jerks

[acroyear]

Top court upholds photo ID voting law - Yahoo! News:

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday upheld a tough state law requiring voters to show photo identification

[...]

"The Indiana law purports to solve a problem that does not exist" - U.S. Sen. Charles Schumer of New York

oh hell, why don't we just nationalize the entire damn ID process, DNA-embedded and all and just get it over with.

Call it "Identi-Eeze". Douglas would love it.

Comments

[dashrippington.livejournal.com]

May I please get my bar code tattoo a little more to the left? No? It has to be centered on the back of the neck? Bloody Fascists!

[scaleslea.livejournal.com]

No, not the back of your neck, that's too inconvenient. How about the center of your forehead? That works!

Doc

[thatliardiego.livejournal.com]

oh hell, why don't we just nationalize the entire damn ID process, DNA-embedded and all and just get it over with.

They'd just make sure to charge $75 for it, payable only by check or major credit card. But no, that wouldn't be a "tax," either -- only Democrats would do that. This would be a "fee" in order to implement the system.

"What's that? No bank account or credit card? I'm sorry, you'll have to submit six forms of identification with government-approved photo down at the courthouse and wait three weeks for approval to cast a provisionary ballot..."

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

oh yeah, and in spite of what the official government website says, your former expired card is not valid verification of your identity for getting a new card.

[stori-lundi.livejournal.com]

I hate to say it but people who don't have photo ids, tend not to have bank cards or credit cards. And anyone can steal or forge those and use them as ID if they don't have photos on them. Just ask my sister who got her SSN hijacked and has had no less than 30 cards opened up in her name.

[thatliardiego.livejournal.com]

I hate to say it but people who don't have photo ids, tend not to have bank cards or credit cards.

Exactly my point.

[stori-lundi.livejournal.com]

And the counter point is that there are other ways to get a legit photo ID from the government. Personally, I think if you want to have the priveldge of being able to note, getting a valid government ID should not be a challenge to you. It's some paperwork but there are provisions for getting an id if you don't have a driver's license, are indigent, or are against being photographed for religious reasons.

[blueeowyn.livejournal.com]

But can people get it done in time for the primary?

And given that my state didn't recognize my passport as a valid way to prove my identity to the MVA ...

[thatwasjen]

Not exactly to this point, but I've been recalling the statement a lot:
"When a place gets crowded enough to require ID’s, social collapse is not far away." -- Robert A. Heinlein

[stori-lundi.livejournal.com]

So why is requiring people to have a valid government ID equivalent to fascism? I don't see your point here. In fact, I worry that my own district doesn't do enough to ensure voter identity because they don't require photo ID. You have to show valid photo id to get on a plane, which can be hijacked and used for mass destruction. Why not require it for voting, which can also be used for mass destruction, in a different sense?

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

Because
* believe it or not, not everybody actually has, or in their day to day lives needs, a "government issued ID"
* believe it or not, most of the people on the above list tend to be minorities, but still american citizens who have the full right to vote
* believe it or not, most of the people on the above two lists tend to vote democrat
* believe it or not, the hoops the government makes you go through in order to "prove" who you are to get one of those IDs are sometimes annoying and often expensive.
* believe it or not, they often find that whatever "proof" they've managed to bring so far isn't good enough and they're forced to go back and try and get more, again often at expense.
* believe it or not, the government has, for minorities, a wonderful trend of not following its own rules - one of the other posters of a comment on here had his application for a passport rejected because they decided not to take his previous (expired) passport as proof of ID, completely against the law and the official state department web site (which still says its valid proof).
* believe it or not, most of those minorities affected by bullshit like this would rather just not bother, especially since it often requires them to take time off work from jobs that don't exactly have discretionary leave that isn't, well, permanent.
* believe it or not, but most of these people will never get on a plane in their entire lives.

the ideal, the principle that you support, is fine.

the practice is extremely discriminating.

as for "why not require it for voting"? when the Republican party who supports this law decides that a vote is worth more security and paper-trailing than a $20 bill, then they're free to decide that a vote is worth an ID. right now, a $20 bill is more easily tracked and audited than a vote.

it's not "fascism" and NOBODY HERE SAID THAT so please watch your wording. the sarcasm of the slippery slope of ever-increasing ID requirements reflects our valid concern, as this very same party supporting this law has spoken in favor of the national ID, the one number to rule them all.

this law IS, however, discriminatory because it forces minorities through a bureaucracy that has in many localities far too many loopholes and to much corruption to truly and ably support the people in order that all my meet that ideal.

