Yahoo/AP: Tough ID laws could block thousands of 2012 votes

[SnyderShrugged]

Yes but, as discussed yesterday in this thread, many people who are very poor or elderly, or disabled, what have you, will not have enough of the necessary documentation required to get a photo ID. It doesn't matter whether it is free or not.

It sucks, but I think that there are enough resources out there that if someone wants an ID then they can get one. Lots of opportunity for excuses, but they atr pretty weak in the grand scheme of things. An excuse can be found for one offs almost always. Our approach cant possibly be to0 address all one offs, but more to serve the general population (almost all of which can and will get an Id if they simply try.)

[Larry]

I think most homeless can gain a state ID with little effort.

And you're living in a fantasy world.

Try again.

Pick the state you're in, and show us the requirements that your state demands people have, before they qualify for this "no-fee identification card".

Than show us the requirements that you have to have, before you can get those items.

---------- Post added July-12th-2012 at 11:49 AM ----------

It sucks, but I think that there are enough resources out there that if someone wants an ID then they can get one.

That means something more specific that "well, I'm just certain that it's easy, because that's my opinion".

[SnyderShrugged]

And you're living in a fantasy world.

Try again.

Pick the state you're in, and show us the requirements that your state demands people have, before they qualify for this "no-fee identification card".

Than show us the requirements that you have to have, before you can get those items.

why dont you just go ahead and name the specific requirements that you are thinking of, and explain why they are impossible to meet for 99% of the general population instead? I dont feel like looking stuff up for you during my work day.

I clearly showed you a path to ID without cost. If somefolks cant follow that special path,, designed specifically for them, I dont know what to say beyond. Sorry and that sucks.

---------- Post added July-12th-2012 at 11:52 AM ----------

That means something more specific that "well, I'm just certain that it's easy, because that's my opinion".

Or that its actually easy for almost anyone.

[Duckus]

11 percent isnt a high number of people who dont have IDs. It would be a high number if it was people who want IDs but cant get them.

My guess is that most of those 11 percent simply dont bother to get one. But could with very little effort.

Should we pass laws based on a guess without further understanding?

Sounds crazy but maybe the state governments should study that and implement programs that get folks IDs before passing legislation that fundamentally changes how we have voted for decades? Maybe it exists in other states, but not here in Texas.

Honest question, because I don't know, has any state that has already passed voter ID laws also passed with it programs to help get folks ID? Funding public education campaigns and studying the effects of this might be important.

[mistertim]

For North Carolina:

http://www.ncdot.gov/dmv/driver/id/

Step 1, Requirements & Documents

You will need to bring four documents total.

To avoid inconveniences, make sure you have all necessary documents before visiting the Driver License Office.

In order to apply for the first time issuance of a NC ID Card you will need to gather documents from the following categories:

Proof of Age & Identity

You will need 2 documents from this category which provide your full name and date of birth. Listed below are acceptable documents you can use, provided they include your full name (including middle name). Documents that do not include a middle name will not be accepted.

Acceptable Documents

Proof of Social Security

You will need a Social Security card or proof of Social Security Number by presenting one of the following documents

Proof of Residency

If you are not a U.S. citizen, you must provide documentation issued by the U.S. government indicating legal presence

Step 2, Pay Fees

The following persons may obtain an ID Card at no fee:

There is no fee charged for a North Carolina ID Card for a resident of the State who is legally blind, is at least 70 years old, homeless or who has been issued a driver license which has subsequently been cancelled as a result of a physical or mental disability or disease.

To obtain a North Carolina ID Card without paying a fee, a homeless person must present a letter to the Division from the director of a facility that provides care or shelter to homeless persons verifying that the person is homeless.

How to Pay:

Payment for transactions at DMV Offices are limited to cash, money order or personal checks[?]. No other forms of payment are accepted, including debit and credit cards.

Note that that is just for the "Pay Fees" portion. It seems they still have to present the same other documentation as non homeless people that is listed above that portion.

[Larry]

why dont you just go ahead and name the specific requirements that you are thinking of, and explain why they are impossible to meet for 99% of the general population instead? I dont feel like looking stuff up for you during my work day.

I already have. Pages ago. And you, and dozens of other arrogant imbiciles have pretended not to see them, and simply waved their hand and said "you don't need identification".

Well, guess what? The Jedi Mind Trick might work on the feeble minded, but I'm not one of them.

