The 2000 US presidential election was decided by 537 votes in Florida, well within the margin of error that is caused by fraudulent voting each year in Florida alone.
I remember watching the endless news cycle... most of the complaints were about the crappy punching and counting machines rather than "fraud".
A valid government issued photo id is required for many aspects of daily life, such as getting medical care, boarding an airplane, etc. The fact that some are too lazy to get a non-drivers license id (states will issue ids in cases where the person doesn't have or want a drivers license), or too lazy to have a valid drivers license (many people drive illegally with an expired or non-existent drivers license), should not be used as an excuse as to why they shouldn't be required to have a valid id in order to ensure fair elections.
Who would have thought that in "the land of the free" ID is a requirement for so many things.
I currently dont have any valid photo ID, my passport has expired, I have not seen my photo driving license for 5+ years and I dont care, I dont need these things unless I need to go abroad at which point I will get a passport. It seems that "the land of the free" is much less free than the rest of the world believes.
I don't want to get into a heated debate about this, but it isn't laziness. Many people don't have drivers licenses because they don't drive. Many elderly people haven't renewed their drivers license because they don't drive. Your examples of needing an ID for medical care is simply false. I have gotten medical care with through a the ER at a hospital, as well as through free clinics, and primary care physicians. The only time I ever was asked for ID was in college at student health. Many people don't fly. What if we made Food Stamp cards the relevant ID, would you be "lazy" for not having one? No, it is not a part of your life to need it, so you don't get it. It doesn't help that the DMV is practically synonymous with headache and inconvenience. I know that I avoid going until I have to.
Yes there are immigrants (documented or otherwise) who can't vote. Those undocumented immigrants I know don't generally want to bring themselves to the government's attention and so they aren't typically going to try to vote.
Yes felons can't vote, sometimes, in some states. In fact many felons are eligible to have their vote restored, but don't know that. Again, I could be mistaken, but I don't think the felon community is organizing a massive get-out-the-vote campaign.
Show me documented voter fraud on the order of 1000's of false votes in a state or go home. This is not a problem. Don't say that there could be voter fraud, show me that there is. If there were no social cost to these laws, I wouldn't have a problem, but the fact is that these laws have the primary effect of denying people their right to vote. Furthermore these denials disproportionally hit people of color and the poor. Both groups tend to vote for Democrats. This in itself should cause one to pause to consider if these laws are motivated by partisan politics.
Thumbs up to the whole post.
Yes, this subject is motivated by partisan politics. If it were not true that "both groups tend to vote for Democrats" you would never in a million years see Democrats objecting to the simple, logical, and rational requirement that a photo id be required to ensure fair elections.
This entire post is about "partizan politics" and
about the freedom to cast a vote.
If the people of the UK were told that we had to turn up with valid photo ID to vote, there would be an almighty shitstorm and politicians would be fighting for press attention to say that this should not be so - on all sides - and from all parties within the UK political spectrum. The fact that this is divisive in American politics shows just how polarised the "2" parties are, and why American politics really needs at least one other political party in contention.
Somehow, I don't think the vast majority of people who don't have any id, would have a problem getting out of work, because as noted, they often are elderly or otherwise not employed (except those who are just too lazy to get an id). Yes, life is a hassle, and we all have stand in line to get the things we need, but the government has decided that for the betterment of society that drivers licenses or state id's are needed once every 5-10 years (depends on the state, but mine is good for 10 years).
You are missing a HUGE point, it costs money in one way or the other, you either have to get a bus, a cab, take a day off of work, etc to be able to BUY a bit of ID so that you can vote.
What kind of horrible country would CHARGE ITS CITIZENS TO VOTE.? That is quite the opposite of Freedom - that is an outrage.
A judge just postponed Pennsylvania's voter ID requirement saying there wasn't enough time from when the law was enacted to enable people to get IDs in time for the November election. Ironically, Pennsylvania officials admitted in testimony that they had never seen a case of in-person voter fraud.
They way we (the US) enable or disable voting rights state by state dependant on whatever legislature/governor is currently in charge is a joke/one more tool (amongst many*) to push election results toward one side or the other.
*eg: redrawing districts
That's scummy politicians for you, they are pretty much the same the world over.
This seems like a weak point. If the main mechanism (general election) of a national democracy is able to be influenced by local laws then this undermines the point of a national democracy. Someone in one area may have the ability to vote while in another area they wouldn't so therefore not all voters are considered equally.
The way that you have put that says that you dont live in a democracy, one of the most fundamental points of a democracy is that everyone gets to vote (excluding young people, criminals and the insane which is sensible), this is not the case in some States you have different "rights" to vote than in others - crazy.