Pages Menu
Categories Menu

Posted by on May 8, 2012 in Guest Contributor, Law, Politics | 12 comments

Nonsensical new Voter ID laws

While working today, a show came on the radio about how cruel and nonsensical the new Voter ID law is and I just had to stop and do a movie.

PS – If you want to see the follow up movie to “Little Stuff” I posted earlier on TMV, here’s the link:

Click here for reuse options!
Copyright 2012 The Moderate Voice
  • RP

    OK then lets do away with any requirement for ID’s at all.

    1. No more picture ID’s to buy allergy medicines at the drug store.
    2. No more picture ID’s to travel outside the USA.
    3. No more picture ID’s to use a credit card when making a purchase. (Flowers bread outlets require this as well as other stores)
    4. No more picture ID’s to cash a check.
    If all of the above are more important in the normal course of business than voting, then I will agree that picture ID’s should not be required.

    But if voting is of more importance, then why should it be different than the laws written to stop the sale of allergy medicines?

  • roro80

    1. The reasons this is necessary for certain OTC drugs don’t exist with voting. People are registered to vote in one location, and can’t go from place to place to vote multiple times, with or without ID.

    2. Evidently strongly controlling who is and is not voting is a matter of national security? Maybe if someone votes more than once, thousands of people die?

    3. Because evidently using a credit card is a Constitutionally protected right now. ?

    4. Hmmm…I don’t know the last time I was asked for picture ID when cashing a check.

    The problem with your 4 points, RP, is that you are mixing up things that are rights that the government and the governmnet alone has a responsibility to protect for all citizens, and transactions people have with private businesses, with the exception of the TSA case. Most of these cases you list require ID because of the ease of abuse. Voting does not have that same ease of abuse, nor does abuse pay off for the abuser. In order to restrict voting in this way, a strong case must be made that this sort of abuse is occurring, that these measures will protect against this abuse, and that it is not unreasonably limiting the ability of non-abusers to excercise their rights. None of these points exists, and in fact it has been shown that these voter restrictions fail on all three points.

  • zephyr

    Voter suppression has always been the real problem, the rest is mostly nonsense.

  • It really is important to distinguish between things that are really different. A comment mentions some things that should, and do, require a photo ID. But this doesn’t mean such IDs are always necessary, are always appropriate, or (as in the case of IDs to vote) might just be a political gimmick to keep down voting of certain age and ethnic groups. False analogies lead to false conclusions. 

  • merkin

    To me, this is much ado about nothing on both sides.

    We don’t have a problem with people voting illegally. We don’t have a problem with people who vote more than once. We don’t have a problem with illegals voting.

    The laws and regulations that have been passed recently are just useless, bureaucratic fodder choking up the system. RP and the Republicans in general are gung ho to cut down on these types of useless regulations and needless to say quick to vote out the bums who put them on the books.

    One thing that the voter ID laws and the mechanisms that check them on election day will make election day voter registration much easier.

  • Dr. J

    You tell ’em, Merkin. Keep your government hands off my election!

  • roro80

    Did you fail to read Merkins comment Dr J?

  • DR. CLARISSA PINKOLA ESTÉS, Managing Editor of TMV, and Columnist

    Hi there all, just a small head’s up. We have some new visitors to our site. Please read the Commenters’ Rules at the top of the home page first.

    The comments section is for commenting about the post topic. There are to be no attacks on writers or on other commenters.

    The rules of civility here are very few but are meant to move comments along without insulting others or highjacking threads or other ‘off the mark’ issues as covered in TMV’s longstanding rules for commenting.


    archangel/ dr.e

  • EEllis

    While there haven’t been any none cases where voter fruad has made any signifigant difference in results, tho I think the idea that there is none at all is just silly, but combating voter fraud directly isn’t really the main reason for the ID laws. It is so the people can have confidence in the process. Fraud may not happen all that often but it is absurdly easy for it to occur.

    While this is being made out to be a partisan issue polls make it clear that the majority from all walks of life are for voter ID laws. Even the communities that are going to be “suppressed”, another statement not supported by fact, a majority of voters approve of voter ID laws.

  • EEllis

    That should of been known not none in that first line

  • Rcoutme

    I have seen points both for and against the laws being written. I have seen claims that free picture ID’s are offered to voters (to avoid a poll tax). I have seen claims that no restriction of votes occurs in places where picture ID’s are required. In the end, as the author said, it looks to be a waste of government money, time and paperwork.

  • EEllis

    it looks to be a waste of government money, time and paperwork.

    I think you may be right when just considering the direct results but if laws such as these help install confidence in the process then that is worth it.

Twitter Auto Publish Powered By :