• The short answer is, I don’t give a damn.

    Expanding somewhat: I’ve said I vote Republican because their views are more similar to mine. The margin is pretty damned small. Both parties are occupied at the top levels by people who consider it their birthright to fuck with me. My objection to Democrats is recent, based on the ascendancy of an ideology that not only declares itself entitled to fuck with me, it assigns itself moral ascendancy to justify it — FOAD. I’m determined to vote, but I have only one example in forty-odd years of voting that wasn’t lesser-of-two-evils by a thin margin, and that was local, a neighbor I liked and trusted.

    That being the case, if there’s vote fraud I want it stopped, be it Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, or Monster Loony Party, and regardless of who won or lost. Clear enough?

    Regards,
    Ric

  • Why nastiness? Why not? You and your fellows aren’t inhibited.

    It is not genteel or “civil” to accuse me and mine of mopery, dopery, and skulduggery along the spaceways — case in point, gtomkins’s paranoiac postulations @35 — no matter how careful you are to phrase it. I simply reply in kind, with occasional outbreaks of temper.

    I and my fellows would be happy to deal with you on the basis of good faith, provided you were willing to return the favor. Since you clearly are not, you’re going to see some intemperate language. Deal with it.

    Regards,
    Ric

  • Laura, in an ideal world you’d be right, and I’d be arguing your part. That ship sailed long ago, and it’s not coming back.

    Your Grandmother is not remarkable — I’ve never had to show any kind of ID to register or to vote, because I live in a small town and all the people involved know me; I don’t even show ID at the bank, because I held the clerk when she was a baby. I would like it if we could all live in an environment where that degree of familiarity and trust was routine.

    We don’t, and can’t. Like it or not, we have people on both sides who don’t trust the process, and once trust is broken it is very, very slow to return. Vociferous refusals to accept the notion of ID for confirmation of eligibility slow that return of trust rather than advancing it.

    I don’t like any ID requirement, voter or otherwise, but once trust is lost, the only fallback is some form of verification, and that’s where we are. I don’t trust you not to diddle the process, and you sure as Hell don’t trust me; what shall we do? I’m not going to start trusting you as long as you’re peddling paranoid lies (“It really is true that conservatives do everything in their power to restrict the voting of poor people.” — not yours, but you seem sympathetic) and you’re not going to start trusting me until I agree with redistributionism, which will happen when Hell freezes over, not likely with Global Warming. Voter ID isn’t a good thing, but it’s the least bad thing we can do.

    The point of this article was that it’s onerous for “young, poor, and urban” people to get ID. That’s bullshit, and if you don’t know that it’s because you don’t pay attention — and if you do, why are you peddling the crap? People need, and get, ID for all kinds of reasons. An ID for voting is no different than one for any other purpose, and you’d be much better served by going along with the requirement and focusing your efforts on helping the disadvantaged get the necessary papers.

    Regards,
    Ric
    [who must now abandon the lists for other commitments; have a happy, all]

  • The “voter fraud is rare” mantra is smarmy, po-faced disingenuousness. Since there are few places with requirements for voter ID, there is no way to know whether voting fraud occurs or not in most cases. Certainly voter fraud would be more difficult, for Republicans as well as Democrats, if secure ID requirements were in place. End Republican vote fraud!

    I am a conservative with strong libertarian tendencies who mostly votes Republican, because the programs they advertise come closer to my ideals than those of Democrats. Personally, I am very unhappy with any ID requirement at all for American citizens, including passports — you may or may not know that the United States was one of the last countries to adopt ID requirements for international travel. The world is how it is, however, and in an environment where ID, including photo ID, is required for the most trivial economic transaction there is no reason to object to photo ID for voting other than a desire to commit fraud, or a wilful disengagement from the realities of life.

    Some of the counterarguments, above, are simply silly. Direct deposit works well and avoids theft — but try to get a bank account without some reliable form of ID and you will be deeply disappointed. That difficulty is partly overcome by having the State maintain the accounts, but when I went to collect unemployment, which uses that system here in Texas, I had to show photo ID and provide a birth certificate. Using the card doesn’t require ID. Getting the card definitely does. Utility bills can be, and are, scanned and reprinted, with edits as desired, on laser printers identical in function to those used by the utility — even the same models are freely available.

    Yes, there are old people, many though certainly not all black, who didn’t get birth certificates for many reasons, including but not limited to past racial discrimination. In my original home in East Texas, which is as Southern as anything in Mississippi, I knew many of them. There are simple and effective, if sometimes not quick or easy, ways for them to establish identity and get “on the books”, involving the testimony of neighbors and relatives — and they are used to qualify for Social Security payments, Medicaid and Medicare, and a thousand other programs. I’ve provided such testimony myself. There are more “refuseniks” who don’t care to participate in social programs than there are people genuinely disadvantaged.

    The same expense and effort needed to mount an effective demonstration against the requirement could be applied to get everyone qualified the necessary ID, but that isn’t sexy enough, is it? You wouldn’t be “animated” to get your fifteen seconds on the teevee news, carrying signs and shouting obscenities. It says a lot about your priorities.

    Regards,
    Ric

  • It’s necessary to have a photo ID in order to cash a welfare check, like it is with any other check. The young, poor, and urban don’t seem to have a problem with that.

    It’s necessary to have a photo ID to apply for almost all forms of public assistance, including whatever Wisconsin calls “food stamps” now. Nobody who’s ever been in a checkout line doubts the ability of the young, poor, and urban to cope with that requirement.

    Redeeming a Medicaid card for a prescription requires photo ID, as does purchase of beer, cigarettes, and a host of other things that are restricted by age or other requirements. The young, poor, and urban don’t appear to have much trouble.

    In fact, a photo ID is necessary for almost any participation in the economic system short of armed robbery — whichever end of the weapon the person is on — and somehow the young, poor, and urban manage to get by.

    The same vans that take the young, poor, and urban to the polls can easily ferry them to a place where photo ID can be dispensed, and the cost thereof is about the same as the pack of cigarettes or six-pack of OM often passed out as incentives to vote — and the law specifies that the fee can be waived if the applicant is indigent.

    The only barrier to anyone’s getting a photo ID is if they aren’t legally entitled to one. It follows that the only possible objection to photo ID for voting is that you want people who can’t legally vote to do so. It is becoming more and more evident that crying out about “outrages to small-’d’ democratic principles” is a coverup for people whose ambition is to enable vote fraud.

    Regards,
    Ric