FREE TAPATALK APP

RandFan · 29th June 2012, 01:56 PM

Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth

It was the worst day of a bad week.

The point being that I learned my lesson and applied the knowledge gained to future behavior.

Something which is apparently beyond the capabilities of the American voting population.

Straw men are fun. Who has made this argument? No one. We are saying quite simply that there exists many people who are poor and are not aware of changes in election law. If there is no pressing need then why disenfranchise them for no good reason? Why not phase the law in over two years. Oh, BTW, for some it will cost not an insignificant amount of money to get ID. A new poll tax if you will.

Require ID this year.

If a voter shows up without ID let them cast a provisional ballot.
Tell them that next year they will have to have ID to vote at all.
If the vote isn't close no problem.
If the vote is close then THESE can be subject to verification.

If those who are passing these are not doing it for cynical reasons then why push this through during an election year? Can you not see in the very least why you appear cynical?

Earthborn · 29th June 2012, 05:11 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Often rural these people walk or take the bus. There is no pressing need for them to have ID anymore than there was prior to the automobile.

I am not sure I follow. You seem to be talking about driver's licences, I am talking about ID cards. There is no physical reason these need to be the same thing. In fact, where I live they're not; a driver's license is not a valid ID, and you need a valid ID to even get a driver's license.

The idea that there is no pressing need for them to have ID cards makes no sense to me at all. In a modern society everyone needs them whenever there is need to check whether someone is who s/he claims to be; getting government benefits, other legal documents, insurance, a bank account... If poor people are hindered in getting ID cards, the disenfranchising goes much deeper than just denying them to vote.

marplots · 29th June 2012, 05:40 PM

Originally Posted by Earthborn

I am not sure I follow. You seem to be talking about driver's licences, I am talking about ID cards. There is no physical reason these need to be the same thing. In fact, where I live they're not; a driver's license is not a valid ID, and you need a valid ID to even get a driver's license.

The idea that there is no pressing need for them to have ID cards makes no sense to me at all. In a modern society everyone needs them whenever there is need to check whether someone is who s/he claims to be; getting government benefits, other legal documents, insurance, a bank account... If poor people are hindered in getting ID cards, the disenfranchising goes much deeper than just denying them to vote.

While I generally agree, there may be special populations, like the Amish, who don't participate in what we think of as a normal, ID having society. In my state, you can get a "voter ID card" separate from all other types of ID, although you do have to show proof of residency and maybe citizenship, I'm not sure. But it is an ID specifically for voting.

RandFan · 29th June 2012, 07:00 PM

Originally Posted by Earthborn

I am not sure I follow. You seem to be talking about driver's licences, I am talking about ID cards. There is no physical reason these need to be the same thing. In fact, where I live they're not; a driver's license is not a valid ID, and you need a valid ID to even get a driver's license.

Where I live, a drivers licenses or Department of Motor Vehicles issued ID serve as our primary legal ID. Birth certificates and passports can work but not in many if not most circumstances.

Quote:

The idea that there is no pressing need for them to have ID cards makes no sense to me at all. In a modern society everyone needs them whenever there is need to check whether someone is who s/he claims to be; getting government benefits, other legal documents, insurance, a bank account... If poor people are hindered in getting ID cards, the disenfranchising goes much deeper than just denying them to vote.

So, let me see if I understand you right. You are saying that either A.) Such people do not exist or B.) Given your limited knowledge of America you can state categoricaly that the problems of these people are much "deeper". What does that mean? I honestly don't know what you are even talking about. After I filed for disability and demonstrated my status and long before I qualified for disability I physically lost my drivers license (ID) and didn't bother to renew it for more than 2 years. I didn't need it. I had a bank account. What did I need it for? what deep problems was I suffering? After my surgery I was able to drive again I went and got a copy of my license. Had the surgery not been successful I probably wouldn't have my license still. So I'm really not sure what you are getting at.

Neally · 30th June 2012, 08:12 AM

Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth

It was the worst day of a bad week.

The point being that I learned my lesson and applied the knowledge gained to future behavior.

Something which is apparently beyond the capabilities of the American voting population.

Yes, the left would like you to think so since it apparently is an evil conspiracy of the right to suppress votes.

Biscuit · 30th June 2012, 08:29 AM

Originally Posted by schplurg

I think the whole idea that voter ID etc will "disenfranchise" voters is bull. You must show proof of ID to buy alcohol. How often do you think this keeps Americans - rich or poor - from getting their booze?

Then you can demonstrate that it is "bull" right? Also drinking booze, like getting a library card and driving, is not a fundamental right in the USA.

Originally Posted by schplurg

50% of the people in this country don't vote as it is, so what's the excuse for that?

Unrelated but what do you mean? Don't ever vote? Don't vote in local elections?

Originally Posted by schplurg

What is more alarming to me is that Obama can give amnesty to 800,000 "16 - 30 year old 'children' of illegal immigrants", several months before an election, and very few people here even make a fuss. Hmmmm, 800,000 illegals, and a push for no voter ID. Smells, dontcha think?

