Join In On The Action "Register Here" To View The Forums

Already a Member Login Here

Board index Forum Index
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7463
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 15 Mar 2012, 12:58 pm

:grin: :grin: :grin:
:angel: :angel: :angel:
:cool: :cool: :cool:
:winkgrin:
User avatar
Dignitary
 
Posts: 3239
Joined: 29 Jan 2003, 9:54 am

Post 15 Mar 2012, 6:57 pm

Pennsylvania just passed a Voter ID law yesterday and I learned about it at the local party meeting tonight.

The list of acceptable id's in long and includes things like student id cards as long as it has an expiration date.

If you do not have a driver's license, a state issued non-driver's ID is available for free upon filling out a voter's identification affidavit and providing a SS card, a birth certificate and two utitility bills showing your name and address (all things I had to provide to register my 6 year old for first grade).

Absentee ballots - the ballot will include a space to provide your driver's license/ non-driver's state ID number or the last 4 digits of your social security number. The local board of election will confirm the numbers after the votes have been opened.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7463
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 16 Mar 2012, 7:28 am

That works for me...
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 16006
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 16 Mar 2012, 10:15 am

So those without birth certificates? If I sound repetitive on that, it's because no-one seems to have addressed it.

Can you, for example, use your UK issued birth certificate if you have become a naturalised citizen? I would guess you need a certificate of naturalisation instead, right?

If I read that correctly, it'd asking for four pieces of ID to show name and address. It assumes every adult will be getting utility bills. It must cost quite a bit to have public employees check all that stuff out...

I can get the idea that ID to vote sounds reasonable. I'm still wondering if it's a sledgehammer to crack a nut (and if the nut is the right kind), though.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7463
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 16 Mar 2012, 11:08 am

Danivon,
I must say that it appears there is no pleasin' ya. Several forms of ID would be accepted, Utility bills and birth certificate, even a non-state ID with SSN attached.

My goodness, how easy does it have to be?
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 16006
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 16 Mar 2012, 11:54 am

bbauska wrote:Danivon,
I must say that it appears there is no pleasin' ya. Several forms of ID would be accepted, Utility bills and birth certificate, even a non-state ID with SSN attached.

My goodness, how easy does it have to be?
Sigh... Ok. You need a photo-ID to vote under the new Pa law. There are various forms of them, apparently.

However, if you don't have one of those (I imagine that most elderly non-drivers are not at a local college), you can get a photo-ID free from the State, but (as I read it) only if you bring along all four things - the SS card, the birth certificate and two utility bills.

What I'd like to see, to be honest, is both a reasonable estimation of the number of American citizen adults who don't have photo-ID, and of those, how many are also missing the key documentation like birth certificate (it would make sense if there was a disproportionate share). And then how many of them are on voter rolls at the moment.

That would give a view of how many people would have problems getting through the new ID laws as suggested.

I'll see if I can find that kind of thing. I'm sure that the NAACP and others are also trying to find such data - although it's hard to identify.

Still, so is fraud, isn't it? Still, I am not convinced that ID laws prevent fraud. It's not like fake ID is hard to obtain, and it will only get easier as long as technology moves onwards. If there is concerted voter fraud, it won't be long before a way around is figured out, and all that extra time and money spend on IDing voters will end up being a waste.
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7463
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 16 Mar 2012, 12:04 pm

Danivon,
How easy do we need to make it? I understand your desire to get actual number estimates, but goodness sakes, how easy?

I will see what I can find.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 16006
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 16 Mar 2012, 1:26 pm

bbauska wrote:Danivon,
How easy do we need to make it? I understand your desire to get actual number estimates, but goodness sakes, how easy?
Point is, it's currently easier. You want to make it more difficult.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 16006
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 16 Mar 2012, 1:47 pm

Here's a pdf on a study from 2006. They surveyed voters across three states (as the exited polls), to ask what ID they had access to:

http://faculty.washington.edu/mbarreto/ ... D_APSA.pdf

The Findings
Depending on how voter identification laws are implemented, a substantial amount of current voters could be disenfranchised. While 88% of the sample stated they did have a valid state driver’s license, only 56% stated that they had a driver’s license and at least one additional form of identification. Further, access to identification varied considerably by race, class and immigrant status.

...
For five out of six types of voter identification, Latinos, Asians, Blacks and immigrants were statistically less likely to have access to ID, as compared to Whites and the native born (see table 3). In the two combined measures, minorities and immigrants were again significantly less likely to have multiple forms of the acceptable identification. While Latinos and Blacks were not less likely to have a state driver’s license, Latinos, Blacks, Asians and immigrants were all significantly less likely to have at least a driver’s license and one additional form of identification. The changes in predicted probability reported in table 4 suggest that these differences were profound. Asians and Blacks were over 20% less likely to have two forms of identification, as compared to Whites, while Latinos were 13% less likely. Immigrants were about 6.5% less likely to be able to provide two forms of ID compared to native born.
Further, considerable group differences exist even for forms of identification that might be considered very basic or accessible. With regard to a recent bank statement, Asians were almost 24% less likely to have access, Blacks about 17% less likely, Latinos 15% less likely, and immigrants 7% less likely. Similarly, Blacks were 20% less likely to have access to a recent utility bill that would contain their name and current address, while Asians were 18% less likely, Latinos 14% less likely and immigrants 10% less likely to be able to present a utility bill. Although these two forms of identification are often cited as easily accessible, our findings demonstrate clearly that racial and ethnic minorities do not have access to the same types of identification as Whites. Our findings are supported by extant research in the fields of economics and sociology, where scholars have found that minorities and immigrants have much lower rates of access to bank checking and credit accounts (Hogarth et. al. 2003; Rhine and Toussaint 1999). Further, minorities are less likely to own their home, and therefore may not have a full range of utility bills in their name (Flippen 2001). Or in the case of multiple family households, the bills may be in the sole name of the male head of household, leaving three other adults in the household without proof of their residency in that household, at least by way of utility bill (Angel and Tienda 1982; Glick et. al. 1997). It is clear that imposing stricter voter identification requirements would disproportionately impact Latino, Black, Asian and immigrant voters.


