Should You Need a Photo ID to Vote In an Election

This is a simple poll...

Some states in the US do not require a valid photo-ID to vote. Usually they justify it with lines like. "Poor people cannot get these expensive government issued IDs" or something similar to that effect. It as also been said that IDs can somehow cause "Racial Tension" or "upset the impoverished." How this would happen, I am not sure.

On the other side, we have lobbyists that are trying to push for this rule. Noting that it will severely decrees voter fraud in these states. Showing pretty damning statistics as well. It should also be noted that almost every state has a program to give free ID's to its citizens for voting purposes. If not free, then always at a very reduced rate (some as low as 3-4 USD)

I am trying to be as unbiased as I can, but I literally cannot see a valid reason not to have this system in place. That is why I wanted to make the poll and spur discussion.

 

Honestly, where I live it's mandatory to bring a photo ID and something showing where you live (out drivers license do both).

Such stuff used to be legal, but there was too much fraud.

Edit:
All that to say:
I don't quite get where the debate stands, I mean the state could give free IDs to people living in poverty.
Fraud obviously happens when IDs aren't required, so why risk it?

 

Voter ID laws, otherwise known as "voter-fraud protection", are a great idea... in theory. In practice, they really only serve to harm and disenfranchise minorities, young voters, and residents of rural areas.

A perfect example of the flaws in voter ID laws is the implementation of such laws in Texas, last year. Following the passing of the legislation, an estimated 600,000 registered voters were unable to vote. Another 400,000 registered voters would have to travel 3 hours or more to the nearest ID-issuing government office.

But this doesn't even take into account the number of registered voters who change their name, do not drive, or have documents that have been misplaced, are out of date, or have some other bureaucratic error that can be barred entirely from obtaining an appropriate ID. Others who are not barred must go through lengthy processes with various government offices in order to obtain appropriate documents and identification in order to obtain an ID that can be used for voting.

More than that, still using Texas as an example, Texas passed this law in order to "prevent voter fraud" when, in fact, of the 20 million votes cast in Texas in the last decade, only 2 cases were fraudulent. This proves true in most states, actually. Voter fraud is something that we are all aware exists, but we're not entirely clear, and we've been misled, on exactly to what extent it affects elections.

The majority of states require some form of identification in order to vote. But only a small number have strict voter ID laws, such as a Texas, requiring specific photo IDs. In most states, registered voters are given a voter card. The voter card informs you of your polling location and instructs you to present the card at the time of voting. This serves as identification and proof of the right to vote. In states where a photo ID is required, this card is usually issued but not needed to vote (as the photo ID takes its place).

Again, using Texas (because it is the most recent) as an example, voter fraud is not a common occurrence. It is, in fact, quite rare and not worth disenfranchising 600,000 registered voters (mostly minorities, women, and young voters) in order to prevent. It has been speculated that, in most cases (and Texas, in particular), such voter ID laws are implemented in order to tilt elections in favor of the Republican party. This is because, according to multiple studies (and as evidenced last year in Texas), voter turnout amongst young voters, women, and ethnic minorities is drastically reduced in states with such laws. Oddly enough, the same demographics are the same ones that tend to vote Democrat or for other liberal, independent parties. It also doesn't help the case that these laws are almost always, nearly exclusively, supported by Republicans.

Accountability is always a great idea. It's something that we all want, but it's something that we don't always understand how to implement nor are we always aware of to just what extent such measures are truly necessary.

 

So your saying that we shouldn't have the added security layer because its inconvenient? I just don't see how it is that big of an issue. If you want to vote in a state ran federal election, you should be able to prove that your a citizen of that state. A state issued ID or Drivers License will performed this task wonderfully. Plus, in many states its illegal to walk around after curfew without a ID or DL. Is it really that hard for someone to drive/walk/ride to their DMV/BMV and get a ID? Yes its annoying, but its not the end of the world. If it is really that hard for people to get IDs in these states... then the process is the problem, not the voter ID system.

 

Inconvenient? Were you listening? 600,000 registered voters who can no longer vote. Disenfranchised, not inconvenienced.

