How many DC residents do not have ID cards of some sort?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would conservatively estimate that probably 75% of AA people over 50 years old lack any form of govt ID at all. It just wasn’t done before the 70’s. And they’ve grown up and lived their whole lives without ever driving or traveling, or being able to get a job. You people live very sheltered lives, and have no idea what life is like in the AA community.

You are hallucinating...

[Anonymous]

Roughly 5% of the US population has no bank account. If you have a low wage job, you simply pick up your paycheck, cash it, and pay your bills in cash, including rent and utilities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would conservatively estimate that probably 75% of AA people over 50 years old lack any form of govt ID at all. It just wasn’t done before the 70’s. And they’ve grown up and lived their whole lives without ever driving or traveling, or being able to get a job. You people live very sheltered lives, and have no idea what life is like in the AA community.

You must be kidding.
Of the over 50 African American crowd I know, have drivers licenses, a few with passports. Yes, there are the homeless and people who have been institutionalized and people who just can't get their $h!t together, but they are not 75%. Even among my southern relatives (AfAm side) they have drivers licenses and some have their military IDs.

[Anonymous]

My umc grandma didn’t have a drivers license. It was expired when she flew to my wedding in 2010 and that was the last time she flew. She had expired passports. Her birth certificate didn’t match her social security card or drivers license (birthdates didn’t match and her middle name was different on all). She just died and it was a disaster trying to get things to match to close out the estate. I know if she had tried to get a new drivers license she wouldn’t have been able. Same with dhs grandpa. Seems his mom changed his name and last name and he wasn’t born in a hospital. He hasn’t driven since the 90s though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Probably thousands.

There are plenty of older folks who were born in the rural south who are living in DC now and may not have ever had a birth certificate.

How did they get to DC? How do they get a social security check? How do they rent?

Many came to DC in search of educational opportunities for their children. They took the train, the bus, or came with other people by car. Imagine, for example, a SAHM who never drove. Any social security that she has would be based on her husband’s income and SS# . She might still live in the family home — a house that was purchased by her husband. Many people of a certain age were paid in cash and don’t qualify for social security benefits which, originally were deliberately crafted to leave out jobs that were disproportionately held by Black people.

Maybe go read up on the Great Migration.

The Great Migration was 100 years ago. There is no one collecting social security based on their husband who doesn't have their own SS#. Sorry... even in the 30s when Social Security was created and your point was actually true, the government made all sorts of accommodations... you could bring in a church document, you could bring in your mom or a sibling or a friend to verify your birth. They swore an affidavit and they gave you a SS#. We now fall over ourselves to accept documents from every country in the world. There is no one who can't get an ID if they want one.

Are there homeless and mentally ill people who have lost the card, sure? But even most of them receive SSI, so yes, someone is holding their paperwork.

The Great Migration ended around 197O — So widen your range a bit. No one has said that you “can’t” get an ID. Many of us have said that it can be expensive and difficult and a major hurdle for people who do not have birth certificates. The extreme difficulties are less about people who had these documents and lost them and more about people who never had them in the first place.

[Anonymous]

The people who were born on a kitchen table by kerosene lantern in an unheated, dirt floor shack on a subsistence farm in the middle of nowhere and whose birth was recorded, if at all, in a tattered family Bible somewhere are for the most part dead of old age my now.

The people who claim getting identification is too expensive or complex for them seem for the most part to afford other things, including cigarettes, drugs and booze, and to be able to handle normal transactions, like getting a prepaid cell phone. And if they’re really broke there typically are fee waivers available, and social service organizations to help them get straightened out if they want to.

The chronically disorganized really shouldn’t be setting the standard and even they usually can organize the things they really care about.

The truly mentally ill are unfortunate and it is hard not to sympathize with them, but again they really should not be the standard.

We have become way to much of a “show your papers” society. People with no business having copies of our drivers licenses routinely demand and scan them to keep in perpetuity. Even worse are the “show ID” transactions where possession of something that looks valid is enough.

All this being said, there are times when it is reasonable and important to be able confirm who a person is. The idea that it is oppressive to require people to have identification when they might have some trouble getting or maintaining possession of it is dramatically exaggerated. It comes up most often in the context of voter ID laws. People routinely show ID to visit their kid’s school, enter office buildings, get government services, get medical care, buy booze and cigarettes, and even see movies. But suddenly it’s a wholesale disenfranchisement to want to confirm that voters are who they claim to be? Not a persuasive claim.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The people who were born on a kitchen table by kerosene lantern in an unheated, dirt floor shack on a subsistence farm in the middle of nowhere and whose birth was recorded, if at all, in a tattered family Bible somewhere are for the most part dead of old age my now.

The people who claim getting identification is too expensive or complex for them seem for the most part to afford other things, including cigarettes, drugs and booze, and to be able to handle normal transactions, like getting a prepaid cell phone. And if they’re really broke there typically are fee waivers available, and social service organizations to help them get straightened out if they want to.

