US Supreme Court Says: Need ID to Vote

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by Aeson
I want my microchip now. It's such a bother having to carry around a wallet.

Whos to say "Big Brother" hasnt installed it already?

Dont you hear a small barely audible whirring sound everytime you walk past a speaker?

Zaeger & Evans my friends, Zaeger & Evans...

[Aeson]

Well the least they could do is allow me to pay at the checkout line with my chip. Bastards!

(Besides, if they chipped me for surveillance... the joke is on them. 32 years of soul crushing boredom for whoever is keeping tabs on me...)

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Wezil
If you are so marginalized that you don't have photo ID and are incapable/unwilling to acquire this piece of ID what are the odds that you are a voter anyway?

Quite a few elderly as well as minority voters have been turned away for this reason. That is the point, as both groups tend to vote Democratic. The question as to whether or not this is an unreasonable burden misses the point. It is simply a way for the GOP to try and hold on to power in districts and states where the electorate is split. It does little to fix real problems we have with vote fraud or vote suppression (the later being far worse than all the vote fraud piled together).

[snoopy369]

The point of whether it is an unreasonable burden is exactly the point. I'd think it is a good solution to vote suppresion as well - it makes other vote denial methods more difficult, as you can prove you have a right to vote...

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by snoopy369
The point of whether it is an unreasonable burden is exactly the point. I'd think it is a good solution to vote suppresion as well - it makes other vote denial methods more difficult, as you can prove you have a right to vote...

Normally, you're an intelligent poster. I may disagree with you, but you don't make stupid posts.

Whether or not this is an undo burden is only a point for those who want to ignore the real issue. These laws are designed to suppress the vote. Far from being a solution it is an additional burden on already marginalized sectors of the voting public. These laws have one purpose, and one purpose alone, to lower the number of eligible Democratic voters. If they really wanted to fix vote fraud, they'd go after absentee ballots, which is where the vast majority of vote fraud occurs. But absentee ballot vote fraud generally favors the GOP, as does most voter suppression. Hence the lack of laws or enforcement.

[onodera]

Can't those suppressed voters just go get a photo ID? It doesn't look like an unreasonable burden to me. Being able to live without one is what puzzles me.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by onodera
Can't those suppressed voters just go get a photo ID?

Yes.

[snoopy369]

You're just a paranoid commie sometimes, che. This is one of those times.

The fact that we don't require an ID to vote shocked me when I first voted. I could walk into each voting location and give different information each time, and vote dozens of time, with no difficulty...

Undue or unreasonable burden is absolutely the standard to be used here. If the state imposes 'a significant difficulty or expense' to bar voting, then that would be vote suppression; instead, the state is ensuring that only people allowed to vote can. Every citizen can get a free ID, and frankly that's the best part of this from the 'poor' citizen's point of view - instead of paying for a drivers' license, he/she can now obtain a free government-issued identification, which gives him/her greater access to services, check cashing, getting a job, etc., with no expense.

Absentee ballot fraud favors democrats, historically, since it usually involves suppressing the military's vote (ie, FL 2000, the forgotten scandal...)

Why would the IN house pass this law, anyway, if it suppressed democrat votes? (They have a democratic majority in the house.)

[Arrian]

The fact that we don't require an ID to vote shocked me when I first voted.

Yup. This is a very minimal requirement.

Doing this, by the way, in no way means that one cannot also address problems with absentee ballots.

-Arrian

[Wezil]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Quite a few elderly as well as minority voters have been turned away for this reason. That is the point, as both groups tend to vote Democratic.

No, that is not the point. The point is if these people are such morons they can't/won't get a piece of free ID then I don't think they are liable to vote anyway (or know how to perhaps).

I find it strange that only Dems have a problem with such simple things (obtaining free ID or voting properly in Florida...). Is there something intrinsically screwed up with Dem brains?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Wezil
No, that is not the point.

It's absolutely the point. If these groups tended to vote GOP, you can be damn sure that not only would the GOP not have passed these laws, the Supreme Court would have declared it unconstitutional.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by onodera
Can't those suppressed voters just go get a photo ID?

If they have transportation, if they can take the time off work, if they can afford the time it takes, if they can wait in long lines, if the facility is located somewhere they can get to, etc. It took me half a day to get my drivers license when I moved to Florida, fortunately, I had nothing better to do.

[Wezil]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


It's absolutely the point. If these groups tended to vote GOP, you can be damn sure that not only would the GOP not have passed these laws, the Supreme Court would have declared it unconstitutional.

Alright then back to my earlier point. Let's just microchip these morons so we can make it easy for them.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
I agree as long as free picture ID is provided and that accessabilty to acquiring one is made exceedingly easy and free from any forms of intimidation.

This really is the true test. As long as a state does this then there is no problems.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by onodera
WTF, you can vote without any ID in the US?
So I could come to the States as a tourist this November, stroll into the school or wherever you place your voting booths, get a ballot and vote?

In most states if you are a registered voter who can say what your address and social security number is then they will let you vote. In others you must show a driver's license or other picture ID as well as be a registered voter though no citizenship check is done to get a driver's license or to become registered; it is declared that you can face felony charges for falsely declaring citizenship but most states won't bother to double check. In other states having a witness agree you are who you say you are (I.E. my name is Bob Barker and this is my father who will vouch for me) is enough as long as you are a registered voter.

Indiana State Congressmen claimed they were worried that illegal aliens and noncitizens might vote so they required that people who register have their citizenship checked and present photo ID when voting. Like I said that is there right and no one has a problem as long as a picture ID is provided for free. If it is not free then it gets into legal trouble with the old history of poll taxes and voting tests which were designed to prevent non-Whites from voting and which are illegal.