That is 100% false. Do you know who was president the last time illegal immigrants were actually given amnesty?

RandFan · 30th June 2012, 08:59 AM

Originally Posted by Neally

Yes, the left would like you to think so since it apparently is an evil conspiracy of the right to suppress votes.

Evil conspiracy straw man aside (is specious rhetoric the only game you have):

There is no urgency for these laws.
They are being passed in an election year.
There are reasonable alternative solutions like phasing the laws in over 2 election cycles.

What other reason fits the facts besides political strategy to suppress votes?

Earthborn · 30th June 2012, 09:13 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Where I live, a drivers licenses or Department of Motor Vehicles issued ID serve as our primary legal ID.

The link mentions "state issued non-driver ID cards", so why is it relevant that many poor people "walk or take the bus" ? And why don't they have those cards?

Quote:

You are saying that either A.) Such people do not exist

Rather odd interpretation.

Quote:

or B.) Given your limited knowledge of America you can state categoricaly that the problems of these people are much "deeper".

Given my limited knowledge of how modern societies work, I can state categorically that people who have no easy way to show who they are and what they own, are people who are being disenfranchised in a way much deeper than not being allowed to vote.

Quote:

After I filed for disability and demonstrated my status and long before I qualified for disability I physically lost my drivers license (ID) and didn't bother to renew it for more than 2 years.

What if you tried to file for disability after you lost your driver's license? I bet it would have been more difficult and costly to prove who you are.

Quote:

I had a bank account.

What if you wanted another one, perhaps from another bank?

Quote:

What did I need it for?

To prove that you are who you say you are, and that therefore the legal rights registered in Randfan's name apply to you and not someone else. You may want to check the ideas by economist Hernando de Soto. If you think about those concepts, it is no great surprise that the US has "pockets of extreme poverty, near or at third world levels".

Quote:

After my surgery I was able to drive again I went and got a copy of my license.

Didn't the hospital ask you for ID?

RandFan · 30th June 2012, 09:35 AM

Originally Posted by Earthborn

¹The link mentions "state issued non-driver ID cards", so why is it relevant that many poor people "walk or take the bus" ? And why don't they have those cards?

²Rather odd interpretation.

³Given my limited knowledge of how modern societies work, I can state categorically that people who have no easy way to show who they are and what they own, are people who are being disenfranchised in a way much deeper than not being allowed to vote.

³What if you tried to file for disability after you lost your driver's license? I bet it would have been more difficult and costly to prove who you are.

⁴What if you wanted another one, perhaps from another bank?

⁵To prove that you are who you say you are, and that therefore the legal rights registered in Randfan's name apply to you and not someone else. You may want to check the ideas by economist Hernando de Soto.

⁶If you think about those concepts, it is no great surprise that the US has "pockets of extreme poverty, near or at third world levels".

⁷Didn't the hospital ask you for ID?

Yes, and I also mentioned them. It's relevant because if you don't drive and you don't have a need for a licence then they likely won't have ID. They don't have the cards because there is no need.
It's called an inference. It follows from what you said. The implication being that I'm just making them up. Because if they exist it doesn't matter why they exist, right?
You are not being clear. But I'll try to address what I think you are mean. I didn't need my ID and could easily have gone many years without it. Small rural towns do not have the same requirements.
I would have gone and renewed my licence as I eventually did.
I don't often have to prove who I am. People in rural areas have to demonstrate it even less often.
Non sequitur. correlation fallacy.
They asked me for medical card.

I'm not sure how got sucked into this silly and absurd debate. All that matters is that they exist (see below)

Originally Posted by Charles Gonzales

source First, it is true that almost everyone has some form of photo identification. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, 89 percent of American citizens have photo ID. But that means that 11 percent of us, about 23 million eligible voters, don't. Millions of our fellow citizens might be disenfranchised.

Corsair 115 · 30th June 2012, 10:18 AM

Originally Posted by BenBurch

People who do not drive often do not have them.

As the Canadian federal election rules demonstrate, a driver's license is not the only form of acceptable ID. If one consults the list of acceptable pieces of ID from the second option listed on the Elections Canada web page, there are plenty of very reasonable alternatives, ones which most persons should have, well off or not.

Originally Posted by RandFan

Often rural these people walk or take the bus. There is no pressing need for them to have ID anymore than there was prior to the automobile.

See above.

RandFan · 30th June 2012, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by Corsair 115

As the Canadian federal election rules demonstrate, a driver's license is not the only form of acceptable ID. If one consults the list of acceptable pieces of ID from the second option listed on the Elections Canada web page, there are plenty of very reasonable alternatives, ones which most persons should have, well off or not.

See above.

Do the current rash of voter ID laws in the states contain such provisions? If so then that would change my mind somewhat.

Earthborn · 30th June 2012, 11:03 AM

Order of quotes mine

Originally Posted by RandFan

I'm not sure how got sucked into this silly and absurd debate.

I'm not sure why you try to make this debate silly and absurd.

