Having a form of identification to vote.

[Azathoth]

The 2002 federal Help America Vote Act requires any voter who registered by mail and who has not previously voted in a federal election to show current and valid photo identification or a copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name and address of the voter. Voters who submitted any of these forms of identification during registration are exempt, as are voters entitled to vote by absentee ballot under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act.

This is seriously what all the fuss is about? If someone doesn't have at least one of these they must live under a rock.

[pErvinalia]

In British Columbia you can get a photo ID card for $20 or so. You go to the same place you would to get a driver's license and you only have to provide a birth certificate AFAIK.

You can get them for free in the US if you are poor.

I think that's the answer. Require ID, but make it easy and cheap for disadvantaged people (I'm thinking - poor; ESL; disabled) to get.

[Wandering Through]

Of course, the REAL reason that people want to insist on NO ID is because it helps the right left wing.

There, fixed a couple of typos for you.

The right wing get their vote out much easier than the left. Any little thing that will make it more awkward will help the Republicans ( in the case of the US ).
Right wing people tend to be more obsessive about politics. They are more likely to plan their voting well in advance.
A lot of inner city people live less organised lives, and do things at the last minute. If they can't find their ID, or are unsure, they are likely to just say "sod it" and not bother.
It's hard enough getting a decent turnout, without putting unneccessary obstacles in the way.

Translation: Center and right-of-center people tend to take their civic duty to vote much more seriously than the dependent class that my side relies on to get elected. Probably because the selfish bastards are the ones getting soaked to pay for the government largesse with which we purchase our votes. My sides inner city voters tend to be irresponsible, disorganized procrastinators who are just as likely to stay home and slam another 40oz beer or smoke another carton of cigarettes purchased illegally with their welfare money as they are to get off their asses and vote. Mind you, this irresponsibility, disorganization and procrastination have nothing to do with their station in life, that is strictly due to their being held down by the Wall-Street Oligarchs. Therefore, it is hard enough for us to get a decent turnout for our side, even without putting any obstacles to fraud whatsoever in their path.

And before anyone starts spouting the names of wealthy people (or working class for that matter) who vote left, I remind you the argument being made is that Voter ID unfairly discriminates against the poor. No Hollywood liberal is being disenfranchised if he needs to show an ID at the polling station. Obviously, people of all socio-economic classes vote on both sides of the spectrum. I think the need for ID is obvious, and if I'm not mistaken, any state who has implemented Voter ID laws lately have been forced to offer ID's at no or very low cost so that the law will withstand court challenge by some lefty legal outfit (strictly on behalf of some poor, disenfranchised voter, of course). Anyone who can claim with a straight face that someone not living on the street couldn't come up with $20 or less dollars to obtain an ID is either a damned good liar, or delusional. And note, I deal with a lot of people whose income levels fall below the poverty threshold.

[pErvinalia]

sigh. you seem to be rolling out the "poor are lazy" meme. I really get tired of that one.

[Wandering Through]

sigh. you seem to be rolling out the "poor are lazy" meme. I really get tired of that one.

If you are referring to my post, I was actually just putting MisterMack's reasoning for prohibiting voter ID into slightly different but analogous language. In my opinion, my translation says exactly the same thing as his post, just in language he would never come right out and use (except the Wall Street Oligarch remark, that was entirely me being a smart-ass)(although I bet he agreed).

I realize most poor people are not lazy, in fact I've known many of them who worked a hell of a lot harder earning a living by hook and by crook than they ever would have had to work to earn an honest living (and probably a higher wage). Most of them fairly sharp characters, too. Some are lazy of course, but not all lazy people are poor.

Bah, I had an entire paragraph on my experience with dependent class folks, and decided it was a derail. So, long story short, in my estimation, MisterMack implied poor people were too lazy to be bothered with getting an ID to vote. I just put it into plain English for him.

Also, I should make clear that my opinion on Voter ID is meant for first-world nations. Obviously, in third world countries where ID is actually difficult to come by, the finger in ink method seems pretty reasonable to me.

[mistermack]

Many of the poor ARE fucking lazy. And disorganised. And less likely to vote.
Right wing people DO take voting more seriously.
It's just a fact.
So what? That's WHY those people are poor in the first place.
People can bang on about how easy it is to do this, or do that. How you can get this form of ID, or that, for little money. It's all true.

But it's also true that there will always be disorganised people, who leave things too late, who don't take voting as seriously as people on the right. It's just a fact of life.

People on the right KNOW that, and KNOW that if you require ID, it will result in many people who would have voted, will not vote. Because it only takes a tiny obstacle to persuade them not to bother.
Bad weather is another. The right always does better in bad weather.
And most of THOSE people, who are easily put off, would have voted for the left. Not all, but most.

So it really is just a tactic to sway the balance.
George Bush got elected by a TINY margin the second time.
If everyone had voted, he would NEVER have got in.
So requiring ID can win an election, on it's own, if it's tight.

[Jason]

Many of the poor ARE fucking lazy. And disorganised. And less likely to vote.

With respect mistermack, that is so much biased horseshit. In my life I've been a member of and known many of the 'working poor' and I can say with certainty that the majority of 'poor' people I've known have been anything but lazy. I'd like to know where you get your facts.

[Wandering Through]

sigh. you seem to be rolling out the "poor are lazy" meme. I really get tired of that one.

