Comment by TaylorAlexander
4 years ago
Yes they’ve been using the phrase “ensuring voter quality” to justify measures which essentially restrict access to voting for the poor.
4 years ago
Yes they’ve been using the phrase “ensuring voter quality” to justify measures which essentially restrict access to voting for the poor.
I can’t help but see this as some sort of propaganda. Where’s the evidence this is a concerted effort against poor people?
You can’t do much in life without ID.
"You can’t do much in life without ID."
This is a common belief that, to me, displays a serious lack of knowledge of the breadth of human experience. It should not be hard to imagine how people who are some combination of very sick, old, lonely, disabled or poor can have their ID expire and then not get a new one for year after year. Yet people seem to constantly proclaim this as unthinkable or nonsensical, as if only their version of a lived life is believable.
Some countries make it work. The key is to make the mandatory IDs free and easy to obtain. It’s not that difficult. When I need to renew my ID here in <random European country> I need a 20 minutes appointment, any document can be printed there so there is no issue with pdf and no need to fake a mail. Nothing to pay as well.
For the driver’s licence it was even easier, I just had to upload a photo and a pdf bill as a proof of address on a government web server, and I had it in the mail 3 weeks later.
Voting is a fundamental right. If you are going to require IDs for it, it follows that IDs are a fundamental right, and making them arbitrarily difficult to obtain is capricious, discriminatory and should be considered unconstitutional in a sane democracy.
It's not just requiring ID, it's closing polling places, discarding mail-in ballots, and a whole host of techniques designed to "ensure the quality of voters". And these techniques disproportionately affect voters of color and the poor.
Also when I was a kid (20 years ago) no ID was required to vote. Actual voter fraud is incredibly, vanishingly rare. But the lie that it is common is used to drum up support for these regressive measures.
https://americanindependent.com/arizona-republican-john-kava...
Not to mention having biased election volunteers look at your ID and deem it fake or a "different signature." You can take them to court, but by then the election is over, so it doesn't matter. There's so many ways for the Republicans to corrupt the vote and they've had great success in doing so thus far, so why not go deeper down that path? Who is going to stop them? Democrats who even with a majority can't get a caucus going due to there always being conservative democrats who are pretty much republicans and loyal to republican causes.
I'm astonished that anyone would advocate for voting without some sort of Id. If you cant drink, drive or get a library card without an ID you shouldn't be able to vote. The Id laws that states do have on the books are incredibly liberal in what type of Id is acceptable to vote . Texas, a state lots of people are quick to assert has suppressive voter ID laws, doesn't even require a picture ID or original documents. In fact even a copy of a utility bill is acceptable: https://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/forms/id/poster-8.5x14...
2 replies →
And yet, gun permits (photo-less) are valid voting ID, and university IDs (with photo) are not.