Quote:

It follows from what you said.

No, it doesn't.

Quote:

The implication being that I'm just making them up.

If you think I was implying that, you are just interpreting my words in some silly and absurd way. Try not to do that.

Quote:

Because if they exist it doesn't matter why they exist, right?

I would argue the opposite: the reason it matters why they exist is the fact that they exist. Whatever doesn't exist doesn't require an explanation for its existence. Whatever exists does.

Quote:

They don't have the cards because there is no need.

I'll reformulate my question: why is there no need for them to have an ID card? If they were made mandatory, republicans can demand voter ID without disenfranchising anyone. Requesting ID for voting needn't be seen as unreasonable, though America has come up with other ways to prevent double voting that don't require it.

Quote:

I don't often have to prove who I am.

I don't think it is relevant how often you are asked for ID, what matters is how easily you can do so when you are. If it is not so easy a person is hindered in getting access to services in which it is necessary. It may also be true that someone is more likely to try to avoid such services, and may end up locked out of the benefits of a capitalist society.

Quote:

I would have gone and renewed my licence as I eventually did.

So you would have gotten an ID card because you actually need it sometimes. Thank you for proving the point.

Quote:

They asked me for medical card.

Are you talking about an health insurance card, or hospital card or something I am not familiar with?

RandFan · 30th June 2012, 12:07 PM

Originally Posted by Earthborn

¹I'm not sure why you try to make this debate silly and absurd.

²I'll reformulate my question: why is there no need for them to have an ID card? If they were made mandatory, republicans can demand voter ID without disenfranchising anyone. Requesting ID for voting needn't be seen as unreasonable, though America has come up with other ways to prevent double voting that don't require it.

³I don't think it is relevant how often you are asked for ID, what matters is how easily you can do so when you are.

⁴So you would have gotten an ID card because you actually need it sometimes. Thank you for proving the point.

⁵Are you talking about an health insurance card, or hospital card or something I am not familiar with?

These people exist. Therefore it is pointless.
That there could be a need doesn't necessitate a need. It may be that they will need ID to vote. We could do that without disenfranchising people now. Just phase the law in as has been argued.
If you don't find out that you need it until you go to vote then it's impossible. I'm not against voter ID laws. I only ask for out reach and eduction to avoid disenfranchising people.
It doesn't prove your point. It proves mine. Had time been of the essence and applying for and receiving my ID in the mail is to great then the fact that I could get the ID is irrelevant.
It's a card provided to me by my health provider. It is proof that I belong to a "medical plan". A medical plan is a combination of an insurance provider and a group of physicians and medical professionals. It says on the front of my medical card "Patient ID", "Always bring this plate with you". Plate because the card is embossed with my Patient ID number.

As the discussion is pointless I'm growing weary of it. At best your original argument is a fallacy similar to the false consolation (it's okay to disenfranchise them because that is the least of their worries). At the end of the day the people exist and their right to vote should be respected and ought not be dismissed for some claim that their problems are far worse. I reject that but even if I grant it, it's still fallacious.

WildCat · 30th June 2012, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by Earthborn

The link mentions "state issued non-driver ID cards", so why is it relevant that many poor people "walk or take the bus" ? And why don't they have those cards?

They do have those cards, they need them to cash checks at a currency exchange, apply for food stamps, buy alcohol at a store or to enter a bar, travel by commercial airliner, etc etc.

Show me someone who doesn't have an ID of some sort, and I'll show you someone who doesn't know what day of the week it is let alone who is running for office.

lomiller · 30th June 2012, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by Brainster

From the #2 result, at the notoriously conservative New York Times:

So you reject information unless that information is provided from a conservative source?

Corsair 115 · 30th June 2012, 04:55 PM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Do the current rash of voter ID laws in the states contain such provisions? If so then that would change my mind somewhat.

I can't speak to that, because that wasn't the specific point I wanted to clarify. The supposition to me seemed to be that it's a driver's license or no ID at all, which as the Canadian voter ID rules demonstrate, is a false choice. There are plenty of reasonable alternatives. I can't help it if some American locales wish to reject rational propositions in favour of more onerous ones.

RandFan · 30th June 2012, 05:04 PM

Originally Posted by Corsair 115

I can't speak to that, because that wasn't the specific point I wanted to clarify. The supposition to me seemed to be that it's a driver's license or no ID at all, which as the Canadian voter ID rules demonstrate, is a false choice. There are plenty of reasonable alternatives. I can't help it if some American locales wish to reject rational propositions in favour of more onerous ones.

Got it. Yes.

WildCat · 30th June 2012, 06:54 PM

Originally Posted by Corsair 115

I can't speak to that, because that wasn't the specific point I wanted to clarify. The supposition to me seemed to be that it's a driver's license or no ID at all, which as the Canadian voter ID rules demonstrate, is a false choice. There are plenty of reasonable alternatives. I can't help it if some American locales wish to reject rational propositions in favour of more onerous ones.

Every single state issues non-drivers license IDs, there is no locale where they are unavailable.

