Keeping College Students from Voting

[AlphaFrog]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

I can't buy some cold medicines without showing an i.d., can't get on a plane, can't open a bank account. Showing an i.d. to vote is a simple thing; if some groups need help to get their i.d.s community groups should help them do it. If the process needs to be simplified, then let's do it.

To the people that this affects, buying cold meds would be a luxury, getting on a plane a fairy tale, and opening a bank account a life-long goal (if they trust banks). Just for perspective, here.

However, I too believe that people should have legal photo IDs to vote and have trouble believing that there isn't some sort of assistance program for those who want/need an ID. If someone is motivated to vote, then they should follow the necessary steps. Sometimes rights involve due process.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

To the people that this affects, buying cold meds would be a luxury, getting on a plane a fairy tale, and opening a bank account a life-long goal (if they trust banks). Just for perspective, here.

However, I too believe that people should have legal photo IDs to vote and have trouble believing that there isn't some sort of assistance program for those who want/need an ID. If someone is motivated to vote, then they should follow the necessary steps. Sometimes rights involve due process.

While I'm sure you didn't mean "due process" in its meaning as legal term of art, it's still pretty ... bad ... to connect that with techniques historically only used to suppress certain voter groups.

[amanda6035]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

However, I too believe that people should have legal photo IDs to vote and have trouble believing that there isn't some sort of assistance program for those who want/need an ID. If someone is motivated to vote, then they should follow the necessary steps. Sometimes rights involve due process.

Ditto!

Plus, if folks want to talk about dirty campaign tactics... what about bussing "poor people" to the polling stations in exchange for a vote for a particular candidate? "Aw, how sweet, they gave me free transportation so I could vote, but I have to vote for their candidate." Yeah, because THAT's fair.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

To the people that this affects, buying cold meds would be a luxury, getting on a plane a fairy tale, and opening a bank account a life-long goal (if they trust banks). Just for perspective, here.

Exactly.

SWTXBelle, do you know how many people in this country cannot afford any type of medication, have never traveled outside of their communities (let alone traveling on an airplane), and were taught that bank accounts were either unattainable or even "bad"?

Originally Posted by AlphaFrog

However, I too believe that people should have legal photo IDs to vote and have trouble believing that there isn't some sort of assistance program for those who want/need an ID. If someone is motivated to vote, then they should follow the necessary steps. Sometimes rights involve due process.

Discrimination is based on outcome and not intent because intent usually cannot be proven. Something that makes complete sense in theory can have discriminatory outcomes. As has always been the case, there is a combination of policy makers who truly want I.D. to verify who the voter is; and there are policy makers who only want to exclude certain power minority groups that are less likely to have I.D.

There are relatively few assistance programs that effectively reach the poor and disadvantaged (which includes the physically and mentally ill). This process takes yeeeeeeears. States should not make changes and expect the practices to immediately fit the changes. That is attempting after-the-fact solutions and that never works.

If I.D. is supposed to be a requirement of American citizens, and even some rite of American passage as though every American has one from birth, the government needs to do a better job at mandating this. Then it will be true that every documented birth citizen has an I.D.--or should have an I.D.. If the government is not going to do that, it will remain the case that after-the-fact policies regarding I.D.s will be intentionally and unintentionally exclusive.

Cold medicine = arguably not a basic right of American citizenship
Traveling on a plane = arguably not a basic right of American citizenship
Having a bank account = arguably not a basic right of American citizenship

Voting = DEFINITELY a basic right of American citizenship. So, the laws and policies need to be ensure that "everyone" has access to what they need to attain this right, if they want to vote.

[DrPhil]

I am baffled that some people think that EVERYONE has an I.D. card. That assumption comes from a very privileged place.

Originally Posted by MysticCat

For example: Department of Justice objects to South Carolina's voter law

(I posted the CBS News article on this. )

[DrPhil]

What about knowing that certain segments of this country are less likely to have some form of I.D. and proposing that I.D. be required to vote?

Oh...wait....

[SWTXBelle]

Yes, there are those who do not, for a variety of reasons, have photo identification. They are a distinct minority ( looking at a variety of sources, estimates seem to range from 11% - 25%) , and if the problem is access to photo id (because of cost, transportation issues, etc.) than those problems should be addressed. I would fully support efforts to insure that all qualified American citizens were able to acquire id. All those community groups who work to register voters would seem to be a good place to start with efforts to get photo identification in the hands of possible voters.

That is really a separate issue from the idea of having to provide id at a polling place. Here's a better example for id opponents - If I wish to register my child for public school, I have to provide a plethora of identification and forms. Public education is a right, but it is a right which comes with requirements to exercise. Voting is a right, but we already have requirements in place to exercise it.

Currently in Texas if you do not have your voter registration card or id you can sign an affidavit at the polling place - it may be that something similar could work for the minority of American citizens who do not have id. I've had to use the affidavit - it took maybe 5 minutes to do.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Yes, there are those who do not, for a variety of reasons, have photo identification. They are a distinct minority ( looking at a variety of sources, estimates seem to range from 11% - 25%) , and if the problem is access to photo id (because of cost, transportation issues, etc.) than those problems should be addressed. I would fully support efforts to insure that all qualified American citizens were able to acquire id. All those community groups who work to register voters would seem to be a good place to start with efforts to get photo identification in the hands of possible voters.