I've told you, and everybody else in this thread, some of the actual hurdles faced by an actual senior citizen actually dealing with actual bureaucracy.

You've responded with fantasyland platitudes.

It's your turn. Back up your claim. I've already backed up mine.

I clearly showed you a path to ID without cost.

You clearly showed no such thing. You made a claim that well, "if a person meets all of the other hurdles that I haven't mentioned exist, then the government will waive the fee"

[SnyderShrugged]

I already have. Pages ago. And you, and dozens of other arrogant imbiciles have pretended not to see them, and simply waved their hand and said "you don't need identification".

Well, guess what? The Jedi Mind Trick might work on the feeble minded, but I'm not one of them.

I've told you, and everybody else in this thread, some of the actual hurdles faced by an actual senior citizen actually dealing with actual bureaucracy.

You've responded with fantasyland platitudes.

It's your turn. Back up your claim. I've already backed up mine.

You clearly showed no such thing. You made a claim that well, "if a person meets all of the other hurdles that I haven't mentioned exist, then the government will waive the fee"

I just started participating in the thread and one would assume if your case were so very strong that you would easilly be able to list the items that you are thinking of. Telling, but par for the course.

Let me know when you want to discuss I'm very open to candor on this tough subject and eager to understand the perspective I think Im seeing. In fact, eager enough to wade thought he thread in an attempt to learn your specific thoughts rather than the easy way of having you just simply say them to me. Oh well.

---------- Post added July-12th-2012 at 12:12 PM ----------

Thanks Tim!! Great link.

So in my state (NC) Larry, it says ..

The following persons may obtain an ID Card at no fee:

There is no fee charged for a North Carolina ID Card for a resident of the State who is legally blind, is at least 70 years old, homeless or who has been issued a driver license which has subsequently been cancelled as a result of a physical or mental disability or disease.

To obtain a North Carolina ID Card without paying a fee, a homeless person must present a letter to the Division from the director of a facility that provides care or shelter to homeless persons verifying that the person is homeless.

Wow, so they have to ask for a letter. Whoa!!! That is rough!!!! LOL

---------- Post added July-12th-2012 at 12:13 PM ----------

You clearly showed no such thing. You made a claim that well, "if a person meets all of the other hurdles that I haven't mentioned exist, then the government will waive the fee"

Well, hopefully MrTims post is more "clear" to ya brother.

[mistertim]

No problem, SS. But please note what I mentioned below the quote. That it seems that portion is only for PAYMENT. There is no indication there that they wouldn't have to present all of the other documentation that is mentioned above. 4 pieces of documentation is likely going to be very difficult for someone who is so poor they are homeless. Look at the lists of acceptable documents for the three categories and tell me how likely it is that a homeless person will have that stuff and how easy (or even possible) it would be for them to get it.

[Larry]

deleted post.

I am not going to delay going to Disney so that I can sit here and argue something that I already spent over a year, doing.

[mistertim]

Have fun, Larry.

[SnyderShrugged]

No problem, SS. But please note what I mentioned below the quote. That it seems that portion is only for PAYMENT. There is no indication there that they wouldn't have to present all of the other documentation that is mentioned above. 4 pieces of documentation is likely going to be very difficult for someone who is so poor they are homeless. Look at the lists of acceptable documents for the three categories and tell me how likely it is that a homeless person will have that stuff and how easy (or even possible) it would be for them to get it.

I think that means that since they dont have to make a payment due to being homeless, all they need to provide is the letter. I dont believe they need the other stuff by the way that reads.??

[mistertim]

I think that means that since they dont have to make a payment due to being homeless, all they need to provide is the letter. I dont believe they need the other stuff by the way that reads.??

I don't know (someone would probably have to actually call and ask them. I like you SS, but I'm not going that far to get info for you ), but I wouldn't necessarily interpret it that way. Otherwise I'd think they would have stated that in the "Requirements & Documents" section as opposed to just the "Pay Fees" section.

[Predicto]

SnyderShrugged, the thing that I don't think you are appreciating is that doing all of this is very difficult for some people. Not people like you, but some poor and elderly people. Not impossible to do, but a royal pain in the butt. Some people don't live like you and me.

[lovetoaster]

SnyderShrugged, the thing that I don't think you are appreciating is that doing all of this is very difficult for some people. Not people like you, but some poor and elderly people. Not impossible to do, but a royal pain in the butt. Some people don't live like you and me.