I invite you to look up and research the case in Texas, last year. These people have been barred from voting because of clerical errors and beauracracy.

The notion that we should spend thousands of dollars to create new IDs and disenfranchise, again, not inconvenience, but actually bar from voting, 600,000 registered voters in order to prevent 2 fraudulent votes out of 20 million is utter lunacy. You cannot justify that in any way.

And, again, I have to stress that these people who were disenfranchised were registered voters. U.S. citizens who had already done all of the necessary paperwork and provided the documents needed to prove that they can legally vote in the U.S. But now, due to red tape and beauracracy, can no longer vote and cannot obtain an ID that would allow them to vote.

Texas didn't have these laws until last year and, in a decade, only had 2 fraudulent votes out of 20 million. That's 0.000009% of all votes cast.

Oh. And the process may be the problem, but if you seriously expect the state's to overhaul how they issue IDs, change how other offices handle birth certificates, and SSN cards, build new offices (especially in rural areas), and create programs that incentivize people to get a photo ID, I applaud your optimism, but keep dreaming.

You cannot justify such measures.

 

Voter fraud constitutes an incredibly small fraction of the vote. A two-year investigation by Iowa's republican secretary of state found evidence of 117 possible cases of fraudulent voting, which only led to 6 criminal convictions. In 2011 a Wisconsin task force found enough evidence to charge 20 people with voter fraud during the 2008 election. Kansas' secretary of state examined 84 million votes cast across 22 states to look for duplicate registrants. In the end only 14 cases were prosecuted, representing 0.00000017% of the votes cast.

In contrast, and as BaconMan has mentioned, a minimum estimate of 600,000 legitimate voters would be potentially disenfranchised with new voter ID laws. You would be dumping taxpayer money on pointless bureaucracy that in the end would ironically skew the vote count to be much more inaccurate than if you just let a few cases of fraud slip through the cracks.

Voter ID laws are a waste of time and money. It should also be noted that young voters and minorities are the majority of voters that would get disenfranchised by this legislation, and coincidentally it's always republicans that are proposing this legislation, who statistically receive less of these votes. Their motivations are suspect, especially given that this is supposed to be the party of "small government" and no "wasteful spending".

 

I will concede on the aspect that clerical errors and added red tape helps no one. However the one question I have on this issue is as follows. How do voter ID laws only effect young voters and minorities. Any citizen should be able to get an state issued ID card or drivers license (yes I get that clerical mistakes happen that prevent this in a small number of cases). How is attaining something that has only one process in each state targeting minorities and young people. Especially when people are expected to carry them at all times anyway?

 

You're actually not expected to carry a photo ID at all times. You would be surprised at the number of people who don't have one.

Young people, to start with, often aren't issued an ID until they apply for a Driver's License. Up until that point, their parents have been their legal guardians and have handled all documentation. Not only does this lead to documents being outdated and misplaced or lapses in communication/retrieval of documents from one's parents. In addition, especially in urban areas, many people (especially young people) don't drive and therefore have no need for a Driver's License. They can get a state-issued photo ID, sure. But what's the point? Unless your school, work, or hobbies require one, it's often just money that could be spent elsewhere. There's also the fact that most local establishments accept college photo IDs as a valid form of identification. So, for college students, this often serves as their sole form of photo identification.

Minorities, statistically, reside most often in low-income areas. This often means that they cannot afford to purchase up-to-date documents, photo IDs, or the transportation to offices for said documents. But, more than that, many people belonging to an ethnic minority are first generation citizens with immigrant parents. This often results in lost documents (birth certificates, SSN cards, etc.) or lack of U.S. government issued documents all together. And the process by which to obtain the documents required to obtain a photo ID is often riddled with red tape, bureaucracy, being sent back and forth between offices, various fees, waiting periods, travel expenses, and the need to track down even more obscure documentation.

The people who aren't outright barred from obtaining an ID, due to being unable to (for one reason or another) procure various documentation, are often subjected to the system and find themselves unable to pay fees, fines, transportation costs, or are stuck in limbo so long that they just become discouraged and give up, opting not to participate in the political system which governs their lives.

