Federal Judge Strikes Down Wisconsin Voter ID Law

[Gulo Blue]

Are there qualified studies done that quantify how much less participation we see with voter id laws (specifically from this section of voters which people are saying are disenfranchised)?

My understanding is that the Supreme Court found evidence that it does and the focus on it makes me think both parties know the impact. Wikipedia mentions studies that find a 1.6-2.2% drop in voter turnout when ID laws are enacted and 11% of voting age Americans don't have photo ID.

 

[zyxt9]

I like how you skipped right over the first part. Requiring all people to carry ID at all times....you are so big brother, chips in our heads too....I thought the part about the wrist tattoos would make a point seeing as you have mentioned converting to Judaism several times here. Ask some of you in-laws what they think about the idea.

Showing ID before you vote is no great inconvenience to most, but it might be to some. But as people in this thread have said, what's the reason for it? Is it really about voter fraud, or is it about trying to see if you can get a large block of voters to not bother to show up? It's frivolous legislation, and a waste of time and effort by those who are paid by taxpayer salaries, who could be doing something useful, almost anything else useful.

the IDs are not being used to throw people into concentration camps and killed, so they actually have IDs and Social Security Numbers among other forms of ID, and actually prefer having to show ID than not when it comes to voting, banking, etc. as it actually PROTECTS them as opposed to persecutes them.

as for the tinfoil hat thing, it is like I tell people who come to Disney and complain that Disney asks for a biometric comparison to verify they and their ticket are together. do you have a credit card? cell phone? guess what??? you're on the grid, and it is extremely difficult to not be on the grid these days, like it or not.

for me, it is 100% about ensuring one person, one vote. I fail to see how a "large block" of voters are not going to vote because they ask for an ID. furthermore, you first say it MIGHT be a problem for SOME, then follow that up by saying it is a LARGE BLOCK of people. do you see where the math does not add up there? still, I cannot fathom how a singular individual will not go to a polling station simply because they are verifying their ID unless they have intent to commit fraud.

you are right though, it is frivolous legislation and a waste of time and money. it should be automatic that you show up with your ID and verify you are who you say you are. it shouldn't even have to be law, because it should just be plain common sense in this day of identity theft.

 

[Gulo Blue]

what is the problem exactly, unless it is because someone is trying to cheat the system, then I can see where it would be a problem.

So...I answered this question last time you asked. I take it you just aren't buying my explanation. You don't think convenience has an impact.

 

[zyxt9]

My understanding is that the Supreme Court found evidence that it does and the focus on it makes me think both parties know the impact. Wikipedia mentions studies that find a 1.6-2.2% drop in voter turnout when ID laws are enacted and 11% of voting age Americans don't have photo ID.

if they have chosen not to get an ID, then they have chosen not to go vote. it isn't like getting a state issued ID is difficult.

and again, anyone not going to a polling station simply because they ask for ID begs the question of why? afraid of Big Brother??? but you tell them your info when checking in so how does the ID verification change the fact the government can see where you were and when?

it just does not have a valid argument

 

[zyxt9]

So...I answered this question last time you asked. I take it you just aren't buying my explanation. You don't think convenience has an impact.

no, I don't buy that argument at all. it comes across as grasping for any possible excuse, legit or in this case, not. it isn't difficult nor inconvenient to obtain an ID, definitely no moreso than going to a polling station and waiting in those lines and dealing with the "hassle" experienced when casting one's vote.

 

[Gulo Blue]

if they have chosen not to get an ID, then they have chosen not to go vote. it isn't like getting a state issued ID is difficult.

and again, anyone not going to a polling station simply because they ask for ID begs the question of why? afraid of Big Brother??? but you tell them your info when checking in so how does the ID verification change the fact the government can see where you were and when?

it just does not have a valid argument

Only some people have to get an ID to vote. People that drive cars (which correlates with wealth) already have them. So voting is easier for them.