They're free in states that require voter ID.

Nova Land · 1st July 2012, 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Show me someone who doesn't have an ID of some sort, and I'll show you someone who doesn't know what day of the week it is let alone who is running for office.

Today is Sunday where I am. (You didn't ask the date, but it is July 1.)

The candidates for president this year have not yet been formally selected, but the Democratic candidate will be Barack Obama and the Republican one will be Mitt Romney.

Neally · 1st July 2012, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by WildCat

Every single state issues non-drivers license IDs, there is no locale where they are unavailable.

They're free in states that require voter ID.

But wait, it would be hard for those that don't have an acceptable ID to get some form of ID. That alone constitutes voter suppression and disenfranchisement!

marplots · 1st July 2012, 09:15 PM

Originally Posted by Neally

But wait, it would be hard for those that don't have an acceptable ID to get some form of ID. That alone constitutes voter suppression and disenfranchisement!

It doesn't take much to keep people away from the polls. I've heard that weather can have a very dramatic effect.

RandFan · 1st July 2012, 11:53 PM

Originally Posted by Neally

But wait, it would be hard for those that don't have an acceptable ID to get some form of ID. That alone constitutes voter suppression and disenfranchisement!

Not all people know they need voter ID and won't know until they go to the voting booth. I've already posted links of varous organizations that have documented the difficulty. Here's another. AARP

But you don't care. You've got your fingers in your ears and you are humming loudly. You refuse to acknowledge that reasonable alternatives are available. Nope, for some reason you just have to have that this year.

WildCat · 2nd July 2012, 06:26 AM

Originally Posted by Nova Land

Today is Sunday where I am. (You didn't ask the date, but it is July 1.)

The candidates for president this year have not yet been formally selected, but the Democratic candidate will be Barack Obama and the Republican one will be Mitt Romney.

So why don't you have an ID? You don't buy alcohol? Enter bars? Fly on an airplane? Pick up a package from UPS or FedEx? Open a bank account? Apply for food stamps? Travel abroad? Rent an apartment? Buy real property? Drive a car? Get a marriage license?

Etc etc etc.

WildCat · 2nd July 2012, 06:28 AM

Originally Posted by RandFan

Not all people know they need voter ID and won't know until they go to the voting booth.

In which case they can fill out a provisional ballot and have a week or 2 to get an ID.

Oh, the humanity!

marplots · 2nd July 2012, 06:58 AM

Originally Posted by WildCat

So why don't you have an ID? You don't buy alcohol? Enter bars? Fly on an airplane? Pick up a package from UPS or FedEx? Open a bank account? Apply for food stamps? Travel abroad? Rent an apartment? Buy real property? Drive a car? Get a marriage license?

Etc etc etc.

Sounds like voting would be the least of the disenfranchisements going on here.

Nova Land · 2nd July 2012, 07:44 AM

Originally Posted by WildCat

So why don't you have an ID?

My reasons for not having ID are not the topic of this thread. If you want to discuss reasons why people don't have ID, start a new thread on that topic.

You made a claim, that people who do not have ID are mentally incompetent (don't know the day of the week, don't know what's going on in politics). Your claim is untrue.

Which -- as RandFan and others have demonstrated quite capably in this thread -- appears to be the case with a large number of the claims being made by those pushing for these new laws.

The Central Scrutinizer · 2nd July 2012, 07:48 AM

Originally Posted by Vorticity

I have a fair amount of confidence here in my default assumption that both sides are wrong, i.e. that:

1) There is no appreciable voter fraud, and therefore no need for voter ID laws,

and

2) When implemented, voter ID laws do nothing whatsoever to suppress the vote...

...in which case the whole debate is a waste of time.

I'd be happy to consider any evidence that I am wrong on either point above.

I think this pretty much sums it up.

RandFan · 2nd July 2012, 08:14 AM

Originally Posted by marplots

Sounds like voting would be the least of the disenfranchisements going on here.

What does that even mean?
If you mean voting is the least of their worries, fallacy.
Why are these laws so important that they must be enacted just before an election?
Why do conservatives feel the need to defend these laws? What is so important about them? Why now? Do you have any evidence to back up your claims?

29th June 2012, 01:56 PM	#81
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth It was the worst day of a bad week. The point being that I learned my lesson and applied the knowledge gained to future behavior. Something which is apparently beyond the capabilities of the American voting population. Straw men are fun. Who has made this argument? No one. We are saying quite simply that there exists many people who are poor and are not aware of changes in election law. If there is no pressing need then why disenfranchise them for no good reason? Why not phase the law in over two years. Oh, BTW, for some it will cost not an insignificant amount of money to get ID. A new poll tax if you will. Require ID this year. If a voter shows up without ID let them cast a provisional ballot. Tell them that next year they will have to have ID to vote at all. If the vote isn't close no problem. If the vote is close then THESE can be subject to verification. If those who are passing these are not doing it for cynical reasons then why push this through during an election year? Can you not see in the very least why you appear cynical?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith Last edited by RandFan; 29th June 2012 at 02:03 PM.

