9.Social Security
10.Purchase a home
11.Apply for a mortgage
12.Rent a home, apartment, hotel, motel
13.Drive a car
14.Purchase a car
15.Rent a car
16.Fly
17.Marriage
18.Buy a gun
19.Buy a BB gun
20.Hunting license
21.Fishing license
22.Adopt a pet
23.Fill a prescription
24.Donate Blood
25.Purchase cold and flu medication
26.Gambling
27.Lottery tickets
28.Purchase a video game rated "M"
29.See a movie rated NC-17
30.Purchase a cell phone plan
31.Holding a rally or protest"such as protesting against voter ID laws
32.Writing a check
33.Using a credit or debt card
34.Cashing a check
35.Applying for a business license
36.Initially registering a vehicle
37.Applying for a building permit
38.Serving on Jury duty
39.Sales tax exemption age 80+
40.Performing a cash transaction of $5,000 or more
41.Join the military
42.Pickup mail at the post office
43.Pickup package at UPS, FEDEX, etc.
44.Entering a bar or club
45.Applying for a library card
46.Go to school

I truly don't understand the whole argument from the left, it's complete double speak. Please explain the left's argument on how voter ID law would completely deny people the right to vote.

It is a solution to an imaginary problem.

While you are right, getting a gun is a good example of a right that require you to show ID, and voting COULD be the same, but why? It does reduce turnout, and inconvenience a segment of the population all to address an issue that simply does not exist.

That's just not true. With our polling stations being upgraded from punch cards and check boxes, to the modern computerized systems; in addition, states are beginning to compare their voter data with each other slowly; we are starting to figure out some ways that voting fraud is and has been taking place. Persons casting early ballots in one state, then driving to a neighboring state and voting in person. People in comas somehow voting, dead people voting. We are starting to uncover the crazy schemes people pull off just to vote multiple times.

http://cleveland.cbslocal.com...

http://www.foxnews.com...

Where is this "segment of the population" who are unable to vote if they need an ID? All arguments point to this weasel phrase "segment of the population", but we have yet to see it.

Let's think about this 100% logically.

1) You can't rent or own any sort of living quarters without ID
2) You can't get a job
3) You can't cash your paycheck or put it in the bank
4) You can't get government assistance

So you can't do even the most basic things required to survive; what's left?

Illegal Immigrants? They aren't legally allowed to vote

Homeless people? The homeless population which is so lazy and careless about EVERYTHING that they don't have identification are out worrying about where their next meal is coming from, and whether or not they have enough change to grab another 40 before the corner store closes.

So who are these people in the "Segment of the population?"

https://www.washingtonpost.com...
31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast
a 0.0000031% fraud rate.

To the segments. It effects the elderly and poor disproportionately.

It's okay if gun laws would help save 1 life.. but voter ID common sense laws that would possibly stop a known 31 credible incidents is somehow off limits? I'd call that hypocrisy.

Well, first I never have called for more gun laws, but your point has some validity. So, are you saying you are FOR more gun laws? If you are for THIS law, but don't want additional controls on gun purchases, who exactly is the hypocrite?

Also, in the 31 incidents, these laws would have done nothing. Isn't it the gun control people that want to stop ineffective laws?

Honestly, the get out and vote campaigns that are targeting the same individuals that would be "disenfranchised" could assist people with the ability to get an ID. There are logical ways to get these individuals an ID for the purposes of voting.

The simple truth is, as shown by dozens of direct quotes from GOP leadership, these laws are intended to suppress votes that they know break for Democrats.
vortex86
Posts: 572
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/15/2016 2:09:41 PM
Posted: 2 months ago
At 9/15/2016 5:54:48 AM, FourTrouble wrote:
@MakeSense

The argument against voter ID laws is simple. Roughly 11 percent of Americans don't have state-issued ID. Voter ID laws place a burden on these voters that provably (via numerous studies) depress voter turnout. This is a significant harm to the integrity of our political system.

And what percentage of those 11% of Americans that don't have state-issued IDs 1 are registered voters, and 2 of those that are registered voters what percentage don't vote in the first place? Let's not conflate statistics. Let's for instance look at the Indiana supreme court ruling which compared not just Driver's license which is not the only form of photo identification allowed (not to mention absentee ballots don't require one at all) found that the percentage was closer to 1%. Then you look at the percentage of registered voters that actually vote.

Or you can look at voter turnout before the Indiana law passed and after. 56% in 2000, 52% in 2004, 62% in 2008, 58% in 2012.

To eliminate some variables. I provide the data to compare to national voter turnout. 50.3% in 2000, 55.7% in 2004, 57.1% in 2008, and 54.9% in 2012.

Comparably they both increased from 2004 to 2008 and dropped in 2012 at roughly the same rate (more so nationally).