 

But its not the government's job to make sure that everyone can vote. That is the responsibility of the person. If that person gets discouraged so easy, or cannot take the time and effort to get and pay for a ID, they probably shouldn't be voting. I was poor when I had my ID issued. I had to donate plasma to earn the money to get my ID, I had to walk 3 miles to donate. All of this "the poor and minorities will be disenfranchised" stuff doesn't matter ultimately. Its the government's job to protect against voter fraud. Look up voter fraud in Illinois.

 

I don't know whether to laugh or cry.

Victim blaming is a fun game, huh?

 

They are "victims" because they are poor? I was not a victim, nor will I ever be. At least in that sense. The government cannot do everything, nor should they.

 

The poor are disproportionately disadvantaged in this country. Once in poverty, it is incredibly difficult to get out. Any nonsense you've been fed about the American Dream and "pulling yourself up by your bootstraps" is just that, nonsense.

But, that aside. You are essentially saying: "why bother fixing our nation's issues? Why shouldn't we implement systems that do more harm than good? If it harms people, it's probably their fault, anyway."

People who are given the run around by red tape and bureaucracy don't give up because they're lazy or "not trying hard enough". They give up because of the mental and financial toll that it takes on them and their family. "I put up with the system's bullshit, so why can't everyone else?" is the same strawman argument that conservatives throw at every social policy under the sun. "I worked for my tuition when I was in school, kids today are just lazy." They forget, however, that a minimum-wage worker in 1979, making $2.90 per hour, had to work 254 hours in a year to pay the $738 annual cost of tuition at a public four-year college in that same year. By 2010, minimum-wage workers at $7.25 per hour had to spend 923 hours to cover the $6,695 annual tuition at a public four-year college.

It is the government's job to ensure that every U.S. citizen can vote. If we are to be governed by a system, a system that, need I remind you, is and was intended to include every last U.S. citizen, then that system must be made accessible and available to everyone. Not just the people willing to wade through the bullshit. Not just the people who weren't screwed over by clerical errors.

And all of this is ignoring the fact that these laws are an unnecessary evil. I looked up the case in Illinois (I assume that you're referring to the case in the 2014 election). It may well be fraud, but it's a software issue. Not an issue that any ID will solve. These laws do the opposite of preventing fraud. They skew votes in favor of the Republican party by thousands of votes by disenfranchising registered voters. They not only are unnecessary for a problem that registers near 0% of all votes cast in the last decade, in most states, but they skew ballots and tilt elections far more than voter fraud ever has.

 

My life experience as taught me otherwise. You cannot expect the government to hold your hand through life. You either get up and work for your money, or you live like a second class citizen. It is that simple.

I am saying that it helps. Its not "Voter ID"s fault that Texas didn't do it right and it ended up a mess.

You have to look at like that. You cannot have a government tailored differently for every citizen. Its not logical, nor practical.

Yeah but that is the corrupt Collages fault. They are the ones that pay hundreds of thousands to themselves. There is no legit reason for how overpriced schooling is now. Your blaming the economy itself when the problem is with schools in general. The best answer to this would be having a community collages that are managed the same as high schools. That means free admittance/books for the impoverished. They have tried to do this, however the liberal ran Collages always lobby against it.

If wading through bullshit is what you have to do, then just do it. It isn't like they are saying that only people of a certain pay grade are aloud in the wade pool.

No I am talking about the last 5 elections...
Demarcates have IDs/Licenses too. To me this sounds like "Democrats don't want to be bothered with this, so its a problem." There is no group of people that are refused IDs. If they really cannot get their SSN, Birth certificate, and two pieces of mail to prove residency.. they are too irresponsible or unmotivated to vote.

 

Alright I'm going to jump in here. First I think photo ID's would be a good addition to the voting process; but we shouldn't implement them. The reason being is simple, its too costly and too much trouble to be worth the hassle at this point.

