Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Once again, Republicans have shown that they don’t care about voting rights. OP asks “Why is voting rights legislation needed?” Several people answer. Republicans (and possibly OP) reply that we’re making too big a deal out of this.

This would seriously be okay with you if the tables were turned, OP and con PPs?
“Changes in how Congress handles the electoral vote count around Jan. 6 every four years wouldn’t speak to any of that. Nor would they address what is perhaps among the worst of the recent state predations: election hijacking. Last year, 262 bills introduced in 41 states would award undue power to state legislatures or hyperpartisan actors to interfere with election administration; 32 of them are now law in 17 states.

The measures introduced or passed do things such as intimidate election officials by allowing bogus “audits” of nonexistent fraud, criminalize routine election administration and allow legislatures to replace election boards that refuse to bow to partisanship. In the worst-case scenario, some proposals permit the state legislature to determine who won an election, irrespective of the voters’ choice.”
https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/2022/01/06/eca-reform-voting-rights/

What the GOP is introducing as law (written by ALEC or similar, no doubt) is nothing short of fascism. Allowing the appearance of a free and fair election but then overturning the outcome if the GOP statehouse doesn’t like it is fascism.

Does none of you think this is a big deal, seriously? At what point did you all decide fascism was the way forward?

OP certainly showed she’s a “rationale” conservative though. She’ll come up with rationales to support her predetermined positions.

OP here - have to admit, that's a good one!

So are you going to deal with any substance or are you just enjoying the random joke generation?

Well, my take is that anyone who wants to vote can vote. None of the state-level restrictions or audits really change that. The article in the post looks like a partisan op-ed. I guess I'm just not worried that anyone who truly wants to vote will be denied.

The fact that you are not worried does not mean it is impossible. I know an older couple, wife is 67, husband is 75. No internet, very isolated people, they are also hoarders so very wary of anyone they do not absolutely trust. The husband is in charge but in poor health and very, very difficult for him to physically get around at all. In 2020 I helped them register for mail voting. State required DL number. Husband did have the number and they both knew their SS numbers. Had they not it would have been a nightmare. I helped them apply for LiHEAP last year, which is much easier. and it took weeks for them to come up with the info needed.

I "harvested" their ballots and dropped them in the drop box by the courthouse. No idea what the rules are in my state but why should that be not allowed? Btw, they were Trump voters and I most certainly am not.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you think people should be able to vote even if they have no proof of who they are?

I guess that is what they think. What could possibly go wrong? Ballot harvesting? Absentee ballots to every house, etc.

You didn’t read any of the examples either. People who had been voting for 70 years couldn’t vote because their drivers’ license expired a few months back. PATHETIC.

Anonymous wrote:Show me one study that voter ID laws have decreased voter turnout.

Fourth study:
“Using exact matching and a difference-in-differences design, we show that for the 3 percent of voters who lack ID in North Carolina, the ID law caused a 0.7 percentage point turnout decrease in the 2016 primary election relative to those with ID.”
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/political-science-research-and-methods/article/abs/durable-differential-deterrent-effects-of-strict-photo-identification-laws/E97B3308FDA75972A6374EDCD26333BF#

Anonymous wrote:Show me one study that voter ID laws have decreased voter turnout.

Third study:
“The results showed a concrete effect on minority turnout. “Racial and ethnic minority turnout is dropping, relative to white turnout, more when these laws are passed than when not,” says Zoltan Hajnal, a professor of political science at the University of California, San Diego, and one of the study’s coauthors.”
https://www.fastcompany.com/90523539/strict-voter-id-laws-directly-reduce-minority-turnout
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/21565503.2020.1773280?journalCode=rpgi20

Anonymous wrote:Show me one study that voter ID laws have decreased voter turnout.

Here’s another:
“This research explores the effects of voter ID laws on elections. The authors argue that many of the studies which find voter ID has no effect of disenfranchising minorities were conducted before the strictest voter ID laws were adopted. This study utilizes a nationwide survey of over 50,000 respondents. The study finds strong evidence suggesting that racial minorities’ turnout is decreased by voter ID laws. Specially, Latino voter turnout was 10.3 percentage-points lower in states with photo ID requirements, while multi-racial Americans’ turnout was 12.8 percentage-points lower. These effects significantly widened the turnout gap between white Americans and non-white Americans. Beyond race, voter turnout among naturalized citizens (i.e. those not born in America), was 12.7 percentage-points lower in general elections. When factoring in ideology, the findings show that, among self-described strong liberals, turnout is decreased by 10.7 percentage points when voter ID laws are present, while for self-described strong conservatives, turnout only drops 2.8 percentage points.”
http://ippsr.msu.edu/research/voter-identification-laws-and-suppression-minority-votes

To all of you who have responded to OP’s original question, you have done an excellent job showing me why the legislation is needed. Here’s the thing, instead of spending time on DCUM arguing with some of the posters who aren’t persuadable for whatever reason, shouldn’t we be spending our time doing whatever we can to stop the Republicans from succeeding in suppressing votes?