29th June 2012, 05:11 PM	#82
Earthborn Terrestrial Intelligence Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Terra Firma Posts: 5,676	Originally Posted by RandFan Often rural these people walk or take the bus. There is no pressing need for them to have ID anymore than there was prior to the automobile. I am not sure I follow. You seem to be talking about driver's licences, I am talking about ID cards. There is no physical reason these need to be the same thing. In fact, where I live they're not; a driver's license is not a valid ID, and you need a valid ID to even get a driver's license. The idea that there is no pressing need for them to have ID cards makes no sense to me at all. In a modern society everyone needs them whenever there is need to check whether someone is who s/he claims to be; getting government benefits, other legal documents, insurance, a bank account... If poor people are hindered in getting ID cards, the disenfranchising goes much deeper than just denying them to vote.
	__________________ Perhaps nothing is entirely true; and not even that! Multatuli

29th June 2012, 05:40 PM	#83
marplots Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,645	Originally Posted by Earthborn I am not sure I follow. You seem to be talking about driver's licences, I am talking about ID cards. There is no physical reason these need to be the same thing. In fact, where I live they're not; a driver's license is not a valid ID, and you need a valid ID to even get a driver's license. The idea that there is no pressing need for them to have ID cards makes no sense to me at all. In a modern society everyone needs them whenever there is need to check whether someone is who s/he claims to be; getting government benefits, other legal documents, insurance, a bank account... If poor people are hindered in getting ID cards, the disenfranchising goes much deeper than just denying them to vote. While I generally agree, there may be special populations, like the Amish, who don't participate in what we think of as a normal, ID having society. In my state, you can get a "voter ID card" separate from all other types of ID, although you do have to show proof of residency and maybe citizenship, I'm not sure. But it is an ID specifically for voting.
marplots Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,645

29th June 2012, 07:00 PM	#84
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by Earthborn I am not sure I follow. You seem to be talking about driver's licences, I am talking about ID cards. There is no physical reason these need to be the same thing. In fact, where I live they're not; a driver's license is not a valid ID, and you need a valid ID to even get a driver's license. Where I live, a drivers licenses or Department of Motor Vehicles issued ID serve as our primary legal ID. Birth certificates and passports can work but not in many if not most circumstances. Quote: The idea that there is no pressing need for them to have ID cards makes no sense to me at all. In a modern society everyone needs them whenever there is need to check whether someone is who s/he claims to be; getting government benefits, other legal documents, insurance, a bank account... If poor people are hindered in getting ID cards, the disenfranchising goes much deeper than just denying them to vote. So, let me see if I understand you right. You are saying that either A.) Such people do not exist or B.) Given your limited knowledge of America you can state categoricaly that the problems of these people are much "deeper". What does that mean? I honestly don't know what you are even talking about. After I filed for disability and demonstrated my status and long before I qualified for disability I physically lost my drivers license (ID) and didn't bother to renew it for more than 2 years. I didn't need it. I had a bank account. What did I need it for? what deep problems was I suffering? After my surgery I was able to drive again I went and got a copy of my license. Had the surgery not been successful I probably wouldn't have my license still. So I'm really not sure what you are getting at.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

30th June 2012, 08:12 AM	#85
Neally Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 3,150	Originally Posted by Sword_Of_Truth It was the worst day of a bad week. The point being that I learned my lesson and applied the knowledge gained to future behavior. Something which is apparently beyond the capabilities of the American voting population. Yes, the left would like you to think so since it apparently is an evil conspiracy of the right to suppress votes.
Neally Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 3,150

30th June 2012, 08:29 AM	#86
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,923	Originally Posted by schplurg I think the whole idea that voter ID etc will "disenfranchise" voters is bull. You must show proof of ID to buy alcohol. How often do you think this keeps Americans - rich or poor - from getting their booze? Then you can demonstrate that it is "bull" right? Also drinking booze, like getting a library card and driving, is not a fundamental right in the USA. Originally Posted by schplurg 50% of the people in this country don't vote as it is, so what's the excuse for that? Unrelated but what do you mean? Don't ever vote? Don't vote in local elections? Originally Posted by schplurg What is more alarming to me is that Obama can give amnesty to 800,000 "16 - 30 year old 'children' of illegal immigrants", several months before an election, and very few people here even make a fuss. Hmmmm, 800,000 illegals, and a push for no voter ID. Smells, dontcha think? That is 100% false. Do you know who was president the last time illegal immigrants were actually given amnesty?
Biscuit Illuminator Join Date: Aug 2007 Posts: 4,923	__________________ “... there is no shame in not knowing. The problem arises when irrational thought and attendant behavior fill the vacuum left by ignorance.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

30th June 2012, 08:59 AM	#87
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by Neally Yes, the left would like you to think so since it apparently is an evil conspiracy of the right to suppress votes. Evil conspiracy straw man aside (is specious rhetoric the only game you have): There is no urgency for these laws. They are being passed in an election year. There are reasonable alternative solutions like phasing the laws in over 2 election cycles. What other reason fits the facts besides political strategy to suppress votes?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

