JSA
1st String
Posts: 1,895
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 16
I Root For:
Location:
|
RE: Trump Administration
(01-26-2017 04:13 PM)Rick Gerlach Wrote: (01-26-2017 03:38 PM)JSA Wrote: (01-26-2017 12:21 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: (01-26-2017 12:10 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote: (01-26-2017 11:58 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: Well, it certainly would keep stupid, umimformed minimally caring people from voting. I can see how that would slant the results toward good policies. We sure don't need that.
Out of curiosity, who do you think would have been most affected if my plan was in place, Trump or Clinton? Who would have lost the most voters?
You misunderstood my point about passports. If asking people for ID to vote is restricting their right to vote, then asking them for ID to get a passport must be restricting their right to travel. Yet there s an uproar over one and silence on the other.
Passports are only restricting their rights to travel to foreign countries - passports are not needed to travel within the states.
And I agree that having a more informed voter base would be better, but I still value the ability of more legal voters to vote over having less uninformed voters voting. IMO, voting should be as much of a right as the right to free speech, so we should only restrict it in very limited cases, like if someone is currently incarcerated for a crime they have committed (but I think people who have already served time should be able to vote).
And if you think Dems have the market cornerned on uninformed voters, you've got that wronbr. Plenty of uninformed voters to go around.
Thus my question, which did not have the slant you read into it.
To put it another way, if uninformed and ignorant voters did not vote, would Trump still have won?
We have the right to life, LIBERTY, and...well, you know.
But if you don't have Liberty to leave the country and re-enter, where do you live? Cuba? North Korea?
Point remains, how is THIS instance of requiring ID different from all the others? Maybe we should stop requiring ID to get...well, everything else.
I think we're conflating two issues.
Presenting adequate ID to vote or secure state assistance is valid, I think.
Selective enforcement of requirements is not.
As for other requirements, an educated electorate would be nice, but:
"The Negro citizen may go to register only to be told that the day is wrong, or the hour is late, or the
official in charge is absent. And if he persists, and if he manages to present himself to the registrar,
he may be disqualified because he did not spell out his middle name or because he abbreviated a word on the application.
And if he manages to fill out an application he is given a test. The registrar is the sole judge of whether
he passes this test. He may be asked to recite the entire Constitution, or explain the most complex
provisions of State law. And even a college degree cannot be used to prove that he can read and write.
For the fact is that the only way to pass these barriers is to show a white skin."
While the above text is poignant, and serves as a serious reminder of past injustice, it is over 50 years old. I refuse to accept that the situations cited in the quote are occurring in Texas today, and I don't see that a photo voter ID card is in any way analogous to those situations.
Most here are historically 'literate' on the denial of civil rights that led to the Voting Rights Act.
No one here would advocate a return to that.
Introducing these 'examples', or referring to poll taxes, seems to me disingenuous and seems an attempt to distract from, or shut down, discussion.
No one is arguing that only 'certain types' of citizens be required to present a photo ID to vote.
Were Japanese-Americans placed in internment camps during WW2 allowed to vote? Requiring a Japanese-American citizen to get a photo ID to vote must therefore be racist as well.
I'm not saying a voter ID was analogous. In fact, that was my point. I'm fine with a standard ID with provisions to help those in
need secure one. But unless things have been revised, as many have asked, why is a concealed gun permit adequate ID,
but a state university student ID is not.
And I agree, things have improved dramatically since 1965. Maybe not to the same degree as before, but subjective standards will
always be open to abuse.
To give a personal example, when my driver's license was set to expire a few years ago, I received notification that I would have to
bring a copy of my birth certificate. I wound up having to drive from Meyerland to the UPS center in Stafford to pick it up.
Went I went to renew, no one ever asked for it. However, there was a group of young adults who appeared to be in some
kind of involved discussion with an employee. To be fair, I don't know what it was about, but they seemed frustrated, and
the employee seemed firm (but polite). I'm white, they weren't.
(This post was last modified: 01-26-2017 04:49 PM by JSA.)
|
|