Carded at polls: No photo ID, no vote

[Midnight Mike]

And people wonder why we say the media tends to be biased :roll:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22806147/

Jan. 23, 2008

There's the poor, 32-year-old mother of seven who says it would cost her at least $50 to vote in person. There's also the 92-year-old woman who's voted for decades in the same polling place, but now can't vote there because she let her driver's license expire when her eyesight began to fail.

These folks live in Indiana, home of the country's most restrictive photo-identification voter law. The U.S. Supreme Court is now scrutinizing whether that statute violates the first and 14th amendments, in the most contentious legal battle over voting since the high court issued a bitterly divided decision eight years ago that stopped Florida's recount and handed the presidency to George W. Bush.

New Yorkers, you are going to love this one
In New York City, for example, where subways and buses abound, only 45 percent of residents have photo IDs that would comply with the Indiana law, said Waldman, citing local surveys.

Let's assume for a moment that this is correct, they are trying to say that these 45%, have never bought a drink in a bar, flew on an airplane, opened a bank account, used a credit card?

[PhilDernerJr]

Needing IDs are dumb. I think everybody should completely be able to use their deceased relatives names to vote 7 times in one election. How ridiculous it is to ensure safe results. God forbid one candidate legitimately have more votes than the other guy. :roll:

[adam613]

I have no problem with requiring photo ID to vote in person.

But if they do, the state needs to provide free photo IDs that comply with the law to anyone who wants one. None of this "only for people who can't afford to pay for one" crap...governments are notoriously bad at deciding who can afford what (which is how you end up with professional welfare recipients).


Let's assume for a moment that this is correct, they are trying to say that these 45%, have never bought a drink in a bar, flew on an airplane, opened a bank account, used a credit card?

Poor people don't tend to do any of these things (with the exception of opening a bank account and credit card, both of which can be done without a photo ID), and poor people are exactly who these voter ID laws are intended to keep from voting.

And this will do very little, if anything, to stop fraud, because when your seven dead relatives vote, they do so using absentee ballots, which don't require photo ID.

[PhilDernerJr]

You really think that voter IDs are intended to prevent poor people from voting? What evidence exists to make someone even think that?

[Midnight Mike]

Poor people don't tend to do any of these things (with the exception of opening a bank account and credit card, both of which can be done without a photo ID), and poor people are exactly who these voter ID laws are intended to keep from voting.

And this will do very little, if anything, to stop fraud, because when your seven dead relatives vote, they do so using absentee ballots, which don't require photo ID.

So, to follow through with what you wrote, 45% of the people in New York City are soooo poor that they do not have photo ID?

I think you need to present photo ID at the Welfare office & when using food stamps....

[wunaladreamin]

Not everyone can afford to have a cedit card, and some are poor enough to not be able to afford the fee for a non-driver's licence ID. Tough call.

[PhilDernerJr]

To me, an ID is so basic. You pass out somewhere...the ID will get your family to the hospital. Get stopped by police on the street...the ID can clear your name. There are a million reasons that people should get an ID at age 18 immediately.

I don't care how poor you are, you can scrounge up $40 once every 5 years. It's not appeasing to the government, but for your own benefit and protection.

[wunaladreamin]

I agree completely, but there are some families out there who have so hard a time putting food on the table, a roof over their head, and some clothes on their back that $40 is to huge burden to bear.

[Midnight Mike]

Not everyone can afford to have a cedit card, and some are poor enough to not be able to afford the fee for a non-driver's licence ID. Tough call.

I am not doubting that, I am challenging the 45% number, so, they are saying that 55% of the people living in NYC can not afford a photo ID of some sort? Maybe the person that wrote the article does not realize that NYC is made up of more than just Manhattan :wink:

[adam613]

You really think that voter IDs are intended to prevent poor people from voting? What evidence exists to make someone even think that?

It's a simple conclusion to draw when you consider the following factors:

1) These bills are presented in a partisan manner exclusively by Republicans
2) Poor people, in most places, generally vote for Democrats
3) The bills are being presented in terms of preventing fraud
4) There is little evidence of in-person voter fraud, while there is tons of evidence of absentee voter fraud (on both sides), which these laws don't even attempt to address.

"Preventing fraud" has almost become a keyword for vote suppression among Republicans. They were pushing for electronic voting machines in places like Ohio and Florida in the name of preventing fraud, but that's over now that it has been determined that they actually make fraud easier.

If a bipartisan solution for voter fraud came up, or Republicans started trying to get poor people to vote FOR them, I wouldn't be so suspicious.


So, to follow through with what you wrote, 45% of the people in New York City are soooo poor that they do not have photo ID?

I think you need to present photo ID at the Welfare office & when using food stamps....

It's not so much that poor people are sooo poor that they don't have a photo ID. But people in every income bracket make different choices about what they spend their money on. To most of us, we need a photo ID for things we do in our daily lives, so it's a basic requirement. Not so much if don't do things like drive. If it doesn't seem necessary, why spend money on it?

Also, not every poor person is poor enough to get welfare. As I said above, the government is notoriously bad at determining who is poor.

I should have made it clearer above that I think the government has significant interest in providing free photo IDs to everyone regardless of this voter ID nonsense. As Phil said, it's for your own protection to have one. But the voter ID laws provide a good impetus for them to do so.


I am not doubting that, I am challenging the 45% number, so, they are saying that 55% of the people living in NYC can not afford a photo ID of some sort? Maybe the person that wrote the article does not realize that NYC is made up of more than just Manhattan :wink:

This is MSNBC we're talking about. The poll probably asked who has a drivers license, not who can afford what :P

[PhilDernerJr]

I think in-person voter fraud is worse than you realize. I don't know "official" stats, but how would they even know to track it?

I personally know of people that have showed up to vote multiple times a day at different locations in dead relatives' stead.

When I show up to vote at 7pm, and the people manning the desks are 1,100 years old and still don't know how to tear a card or find a name that's in alphabetical order....even though they've been doing it all day...how are they supposed to notice if someone is really the person they are claiming?

Because of that, I've been expecting and HOPING that they would implement such an idea.

If COST is the problem, if states handed out the IDs for free...I think people would still come up with an excuse on how it targets the poor.

[RDU-JFK]

When I show up to vote at 7pm, and the people manning the desks are 1,100 years old and still don't know how to tear a card or find a name that's in alphabetical order....even though they've been doing it all day...how are they supposed to notice if someone is really the person they are claiming?


hahaha so true!

[Midnight Mike]

If COST is the problem, if states handed out the IDs for free...I think people would still come up with an excuse on how it targets the poor.

We have a winner folks!
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v726/MidnightMike/Avatars/siren1.gif

[Midnight Mike]

I found this on another website, so, I can not take credit for it....


There is NO valid objection to this at all. If you can't prove who you are then you can't vote. This doesn't punish the poor, it punishes cheaters.

[adam613]

If COST is the problem, if states handed out the IDs for free...I think people would still come up with an excuse on how it targets the poor.

Probably, but then they'd just be obstructionist :)


I found this on another website, so, I can not take credit for it....


There is NO valid objection to this at all. If you can't prove who you are then you can't vote. This doesn't punish the poor, it punishes cheaters.

Claiming that there is "no valid objection" to something is an implicit admission that there are problems with it you don't know how to defend. There's a VALID objection to everything. But just because an objection is valid doesn't mean it matters.

[Matt Molnar]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v726/MidnightMike/Avatars/siren1.gif
YAY FOR THE DRUDGE SIREN!