30th June 2012, 09:13 AM	#88
Earthborn Terrestrial Intelligence Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Terra Firma Posts: 5,676	Originally Posted by RandFan Where I live, a drivers licenses or Department of Motor Vehicles issued ID serve as our primary legal ID. The link mentions "state issued non-driver ID cards", so why is it relevant that many poor people "walk or take the bus" ? And why don't they have those cards? Quote: You are saying that either A.) Such people do not exist Rather odd interpretation. Quote: or B.) Given your limited knowledge of America you can state categoricaly that the problems of these people are much "deeper". Given my limited knowledge of how modern societies work, I can state categorically that people who have no easy way to show who they are and what they own, are people who are being disenfranchised in a way much deeper than not being allowed to vote. Quote: After I filed for disability and demonstrated my status and long before I qualified for disability I physically lost my drivers license (ID) and didn't bother to renew it for more than 2 years. What if you tried to file for disability after you lost your driver's license? I bet it would have been more difficult and costly to prove who you are. Quote: I had a bank account. What if you wanted another one, perhaps from another bank? Quote: What did I need it for? To prove that you are who you say you are, and that therefore the legal rights registered in Randfan's name apply to you and not someone else. You may want to check the ideas by economist Hernando de Soto. If you think about those concepts, it is no great surprise that the US has "pockets of extreme poverty, near or at third world levels". Quote: After my surgery I was able to drive again I went and got a copy of my license. Didn't the hospital ask you for ID?
	__________________ Perhaps nothing is entirely true; and not even that! Multatuli

30th June 2012, 09:35 AM	#89
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by Earthborn ¹The link mentions "state issued non-driver ID cards", so why is it relevant that many poor people "walk or take the bus" ? And why don't they have those cards? ²Rather odd interpretation. ³Given my limited knowledge of how modern societies work, I can state categorically that people who have no easy way to show who they are and what they own, are people who are being disenfranchised in a way much deeper than not being allowed to vote. ³What if you tried to file for disability after you lost your driver's license? I bet it would have been more difficult and costly to prove who you are. ⁴What if you wanted another one, perhaps from another bank? ⁵To prove that you are who you say you are, and that therefore the legal rights registered in Randfan's name apply to you and not someone else. You may want to check the ideas by economist Hernando de Soto. ⁶If you think about those concepts, it is no great surprise that the US has "pockets of extreme poverty, near or at third world levels". ⁷Didn't the hospital ask you for ID? Yes, and I also mentioned them. It's relevant because if you don't drive and you don't have a need for a licence then they likely won't have ID. They don't have the cards because there is no need. It's called an inference. It follows from what you said. The implication being that I'm just making them up. Because if they exist it doesn't matter why they exist, right? You are not being clear. But I'll try to address what I think you are mean. I didn't need my ID and could easily have gone many years without it. Small rural towns do not have the same requirements. I would have gone and renewed my licence as I eventually did. I don't often have to prove who I am. People in rural areas have to demonstrate it even less often. Non sequitur. correlation fallacy. They asked me for medical card. I'm not sure how got sucked into this silly and absurd debate. All that matters is that they exist (see below) Originally Posted by Charles Gonzales source First, it is true that almost everyone has some form of photo identification. According to the Brennan Center for Justice, 89 percent of American citizens have photo ID. But that means that 11 percent of us, about 23 million eligible voters, don't. Millions of our fellow citizens might be disenfranchised.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith Last edited by RandFan; 30th June 2012 at 09:44 AM.

30th June 2012, 10:18 AM	#90
Corsair 115 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Tranquility Base Posts: 8,684	Originally Posted by BenBurch People who do not drive often do not have them. As the Canadian federal election rules demonstrate, a driver's license is not the only form of acceptable ID. If one consults the list of acceptable pieces of ID from the second option listed on the Elections Canada web page, there are plenty of very reasonable alternatives, ones which most persons should have, well off or not. Originally Posted by RandFan Often rural these people walk or take the bus. There is no pressing need for them to have ID anymore than there was prior to the automobile. See above.
	__________________ "We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win."

30th June 2012, 10:37 AM	#91
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by Corsair 115 As the Canadian federal election rules demonstrate, a driver's license is not the only form of acceptable ID. If one consults the list of acceptable pieces of ID from the second option listed on the Elections Canada web page, there are plenty of very reasonable alternatives, ones which most persons should have, well off or not. See above. Do the current rash of voter ID laws in the states contain such provisions? If so then that would change my mind somewhat.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