The chronically disorganized really shouldn’t be setting the standard and even they usually can organize the things they really care about.

The truly mentally ill are unfortunate and it is hard not to sympathize with them, but again they really should not be the standard.

We have become way to much of a “show your papers” society. People with no business having copies of our drivers licenses routinely demand and scan them to keep in perpetuity. Even worse are the “show ID” transactions where possession of something that looks valid is enough.

All this being said, there are times when it is reasonable and important to be able confirm who a person is. The idea that it is oppressive to require people to have identification when they might have some trouble getting or maintaining possession of it is dramatically exaggerated. It comes up most often in the context of voter ID laws. People routinely show ID to visit their kid’s school, enter office buildings, get government services, get medical care, buy booze and cigarettes, and even see movies. But suddenly it’s a wholesale disenfranchisement to want to confirm that voters are who they claim to be? Not a persuasive claim.

I agree. It seems to me one solution is to accept expired IDs for voting also. I realize not everyone may keep their IDs up to date, but most people have them.

And guess what? DC offers FREE non-driver ID cards if you are a senior citizen, homeless, or were recently let out of prison:
https://dmv.dc.gov/node/1120181

[Anonymous]

11 percent of the U.S. population doesn't have valid ID, according to the ACLU.

It's up to 25 percent for people of color.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who were born on a kitchen table by kerosene lantern in an unheated, dirt floor shack on a subsistence farm in the middle of nowhere and whose birth was recorded, if at all, in a tattered family Bible somewhere are for the most part dead of old age my now.

The people who claim getting identification is too expensive or complex for them seem for the most part to afford other things, including cigarettes, drugs and booze, and to be able to handle normal transactions, like getting a prepaid cell phone. And if they’re really broke there typically are fee waivers available, and social service organizations to help them get straightened out if they want to.

The chronically disorganized really shouldn’t be setting the standard and even they usually can organize the things they really care about.

The truly mentally ill are unfortunate and it is hard not to sympathize with them, but again they really should not be the standard.

We have become way to much of a “show your papers” society. People with no business having copies of our drivers licenses routinely demand and scan them to keep in perpetuity. Even worse are the “show ID” transactions where possession of something that looks valid is enough.

All this being said, there are times when it is reasonable and important to be able confirm who a person is. The idea that it is oppressive to require people to have identification when they might have some trouble getting or maintaining possession of it is dramatically exaggerated. It comes up most often in the context of voter ID laws. People routinely show ID to visit their kid’s school, enter office buildings, get government services, get medical care, buy booze and cigarettes, and even see movies. But suddenly it’s a wholesale disenfranchisement to want to confirm that voters are who they claim to be? Not a persuasive claim.

I agree. It seems to me one solution is to accept expired IDs for voting also. I realize not everyone may keep their IDs up to date, but most people have them.

And guess what? DC offers FREE non-driver ID cards if you are a senior citizen, homeless, or were recently let out of prison:
https://dmv.dc.gov/node/1120181

Guess what??? You still have to have all the correct documents, which cost money, and transportation to the DMV, and be able to get the time off work.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:11 percent of the U.S. population doesn't have valid ID, according to the ACLU.

It's up to 25 percent for people of color.

This is the survey they refer to. They called 987 people, in 2006:
https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legacy/d/download_file_39242.pdf

What has changed since then is banking rules got much stricter in terms of documentation needed to open an account, and TSA rules got stricter in terms of identification needed to fly.

88% of all Americans have taken an airplane flight in their lifetime, and 48% of Americans fly in a typical year:

https://www.airlines.org/news/air-travel-more-accessible-in-2017-according-to-latest-air-travelers-in-america-report/

5.4% of US households are unbanked:
https://www.fdic.gov/analysis/household-survey/index.html

So.. who are all these people without valid ID that are able to fly and do banking?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who were born on a kitchen table by kerosene lantern in an unheated, dirt floor shack on a subsistence farm in the middle of nowhere and whose birth was recorded, if at all, in a tattered family Bible somewhere are for the most part dead of old age my now.

The people who claim getting identification is too expensive or complex for them seem for the most part to afford other things, including cigarettes, drugs and booze, and to be able to handle normal transactions, like getting a prepaid cell phone. And if they’re really broke there typically are fee waivers available, and social service organizations to help them get straightened out if they want to.

The chronically disorganized really shouldn’t be setting the standard and even they usually can organize the things they really care about.

The truly mentally ill are unfortunate and it is hard not to sympathize with them, but again they really should not be the standard.

We have become way to much of a “show your papers” society. People with no business having copies of our drivers licenses routinely demand and scan them to keep in perpetuity. Even worse are the “show ID” transactions where possession of something that looks valid is enough.

All this being said, there are times when it is reasonable and important to be able confirm who a person is. The idea that it is oppressive to require people to have identification when they might have some trouble getting or maintaining possession of it is dramatically exaggerated. It comes up most often in the context of voter ID laws. People routinely show ID to visit their kid’s school, enter office buildings, get government services, get medical care, buy booze and cigarettes, and even see movies. But suddenly it’s a wholesale disenfranchisement to want to confirm that voters are who they claim to be? Not a persuasive claim.

