Voter ID. Do you agree or disagree?

[Subduction Zone]

All states have voter ID procedures but the process is not uniform. Nor should it be since the Constitution leaves that up to the states. Anyone who tries to vote illegally isn't dealing with a full deck since getting caught is a federal crime in a national election, and I believe that can get one up to five years in a slammer.

This right-wing hyperbole about voter ID is just propaganda since even Pubs who handled the electioneering process both in the states and in the fed have publicly said that this was probably the "cleanest" federal election in American history. However, if one only watches the Fox Propaganda Channel they probably aren't aware of this-- and a lot of other things as well.

There is one election that I know of where the Democrats won by "cheating" in my state. I used the scare quotes because what they did was illegal then, but would not be illegal now. What they did was to have voting registration efforts that got the homeless to register. Quite a few of them did and quite a few voted. The problem? Many of them were felons and could not legally register to vote at that time. As a population they were much more likely to vote Democratic, though one could never prove who any one particular voter voted for. At any rate the Democratic governor contestant won and the newly registered voters were the difference.

None of those ex-cons were charged either. Though they clearly could have been. I think that didn't happen because such a conviction would have been appealed and it was far too likely that a ban on felons.voting once they had served their term would have been found to be unconstitutional.

Since that time the law was changed. Now once one has served one's time one is automatically able to vote again.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

None of those ex-cons were charged either. Though they clearly could have been. I think that didn't happen because such a conviction would have been appealed and it was far too likely that a ban on felons.voting once they had served their term would have been found to be unconstitutional.

Since that time the law was changed. Now once one has served one's time one is automatically able to vote again.

In Canada, prisoners vote from prison.

Elections Canada sets up polling stations in prisons. The prisoners' votes get counted in the district where they lived before they were arrested (or, if they had no fixed address, their votes go to either where they were arrested or stood trial). It's never created an issue.

... and it's the sort of thing that happens in a society that considers democracy and voting rights to be important.

 

[ecco]

There is one election that I know of where the Democrats won by "cheating" in my state. I used the scare quotes because what they did was illegal then, but would not be illegal now. What they did was to have voting registration efforts that got the homeless to register. Quite a few of them did and quite a few voted. The problem? Many of them were felons and could not legally register to vote at that time.

The real problem is why ex-cons were denied the right to vote to begin with. I'll bet those laws were passed by Republican state legislatures and signed by a Republican governor.

Example...

Can Felons Vote in Florida? - FindLaw

In November 2018, Florida voters passed Amendment 4, a measure that restores voting rights to certain felons (nearly 1.4 million people) once they have served their sentences, including parole and probation. Those convicted of murder and sexual offenses remain unable to vote.

In March 2019, a state law was passed (Florida legislature has large Republican majrituy and a Republican governor) that limits Amendment 4. That law requires former felons to either pay all fees that they owe as part of their case or get their sentence modified in order to register to vote. At the time of its passing, this law prevented nearly 775,000 felons from voting.​

The repressive Florida law was upheld by the Circuit Court nullifying the will of the voters.


Then there is this...

Mike Bloomberg contributed $16,000,000 to help pay the fines. This led to...

Bloomberg Adds $16 Million To A Fund That Helps Florida Felons Get Chance To Vote

MATT GAETZ: It is a third-degree felony for someone to either directly or indirectly provide something of value to impact whether or not someone votes.

ALLEN: Florida's attorney general has now sent a letter to the FBI and the state Department of Law Enforcement asking them to investigate. The state's law requiring felons to pay fines before they can vote was recently upheld by a federal appeals court. Julie Ebenstein, an attorney with the ACLU's Voting Rights Project, says in court, part of the state's defense was that if felons don't have the funds, others could always pay for them.

JULIE EBENSTEIN: I'm surprised to hear now that third parties who are generously willing to pay people's outstanding legal financial obligations, suddenly they're being accused of a crime for doing exactly what the state suggested was perfectly legitimate.
​

Hopefully, when Matt Gaetz is convicted, a large portion of his penalty will be a very large fine that he will be unable to pay and hence unable to vote. I wonder if he sees the irony of his actions.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The real problem is why ex-cons were denied the right to vote to begin with. I'll bet those laws were passed by Republican state legislatures and signed by a Republican governor.

Example...

Can Felons Vote in Florida? - FindLaw

In November 2018, Florida voters passed Amendment 4, a measure that restores voting rights to certain felons (nearly 1.4 million people) once they have served their sentences, including parole and probation. Those convicted of murder and sexual offenses remain unable to vote.

In March 2019, a state law was passed (Florida legislature has large Republican majrituy and a Republican governor) that limits Amendment 4. That law requires former felons to either pay all fees that they owe as part of their case or get their sentence modified in order to register to vote. At the time of its passing, this law prevented nearly 775,000 felons from voting.​

The repressive Florida law was upheld by the Circuit Court nullifying the will of the voters.

