← Back to context

Comment by leflambeur

15 days ago

There is no national id (other than passports; but most people don't carry theirs on themselves in their own country) because driver's licenses (issued by states) serve the same purpose. We don't have a non-DL id (that's popular at least).

Anyway, this is sort of by-the-by. Most adults have driver's licenses, and no one in Alaska is going to reject your Tennessee-issued DL so it is a de-facto national id.

91% of adults have a driver's license, leaving 9% of potential voters without a DL.

In a properly functioning democracy barring 9% of your voting population from voting because they lack an unrelated document (why should a driver's license be linked to ability to vote?) would be considered a major flaw.

  • In a properly functioning democracy ... nobody without proof of citizenship should ever be allowed to cast a vote.

  • You don't get it.

    You may elect to have your DL as a voting document as a convenience. It doesn't mean you have to have one in order to vote. A state's Board of Elections will issue you a voting document.

  • >>why should a driver's license be linked to ability to vote?

    It's not, it's just one of many acceptable forms of id - along with a passport, birth certificate, and probably few others.

    >>In a properly functioning democracy barring 9% of your voting population

    Unless they are stopped from obtaining any document then they aren't barred from anything. Most Americans don't have a passport either but no one would argue that they are barred from travelling internationally, they just have to go and get a passport issued.

    • > Unless they are stopped from obtaining any document then they aren't barred from anything. Most Americans don't have a passport either but no one would argue that they are barred from travelling internationally, they just have to go and get a passport issued.

      Making it difficult (as the article states, this 9% do not have ready access to documents proving their citizenship) is essentially barring with extra steps.

      I hate this semantics/loophole game Americans like to play, seems to be quite common in your society to use the "akshually, technically" and going completely against the spirit of something. The spirit is: this makes it more difficult to vote, it will inevitably bar some people from voting, it's just salami-slicing...

      2 replies →

  • 40% of the eligible voters sit out every election. No one who wants to vote is being barred from anything. They don’t lack an unrelated document, they lack the proof that they are allowed to vote. We have freedom of expression and yet to purchase alcohol you must be able to prove you are allowed to buy it. We have the freedom to bear arms and yet in many states you must prove you aren’t a nut job to own and carry a gun.