First things first, I don’t doubt it is a bad thing, considering who supports it and who doesn’t.
But my question is what exactly is the issue and what is the current and proposed voting process when it comes to IDs?
Here in my EU country, you have to show some version of a government ID, be it an ID card, drivers license or passport. And we don’t have to pre-register to vote.
Before you can vote, you have to “register” to vote. When you do this, you need to prove you’re a U.S. citizen. Usually providing a birth certificate, or passport, military id, idk everything.
My understanding was that the name you were registering to vote with had to match the document you were using. But if you got married then often times the women would have a different last name and now it doesn’t match your birth certificate. Normally you’d just have to prove you got married too but this new law would say no, you have to have the exact name or you can’t vote.
Since women typically take the man’s last name, it would effectively mean any married women registering to vote would not be allowed. And since the bill is worded confusingly on purpose, many women would not even realize this until they went to register to vote, and told they couldn’t because of their new last name.
It’s not effectively any woman, it’s a women who is using their birth certificate for ID. Which is effectively 1/3 of the options so it’s significant but not “effectively mean any married woman can’t vote.”
They can use a passport, state issued ID such as Drivers license or ID card or a birth certificate. The new drivers licenses and IDs that are “real IDs” which is required now are also proof of citizenship.
That’s fair, I should’ve been more exact with my words. If someone is poor and living in a large metro area they might not even have a drivers license so birth certificate would be their best option. And large metro areas typically swing democrat so it would disproportionately hurts dems more than cons.
Not an llm but wanted to acknowledge good criticism.
The problem is primarily that it falsely validates a fascist conspiracy theory which is being weaponized to dismantle western democracy. That’s really most of it.
If it validates a conspiracy theory then has it not proven the conspiracy theory to be more likly. When one is doing science and one discovered evidence that supports a conclusion you cannot dismiss the evidence or change you methodology to avoid the evidence simply because you don’t like what the evidence implies. Follow the science mate don’t change ur methodology cos the science disagrees with ur preconceived notions.
Voter fraud is incredibly rare in the US. The conspiracy theory is that elections are horrifically insecure and the result of every vote is fraudulent.
The proposed voter id laws take that as an inroad to erode the right to vote for all citizens.
How can u know its rare worhout checking id? I’m not a us citizen whats stopping me from walking into a polling booth and voting? It seems pretty insecure to me. One cannot simply assert an assumption and proclaim it to be true.
In 25 years of records, there have been fewer than 1500 convictions for voter fraud. In Arizona, there were 36 proven cases against 42 million ballots cast.
What’s stopping me from walking into a polling booth and voting?
The wonderful thing here is you aren’t American, so you convince yourself far more thoroughly than my words ever could. The election is Tuesday, come over and try to vote.
U didn’t address my point. Without id how can u know if the fraud isnt happening. Absense of evidence is not evidence of absence. Its not like they send an FBI agent to go id a couple hundred people to do a proper statistical analysis. They caught the dumbest most obvious worst offenders that’s it.
Ur stats are the absolute lowest bound they are not a statistical sample. Ur attempt at purposefully implicating that it is such when it is not is very telling of your priorities here.
A sarcastic reply does not count as good faith argument do better.
Google it my friend. It’s very easy to detect fraud when you’re working with big numbers.
In some cases yes in others no. Financial fraud large numbers makes it east to detect via per digit variations. Voting doesn’t follow this.
This isn’t an argument it’s an appeal to irrelevance.