My first point to why, is a simple criticism of our voting system which for presidential elections is ultimately pointless. Your vote doesn't matter in the current system because the representative can simply vote against it. next the "First past the post" winner take all system is just whole unrepresentative of the voters opinions. This effects our country on every single level of government. People can be elected just because they are hated less than the other guy running. The majority of voters may not even want the winner in office. Minor political parties are isolated and ultimately ignored. Why go through the trouble of trying to fix/repair a problem (if it can be called that) for a system that clearly isn't working.

The second reason why, is that it does isolate minority groups especially those who lack English skills. It is very hard for those whose primary language is not English. It's hard to communicate law changes and its hard to deal with bureaucracy meaning that those voters who obey laws and pay taxes the same as other citizens could be lost due to the extra hassle it could cause. The political landscape is already stagnant and isolating different groups of people would only cause to increase stagnation.

Lastly, the rates of voter frauds are greatly exaggerated. The amount of actual votes cast fraudulent and their impact is minimal at best. Even then those who want to cast fraudulent votes still will. Its not hard to make a fake ID, when people cast fraudulent votes many times fake ID's are used. Its really not that difficult to add a picture to one of them. Sure information on the ID's might be able to give away someone who is lying but do you really think the majority of poll workers are going to take the time to thoroughly inspect every single ID? I know i wouldn't hundreds or thousands of people could go through the polls daily during elections, the extra time and effort required to check the ID's thoroughly would not be worth the pay off. Think of the wasted work hours and just time in general people would have to waste during election time, your wait to vote could increase exponentially. The simple conclusion is why waste time and effort on something that has little to no effect on the actual election results, just to say we did?

Its like running a business, you don't spend more money trying to minimize a expense than it cost to just keep the expense at the level its currently at. It would cost too much time, energy, and money to implement effectively.

 

I've tried reason. I could go on about how your evidence is purely anecdotal or how your own experience isn't representative of everyone's and therefore cannot be used to create an informed opinion or how it's not colleges' fault that they want to maximize profits, it the government's for not regulating them or how creating an efficient system that serves the people, first and foremost, doesn't involve "tailoring" just a bit of sensibility and less political bullshit. But I won't. I feel that this conversation has run its course and there really isn't much left to say. This is all I have left:

 

This is what I am looking for. Real reasons that minorities might be effected. Explanations. In fact, you may have even swayed my overall opinion with this post. Thank you for your informing post.

Saying something is nonsense without any basis isn't any better than me saying that I have had contradictory experiences.

You say its the government's fault, I say the fault lies with the people doing it. The blame shouldn't be on the government for everything. The collages control the market artificially, its there fault for doing it, not the governments for failing to stop it.

 

The discussion about the American Dream nonsense would take up another thread, entirely.

I'll admit, I'm a bit frustrated. Because, to my mind (and I'm sure you see it differently, and that's fine), you are unwilling to see reason. I feel that your arguments are riddled with logical fallacies and you seem intent on supporting a system that has not only been proven not to work but has been proven to do more harm than good.

So, what I'm saying is: I feel there is nothing left to be said in this conversation and we've reached the point where we just have to agree to disagree.

 

Yes it would, I might very well be interested in hearing your views on that as well sometime.

Its not so much as I don't see the reason. I just read the information differently. I see what your trying to say. I just don't agree entirely with it. However that is just a difference in mindset. However with what Znelson said, I feel more informed on the issue of voter ID. That was my main reason for starting this thread.
I would like to thank everyone that replied, you were all helpful.

 

"We pulled on these bootstraps so hard that they broke." I'm quoting Rise Against. I don't normally quote music, as I'm not a teenager discovering Facebook for the first time who thinks that status' are for a) a diary of every single waking moment of your life or b) a means by which to passive aggressively express ever single emotion a human being is capable of feeling by reciting every lyric you ever hear on the radio. But, look up Disparity By Design by Rise Against. That sums up my feelings on the issue (as much as any song possibly can sum up one's opinion on such an intricate matter).

That said, with the 2016 Presidential Election coming up, perhaps this would make for a good Hall of Elders topic, in the near future.

Fair enough.