To make it harder a significant number of people need to have no ID. Banking require and id [1] and 93.5% of the population is banked. Most of the remainder probably has an ID for Government services that need them such as applying for food stamps, medicare, medicaid, having a job, unemployment support and social security.

In Norway, my home country, it has never been an issue in our 200 years as an independent country for anyone to get an ID to vote. And we used to be mostly dirt poor fishers and farmers that often lived in fairly isolated places.

Forgot link of evidence that banking require ID https://www.consumerfinance.gov/ask-cfpb/can-i-get-a-checkin...

Generally that 6.5% of unbanked persons tend not to vote for less healthcare and more tax breaks for the rich.

Instituting the voter ID law makes it harder for 6.5% of people that rarely vote for Republicans to vote to prevent 0.000X% of votes cast fraudulently each election.

Do you get it now?

As I stated the unbanked are likely to be very old or poor so that use government services that require an ID. For instance, they rely on food stamps or Medicaid or social security. A large part of this 6.5% and the cohort you talk about therefor has an ID.

The reason why I think so is that people that are not poor can not lead their lives without a bank account due to the essentials for a non poor life requiring a bank account.

This is my last comment. The Republicans would much prefer to prevent or make it harder to vote for 2%, 1%, whatever.

They don’t care about voter fraud. At all.

They care about adding enough shit together that they can win elections.

That is all they care about.

It is not in good faith. It is not about protecting the sanctity of elections.

It is about the opposite. They’ve never been able to show that voter fraud has ever affected an election.

They’re in it because even shaving a percentage of people from voting Democrat is worth it for them.

That is it. That’s the only reason.

Goodbye.