No totals, but certainly not neglible proportions of people.
User avatar
Emissary
 
Posts: 3405
Joined: 12 Jun 2006, 2:01 am

Post 16 Mar 2012, 3:20 pm

It shows that they're less likely to have them, not that they're unable to get them.

Seriously now, do you honestly think it's likely to be a problem for any legal citizen to obtain a valid form of ID if they want to ?
User avatar
Administrator
 
Posts: 7463
Joined: 26 Jun 2000, 1:13 pm

Post 16 Mar 2012, 4:23 pm

I think my position on that question if evident.
User avatar
Dignitary
 
Posts: 3239
Joined: 29 Jan 2003, 9:54 am

Post 16 Mar 2012, 8:56 pm

danivon wrote:So those without birth certificates? If I sound repetitive on that, it's because no-one seems to have addressed it.

One can order a certificate of live birth from the state for free. You provide your name, date and location of birth and the names of your parents. That is what I have since my original birth certificate was lost long ago. Takes about 4-6 weeks to get via mail, order one on the internet which you get in 3-5 days (there is a $10 charge for that) or you can show up at a local state gov't office of vital records location and get it same day.

danivon wrote:Can you, for example, use your UK issued birth certificate if you have become a naturalised citizen? I would guess you need a certificate of naturalisation instead, right?
If you are naturalized citizen, you would use your certificate of naturalization instead of a BC. Yes.

danivon wrote:If I read that correctly, it'd asking for four pieces of ID to show name and address. It assumes every adult will be getting utility bills. It must cost quite a bit to have public employees check all that stuff out...
Again, this is no more then I had to provide to register my 6 year old daughter for 1st grade in September.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 16006
Joined: 15 Apr 2004, 6:29 am

Post 17 Mar 2012, 4:39 am

Archduke Russell John wrote:One can order a certificate of live birth from the state for free. You provide your name, date and location of birth and the names of your parents. That is what I have since my original birth certificate was lost long ago. Takes about 4-6 weeks to get via mail, order one on the internet which you get in 3-5 days (there is a $10 charge for that) or you can show up at a local state gov't office of vital records location and get it same day.
This assumes your birth was registered by the State. Or that you know the names of both parents as registered. For various reasons, that won't alway be the case (lazy parents, unmarried parents, mixed race parents, immigrant parents...)

danivon wrote:Can you, for example, use your UK issued birth certificate if you have become a naturalised citizen? I would guess you need a certificate of naturalisation instead, right?
If you are naturalized citizen, you would use your certificate of naturalization instead of a BC. Yes.

Again, this is no more then I had to provide to register my 6 year old daughter for 1st grade in September.
Which won't have been a problem because there'll have been a bill payer to have utility bills. Not every adult pays household bills, do they? Usually it's just one person in the household.
User avatar
Ambassador
 
Posts: 4991
Joined: 08 Jun 2000, 10:26 am

Post 17 Mar 2012, 10:28 am

mixed race parents? I don't get that.

The purpose of the utility bills is to prove residency. I would think that all states have some requirements to prove residency if you want to vote. Sure you can vote for President, but in which state, and in which local district. Which Congressperson and State Senator and potential Dog Catcher should appear on your particular ballot? I imagine this discriminates against citizens without any fixed residence, such as the homeless. Frankly, I suspect that not being able to vote is not top on their list of issues. No doubt there are alternative procedures if you happen to live somewhere but don't pay the utility bills.

You need to prove residency to send your kids to school because we fund our schools through local property taxes. There have been cases where people have district hopped, which can be severely punished.
User avatar
Truck Series Driver (Pro II)
 
Posts: 897
Joined: 29 Dec 2010, 1:02 pm

Post 17 Mar 2012, 12:16 pm

There are two different qualities to this matter, one is the academic/legal question, and the other is the shitty GOP/Dem rubber meets the vote.

I have zero doubt that Republican interest in the matter is to disenfranchise a group and the Democrat interest is to protect their voters.

The government's legitimacy is derived from the enfranchisement of voters, if people can't vote or won't vote because they can't get a meaningful voice than you push people towards sustained street protests, militias, etc. so in that regard the government has to take steps to make voter participation as high as possible and as valid as possible.

That being the case there's nothing inherently wrong with using ID in voting, but it has to be part and parcel of a greater whole of many factors related to enfranchisement in voting. In a tight vote all the sudden the validity of each vote becomes very integral the question of enfranchisement.

I'd argue that dead people voting is solely the fault of elected Registrars as the government knows who's dead and therefore it's incumbent on them to purge the roles. Also these things are run by volunteers who do the checking off of the voter roles, I imagine much error has got nothing to do with the actual voters.