Supreme Court VRA Decision

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

Kevin, this is where I must ask about the socioeconomic diversity of your home and work environments; and whether you have any substantial dealings with different groups of people other than defendants.

I do quite a bit of pro bono in the juvenile deprived courts here in OKC, so I do deal with all levels of socioeconomic status and cultural/racial diversity. In fact, believe it or not, I'm a huge advocate of culturally competent approaches for Child Welfare workers and have some pretty good war stories in that department.

Thing is, my meth moms, black/latino/whatever etc., are capable of obtaining proper identification. Seriously, if these folks can do it, so can anyone in the world.

Ineptitude is not the central issue here unless your contention is that everyone who does not fit ideal lives and outcomes are inept. If that is what you are contending, you are an illustration of why social inequalities are pervasive in the world. Your post is practically a mirror of what the power elite around the world have said to label and minimize people who do not fit a certain mold.

I hardly qualify as "power elite," but I'll take the compliment. I'm simply stating that obtaining proper ID, at least in Oklahoma, where all 77 counties have twice voted against Obama, where we have voter ID laws, it's not difficult to get an ID.

Yes, if you lose your birth certificate, you're going to have to jump through some hoops, but if you can make a photocopy of some acceptable form of ID, (bank records and utility records can work), you'll be fine. This can all be done by mail.

But responsible adults keep copies of these things. I don't care what your culture or race is. Stupid is not a culture or race. Speaking from experience, it knows no cultural or racial barriers.

Generally speaking, and beyond voting rights, voting throughout the history of the United States of America has never required a great deal of aptitude, consciousness, and critical thought. Certain political activists and scholars have challenged American citizens for generations to critique their own thought processes, challenge politicians and the party system, do not fall for the hoopla, and to inform themselves. Again, generally speaking, American voters have proven time and time again that they want quick information and only just enough information for a quick outcome. Therefore, what constitutes aptitude is definitely subjective. Does aptitude mean having a voter ID, does it mean having transportation to the voting precinct, does it mean being informed and knowing more than just the politicians' names and that you like their convictions on select topics, etc.? And can we assume that people who do not have what we consider aptitude are truly inept? There are people who do not have a voter ID or transportation to the voter precinct but they have been researching and critiquing these politicians more than I have.

You don't have to have any of those things in Oklahoma if you vote by absentee ballot. Truthfully speaking, the only way you fail to vote here is because of a lack of preparation or a lack of responsibility on your own part or a combination thereof.

We need to stop pretending the average person who does not have access is lazy or inept.

I disagree. An 80+ year old person can arrange for transportation (most metros provide something for the elderly) to go to the proper places to obtain the proper documentation. It's not like they have jobs at that age.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by Kevin

if you can make a photocopy of some acceptable form of ID, (bank records and utility records can work), you'll be fine.

What makes these an acceptable form of ID? AFAIK, it's the signature. So why would you consider a photo ID obtained by matching signatures at the DMV more trustworthy than matching signatures at the polling place?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

What makes these an acceptable form of ID? AFAIK, it's the signature. So why would you consider a photo ID obtained by matching signatures at the DMV more trustworthy than matching signatures at the polling place?

No, it's the address printed on them. All of these will work as a secondary ID in the U.S.

Consular Matricula card, Employment photo ID with either Pay stub or W2,
Bank statement or utility bill with name and current address, Social Security card (must be signed) or SSA record earnings statement with current address, US Selective Service Card, Copy of official police report related to the theft of ID with name and current address, for any person under the age of 18, an affidavit signed by the parent or legal guardian, school photo identification along with a report card or other proof of current enrollment
Oklahoma lifetime hunting or fishing license, marriage certificate (Certified English Translation, if applicable), Separation or divorce judgment, Car registration or title or security verification form issued to the applicant with current address.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by Kevin

No, it's the address printed on them. All of these will work as a secondary ID in the U.S.

Consular Matricula card, Employment photo ID with either Pay stub or W2,
Bank statement or utility bill with name and current address, Social Security card (must be signed) or SSA record earnings statement with current address, US Selective Service Card, Copy of official police report related to the theft of ID with name and current address, for any person under the age of 18, an affidavit signed by the parent or legal guardian, school photo identification along with a report card or other proof of current enrollment
Oklahoma lifetime hunting or fishing license, marriage certificate (Certified English Translation, if applicable), Separation or divorce judgment, Car registration or title or security verification form issued to the applicant with current address.

Okay, so what are we trying to accomplish by requiring photo ID at a polling place? Verify that someone is who they say they are? None of these things do that.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

Okay, so what are we trying to accomplish by requiring photo ID at a polling place? Verify that someone is who they say they are? None of these things do that.

They are a lot better than the 'pick a name and sign next to it' method we had before.

The point is to preserve the integrity of the electoral process and if some folks are just too inept to do adult things like keep basic identification around, then not being able to vote is probably one of the least of their problems.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by Kevin

They are a lot better than the 'pick a name and sign next to it' method we had before.

The point is to preserve the integrity of the electoral process and if some folks are just too inept to do adult things like keep basic identification around, then not being able to vote is probably one of the least of their problems.

So let me see if I have this straight. Exchanging a piece of paper that doesn't prove someone is who they claim to be for a small plastic card that doesn't prove someone is who they claim to be somehow preserves the integrity of the electoral process?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

So let me see if I have this straight. Exchanging a piece of paper that doesn't prove someone is who they claim to be for a small plastic card that doesn't prove someone is who they claim to be somehow preserves the integrity of the electoral process?