30th June 2012, 11:03 AM	#92
Earthborn Terrestrial Intelligence Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Terra Firma Posts: 5,676	Order of quotes mine Originally Posted by RandFan I'm not sure how got sucked into this silly and absurd debate. I'm not sure why you try to make this debate silly and absurd. Quote: It follows from what you said. No, it doesn't. Quote: The implication being that I'm just making them up. If you think I was implying that, you are just interpreting my words in some silly and absurd way. Try not to do that. Quote: Because if they exist it doesn't matter why they exist, right? I would argue the opposite: the reason it matters why they exist is the fact that they exist. Whatever doesn't exist doesn't require an explanation for its existence. Whatever exists does. Quote: They don't have the cards because there is no need. I'll reformulate my question: why is there no need for them to have an ID card? If they were made mandatory, republicans can demand voter ID without disenfranchising anyone. Requesting ID for voting needn't be seen as unreasonable, though America has come up with other ways to prevent double voting that don't require it. Quote: I don't often have to prove who I am. I don't think it is relevant how often you are asked for ID, what matters is how easily you can do so when you are. If it is not so easy a person is hindered in getting access to services in which it is necessary. It may also be true that someone is more likely to try to avoid such services, and may end up locked out of the benefits of a capitalist society. Quote: I would have gone and renewed my licence as I eventually did. So you would have gotten an ID card because you actually need it sometimes. Thank you for proving the point. Quote: They asked me for medical card. Are you talking about an health insurance card, or hospital card or something I am not familiar with?
	__________________ Perhaps nothing is entirely true; and not even that! Multatuli Last edited by Earthborn; 30th June 2012 at 11:06 AM.

30th June 2012, 12:07 PM	#93
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by Earthborn ¹I'm not sure why you try to make this debate silly and absurd. ²I'll reformulate my question: why is there no need for them to have an ID card? If they were made mandatory, republicans can demand voter ID without disenfranchising anyone. Requesting ID for voting needn't be seen as unreasonable, though America has come up with other ways to prevent double voting that don't require it. ³I don't think it is relevant how often you are asked for ID, what matters is how easily you can do so when you are. ⁴So you would have gotten an ID card because you actually need it sometimes. Thank you for proving the point. ⁵Are you talking about an health insurance card, or hospital card or something I am not familiar with? These people exist. Therefore it is pointless. That there could be a need doesn't necessitate a need. It may be that they will need ID to vote. We could do that without disenfranchising people now. Just phase the law in as has been argued. If you don't find out that you need it until you go to vote then it's impossible. I'm not against voter ID laws. I only ask for out reach and eduction to avoid disenfranchising people. It doesn't prove your point. It proves mine. Had time been of the essence and applying for and receiving my ID in the mail is to great then the fact that I could get the ID is irrelevant. It's a card provided to me by my health provider. It is proof that I belong to a "medical plan". A medical plan is a combination of an insurance provider and a group of physicians and medical professionals. It says on the front of my medical card "Patient ID", "Always bring this plate with you". Plate because the card is embossed with my Patient ID number. As the discussion is pointless I'm growing weary of it. At best your original argument is a fallacy similar to the false consolation (it's okay to disenfranchise them because that is the least of their worries). At the end of the day the people exist and their right to vote should be respected and ought not be dismissed for some claim that their problems are far worse. I reject that but even if I grant it, it's still fallacious.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

30th June 2012, 02:01 PM	#94
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,475	Originally Posted by Earthborn The link mentions "state issued non-driver ID cards", so why is it relevant that many poor people "walk or take the bus" ? And why don't they have those cards? They do have those cards, they need them to cash checks at a currency exchange, apply for food stamps, buy alcohol at a store or to enter a bar, travel by commercial airliner, etc etc. Show me someone who doesn't have an ID of some sort, and I'll show you someone who doesn't know what day of the week it is let alone who is running for office.

30th June 2012, 03:24 PM	#95
lomiller Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,927	Originally Posted by Brainster From the #2 result, at the notoriously conservative New York Times: So you reject information unless that information is provided from a conservative source?
lomiller Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,927	__________________ "Anything's possible, but only a few things actually happen"

30th June 2012, 04:55 PM	#96
Corsair 115 Philosopher Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Tranquility Base Posts: 8,684	Originally Posted by RandFan Do the current rash of voter ID laws in the states contain such provisions? If so then that would change my mind somewhat. I can't speak to that, because that wasn't the specific point I wanted to clarify. The supposition to me seemed to be that it's a driver's license or no ID at all, which as the Canadian voter ID rules demonstrate, is a false choice. There are plenty of reasonable alternatives. I can't help it if some American locales wish to reject rational propositions in favour of more onerous ones.
	__________________ "We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win."

30th June 2012, 05:04 PM	#97
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by Corsair 115 I can't speak to that, because that wasn't the specific point I wanted to clarify. The supposition to me seemed to be that it's a driver's license or no ID at all, which as the Canadian voter ID rules demonstrate, is a false choice. There are plenty of reasonable alternatives. I can't help it if some American locales wish to reject rational propositions in favour of more onerous ones. Got it. Yes.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

30th June 2012, 06:54 PM	#98
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,475	Originally Posted by Corsair 115 I can't speak to that, because that wasn't the specific point I wanted to clarify. The supposition to me seemed to be that it's a driver's license or no ID at all, which as the Canadian voter ID rules demonstrate, is a false choice. There are plenty of reasonable alternatives. I can't help it if some American locales wish to reject rational propositions in favour of more onerous ones. Every single state issues non-drivers license IDs, there is no locale where they are unavailable. They're free in states that require voter ID.