The way I look at it the Constitution guarantees the right to vote. To me it’s like your vote is a bank deposit that you own. Voter suppresion laws are like someone coming and taking or stealing your deposit before you could put it or invest it in the bank. If you think that is wrong, what are you doing—actually doing—to try to make sure those people can get to the bank and make their deposit. Arguing on DCUM, twitter, Facebook, etc. doesn’t count. If you live in DC, you are already suppressed and disenfranchised on the Federal level. What are you doing to help someone make it in to the voting booth or the clerk’s often with their ballot? The Republicans want us to keep talking because as long as we do that, we won’t be focused on getting over, under, around, or through every obstacle they put in voters paths.

I’ll say one more thing—while Republicans and the Dixiecrats they welcomed into their party have long used voter suppression tactics to keep nonwhite people from voting, they have also used the same tactics to keep poor or working class white people from voting, white students from voting, etc. You want to win some Republicans to your side? Stop arguing with the affluent Republican haves. They want you to help them cover up that they use race to distract working class and poorer white “have nots” from seeing that the haves are why they are struggling and not all people the haves are pointing to.

Anonymous wrote:Show me one study that voter ID laws have decreased voter turnout.

Here you go: one study. Do I need to post a dozen more of these, too?

“A new study by Priorities USA, shared exclusively with The Nation, shows that strict voter-ID laws, in Wisconsin and other states, led to a significant reduction in voter turnout in 2016, with a disproportionate impact on African-American and Democratic-leaning voters. Wisconsin’s voter-ID law reduced turnout by 200,000 votes, according to the new analysis. Donald Trump won the state by only 22,748 votes.”
https://www.thenation.com/article/archive/wisconsins-voter-id-law-suppressed-200000-votes-trump-won-by-23000/tnamp/
https://www.scribd.com/document/347821649/Priorities-USA-Voter-Suppression-Memo

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just give me a reasonable example of someone who can’t get an ID

“Just how tough are new voter identification requirements in Texas? Apparently tough enough that former U.S. House speaker Jim Wright reportedly was denied a voter ID card on Saturday.

"Nobody was ugly to us, but they insisted that they wouldn't give me an ID," Wright, a Democrat who resigned from Congress in 1989, told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram in a story about his experience at a Texas Department of Public Safety office.

The 90-year-old told the newspaper he realized last week that he didn't have a valid ID to vote in Tuesday's elections. He said he was refused a voter ID card because his driver's license expired in 2010 and his faculty identification from Texas Christian University in Fort Worth, where he teaches, doesn't meet requirements under the state law enacted in 2011.”
https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/3422047

Maybe don’t wait until day of as your only option?

I find that the people who say it’s not that hard to get an ID have lead a pretty easy life in that they’ve had steady, good paying jobs, access to transportation, probably haven’t had to move much, have enough money to pay for duplicate documents, access to a easy access to a computer to locate documents, and has bills, leases, property, etc. in their own name.

I took a break from my career to stay home with my kids. While I was a SAHM I had to renew my license and the Real ID law had gone into effect. I’m a lawyer and pulling all the required documents was no joke. I was lucky—I had a passport because we are affluent enough to be able to take a vacation outside of the US and I also needed it for work. If I didn’t have the passport I would have needed more documents. I was also lucky that we own a home and both of our names are on the tax bill. Having that document made things easier. Fortunately when we bought our house we shared the responsibility of calling and establishing various utility accounts so some of the utilities were in my name. That helped too. Oh, yes, I had a 401k and investment accounts in my own name so that helped. You may say it’s no big deal getting an ID but actually it is not easy and many states require an ID that actually requires you to produce a monumental amount of documents,the vast majority of which are easier to obtain the more affluence you have.

Voting is a Constitutional right. Entering a restaurant or going to a concert isn’t.

Why do people need to make this so difficult? 1) Birth certificate or passport, 2) social security card or W2 and 3) two current bills or driver's license or mortgage/rent statement. You can order a birth certificate online if you don't have yours (it's not expensive or difficult), everyone should have #2 and #3. Why are people so flustered by this?

Why are some of you so fact resistant? I bet you pride yourself on being a “straight shooter” and someone with “a lot of common sense,” but you didn’t read any of the examples the PP so generously offered. Some people do not have access to these documents.

The fascist GOP: “we think only the votes of the voters we want should be accepted. But this is totally not part of fascism and how dare you suggest it is. Also, I will not be reading anything that contradicts what I believe.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still haven't seen a compelling rationale for why the right wing needed to pass a slew of bills to make it harder to vote.

Still waiting...

I hate to break it to you, but has been posted multiple times in this thread. Passing laws that make it harder to vote helps Republicans electorally. I know it's not the answer you were looking for (I admire your persistence in getting a good-faith answer from a Republican, but your time is better spent teaching your dog to talk!), but it's God's honest truth.

That's the whole point - WE all know the reasons why - and they are all the wrong reasons.