It's better than nothing. Getting a utility bill with the address on it in a certain name is probably not impossible to falsify, but how on massive a scale do you think folks could defraud the system using those alternative forms of ID without it getting caught somewhere and folks going to prison?

At least now, if you sign up to vote, you have to actually be a person. We won't be able to end up with wide-scale ACORN-like voter registration fraud.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I do quite a bit of pro bono in the juvenile deprived courts here in OKC, so I do deal with all levels of socioeconomic status and cultural/racial diversity. In fact, believe it or not, I'm a huge advocate of culturally competent approaches for Child Welfare workers and have some pretty good war stories in that department.

Thing is, my meth moms, black/latino/whatever etc., are capable of obtaining proper identification. Seriously, if these folks can do it, so can anyone in the world.

I was asking whether your legal profession is the only exposure you have with diverse socioeconomic, cultural, and ethnic environments. Unfortunately, yes, you only have such exposure through the legal profession.

The "if they can do it, anyone can do it" logic does not work with every social outcome. I know people with terminal degrees, extensive resume', and a vigorous voting record who came from impoverished environments. I would never use these people as models to quite literally say "if they can do it, anyone can do it" because I know even they had resources that the average person in their environment does not have. Their positive outcome represents a small percent of the outcomes of the other people from these environments. They can be role models for others but people should never take "if I can do it, anyone can do it" too literally. It is presumptuous to truly believe that everyone can do everything at the same level. Using the inept argument is placing thousands of people in a box that disproportonately impacts people of lower socioeconomic status and racial and ethnic minorities. Are people saying a large segment of poor people and minorities are inept? I believe in personal accountability and agency but people are not inept just because things do not go the way I, personally, would prefer.

***
I spoke with someone earlier who was saying the VRA was not gotten rid of completely, changes were made, so what is all the big fuss. I explained that small changes lead to big changes. We know the routine and we know the game. It happens in all aspects of life where people follow the "slow but steady wins the race" routine. Let us not act brand new.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I was asking whether your legal profession is the only exposure you have with diverse socioeconomic, cultural, and ethnic environments. Unfortunately, yes, you only have such exposure through the legal profession.

It's a pretty intimate level of exposure. Culture is often a big tool for me in choosing the most compatible services for my clients. For example, if my clients are Latino, I have a number of Latino-focused resources. If they're black, I tend to send them to service providers who are also black. The tribes kind of have their own thing going and YMMV from tribe to tribe, so woriking with NA folks is always interesting. When providers are culturally competent though, the outcomes tend to be better. Not to mention the fact that our service providers can often recognize cultural incompetence with regard to our child welfare workers, which in turn makes life easier for me.

The "if they can do it, anyone can do it" logic does not work with every social outcome. I know people with terminal degrees, extensive resume', and a vigorous voting record who came from impoverished environments.

heh.. NONE of my parents have terminal degrees. Some barely speak English. Others are addicts or criminals. They can get IDs. So yes, if they can do it, so can anyone. I work with the real down and out folks. Especially when I'm doing my pro bono work.

Are people saying a large segment of poor people and minorities are inept?

That seems to be what you're saying... I'm not buying that. There's just not an excuse for not being able to come up with some form of ID that I'll accept. If there's a will, there's a way. If people are responsible adults and maintain basic identification paperwork, they won't have problems. If they're irresponsible, they might miss an election or two and if they care, it's not a huge deal to get things straightened out. At least not here. If I was reading another post and saw that the state of Texas was requiring folks to physically present themselves in Austin to obtain paperwork, yes, that's a ridiculous and significant barrier and is totally unreasonable. Someone on a fixed income can't just travel from, say Amarillo to Austin on a lark.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by Kevin

It's a pretty intimate level of exposure. Culture is often a big tool for me in choosing the most compatible services for my clients. For example, if my clients are Latino, I have a number of Latino-focused resources. If they're black, I tend to send them to service providers who are also black. The tribes kind of have their own thing going and YMMV from tribe to tribe, so woriking with NA folks is always interesting. When providers are culturally competent though, the outcomes tend to be better. Not to mention the fact that our service providers can often recognize cultural incompetence with regard to our child welfare workers, which in turn makes life easier for me.


heh.. NONE of my parents have terminal degrees. Some barely speak English. Others are addicts or criminals. They can get IDs. So yes, if they can do it, so can anyone. I work with the real down and out folks. Especially when I'm doing my pro bono work.

The fact that you missed my point regarding exposure outside of the legal profession is troublesome. Even still, the people who you say have IDs still do not represent the majority of their socioeconomic, racial, ethnic, and language group. Is everyone else just inept?

Originally Posted by Kevin

That seems to be what you're saying...

Only you have made this topic about ineptitude. This is not about whether people "suck" versus "don't suck." Social change never happens if groups of people (we aren't just talking about individuals or a couple of people) are led to believe all of their social outcomes are a result of sucking. This topic is about why certain groups have greater access to resources than other groups of people and what can be done so that a larger number of people can gain access. How can you (Kevin) help people in your professional career if you believe everything boils down to ineptitude versus aptitude? Individual consciousness and agency are not the only criteria for desired outcomes.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I spoke with someone earlier who was saying the VRA was not gotten ridden of completely, changes were made, so what is all the big fuss. I explained that small changes lead to big changes. We know the routine and we know the game. It happens in all aspects of life where people follow the "slow but steady wins the race" routine. Let us not act brand new.

Yeah, this was only a small part of it which set forth a formula for which districts would be subject to the VRA. Section 5 still exists, so if Congress was to come up with an alternate, more contemporary formula applying to all 50 states, they might get SCOTUS blessing.

With Republicans in the House though, good luck with that.