If you are referring to my post, I was actually just putting MisterMack's reasoning for prohibiting voter ID into slightly different but analogous language. In my opinion, my translation says exactly the same thing as his post, just in language he would never come right out and use

Many of the poor ARE fucking lazy. And disorganised. And less likely to vote.
Right wing people DO take voting more seriously.
It's just a fact.
So what? That's WHY those people are poor in the first place.
People can bang on about how easy it is to do this, or do that. How you can get this form of ID, or that, for little money. It's all true.

But it's also true that there will always be disorganised people, who leave things too late, who don't take voting as seriously as people on the right. It's just a fact of life.

Well, I stand corrected. Mistermack, I disagree with you on many things, but you have my respect for not pulling that punch. Most of the (few) progressives I've spoken with would never be so blunt. It's always about the "unfair economic burden" of Voter ID laws.

Here is my problem with the lack of ID requirement: Just as you worry that requiring an ID will disenfranchise a poor left-leaning voter, I worry that the lack of an ID allows an unscrupulous individual who has "loaded" the voter registration rolls with false names or dead people to travel to different polling stations voting over and over again as the identities they falsely registered to vote. This means if the are voting against my interest, their 2,3,4, hell 20 votes have disenfranchised me! What I find ironic is that while the "conservatives" (which I do not count myself among) worry that lefties will actually do this and therefore demand voter ID, the "progressives" don't seem the least bit worried about the righties doing the same, and thus opposing any ID requirements. Why exactly is that?

And before anyone starts talking about how few times it's happened in the last 40 years (sans citation I might add), those are the times we know about. Every election cycle we hear about scandals across the country wherein "Get Out The Vote" drives have loaded voter registration roles with fictitious characters. Whether these were simply to pad their enrollment success, or for more nefarious purposes, we can only guess. But you damn sure cannot deny that there are more and more of those stories every election cycle.

[EDIT] Oh, and I meant to make mention that I thought about my previous response to Revolution, and I want to clarify. Upon re-reading, I made it appear that the only hard working poor I had met were working hard at not having legitimate work. That's not true, and it's not what I meant to imply. I've know far more honest, hard working poor people than cons and scammers. The scam artists are just the ones that tend to stick with you, especially when you're getting bent over by Uncle Sam and you get to see the scammers benefiting (and proud of it).

[Tyrannical]

You can't even get a job without showing your social security card. Not requiring voter ID is just to allow voter fraud, there is no other reason.

[JimC]

In Oz, you are required to register as a voter when you turn 18. Then, when you turn up on voting day at a polling station within your electorate, you state your name, they find it on a big list, ask you your address as a check, rule a line through your name, and hand you your ballot papers. Seems to work just fine here...

[Audley Strange]

Isn't voter fraud part and parcel of a free and fair election? I know that sounds counter-intuitive but bear with me. Any system of rules will be open to exploitation and the more people to whom those rules apply means the more likely there will be people exploiting it for their own end.

If you really want a certain win, you don't let people vote at all though you might go through the ritual of it to shut the idiots up.

[mistermack]

There's a whole other thread there, about scammers.

Fact is, there are just as many rich scammers as poor. And they take FAR more from the working middle classes. And they remain hidden, behind their accountants.
They take money off you when you pay interest on a loan, or buy groceries, or fuel for your car. You don't see it, so you don't think they get any of YOUR money. But they do.

And if they get caught, they VERY rarely get more than a slap on the wrist.
Benefits cheats take tiny amounts in comparison to big business cheats.

Perhaps they should make it compulsory to vote. I would like to see that.
Or, if you don't vote, you lose some benefit. I would have no problem with that. It would then be valid to insist on ID.

[redunderthebed]

In Oz, you are required to register as a voter when you turn 18. Then, when you turn up on voting day at a polling station within your electorate, you state your name, they find it on a big list, ask you your address as a check, rule a line through your name, and hand you your ballot papers. Seems to work just fine here...

Yep and you can register even when your 17 and the AEC sends you the forms to do it

[Audley Strange]

There's a whole other thread there, about scammers.

Fact is, there are just as many rich scammers as poor. And they take FAR more from the working middle classes. And they remain hidden, behind their accountants.
They take money off you when you pay interest on a loan, or buy groceries, or fuel for your car. You don't see it, so you don't think they get any of YOUR money. But they do.

And if they get caught, they VERY rarely get more than a slap on the wrist.
Benefits cheats take tiny amounts in comparison to big business cheats.

Perhaps they should make it compulsory to vote. I would like to see that.
Or, if you don't vote, you lose some benefit. I would have no problem with that. It would then be valid to insist on ID.

A prick is a prick, his or her bank account is secondary to that. I do have sympathy with what you are saying because tax avoidance channels money directly out of a country's economy, but that has got fuck all to do on whether people should be barred from voting. Unless you think like so many these days that the concept of universal suffrage should not apply to your pet hate group.

I would vote against any attempt to make it mandatory to vote, it is dictatorial. People have a right to choose not to choose that is part and parcel of liberty. Vote or be punished, you like to see that? just add "for me" in after that vote, you're on the path already.

[Warren Dew]

What's to stop double voting, voting by non-nationals and such if you don't?

Why would you want to stop double voting and voting by non-nationals? You must be some kind of fascist. It's almost as if you actually think that only people who are citizens of a country should be allowed to vote. Foreigners with no stake in the country have a right to vote too, especially those that are there illegally!