The Republicans passing all these laws are unwilling to say their reasons out loud because none of their reasons are good. As such it's perfectly justifiable to keep bringing it up because it's rubbing their noses in it.

+1
It’s different flavors of cheating jelly beans. White supremacy jelly beans. Fascist jelly beans. The rare flavor of “opposed to women’s suffrage” jelly beans. But none of the reasons are good and it’s never been about IDs (because the law would make that uniform and thus would address one of the biggest whines the GOP has had) or security (because it’s always been Republicans caught cheating, always). It’s about the GOP not winning unless they cheat.

Show me one study that voter ID laws have decreased voter turnout.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I still haven't seen a compelling rationale for why the right wing needed to pass a slew of bills to make it harder to vote.

Still waiting...

I hate to break it to you, but has been posted multiple times in this thread. Passing laws that make it harder to vote helps Republicans electorally. I know it's not the answer you were looking for (I admire your persistence in getting a good-faith answer from a Republican, but your time is better spent teaching your dog to talk!), but it's God's honest truth.

That's the whole point - WE all know the reasons why - and they are all the wrong reasons.

The Republicans passing all these laws are unwilling to say their reasons out loud because none of their reasons are good. As such it's perfectly justifiable to keep bringing it up because it's rubbing their noses in it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So you think people should be able to vote even if they have no proof of who they are?

I guess that is what they think. What could possibly go wrong? Ballot harvesting? Absentee ballots to every house, etc.

Anonymous wrote:So you think people should be able to vote even if they have no proof of who they are?

Did your grandparents show proof when they voted in the Roosevelt v Hoover election in 1932?
Did your parents show proof when they voted in the Nixon v Kennedy election in 1962?
Did you show proof when you voted in Bush v Clinton in 1992?

Answer: No, none of that happened. You show proof when you register to vote and that's it.

There is no reason to require an ID to vote. It's worked for 250+ years in this country.

So you think people should be able to vote even if they have no proof of who they are?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just give me a reasonable example of someone who can’t get an ID

“Just how tough are new voter identification requirements in Texas? Apparently tough enough that former U.S. House speaker Jim Wright reportedly was denied a voter ID card on Saturday.

"Nobody was ugly to us, but they insisted that they wouldn't give me an ID," Wright, a Democrat who resigned from Congress in 1989, told the Fort Worth Star-Telegram in a story about his experience at a Texas Department of Public Safety office.

The 90-year-old told the newspaper he realized last week that he didn't have a valid ID to vote in Tuesday's elections. He said he was refused a voter ID card because his driver's license expired in 2010 and his faculty identification from Texas Christian University in Fort Worth, where he teaches, doesn't meet requirements under the state law enacted in 2011.”
https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/3422047

Maybe don’t wait until day of as your only option?

I find that the people who say it’s not that hard to get an ID have lead a pretty easy life in that they’ve had steady, good paying jobs, access to transportation, probably haven’t had to move much, have enough money to pay for duplicate documents, access to a easy access to a computer to locate documents, and has bills, leases, property, etc. in their own name.

I took a break from my career to stay home with my kids. While I was a SAHM I had to renew my license and the Real ID law had gone into effect. I’m a lawyer and pulling all the required documents was no joke. I was lucky—I had a passport because we are affluent enough to be able to take a vacation outside of the US and I also needed it for work. If I didn’t have the passport I would have needed more documents. I was also lucky that we own a home and both of our names are on the tax bill. Having that document made things easier. Fortunately when we bought our house we shared the responsibility of calling and establishing various utility accounts so some of the utilities were in my name. That helped too. Oh, yes, I had a 401k and investment accounts in my own name so that helped. You may say it’s no big deal getting an ID but actually it is not easy and many states require an ID that actually requires you to produce a monumental amount of documents,the vast majority of which are easier to obtain the more affluence you have.

Voting is a Constitutional right. Entering a restaurant or going to a concert isn’t.

Why do people need to make this so difficult? 1) Birth certificate or passport, 2) social security card or W2 and 3) two current bills or driver's license or mortgage/rent statement. You can order a birth certificate online if you don't have yours (it's not expensive or difficult), everyone should have #2 and #3. Why are people so flustered by this?

You haven’t read all the examples.

I don’t think it would matter to the PP is they read all the examples. They either aren’t listening or they don’t care to listen. In their own response they say “You can order a birth certificate on line”. I spoke with people in Mississippi who list their neighbors phone number for voter contact and other contact because they can’t afford their own phone. You think she has access to the internet? It is well known that there are areas of the country that lack internet access and that many households lack access. Remember how this was an issue for online schooling? I can give other examples but I honestly do not think you are interested or willing to listen. Maybe you are like some of my relatives who think that people who don’t have a certain level of affluence shouldn’t be voting or it’s their problem they can’t vote and not your’s. I don’t know. At any rate, in this country there are millions of people who not only can’t put themselves in someone else’s shoes and think “if that were me how would I want to be treated,” but are proud that they don’t do that.