Tweet
Empirically, voter ID laws tend to significantly reduce turnout. Because there is no significant voter fraud, I would say that these laws constitute suppression.
-
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-Bokonon -
Why? Because some dipstick doesn't have a driver's license or paid the $10 for a state ID?(or, for that matter, provided a Military ID if, for some reason, he didn't have the other two)Originally posted by Ramo
Empirically, voter ID laws tend to significantly reduce turnout. Because there is no significant voter fraud, I would say that these laws constitute suppression.
The next question is, how does this "reduce turnout"? 196mil Americans are licensed drivers, are you saying a bunch of them went to the polls, forgot their license(in which case if they drive they were probably breaking the law), said "**** it" and just gave up?
****, I guess voting is just too gosh-darn hard for Americans today.
Today, you are the waves of the Pacific, pushing ever eastward. You are the sequoias rising from the Sierra Nevada, defiant and enduring.Comment
-
Turnout is specifically reduced among people who don't have up to date state issued photo id's, obviously. People, of course, should have up to date state issued photo id's, but many don't - again, particularly the elderly poor."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
Cite?Comment
-
States that imposed identification requirements on voters reduced turnout at the polls in the 2004 presidential election by about 3 percent, and by two to three times as much for minorities, new research suggests.
The study, prepared by scholars at Rutgers and Ohio State Universities for the federal Election Assistance Commission, supports concerns among voting-rights advocates that blacks and Hispanics could be disproportionately affected by ID requirements. But federal officials say more research is needed to draw firmer conclusions about the effects on future elections.
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
My grandmother has up to date photo IDs, and she's well into her 80's.Originally posted by Ramo
Turnout is specifically reduced among people who don't have up to date state issued photo id's, obviously. People, of course, should have up to date state issued photo id's, but many don't - again, particularly the elderly poor.
As for "Up-to-date" State IDs, I suppose that depends, doesn't it? After all, if you put on 50lbs and a beard since you got the photo taken for your license, and it was out of date, I would be inclined to turn you back too.
I'd also love to see a cite on reduction in voter turnout. Specifically, the demographic you mentioned.Today, you are the waves of the Pacific, pushing ever eastward. You are the sequoias rising from the Sierra Nevada, defiant and enduring.Comment
-
I did say elderly poor... More on demographics:
The Eagleton Institute research [the study I referenced above] is supported by findings from a poll conducted by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law in November 2006. Their poll, “Citizens without Proof,” found that as many as 11 percent of Americans—more than 21 million individuals—do not have a current, government-issued photo ID. Elderly, poor and minority Americans are more likely to lack government-issued ID. Polling results suggest six million elderly Americans do not possess a government-issued photo ID, 15 percent of voting-age citizens earning under $35,000 a year do not possess such ID and fully 25 percent of voting-age African Americans do not possess this ID.
"Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
I wonder how that worked. At no point prior they didn't receive literature from the register saying "Bring an ID to the polls"? I seem to recall that most of these states require that you bring the ID the first time you vote at that location, after that it's fine. So, are these first time voters? Recently moved? Since Hispanics are the most effected could they be, dare I say, illegals?Originally posted by Ramo
States that imposed identification requirements on voters reduced turnout at the polls in the 2004 presidential election by about 3 percent, and by two to three times as much for minorities, new research suggests.
The study, prepared by scholars at Rutgers and Ohio State Universities for the federal Election Assistance Commission, supports concerns among voting-rights advocates that blacks and Hispanics could be disproportionately affected by ID requirements. But federal officials say more research is needed to draw firmer conclusions about the effects on future elections.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/us/21voting.html
Will we see the same in 2008?(Presidential elections typically having the highest turnout) After all, your cite implies that this is a recent thing, will it carry over to the next one when pretty remember to bring the ID along?
States that impose IDs, such as Indiana, was it really the ID that caused the drop, or was it the continued exodus from the "middle" part of the country that caused a drop?Today, you are the waves of the Pacific, pushing ever eastward. You are the sequoias rising from the Sierra Nevada, defiant and enduring.Comment
-
A $10 every-5-years State ID is not an onerous requirement dude. It's something you should have to begin with, and *****ing that you never once the past 5years had the time or $10 to get the ID is not a complaint that flies with me.