I understand that, but I regardless of what side of the fence I sit on, I don't like the fact that I can walk into my voting facility and vote as anyone that I know in that district just by saying a name. If I knew the names of 10 people that were not planning on voting, I could just walk in and say I was them and off I go. Sure, I would have to sign something saying I am them, but I am fairly certain that people don't pay enough attention for that to matter. I am not going to do it, because I know there are consequences. But for someone that is not afraid of the consequences, or has nothing to lose, what's to stop them.

Every time I vote, I shudder at how easy it would be to commit fraud if someone really wanted to. There needs to be some sort of middle ground here. I think people need some sort of identification.

[deejaydana]

the thing that I don't think you are appreciating is that doing all of this is very difficult for some people. Not people like you, but some poor and elderly people. Not impossible to do, but a royal pain in the butt. Some people don't live like you and me.

I still contend that while the plight of the poor is something to be weighed thoroughly it doesn't extend so far that we throw out a photo ID requirement as the law of the land. In a society at both the forefront of both technology and adequate entitlement the avenues are there for those who are motivated to vote. A certain % of people on both sides will oversell this topic. I do see and empathize both sides of this debate and actually go back and forth. We're so advanced here though a well devised answer can't or shouldn't be far off. Of course after the debacle of the 2000 Florida results you would have thought would have resulted in more substantive solutions.

[SnyderShrugged]

I don't know (someone would probably have to actually call and ask them. I like you SS, but I'm not going that far to get info for you ), but I wouldn't necessarily interpret it that way. Otherwise I'd think they would have stated that in the "Requirements & Documents" section as opposed to just the "Pay Fees" section.

LOL, Thats very fair Tim!! Thanks for everything already provided man!

---------- Post added July-12th-2012 at 01:14 PM ----------

SnyderShrugged, the thing that I don't think you are appreciating is that doing all of this is very difficult for some people. Not people like you, but some poor and elderly people. Not impossible to do, but a royal pain in the butt. Some people don't live like you and me.

I understand that it is difficult, but difficult isnt necessarily a problem in my book. I think its when its impossible is where we should get concerned.

---------- Post added July-12th-2012 at 01:15 PM ----------

pjfootballer, hey man, your inbox is full! .

[Predicto]

I understand that, but I regardless of what side of the fence I sit on, I don't like the fact that I can walk into my voting facility and vote as anyone that I know in that district just by saying a name. If I knew the names of 10 people that were not planning on voting, I could just walk in and say I was them and off I go. Sure, I would have to sign something saying I am them, but I am fairly certain that people don't pay enough attention for that to matter. I am not going to do it, because I know there are consequences. But for someone that is not afraid of the consequences, or has nothing to lose, what's to stop them.

Except it never seems to happen. And the reasons why are obvious. Those reasons being 1) you would only be able to cast one fraudulent post in your precinct, since the poll workers would notice if you did it ten times, 2) casting a single fraudulent vote isn't going to change the results of an election so if you want to try to steal an election you would need an army of people doing this, 3) its a felony and you will never be able to raise an army of people willing to do it, 4) it would be impossible to cover it up with that many people involved.

There have been vote fraud allegations and investigations after every election in the past few decades. They all turn out to be nothing. This is not to say that you can't steal an election - but you can't do it this way. Photo ID for voting really doesn't protect against the actual risk that you are concerned about.

---------- Post added July-12th-2012 at 10:19 AM ----------

I still contend that while the plight of the poor is something to be weighed thoroughly it doesn't extend so far that we throw out a photo ID requirement as the law of the land. In a society at both the forefront of both technology and adequate entitlement the avenues are there for those who are motivated to vote. A certain % of people on both sides will oversell this topic. I do see and empathize both sides of this debate and actually go back and forth. We're so advanced here though a well devised answer can't or shouldn't be far off. Of course after the debacle of the 2000 Florida results you would have thought would have resulted in more substantive solutions.

I agree. I would have no problem with a photo ID voting requirement if it was coupled with an aggressive "get photo IDs to everyone" program. Maybe it could be tied in to the census. :whoknows:

But that isn't what is happening now, of course.

[mistertim]

But for someone that is not afraid of the consequences, or has nothing to lose, what's to stop them.

The fact that it would be pretty much pointless? So lets take a sociopath who has absolutely no care about the consequences of committing a felony (or multiple felonies) and potentially going to prison. What, exactly, is this person's motivation to pretend to be another person in order to defraud 1 vote in a national election? Because they think it would turn the tide of an election? Say the same person has a list of 10 names of people who live in 10 districts in his/her state and want to pretend to be those people. This person is going to drive for hours and hours from district to district just so they can rig and defraud 10 votes in a national election?