1st July 2012, 01:08 PM	#99
Nova Land / Tagger Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Whitleyville, TN Posts: 5,160	Originally Posted by WildCat Show me someone who doesn't have an ID of some sort, and I'll show you someone who doesn't know what day of the week it is let alone who is running for office. Today is Sunday where I am. (You didn't ask the date, but it is July 1.) The candidates for president this year have not yet been formally selected, but the Democratic candidate will be Barack Obama and the Republican one will be Mitt Romney.

1st July 2012, 08:58 PM	#100
Neally Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 3,150	Originally Posted by WildCat Every single state issues non-drivers license IDs, there is no locale where they are unavailable. They're free in states that require voter ID. But wait, it would be hard for those that don't have an acceptable ID to get some form of ID. That alone constitutes voter suppression and disenfranchisement!
Neally Illuminator Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 3,150

1st July 2012, 09:15 PM	#101
marplots Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,645	Originally Posted by Neally But wait, it would be hard for those that don't have an acceptable ID to get some form of ID. That alone constitutes voter suppression and disenfranchisement! It doesn't take much to keep people away from the polls. I've heard that weather can have a very dramatic effect.
marplots Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,645

1st July 2012, 11:53 PM	#102
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by Neally But wait, it would be hard for those that don't have an acceptable ID to get some form of ID. That alone constitutes voter suppression and disenfranchisement! Not all people know they need voter ID and won't know until they go to the voting booth. I've already posted links of varous organizations that have documented the difficulty. Here's another. AARP But you don't care. You've got your fingers in your ears and you are humming loudly. You refuse to acknowledge that reasonable alternatives are available. Nope, for some reason you just have to have that this year.
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith

2nd July 2012, 06:26 AM	#103
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,475	Originally Posted by Nova Land Today is Sunday where I am. (You didn't ask the date, but it is July 1.) The candidates for president this year have not yet been formally selected, but the Democratic candidate will be Barack Obama and the Republican one will be Mitt Romney. So why don't you have an ID? You don't buy alcohol? Enter bars? Fly on an airplane? Pick up a package from UPS or FedEx? Open a bank account? Apply for food stamps? Travel abroad? Rent an apartment? Buy real property? Drive a car? Get a marriage license? Etc etc etc.
	Last edited by WildCat; 2nd July 2012 at 06:28 AM.

2nd July 2012, 06:28 AM	#104
WildCat NWO Master Conspirator Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Albany Park, Chicago Posts: 49,475	Originally Posted by RandFan Not all people know they need voter ID and won't know until they go to the voting booth. In which case they can fill out a provisional ballot and have a week or 2 to get an ID. Oh, the humanity!

2nd July 2012, 06:58 AM	#105
marplots Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,645	Originally Posted by WildCat So why don't you have an ID? You don't buy alcohol? Enter bars? Fly on an airplane? Pick up a package from UPS or FedEx? Open a bank account? Apply for food stamps? Travel abroad? Rent an apartment? Buy real property? Drive a car? Get a marriage license? Etc etc etc. Sounds like voting would be the least of the disenfranchisements going on here.
marplots Philosopher Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 5,645

2nd July 2012, 07:44 AM	#106
Nova Land / Tagger Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Whitleyville, TN Posts: 5,160	Originally Posted by WildCat So why don't you have an ID? My reasons for not having ID are not the topic of this thread. If you want to discuss reasons why people don't have ID, start a new thread on that topic. You made a claim, that people who do not have ID are mentally incompetent (don't know the day of the week, don't know what's going on in politics). Your claim is untrue. Which -- as RandFan and others have demonstrated quite capably in this thread -- appears to be the case with a large number of the claims being made by those pushing for these new laws.

2nd July 2012, 07:48 AM	#107
The Central Scrutinizer Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: The White Zone Posts: 42,594	Originally Posted by Vorticity I have a fair amount of confidence here in my default assumption that both sides are wrong, i.e. that: 1) There is no appreciable voter fraud, and therefore no need for voter ID laws, and 2) When implemented, voter ID laws do nothing whatsoever to suppress the vote... ...in which case the whole debate is a waste of time. I'd be happy to consider any evidence that I am wrong on either point above. I think this pretty much sums it up.
	__________________ If I see somebody with a gun on a plane? I'll kill him.

2nd July 2012, 08:14 AM	#108
RandFan Mormon Atheist Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Southern California Posts: 53,970	Originally Posted by marplots Sounds like voting would be the least of the disenfranchisements going on here. What does that even mean? If you mean voting is the least of their worries, fallacy. Why are these laws so important that they must be enacted just before an election? Why do conservatives feel the need to defend these laws? What is so important about them? Why now? Do you have any evidence to back up your claims?
	__________________ Ego, ain't it a bitch? It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion. --Adam Smith