I agree. It seems to me one solution is to accept expired IDs for voting also. I realize not everyone may keep their IDs up to date, but most people have them.

And guess what? DC offers FREE non-driver ID cards if you are a senior citizen, homeless, or were recently let out of prison:
https://dmv.dc.gov/node/1120181

Guess what??? You still have to have all the correct documents, which cost money, and transportation to the DMV, and be able to get the time off work.

Life requires effort. Are you hungry? You have to travel to some place to buy food, then cook it or purchase it already cooked. Later you have to do the dishes.

Yes, getting an ID requires some effort, once every few years. What does one do in life that doesn't require effort?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who were born on a kitchen table by kerosene lantern in an unheated, dirt floor shack on a subsistence farm in the middle of nowhere and whose birth was recorded, if at all, in a tattered family Bible somewhere are for the most part dead of old age my now.

The people who claim getting identification is too expensive or complex for them seem for the most part to afford other things, including cigarettes, drugs and booze, and to be able to handle normal transactions, like getting a prepaid cell phone. And if they’re really broke there typically are fee waivers available, and social service organizations to help them get straightened out if they want to.

The chronically disorganized really shouldn’t be setting the standard and even they usually can organize the things they really care about.

The truly mentally ill are unfortunate and it is hard not to sympathize with them, but again they really should not be the standard.

We have become way to much of a “show your papers” society. People with no business having copies of our drivers licenses routinely demand and scan them to keep in perpetuity. Even worse are the “show ID” transactions where possession of something that looks valid is enough.

All this being said, there are times when it is reasonable and important to be able confirm who a person is. The idea that it is oppressive to require people to have identification when they might have some trouble getting or maintaining possession of it is dramatically exaggerated. It comes up most often in the context of voter ID laws. People routinely show ID to visit their kid’s school, enter office buildings, get government services, get medical care, buy booze and cigarettes, and even see movies. But suddenly it’s a wholesale disenfranchisement to want to confirm that voters are who they claim to be? Not a persuasive claim.

I agree. It seems to me one solution is to accept expired IDs for voting also. I realize not everyone may keep their IDs up to date, but most people have them.

And guess what? DC offers FREE non-driver ID cards if you are a senior citizen, homeless, or were recently let out of prison:
https://dmv.dc.gov/node/1120181

Guess what??? You still have to have all the correct documents, which cost money, and transportation to the DMV, and be able to get the time off work.

So does voting. You have to travel to some voting site and get time off work.

[Anonymous]

The not having ID argument is similar to the not having internet access argument. It is made up. We want to believe it because it makes us feel like we understand a potentially awful problem. But the fact of the matter is that the problem does not exist. And just like the internet problem, if it did exist there are dozens of already existing pathways to solve the problem. But if we acknowledged it solved we wouldn't feel like we understood the problem. Real first world problems here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tons. A decent portion of the homeless and mentally ill population have difficulty obtaining and keeping their identification documents.

Definitely should harvest their ballots come election time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The people who were born on a kitchen table by kerosene lantern in an unheated, dirt floor shack on a subsistence farm in the middle of nowhere and whose birth was recorded, if at all, in a tattered family Bible somewhere are for the most part dead of old age my now.

The people who claim getting identification is too expensive or complex for them seem for the most part to afford other things, including cigarettes, drugs and booze, and to be able to handle normal transactions, like getting a prepaid cell phone. And if they’re really broke there typically are fee waivers available, and social service organizations to help them get straightened out if they want to.

The chronically disorganized really shouldn’t be setting the standard and even they usually can organize the things they really care about.

The truly mentally ill are unfortunate and it is hard not to sympathize with them, but again they really should not be the standard.

We have become way to much of a “show your papers” society. People with no business having copies of our drivers licenses routinely demand and scan them to keep in perpetuity. Even worse are the “show ID” transactions where possession of something that looks valid is enough.

All this being said, there are times when it is reasonable and important to be able confirm who a person is. The idea that it is oppressive to require people to have identification when they might have some trouble getting or maintaining possession of it is dramatically exaggerated. It comes up most often in the context of voter ID laws. People routinely show ID to visit their kid’s school, enter office buildings, get government services, get medical care, buy booze and cigarettes, and even see movies. But suddenly it’s a wholesale disenfranchisement to want to confirm that voters are who they claim to be? Not a persuasive claim.

I agree. It seems to me one solution is to accept expired IDs for voting also. I realize not everyone may keep their IDs up to date, but most people have them.

And guess what? DC offers FREE non-driver ID cards if you are a senior citizen, homeless, or were recently let out of prison:
https://dmv.dc.gov/node/1120181

Guess what??? You still have to have all the correct documents, which cost money, and transportation to the DMV, and be able to get the time off work.

So does voting. You have to travel to some voting site and get time off work.

Nope, the ballot harvester will just show up at the home.