First off, requiring a photo-id during in person voting and a photocopy of a photo-id to be sent in with an absentee ballot does not incur any greater cost to the system. That is a red herring. Second, the in-voter fraud may, or may not be as bad as been cited in various reports. I showed a report earlier that stated all people in the field universally agree it is an exploitable flaw, and there isn't enough data to gauge the extent of any abuse of that flaw. This was a bipartisan report and the report said that all proceeding reports before it don't have adequate data to take on the actual figures of in-voter and absentee impersonation fraud.
Misleading description of the state of research and cherry picked reporting.
Adding a photo-id requirement is basically taking care of a security flaw and going after low hanging fruit. There have been cases where the laws were enacted because it was well known that the ability for minorities in the area to get a valid id was near impossible such as Pennsylvania when they initially enacted their voter id law. That was a case of discrimination because the system was setup to make it difficult for certain voters to obtain valid id with which to vote.
Low hanging fruit that comprises effectively no voter fraud. Pointless.
As for arguments against voter id laws they have so far boiled down to the following:
1) The are racist and discriminate against minorities.
debunked: the law for requiring a valid id to vote aren't discriminatory, but the system that provides valid ids may be. Voter id laws need to be enacted with the mind that those wanting to vote and don't currently have an ID can easily obtain one.
This is an obvious rationalization. Whatever ID laws "need" to be does not change what they are.
Additionally, repeated studies have found discriminatory intent behind voter ID laws.
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2422596
You don't know what a debunk is.
2) It is a problem that has zero to little abuse.
debunked: as shown by reports from the ECA and NPR, there is no way to gauge the level of abuse. It is a security flaw that exists within the system that is believed by many experts to be rarely abused for in voter impersonation and more abused for absentee ballot voter impersonation.
This was not shown in any way by those reports, and such a contention is directly contradicted by authoritative research linked elsewhere in this thread.
You are simply attempting to repeat previous failures of understanding of what the report said. That, and your second point is from an NPR show you claim to have heard by some guy whose name you can't remember.
This could be either a failure of understanding or deliberate rationalization.
3) The cost of the law doesn't justify the enactment of the law.
debunked: The costs for enacting the law are very little in most places. Mostly because the large majority of most populations in the various states already own a valid ID. The infrastructure in most places already exists to allow the government to provide valid IDs to all in a reasonable and timely manner. A few places may need to build additional facilities to reach out to individuals in need of a valid ID.
Baseless statement and inaccurate description of voter ID laws. Many of the laws do not provide free ID services, the costs are many millions of dollars for each state, etc, etc.
Furthermore, it doesn't matter what laws might need to do in the future, it matters what the laws are now.
4) Voting is a right and there shouldn't be any form of infringement upon it.
debunked: No where in any American law is voting stated as a right for all or even some. It is just the established way of doing politics. This is why voting methods and protocols vary widely from state to state, county to county, and city to city. The laws only state that if voting is the method used to conduct business by the government, like any other form of business done by the government, it must be fair and equal to all.
Obvious straw man. Once the franchise is given it is a fundamental right like others. (Bush v. Gore) The franchise has already been given in these states, rendering the argument moot.
5) Why is the right so hell bent on enacting these laws? It seems like they are only doing so to prevent minority votes against them.
debunked: The amount of votes potentially stopped even if the law was intended to be discriminatory would be very small. If the abuse of in person voter fraud is as small as many claim it is, the potential blockage of minority votes would be equally as small. Voter ID laws are very popular among right, middle, and left side voters as demonstrated by 34 states having a form of a voter id law with most passing in such laws with ease due to residents overwhelmingly voting for the laws. It is only the vocal minority far left that is against these laws and there is probably some level of counter instigation by the far right that know these laws tweak the nose of the far left. That's politics.
Straw man. Voter ID laws are in part motivated by racism, but it is more that people of those races tend to vote against Republicans. This has always been the reason, it just happens that legally it is easier to argue against the racial suppression part.
http://prq.sagepub.com/content/earl...39.full.pdf?ijkey=a3z14k6ocCg0YKn&keytype=ref
6) Why is the right focused on only the voter ID laws for fraud prevention and not others?
debunked: This is a strawman argument as in most cases the government is actively putting in other systems to measure and counter other potential forms of fraud and abuse. It is just the current media focus and spotlight on the voter id laws that are making them seem more important than they are. The in person voter id laws are just a stop gap to a security leak. It is just an easy fix, so it is something to go after the low hanging fruit. There are other voter fraud problems which are harder to fix in some cases and require more care in fixing them. Just because one law is in the spot light doesn't mean it is the only security fix in the works.
This is the second time you've attempted to claim this obvious falsehood. Less than one third of voter ID laws require photo ID for absentee ballots.
So unless there is some new valid argument, rehashing the old shit I've listed out above is just plain stupid and a waste of time.
You're just furiously rationalizing an obviously irrational policy based on speculation, poor understanding of how to analyze electoral results, and cherry picked data.
What you're doing is a waste of time because you're clearly uninterested in learning more about this. It reminds me of when you furiously argued with a real lawyer about "civil prosecutors" and such, never giving in no matter how many times he tried to politely educate you.
You can feel free to repeat yourself once more in this thread, I'm done debunking your nonsense. You might feel that if you continue to repeat yourself it makes what you're saying more correct, but you can't expect us to play along forever.
Facebook
Twitter