By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
pokoko said:
Kantor said:
I'm not sure I get this problem with requiring a photo ID.

Surely a valid driver's license, obtainable in the US two full years before you can even vote, would count as valid photo ID? And a passport would do the same?

Is it so much to ask that every citizen of what is an extremely affluent country has one of those things? And I'm sure there are cheaper alternatives available.

 You can get a State ID card for under $20 in most places, but a lot of people don't know that, and as I said, the DMV can be a hassle that takes the better part of a day.

As with most things, compromise would solve this, but it's now become a political issue they both sides want to WIN rather than work out logically.  I do believe, however, that the first year a photo ID is required to vote, that every possible effort is made to ensure that every voter understands and is given a reasonable opportunity and chance to obtain one, probably with free voter ID cards.  If you have a large number of voters showing up unaware of the change, then yes, something has gone very wrong.


Which is why every state who has passed such laws has in fact gone and had numerous adds and community outreach to make things known for such people and made it really easy to get such ID.

So in reality, the democratic arguement on this is a farce.


It's worth noting that a majority of voters want voter ID laws to require State photo ID... including a majority of the minorites that this is supposed to hurt.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/08/12/National-Politics/Polling/question_6226.xml

Hell, even 57% of liberals are for voter ID laws... the only group to not support it, are people who are both liberals and democrats... and they still are 48% for the motion.

 

It's actually really hard to find contested laws that have such a vast level of public support.