Yes, voting is tougher for some than for others, but we try to minimize variation in ease of voting. To do something that increases inequality requires good justification, like evidence that it addresses an existing problem bigger than unequal voting access.

 

[Gulo Blue]

no, I don't buy that argument at all. it comes across as grasping for any possible excuse, legit or in this case, not. it isn't difficult nor inconvenient to obtain an ID, definitely no moreso than going to a polling station and waiting in those lines and dealing with the "hassle" experienced when casting one's vote.

A futurist like you? Doesn't think convenience impacts behavior? I find that difficult to believe. You must be wondering why so many people have purchased personal computers or pay monthly fees for smartphones when they could get the same information for free from their local libraries.

Comparing the effort of getting an ID to the effort involved in voting is a false comparison. One group faces the effort required to vote. The other must do that in addition to whatever it takes to get an ID. It's not A vs. B, it's A vs. A + B.

 

[zyxt9]

what I find to be the funniest part of all this is that the percentage claiming to not vote due to the ID requirement is less than 5%...but the real issue is how 50+% of eligible voters do not vote in many elections at all for a wide variety of other reasons, but none of those are being looked at while the ID issue is such a HUGE issue??? seriously, let's figure out why the people not voting is so high before worrying about this small percentage who are claiming they are somehow restricted from voting, when that is not the case at all. if they really wanted to vote, they would go get a state ID, register, and go vote.

 

[zyxt9]

no, I totally get how convenience impacts behavior, but it is far more about what one believes is the value of the resulting effort.

I don't for a second believe the problem is the small amount of inconvenience in acquiring the ID and even less inconvenience of showing it at the polling location. I believe the true problem is the belief that one's vote does not matter relative to the number of total votes, and therefore these individuals do not believe the effort is worth the small impact their vote will have. I also believe that is the main reason so many who have IDs do not vote.

and the futurist in me says this won't be an issue in the future as everyone will have their brain chip...and at that point they won't even need to go to a polling station, they will cast their vote electro-mentally. that might be 10, 100, 1000 years from now, but that is my belief in what will happen in the future. the real far fetched idea is that maybe at that point we will no longer need all of the politicians as everything that is voted on will be able to be voted on by every willing individual instead of an elected official, but politicians will likely figure out a way to survive nonetheless, probably through PR and Marketing campaigns trying to sway the electro-mental votes to their side.

 

[Gulo Blue]

no, I totally get how convenience impacts behavior, but it is far more about what one believes is the value of the resulting effort.

You can either "totally get how convenience impacts behavior" or you can think it's not an issue unless "someone is trying to cheat the system". I don't see how you hold both beliefs.

Pointing to bigger problems doesn't indicate that ID laws are good or bad. It's separate.

 

[zyxt9]

Only some people have to get an ID to vote. People that drive cars (which correlates with wealth) already have them. So voting is easier for them.

Yes, voting is tougher for some than for others, but we try to minimize variation in ease of voting. To do something that increases inequality requires good justification, like evidence that it addresses an existing problem bigger than unequal voting access.

how is going to the polling station somehow easier than going to the location to get the ID? if they can do the one, they can do the other. doesn't it come down to personal motivation? if these individuals are motivated to go vote, there isn't really a barrier to making that happen. they only have to get the ID once, then they can get their updated ID mailed to them, while going to vote will require a few more trips over the course of time.

 

[Gulo Blue]

how is going to the polling station somehow easier than going to the location to get the ID? if they can do the one, they can do the other. doesn't it come down to personal motivation? if these individuals are motivated to go vote, there isn't really a barrier to making that happen. they only have to get the ID once, then they can get their updated ID mailed to them, while going to vote will require a few more trips over the course of time.

The effort required to vote = A.
The effort required to get an ID = B.
A < A + B.