[stori-lundi.livejournal.com]

We *have* a national ID called a SSN. I think the new national ID proposal is redundant and dumb.

Just because the process is flawed doesn't mean that it isn't a valid one. It's like saying that the TSA screeners can never catch everything so we shouldn't bother with screening in the first place. If people really value the vote, they'll get IDs and work to get the process changed. I agree that it is harsh but it is a step in the right direction. I seriously doubt that it is a ploy of the Republicans to stomp the Dems. ID fraud is rampant here in the US and having a valid voter ID card has a of government ID. Without photo ID, someone could steal a dead person's name, show a forged paystub or credit card, get a voter ID card, and in turn get a new SSN, driver's license, or whatnot. That worries me a lot more than people illegally voting.

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

I seriously doubt that it is a ploy of the Republicans to stomp the Dems.

Then why are so few Dems in favor of it and why is it, in EVERY STATE its proposed in, proposed by Republicans, and only AFTER they get into the majority?

the SS card IS "valid ID" without a photo. so is a birth certificate.

so is, believe it or not, a baptism record.

all three could get anyone a falsified ID and from there a falsified voting card.

but what is the damn point? why, as has been stated time and time again, pass a law to prevent a crime that has never taken place on a scale large enough to change an election?

you *really* think there are large swaths of black, hispanic, and east asian people going out of their way to fake their right to vote and vote multiple times? really? as much trouble as their neighborhoods have in just getting to the polls at all (consider the minority suburbs of Ohio in '04 for one extreme example).

ID fraud may be rampant, but voter fraud isn't. anybody who tells you otherwise knows that those who would vote would vote against them.

we're spoiled in the places we've lived and the families we've had that we've not had to deal with the rampant corruption of those who run the ID process in other jurisdictions and go out of their way to make it impossible for certain minorities to complete the process, all because "they feel like it". I know you don't want to believe there's still "whitey" out there doing this to people who have done nothing wrong and hold nothing against other people, but it does still happen. When the minorities simply decide not to give bigoted assholes in power the satisfaction of ruining lives on a whim, I tend to think "go for it".

[acroyear70.livejournal.com]

see, what you're missing is that the centers where one can get those IDs aren't "everywhere" like the are around Fairfax, or even Harrisonburg.

People are being told that the nearest one to them in, say, some part of Pennsylvania or North Carolina or name any other battleground state is more than 50 miles away. btw, they don't have a car, and can't take a whole day off much less shell out $50 for the bus only to be told they're missing some piece of documentation that nobody mentioned on the phone when they called to set up the appointment and the next appointment happens to be after the election's deadline in 3 weeks and...

that happens. it happens to people DAILY. until THAT is fixed, any law requiring such an ID must be considered to be discriminatory. fix the process FIRST and then I'll support the ideal intent of that law.

[thatliardiego.livejournal.com]

I seriously doubt that it is a ploy of the Republicans to stomp the Dems.

Alas, there is more than forty years' worth of evidence to the contrary, going all the way back to the so-called "ballot security" programs of the GOP when the young lawyer William Rehnquist was trying to ensure that ethnic minorities in Arizona would not be able to vote in the 1966 presidential election, as documented by John Dean.

A 1994 study done by the Justice Department showed that blacks are four to five times less likely to have photo ID or a driver's license than any other voters. In 1986, "voter caging" program in New Jersey implemented to stop alleged voter fraud was found to be illicitly preventing minorities from voting, and the courts imposed a standard of strict scrutiny on similar programs in the future.

The GOP has nevertheless worked to drive down minority turnout at every opportunity by claiming massive amount of unproven voter fraud. Yet Project Vote of the Brennan Center for Justice at Columbia University found virtually no widespread voter fraud despite the claims of the GOP.

Lastly, in response to your previous statement, voting is not a privilege -- it is a right. And as such, the government should show just cause in putting any obstacles in the way of the voter trying to exercise that right.

[pyllgrum.livejournal.com]

Exactly. DRIVING is a privilege; in a Republic, voting is a right merging upon a duty.

And the Social Security Number is NOT an ID. If you read the card it clearly states "For Social Security and Tax Purposes - NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION". For YEARS the Republican Party, before being overtaken by Neocons, cried foul at any attempt to produce a National ID.. and frankly, echoes of WWII movies "papieren, bitte" still effect my willingness to produce and support such a record.