I agree. I would have no problem with a photo ID voting requirement if it was coupled with an aggressive "get photo IDs to everyone" program. Maybe it could be tied in to the census. :whoknows:

Michele Bachmann would absolutely go ape****.

[Predicto]

I understand that it is difficult, but difficult isnt necessarily a problem in my book. I think its when its impossible is where we should get concerned.

Maybe I should try this tact. SS, as a libertarian, you are very concerned with market effects. You realise that government action has a powerful indirect impact on human behavior and real world results. You realise that making something difficult or expensive to do is essentially as bad as making it impossible, because it discourages a certain percentage of free actors from doing what they would otherwise do, and imposes an external cost on their freedom. You don't like to see the government creating any new regulatory requirements unless they are absolutely necessary to address a real, legitimate need.

How do you square this photo ID requrement with those core beliefs.

[SnyderShrugged]

Maybe I should try this tact. SS, as a libertarian, you are very concerned with market effects. You realise that government action has a powerful indirect impact on human behavior and real world results. You realise that making something difficult or expensive to do is essentially as bad as making it impossible, because it discourages a certain percentage of free actors from doing what they would otherwise do, and imposes an external cost on their freedom. You don't like to see the government creating any new regulatory requirements unless they are absolutely necessary to address a real, legitimate need.

How do you square this photo ID requrement with those core beliefs.

Mainly because they have been core requirements my entire life and that it seems sensible for things like fraud prevention. I think my views are often misconstrued as anarchist when in reality, I too support common sense laws that dont inhibit any real freedom. I do not believe that requiring an ID to vote is a limit on freedom.

For a slightly different perspective, but in the same vein as your question. I find it just as perplexing that folks who are keen on Govt intervention in personal matters like my own personal health habits and care, are also so against ID requirements.

edit/add: You did make me think harder just now though man. I suppose that if the same ID requirements were for 100% of all people, then maybe I could feel better about it. I kind of dislike the "these folks are special, so they dont have to have ID but you do" perspective.

[pjfootballer]

pjfootballer, hey man, your inbox is full! .

Try it now.

[Predicto]

Mainly because they have been core requirements my entire life and that it seems sensible for things like fraud prevention. I think my views are often misconstrued as anarchist when in reality, I too support common sense laws that dont inhibit any real freedom. I do not believe that requiring an ID to vote is a limit on freedom.

For a slightly different perspective, but in the same vein as your question. I find it just as perplexing that folks who are keen on Govt intervention in personal matters like my own personal health habits and care, are also so against ID requirements.

edit/add: You did make me think harder just now though man. I suppose that if the same ID requirements were for 100% of all people, then maybe I could feel better about it. I kind of dislike the "these folks are special, so they dont have to have ID but you do" perspective.

Fair enough. I tried. :cheers:

[SnyderShrugged]

Fair enough. I tried. :cheers:

You did and you did it well too! (as always brother)

[lovetoaster]

The fact that it would be pretty much pointless? So lets take a sociopath who has absolutely no care about the consequences of committing a felony (or multiple felonies) and potentially going to prison. What, exactly, is this person's motivation to pretend to be another person in order to defraud 1 vote in a national election? Because they think it would turn the tide of an election? Say the same person has a list of 10 names of people who live in 10 districts in his/her state and want to pretend to be those people. This person is going to drive for hours and hours from district to district just so they can rig and defraud 10 votes in a national election?

Listen, I am not saying it is likely, but it is, to me, a pretty sizable loophole. Is it completely absurd to think that someone could get paid to fraudulently vote a few times at one polling center and a few times at a few other polling centers? People don't pay attention to who is coming in and out and if they are, change clothes or wear different makeup. And drive for hours and hours? I can think of four polling places in Charlotte within a few miles. It would take me 15 minutes, tops, to rotate between 4-5 polling venues.

It may sound absurd, but I feel confident that I could vote a few times without really even trying to be sneaky. And if I can, there are a whole hell of a lot of people that can too. Not just one guy trying to steal a vote. I think it is a ridiculous loophole and just invites fraud.

[deejaydana]

how about that guy who recently voted as Eric Holder in Virginia (or it might have been DC). That incident showed everyone how easy it is to commit fraud if you're so inclined. It needs to be tightened up unquestionably.