this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2024
272 points (99.3% liked)
politics
19096 readers
3633 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS.
It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments.
Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Register To Vote
• Citizenship Resource Center
• Congressional Awards Program
• Federal Government Agencies
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• The White House
• U.S. House of Representatives
• U.S. Senate
Partnered Communities:
• News
• World News
• Business News
• Political Discussion
• Ask Politics
• Military News
• Global Politics
• Moderate Politics
• Progressive Politics
• UK Politics
• Canadian Politics
• Australian Politics
• New Zealand Politics
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Don't more developed countries have voter ID laws than not? It's interesting to see that this is one metric where 'everyone else does this except the US' is not used as an argument for the change that would align the US with the rest.
Most of them have a national ID that everybody gets, not the complex mix of IDs that the US has.
If we had that, and everybody had a national ID as a matter of routine, it wouldn't be a big deal. But we don't, because issuing one would be the mark of the beast or something.
And let's be clear, the people saying "we must have ID to vote" are VEHEMENTLY opposed to this idea.
Oh, that's weird, because giving everyone an ID and passing these laws would end all non-citizens voting, so it sounds like a fine compromise to get what they are asking for. Almost as if they are lying about what they want, very curious.
Except it's already not happening. The whole pretending that it is, is how they sell their bad faith ways to disenfranchise voters.
That's true, but then on the state level, such could be implemented alongside that type of law, within a given state, and then that state would be set up 'equivalently', right?
Those two things should go hand in hand, ideally within the same legislation, I'd think.
It could, but in practice never is; it's always things like "we want you to put street numbers on your drivers license, but the reservations don't have street numbers" or "We'll accept concealed carry permits, but not student IDs" or "gee, urban residents are less likely to have a driver's license, let's mandate that"
They are set up by the state.
They cost money, they cost time (to go and get an ID), and they can have a wait to receive it.
Republicans also block national ID implementations and other methods to make getting an ID easier. So the left correctly calls them out on the bullshit. If we had similar ID systems as those countries, I don't think the left would care.
If an ID is required for voting and voting is a right then the government should provide the ID for free. That would be the hold up for implementation. It makes sense to me, but I'm sure there might be other reasons I'm not thinking.
I agree with this. The article says that Ohio provides the ID free of charge.
Other developed countries have national IDs, don't they? I'm fine with arguing for dragging the US to civilization but you have the cart before the horse there if that's your justification for voter ID laws.
You start hitting a hard political issue of requiring every citizen needing a national ID from birth. It is surprisingly politically unpopular creating this form of ID.
So you have this hodgepodge of state requirements, and even then there isn't a requirements that all residents of a state who are citizens have an ID.
Most developed countries implement voter ID laws in ways that do not end up being poll taxes. In Canada, like many other places, there are fees to get a driver's license (not to mention you have to be able to drive) , or a passport. For example, health cards (the modern ones with photos) are valid ID to vote, and are free (there may be a fee to get a new one if you lose one, idk, but the initial card is free). The sum total is that on principle it doesn't cost money to exercise your right to vote.
In Canada we can also vote with attestation if we lack ID
Many of those countries also have rules for people without ID. Get someone who has an ID to vouch for you and it's all good. I mean, what fool is going to risk their freedom for ONE vote?
(answer: likely a Republican)
Non-citizens vote in fewer numbers than Republicans' deceased grandparents.