(For the record, estimates are not to be confused with reliable data. The difficulty of assessing and accessing this distinct minority is why there are difficulties in conducting this research and factors such as identification cards.)

The bolded efforts need to be furthered before an I.D. is required in states where policy makers know a segment of the population does not have I.D.

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

That is really a separate issue from the idea of having to provide id at a polling place.

No, it cannot be a separate issue.

It is all part of the same issue: The Right to Vote

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Here's a better example for id opponents - If I wish to register my child for public school, I have to provide a plethora of identification and forms. Public education is a right, but it is a right which comes with requirements to exercise. Voting is a right, but we already have requirements in place to exercise it.

Here is what Chicago Public Schools requires:

http://www.cps.edu/schools/enroll_in...checklist.aspx

You can see how a child can be placed in Chicago public school without the primary caregivers having forms of I.D. that would be valid for voting purposes. Public school sytems in areas with disadvantaged populations have searched for ways to address this disadvantaged population which includes accepting documentation that disadvantaged populations are more likely to have access to.

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Currently in Texas if you do not have your voter registration card or id you can sign an affidavit at the polling place - it may be that something similar could work for the minority of American citizens who do not have id. I've had to use the affidavit - it took maybe 5 minutes to do.

Perhaps this needs to be presented as an alternative.

It probably will not be presented as an alternative because affidavits will take longer than 5 minutes in areas where a lot of people do not have an I.D.

Plus, affidavits may conveniently get "lost" in certain areas that are not accustomed to poor people and other disadvantaged people coming to polling places. That is how it has historically been done in certain areas.

[amanda6035]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

What about knowing that certain segments of this country are less likely to have some form of I.D. and proposing that I.D. be required to vote?

Oh...wait....

LOL. That is EXACTLY why I posted it. Don't YOU see the irony? So the liberals can bus folks in to vote to stack the odds for their candidate, but the conservatives can't propose fair voting practice? Riiiiight.

It makes sense to me. "Fine, you want to bus in those people to vote, then make them have an ID to prove their citizenship and prevent fraud."

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by amanda6035

LOL. That is EXACTLY why I posted it. Don't YOU see the irony? So the liberals can bus folks in to vote to stack the odds for their candidate, but the conservatives can't propose fair voting practice? Riiiiight.

It makes sense to me. "Fine, you want to bus in those people to vote, then make them have an ID to prove their citizenship and prevent fraud."

Like I said, this is not a competition. These are ALL practices with discriminatory outcomes.

[DubaiSis]

One of many points here is that there is NO proof of voter fraud as a result of lack of photo ID. The only voter fraud (and I use that term lightly) I've ever heard of happened because the poll workers weren't checking the names off the list and people voted more than once. No ID in the world is going to prevent that from happening.

And puhlease. If you think only Democrats bus people to polling stations, you have not participated in a presidential campaign. Getting the disenfranchised to the polling places is a time-honored practice. The difference is Democrats pick up black people (the "poor people" mentioned above) and Republicans pick up old white people. It is against the law to sell transport or money for votes, and if that happens it's ELECTION fraud, not voter fraud and has nothing to do with the initial point about photo IDs. And let's also remember you can't vote just anywhere you want. If you live in a poor neighborhood you're voting in a poor neighborhood. And why don't poor people get to have their voices heard? Because they're not smart enough to not be poor?

[SWTXBelle]

The problem I have with "there are no voter fraud problems" is that what should be said is "there have not been many documented voter fraud problems" or "the way we define voter fraud means there is none". I would argue that requiring id would prevent it, whether or not we have documented voter fraud. One of the problems with not having any identification required to vote is that it is difficult to detect fraud. How do you know who is or who is not voting legally if you have no requirements for proving that the voter is legally entitled to vote? Dead people voting - that doesn't happen any more? Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck voting - no longer a problem? Good to know.

[knight_shadow]

If this was that much of an issue, why wasn't it brought up in 2009 or earlier? That would've at least given the "poor people" representatives an opportunity to set up some of these wonderful "Get an ID!" drives for their constituents.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by knight_shadow

If this was that much of an issue, why wasn't it brought up in 2009 or earlier? That would've at least given the "poor people" representatives an opportunity to set up some of these wonderful "Get an ID!" drives for their constituents.

It's been brought up dozens of times since (at least) 1909 - however, you're right that these concerns are generally only raised when politically expedient. That shouldn't be a surprise, but it also doesn't invalidate concerns over the practice.

[DrPhil]

Damn knight_shadow keeps reading my mind.

Generally speaking, the Democrats and Republicans only push voting requirements, including busing disenfranchised people, when it is an election that is considered especially important. That is part of what happened when Obama was running for office and Democrats were pushing people, many of whom had rarely or never voted, to vote. So, now the Republicans want the White House back and want to make sure those random "people in the 'hood" do not make their way to the poll stations like they did to help (they weren't the main voters for Obama but it helped) get Obama elected.

If voter requirements and voter fraud are a concern, keep it a concern. Do not make it a concern when it is convenient for a political front.