Supreme Court: Section 4 of Voting Rights Act Unconstitutional

[Razgovory]

They are valid but they still need to change?  That doesn't really make sense, unless you don't want them to be valid. Is this "prove who you are" thing actually related to elections and voting or is this just some personal thing where you want everyone to carry a picture ID with them at all times.   Cause at this point it doesn't seem linked anymore.

Here's what I'm seeing: US elections have been valid.  They are currently valid.  They will be valid next time if nobody does anything.  We should change the election laws so that you must "prove who you are".   The last part isn't follow from the rest.

You think it doesnt need to change..cool beans on you.

I think it needs to change.

I'd really rather not have cold beans on me.  Is there particular reason why it's important to "Know what what they look like" and is this actually related to voting?

[Jacob]

So far, the most coherent argument that has been given in this thread for requiring ID to vote is so that voters can "show what they look like."

I'm trying to find out why that matters. Maybe you can help me out?

That's not answering my question.  How did you get from my assertion that Raz is not showing who he is to "it matters that he show who he is?"

And you're not answering any of the questions I've asked you in this thread.

In fact, no one has even attempted to answer the questions at the heart of the matter, namely:

"Why it's necessary to require ID for voting? What's the problem that's being solved by requiring them? Why is it a problem? And how will requiring ID fix it?"

Tangents about how to get from some random Raz comment two steps closer the substance of the issue are just that, tangents.

[Admiral Yi]

And you're not answering any of the questions I've asked you in this thread.

In fact, no one has even attempted to answer the questions at the heart of the matter, namely:

"Why it's necessary to require ID for voting? What's the problem that's being solved by requiring them? Why is it a problem? And how will requiring ID fix it?"

Tangents about how to get from some random Raz comment two steps closer the substance of the issue are just that, tangents.

You're right.  I did not answer your question. My apologies.

So to answer your question, it matters because voter fraud is a bad thing.  Now if the next question is do the benefits of reducing voter fraud outweigh the costs of voter suppression, my answer is I don't know.  I'm not really emotionally committed one way or the other.  If it passes I won't be bent out of shape, and if it fails I won't be bent out of shape.

Now to answer my question to you, the connection between Raz not showing who he is and it mattering is an incorect assumption on your part.  Because I point out a factual error on Raz' part does not necessarily mean I am in favor of voter IDs.  Just as if I were to point out a factual error by Before would not prove that I am opposed.

[Razgovory]

I suspect Yi is bit half-hearted on this because he doesn't believe the conspiracy theories.  There is a significant portion of the electorate that believes that the last election was stolen using illegal immigrants.  I don't know how much of the leadership believes this, probably some, but they have to cater to them.  When I'm talking about significant I'm talking over 40%.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/12/almost-half-of-republicans-indulge-the-stolen-election-delusion/265949/

As the article points out the poll could have done a better job asking the question, but even the most charitable interpretation would put it at a significant number I'd say at least 25%.  It certainly no secret that Republicans believe that Voter ID will help them, many of them were caught on camera saying so.  Whether by reducing voter fraud (which I guess only hurts Democrats), or by driving away minorities voters.

Popular myths notwithstanding I haven't seen evidence of widespread voter fraud in this country.  The last person to be convicted on voter fraud in Missouri was in the 1930's.  If voter fraud is common in Missouri and not be prosecuted then, the Republicans would really be shooting themselves in the foot since they've dominated the House here for almost two decades after a long, long time in the minority.

[11B4V]

They are valid but they still need to change?  That doesn't really make sense, unless you don't want them to be valid. Is this "prove who you are" thing actually related to elections and voting or is this just some personal thing where you want everyone to carry a picture ID with them at all times.   Cause at this point it doesn't seem linked anymore.

Here's what I'm seeing: US elections have been valid.  They are currently valid.  They will be valid next time if nobody does anything.  We should change the election laws so that you must "prove who you are".   The last part isn't follow from the rest.

You think it doesnt need to change..cool beans on you.

I think it needs to change.

I'd really rather not have cold beans on me.  Is there particular reason why it's important to "Know what what they look like" and is this actually related to voting?

To prove who you are.

[11B4V]

I suspect Yi is bit half-hearted on this because he doesn't believe the conspiracy theories.  There is a significant portion of the electorate that believes that the last election was stolen using illegal immigrants.

