this post was submitted on 04 Oct 2024
272 points (99.3% liked)

politics

19120 readers
3353 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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
 

The way voter ID laws like this prevent citizens from voting is generally considered a feature — by restricting ID forms common among the young, such as student IDs, they change the makeup of the electorate to favor Republicans.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago (16 children)

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.

[–] silence7 51 points 1 month ago (2 children)

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.

[–] MegaUltraChicken@lemmy.world 26 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Most of them have a national ID that everybody gets, not the complex mix of IDs that the US has

And let's be clear, the people saying "we must have ID to vote" are VEHEMENTLY opposed to this idea.

[–] barsquid@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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.

[–] TimLovesTech@badatbeing.social 7 points 1 month ago

Except it's already not happening. The whole pretending that it is, is how they sell their bad faith ways to disenfranchise voters.

[–] damnedfurry@lemmy.world -1 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Most of them have a national ID that everybody gets, not the complex mix of IDs that the US has.

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.

[–] silence7 6 points 1 month ago

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"

[–] curbstickle@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago

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.

load more comments (13 replies)