Comment by radicaldreamer

I also know directly from people running state DMV offices (and also coincidentally or not, in the official GOP power structure) that there was a serious effort for drivers licenses from all states to be more standardized and validated by the process that became RealID.

This was around 1995-7, so 9/11 had zero infuence on the origin of this idea, although it likely helped provide justification for it.

That said, I find it mildly interesting that it took at least two decades to even begin to roll out from serious discussions in the corridors of power to actual changes affecting the drivers and voters.

I'm pretty sure terrorists have access to both printers and the gimp. Requiring a mailed bill seems like it would only hinder people who are honest. I highly doubt terrorists are opposed to lying.

Apathy is the same as malice when done by politicians who are supposed to represent everyone, not just the 1% in their district/city/state

Actually poor people are well represented. Witness the trillions of dollars of debt the US is in, the countless duplicative entitlement programs subsidizing food, health care, housing, schooling, etc. Politicians don't get elected unless they give other people's money away to those who don't have it and the poor by definition do not have money to give away but they do vote. Sometimes like here a minor fraud prevention rule slips by like address corroboration but it quickly becomes obsolete because bureaucratic efficiency and modernism is not what government does best.

> There's no good reason anyone would intentionally want to keep the poor poor,

This seems naive to the point of being bizarre. Employers of lower skill and lower margin labor can get it cheaper if their prospective employees are more desperate and thus have less bargaining power. Low wages are the gift that keeps on giving because it keeps your prospective workers from saving enough to weather the risk of negotiating harder, quitting to look for better pay, etc.

If you look at places that have policies that seem to keep the poor down vs places less so, there's at least some clear correlation in terms of who the major employers with more influence in the state are -- those who rely more heavily on cheaper labor with lower profit margins, vs those who are much less exposed to that due to having higher profit margins or less of their costs come from commodity labor.

Just think about what the biggest businesses might be in say, Oklahoma versus New Jersey.

Another way to bring this point home, compare a middle class family in say, Mexico or India, to say, California or New York. Inequality is higher so the cost of basic labor is cheaper, which translates to people with the same middle class job in a place like Mexico or India being able to easily afford a lot more of the sorts of labor intensive services only wealthier people would have in much of the US, like a live in maid/cook, taking a long taxi trip to and from work 5 days a week, etc, stuff that a middle class person in the US would need to ration a lot more even if they do take some ubers here and there and eat out here and then.

There is, on the other hand, a strong incentive to keep poor people from getting ID. If you don't have ID you can still mostly do the peasant work that is required for those in power to stay in power but you can't remove them from power by voting because those in power are increasingly linking the ability to vote with the ability to get documentation which they are continuously working to make it more difficult for poor people to get.

Reap all the benefits of the slaves doing their work, avoid any of the downsides of having to actually listen to their needs.

What’s happening with voter suppression in the US today is contrary to that. Many people are petty and callous. It’s reality. They literally want everyone they don’t like to leave.

> There's no good reason anyone would intentionally want to keep the poor poor, it's just bad design.

We need people to feel pressured into doing shitty jobs, if the poor get less poor maybe they won't flip burgers for minimum wage.

People just don't believe me when I tell them how hard it is to get an ID.

I can tell its all very well intentioned, I can understand how and why all the rules came to exist, it still has the net result of making the poor, poorer.

I would say in certain - often southern R states - this is done on purpose to make it harder to vote.

Some people do not believe in "rising tides", if you believe it's a zero-sum game you will want to keep people poor to keep yourself wealthy.

You haven't looked at one of the major parties very closely, then. They've got a 50 year history of doing exactly what you claim there's no good reason to do.

> There's no good reason anyone would intentionally want to keep the poor poor

That's not what Karl Marx said

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reserve_army_of_labour

The reason the poor are discriminated against is to keep them poor. It’s pretty straightforward and often so reflexively implemented that it leaves room for someone to falsely claim it’s an unintended consequence.