I mean, how do these folks do banking? Credit Card purchases? Getting into clubs?
For that matter, the article you cited said that 25% of Blacks don't have IDs, do 75% of blacks vote during elections?(The answer is "No") Are they really being disenfranchised if they don't give a rat's ass to begin with?
I'm going to bed, I'll be back!Today, you are the waves of the Pacific, pushing ever eastward. You are the sequoias rising from the Sierra Nevada, defiant and enduring.Comment
-
You could look up the Eagleton study for some of the answers, I imagine. To answer one of your questions, Asians were affected almost as much as Hispanics. I think the operative word here isn't "illegal," but "immigrant" (and therefore less familiar to the voting process)."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
I'm not saying it's onerous. Not for me, anyways. But I'm not an old person living in a ghetto without access to a car. More importantly, regardless of the magnitude of the hassle involve, it reduces the number of people in the process for no good reason. I think that makes it a bad law.
do 75% of blacks vote during elections?(The answer is "No")
Black voter turnout is only slightly lower than white voter turnout. Controlled for income, actually, black voter turnout is higher IIRC."Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before. He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. "
-BokononComment
-
And yet, from your article:Originally posted by Ramo
States that imposed identification requirements on voters reduced turnout at the polls in the 2004 presidential election by about 3 percent, and by two to three times as much for minorities, new research suggests.
The study, prepared by scholars at Rutgers and Ohio State Universities for the federal Election Assistance Commission, supports concerns among voting-rights advocates that blacks and Hispanics could be disproportionately affected by ID requirements. But federal officials say more research is needed to draw firmer conclusions about the effects on future elections.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/21/us/21voting.html
curious.Only two states, Indiana and Florida, now require all voters to show photo ID, and voters without it are allowed to cast only provisional ballots. Indiana officials have said voter turnout increased by 2 percent last November, compared with the 2002 midterm election, despite the enactment of a photo ID law in 2005.
Oddly, the mere requiring of a signature apparently had some effect of voting deterrence?
I have a few issues with the underlying paper, you can find it here:
The paper cited is using 2 data sets: Census and County Turnout and then uses the voting req's as variables. I'm just a caveman, but to me, it seems like the authors are coming to conclusions that really aren't justified by the datasets. It could be the correct conclusion, but it could be the result of other factors.
Further, it uses data from one election, 2004. I don't find data from one election to be particularly persuasive, I would rather see data compared over time, before and after the voting requirements changed.
For example, from the paper:Variations in state turnout doesn't really do anything for me without a historical context.The aggregate data show that 60.9 percent of the estimated citizen voting age population voted in 2004. Differences in voter turnout at the state level in 2004 varied based on voter identification requirements. Taking into account the maximum requirements, an average of 64.2 percent of the voting age population turned out in states that required voters to state their names, compared to 58.1 percent in states that required photo identification.
Please correct me if I've missed something, I'm just a layman here.Comment
-
I'm not paranoid. They really are out to get me!Originally posted by snoopy369
You're just a paranoid commie sometimes, che. This is one of those times.
I'm speaking from past experience, not just past decades, but within the last eight years, including the last election.Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...Comment
-
It's not at all unfair. These laws were all enacted in the 1860s, in the wake of the passaged of the 13th Amendment. They were passed specifically in order to prevent freed Black slaves from having the franchise.Originally posted by snoopy369
I do think it's quite unfair to claim that it is intentionally racially discriminatory.
Instead of trying to base things on how you think they came about, you might want to study history. Your position ion this thread has been completely divorced from history, as if all this **** just happened in the last few years to stop illegal aliens from voting. This is part of a 140 year effort to suppress the Black vote and maintain white supremacy,Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...Comment
-
Ah, well, because it's so easy for Lonestar, it's therefore easy for everyone. Give up the argument everyone!Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree...Comment
Comment