Then there is this...

Mike Bloomberg contributed $16,000,000 to help pay the fines. This led to...

Bloomberg Adds $16 Million To A Fund That Helps Florida Felons Get Chance To Vote

MATT GAETZ: It is a third-degree felony for someone to either directly or indirectly provide something of value to impact whether or not someone votes.

ALLEN: Florida's attorney general has now sent a letter to the FBI and the state Department of Law Enforcement asking them to investigate. The state's law requiring felons to pay fines before they can vote was recently upheld by a federal appeals court. Julie Ebenstein, an attorney with the ACLU's Voting Rights Project, says in court, part of the state's defense was that if felons don't have the funds, others could always pay for them.

JULIE EBENSTEIN: I'm surprised to hear now that third parties who are generously willing to pay people's outstanding legal financial obligations, suddenly they're being accused of a crime for doing exactly what the state suggested was perfectly legitimate.
​

Hopefully, when Matt Gaetz is convicted, a large portion of his penalty will be a very large fine that he will be unable to pay and hence unable to vote. I wonder if he sees the irony of his actions.

Those laws are very old so I do not think that was the case at all. I will have to do a Google search when I have a chance. But I seem to remember from even 1950's TV shows that felons could not vote. At that time at least the Democrats were more racist than the Republicans.


EDIT: Hah! I was right. It was more likely racist Democrats, of course it is a mistake to assume that political parties remain constant, the people that the Republican party appeals to today would like the Democrat party of the 1800's. But you were right that racism probably played a very key role. From the Wiki article on felony voter disenfranchisement:

The first US felony disenfranchisement laws were introduced in 1792 in Kentucky,[11] and by 1840 four states had felony disenfranchisement policies. By the American Civil War, about twenty-four states had some form of felony disenfranchisement policy or similar provision in the state constitution.[12] The Fourteenth Amendment was adopted in 1868, and by 1870 the number had increased to twenty eight (out of thirty eight states).[12]

The surge of felony disenfranchisement laws after the Civil War led many to conclude that the laws were implemented as part of a strategy to disenfranchise blacks, especially as the policy was expanded in conjunction with the Black Codes, which established severe penalties for petty crimes and especially targeted black Americans.[13]

Felony disenfranchisement in the United States - Wikipedia

I did not know of the racist past of these laws, but it does make sense when one thinks about it.

 

[Friend of Mara]

Keep in mind you have to have drivers license/ID to drive. Or even a non-drivers ID to do most anything. If you don't have it on you, guess what,,,
you will get a ticket.
you can't buy alcohol
you can't buy cigarettes
yiu can't get insurance
yiu can't buy fuel injector cleaner
you can't buy many medications
you can't get into a bar
you can't buy certain glue's
you can't visit a prisoner
you can't get a fishing license
you can' get a trout tag
you can't get a hunting license
you can't get a deer tag
you can't get a turkey tag
you can't buy a firearm
you can't buy ammuntion
you can't open a checking account
you can't enter a federal building
you can't fly
you can't get a post office box
you can't be an organ donor
you can't get credit
you can't pick your kids up from school
you can't register your kids in school
you can't get a primary Dr
you can't get your kids a Dr or dentist
you can't do many many other things.

AND HERES THE CLENCHER..... TO EVEN REGISTER TO VOTE you need an ID so how is having a voter ID interfering with anyone's right to vote?

So why is anyone against voter ID?

Edit....

Common sense will fail here because politics will try to be used as a weasel way to get around it.

I don't have a problem with it inherently. It just needs to be coupled with a few other things. Make it free to get an ID if it is basically required to live in the states. And don't change the laws about it days/weeks before an election.

The voter id laws have never ever ever even once been about preventing voter fraud and every single person on the planet knows this. True baby brain if you do. Just so sweet and innocent and I wish I could shield you to the truth of the world if you do. I am your mama now.

But the cold hard truth is that having ID is ever so slightly less common in demographics that almost exclusively vote majority democrat. Poor people, POC and young people mainly. So the criticism isn't necessarily on the action itself but rather the motivation.

Sort of like Rick Scott's drug testing bill that would require recipients of government benefits would have to pass a drug test. On paper and in general I can agree to this. Seems reasonable. But when you find out that it actually costs way more to drug test every recipient than you would save from people who fail you have to question why. And then you find out Rick Scott owned major shares in the drug testing companies that would be tasked to do this and significantly increasing his wealth.

So its usually less about the actual issue and more about the motivations of terrible people slighting others for personal gain that I have a problem with.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

What ID do you need to get photo ID where you are?

Anyone else arguing for photo ID want to answer?