 

[zyxt9]

The effort required to vote = A.
The effort required to get an ID = B.
A < A + B.

that is not an accurate formula because it over-simplifies the issue and misrepresents the reality.

getting an ID once is easier than going to a voting location multiple times. if you can do the multiple trips, then you can make the singular.

 

[Gulo Blue]

that is not an accurate formula because it over-simplifies the issue and misrepresents the reality.

getting an ID once is easier than going to a voting location multiple times. if you can do the multiple trips, then you can make the singular.

There's always that first time you have to go do it and it's always an inconvenience that you might not fit into your schedule just to vote, but might to drive drive your car. People don't get to divide the task into even parts over many years.

You said you "totally get how convenience impacts behavior". Maybe you should explain it to me, because you seem to be arguing against the idea pretty consistently.

 

[Gulo Blue]

that is not an accurate formula because it over-simplifies the issue and misrepresents the reality.

getting an ID once is easier than going to a voting location multiple times. if you can do the multiple trips, then you can make the singular.

You want to spread it out over years?

5 A < 5 A + B.

How many elections do you get per license renewal period? I don't think it matters. The point is that it impacts behavior. Who cares how big or little a deal it is if you know it's big enough to impact behavior?

 

[KAWDUP]

The effort required to vote = A.
The effort required to get an ID = B.
A < A + B.

First B is pretty small as compared to A, mostly due to the fact that A starts with a visit to State Id office to get registered to vote already.

Second, all the people who you say have had it so much easier because they drive a car or had whatever wealth that gave them this huge increase in opportunity that you perceive still had to perform B at some point.

In my limited in experience, now for my third state, I found the effort to get that driver's license in the first place, is quite a bit of effort. Day off of work, waiting in line several hours, finding out you didn't have some insignificant piece of information, and then having to do it all over again, because you are out of time by the time you have everything.

Maybe we could make the system of procuring an ID more equal than in this huge perceived difference in effort? Maybe solve that problem - then no one is disenfranchised.

 

[zyxt9]

A non-driving state issued I'd is about as easy a document to obtain as they come. And now you can order replacements, change of addrss, and renew online or through mail. Probably get a good 10 years out of it before going back in for nee photo too. Oh the hardship all that is, I can't bare it.

Not to mention all of the groups that will trip over themselves to help a person get an I'd.

 

[Gulo Blue]

Still more posts about how easy it is. Is it difficult enough to make a difference, or isn't it?

It really doesn't matter that you think it's so easy that it shouldn't keep people from voting, if you also believe that it does keep people from voting.

 

[zyxt9]

as I already mentioned, I do not believe that is the real reason why those individuals are not voting. they are either psycho fools who overthink Big Brother, or they just do not want to vote and use this as a convenient excuse.

once again, big picture is there is a far greater percentage of people not voting than this small number. if these people were the only ones not voting, then your view would be absolutely correct. the fact that there are far larger percentages who are not voting who have IDs or do not use the lack of an ID as their convenient excuse to not vote tells me that it just is not important to them. if it was important to them, then they would go through the process of getting the ID one time in order to vote in multiple future elections.

laziness, lack of motivation, perception their vote doesn't matter, whatever their real reasoning is, the lack of an ID seems to be a trivial issue at best, convenient excuse to divert attention and blame as greater probability. always easier to point the finger at the big bad government that is "forbidding" them their right to vote when in reality it is their lack of will to spend less time going to get their ID than it takes to go vote.

 

[Sbee]

Still more posts about how easy it is. Is it difficult enough to make a difference, or isn't it?

It really doesn't matter that you think it's so easy that it shouldn't keep people from voting, if you also believe that it does keep people from voting.

It's a political argument on the right, they can't win elections so they need to supress votes and gerrymander districts. The dems get more overall votes for the house but have a minority due to the way districts are constantly redrawn.

I'd be all for every measure to increase voter turnout, even getting the rural southern voter who I couldn't be farther from politically.

I don't see the validity in a new argument for impeding people voting. the goal of democracy is to have as high a percentage of the population participate