I'm in favor of requiring a photo id to vote but am well aware of the problems some have in obtaining such an id. That's the problem that needs to be corrected. It does need to be corrected first and we shouldn't just shrug our shoulders and go back to things the way they've been. Everyone should have easy access to a state endorsed identification card. It's an essential function of government and interaction with citizens. As such it should be funded by general taxation rather than a user fee.
A state issued identification card is used for so much more than just authorization for driving a vehicle. Why is it in the hands of the DMV/DDS in most if not every state? Even the non-driver identification cards issued to those who don't drive are usually still issued by DMV/DDS. It's an odd system that wouldn't be designed as it is now if we were designing from scratch but we're use to it because that's how it evolved over time.
The Constitution explicitly gives Congress the power to regulate how congressional elections are held - Article 1, Section 4 - precisely because those elections are national in practice (in terms of how their outcome translates to policy). Congress already uses the power to, for example, set the date of the elections to be the same across the country, or to enforce a uniform electoral system (single-member districts). That same power could be similarly used to enact uniform voter ID requirements, and one could argue that it is the only way to ensure that states aren't abusing the system to benefit whatever party controls them. And once you go there, it makes sense to tie those requirements to a national ID.
States can use their own IDs for state elections. But I don't see why they should get away with arbitrary restrictions (or arbitrary lack of restrictions) for elections that directly apply outside of their borders. They're not sovereign countries, and federal elections are one of the issues on which federal-level regulation is clearly both reasonable and constitutional.
There tension between those two positions is of little practical importance. I'm not worried that they can link my name and address, I'm worried about a sudden outbreak of majority-vs-miniority where someone I really don't like gets in to power and links, I dunno, tax records-name-address, racial-history-name-address , travel-history-bank-account-photo or somesuch. I don't think it is practically feasible to target someone off the information in a voter role.
The real issue to me is that there isn't much organisation against governments laying the groundwork, and in practice opposing an ID card doesn't mean anything. In Australia we basically have all the infrastructure for a national ID card except the formalisation of a little piece of plastic.
Showing an ID to vote is utterly common sense.
Instead of all those voter registration campaigns that everyone spends money on ... they should be spending on 'just getting ID'. And then maybe there should be no need to even register in many cases, if you're ID w/address is good enough.
Two birds.
In the end, you have to register to vote, and in most states you do so with the same agencies that make Identifications. Requiring an ID card to get a voter ID, or having it as part of your driver's license or state id isn't a horrible idea.
There's no reason for it to be a "federally issued id".
States have been proven by experience to be willing to do both. AFAIK, all states that have implemented some form of voter ID to date collect fees for issuance of any eligible IDs. And there are numerous cases of states closing or moving DMVs and similar agencies, or mucking around with vote schedule, to deliberately suppress some voters (a recent example which is particularly glaring because the state explicitly admitted its motivation: https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/north-carolina-voter-id/).
Thus, the only way to ensure that voter ID would not be discriminatory in practice, is to have feds run the whole thing, in a way that guarantees non-discrimination - which means it has to be free, and it has to be easy to get. If you truly believe that voter ID is necessary for election security, then this is the compromise deal that you'll have to accept for us liberals to be onboard with that (keep in mind that most of us don't believe that there's any real issue to be solved by having voter ID, so any such support would be mainly symbolic in nature - and you'll have show good faith in courting it).
Wow, this is mind-blowing to me. A fair election is the basis of western democracy, a sacred institution. In my mind this pretty much equates to treason.
I don't know how these people can sleep at night.
I really think this is a giant myth. You're expecting me to believe that these minorities are living such horrid, opressed lives that they slave away every single day, and can't find a friend with a ride, or band together to make a group trip to get registered one day out of the year?
Yeah, I've heard it, registration centers are closing in minority neighborhoods; but that doesn't mean that these people don't have places to register/get an ID within an hour or two by bus.
The problem is ignorance and apathy, not voter suppression. Frankly, if someone is so uninterested/unwilling to participate in society that they can't be fucked to spend even 1 day out of the year to get a license, then they don't have any business making any decisions regarding out collective government.
Maybe you don’t even have bus fare. Maybe your car can’t make it 90 miles to the nearest DMV.
Also you’re really dismissing the fact that some people literally work all the hours the DMV is open. And when those people have their one or two days off, there’s other crap they have to get done.
I’m not saying we shouldn’t have voter ID... I’m just saying you’re being disingenuous by saying it doesn’t disenfranchise any voters.
>Also you’re really dismissing the fact that some people literally work all the hours the DMV is open. And when those people have their one or two days off, there’s other crap they have to get done.
For an entire year? You can't scrape together $20 and find a free afternoon once or twice in a decade? What percentage of the non homeless population actually lives this way and actually lives too far from a DMV?
Also, I'm not saying it doesn't disenfranchise voters, but the numbers are so incredibly small that it's statistically insignificant.
I understand that we shouldn't let the perfect be the enemy of the good, but I think we shouldn't let the good be the enemy of the perfect either. The symbolic act in being able to cast your vote and at least have the feeling that you have control over various governments that have such powerful sway over your life is powerful and maybe even cathartic.
The documents you present for ID shouldn't be any more than you should present to vote... it's just a shortcut. Voter fraud is a significant issue... in many districts significantly more than the number of people who would be unable to vote because of complications.
1) There is a way for all Americans (including the poor, minorities, indigenous tribes, the homeless, and people without a physical address) to obtain this ID without any prejudice, opportunity cost, or privacy implications 2) There is significant political will to rolling out 1)
Then I'm with you. If not as it currently is the case, then voter ID is a means of disenfranchising the vulnerable groups I mentioned in 1) and I'm opposed.
Update: You might argue that I'm contradicting myself in that voter ID law would be good and ensuring that the groups I mentioned were protected in 1) would be asking for perfection. My rebuttal would be that any scheme that allows for legal disenfranchisement of otherwise legal voters is not good at all.
No one, including partisan commissions established for no other purpose than validating this claim, has been able to provide evidence supporting this.
https://www.pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/blogs/sta...
most of which are practically prohibited by law to obtain a valid ID
An example: https://www.dmv.org/ny-new-york/id-cards.php
To apply for a photo ID card, you must:
* Be a citizen or a legal resident of the U.S.
* Be a resident of New York State.
* Have your original birth certificate.
* Have your Social Security card.
* Be able to provide enough documents to verify your identity.
This is not a myth, and affects magnitudes more people than there are cases of voter fraud.
Renewing or replacing an existing ID requires none of those other documents, generally. (I haven't even seen my SSID card in three decades)
The problem is that the state and federal ID system is so fucked up that it disenfranchises voters. Until that system is fixed, you can't use it for voting.
This issue then becomes a partisan one because voter fraud is so rare that it doesn't seem to need any additions, so strong pushes for voter ID laws (which almost never address the issue of the ID systems) are targeting those who are less likely to have ID, which tends to be concentrated with voting for one party. If anyone actually cared about voter ID laws for non-partisan reasons, it would go hand in hand with a national ID system.