I dont by that, sorry to disappoint.

As the article points out the poll could have done a better job asking the question, but even the most charitable interpretation would put it at a significant number I'd say at least 25%.  It certainly no secret that Republicans believe that Voter ID will help them, many of them were caught on camera saying so.  Whether by reducing voter fraud (which I guess only hurts Democrats), or by driving away minorities voters.

I do not care if it helps or hurts the GOP or the Dems.

[Razgovory]

It's irrelevant if you buy into the conspiracy or not, it's clear that a significant portion of population does.

[11B4V]

It's irrelevant if you buy into the conspiracy or not, it's clear that a significant portion of population does.

I dont think it's a significant portion.

[Razgovory]

While it's possible you can delude yourself into believing that, the amount of dodging you've done in this thread indicates there is something you don't want to take into consideration.  You can tell yourself whatever you want to believe all you like.  If you do it long enough, you may succeed! It happens all the time.  Some people use aids in that.  It's called "Talk Radio".

[Valmy]

I do not care if it helps or hurts the GOP or the Dems.

I care that it puts all the burden on the voters for no particular reason.  The innocent have to put up with this because maybe there are a few people breaking the rules, same crap with everything else.  The government should be the ones who have the burden here.

Ah well.  Now that a few states are going to have this we will see what its impact will be.

[CountDeMoney]

I dont think it's a significant portion.

The Justice Department said there was, using Texas' own statistics from the DPS.  Ergo, that made it a biased ID program, which is why it was shitcanned under the CRA last year.

But now you don't have to worry about that anymore.

[Kleves]

It seems to me pretty common sense that we want to make sure that voters are who they say they are, and that picture ID would be a good (though not the only) way to get that. I don't buy that we have to wait until there is massive voter fraud to put in some basic safeguards. The whole issue for me, then, is how easy it is to get photo ID.

[Valmy]

It seems to me pretty common sense that we want to make sure that voters are who they say they are, and that picture ID would be a good (though not the only) way to get that. I don't buy that we have to wait until there is massive voter fraud to put in some basic safeguards. The whole issue for me, then, is how easy it is to get photo ID.

We do have basic safeguards already.  The question is why should we introduce more?  And as I said if they just gave everybody who is a registered voter a free picture ID, or did something else that is basically them doing the work, I would be fine with it.  Demanding we all put in extra effort as if we are all guilty is ridiculous.

[CountDeMoney]

Then make it easy.  Don't pick and choose specific types of photo ID and not others.  That's what the problem is.

Hell, the civil rights leaders of the 50s and 60s would've given their eye teeth for a mandated Federal photo ID voting system to ensure voter rights, but not this ham-handed approach where expired handgun permits are OK, but state university IDs aren't.  And oh, and by the way you have to pay for it.

You want voter IDs, fine.  Make them free.  Or accept all forms of photo ID, not just specific ones.  Give it a 4 year ramp up time for those that don't have them to get them.

But no, these suppression efforts with their bullshit requirements and speed-clock attempts to affect as much of the next election as possible are exactly that: suppression efforts.  And that doesn't count the fucking around with reducing poll hours, reducing early voting time, eliminating polling stations.  All attempts to reduce voter turnout.

The vote is free, so should the means to do it.  Anything else is a bona fide poll tax, and you know it.

The whole issue for me, then, is how easy it is to get photo ID.

Not everybody is you.

[Baron von Schtinkenbutt]

Hell, the civil rights leaders of the 50s and 60s would've given their eye teeth for a mandated Federal photo ID voting system to ensure voter rights, but not this ham-handed approach where expired handgun permits are OK, but state university IDs aren't.

And oh, and by the way you have to pay for it.

Actually, election-only IDs are going to be free.

You want voter IDs, fine.  Make them free.  Or accept all forms of photo ID, not just specific ones.  Give it a 4 year ramp up time for those that don't have them to get them.

Yeah, hurry up and make it stick is bullshit.

But no, these suppression efforts with their bullshit requirements and speed-clock attempts to affect as much of the next election as possible are exactly that: suppression efforts.  And that doesn't count the fucking around with reducing poll hours, reducing early voting time, eliminating polling stations.  All attempts to reduce voter turnout.

I didn't even know what this "early voting" thing was until I moved to Texas, and I thought it was only for special groups of people.