(Compulsory) national ID cards

Maybe she should get one of those fancy Medicare power chairs that seem to be so popular at tea party rallies.

Well, obviously she has no right to vote. She doesn't conform adequately. Duh.

Ok, so we need to pass a law that there must be a chair available in the BMV for every person in line? You guys don't realize how ridiculous you sound?

1. Hrm, I have to go to a place where there will be lines.
2. I can't stand up for long periods of time.

....

Help! I'm disenfranchised! There's no way I could possibly take any action or plan for this scenario on my own!

bandit0013 wrote:

Ok, so we need to pass a law that there must be a chair available in the BMV for every person in line? You guys don't realize how ridiculous you sound?

1. Hrm, I have to go to a place where there will be lines.
2. I can't stand up for long periods of time.

....

Help! I'm disenfranchised! There's no way I could possibly take any action or plan for this scenario on my own!

You are the one that sounds ridiculous. First of all you are leaving out the
3. I can't afford a wheelchair.

Second of all being disenfranchised doesn't mean it's impossible for you to vote, it just means that there are barriers for you that don't exist for other people. Back in the days of Jim Crow it wasn't impossible for a illiterate black person to vote. All he had to do was take the initiative and teach himself to read and write like a true American.

Stengah wrote:

No weaker than the case for requiring a voter ID.

Educate yourselves

A notorious recent case of absentee ballot fraud was Miami’s mayoral election of 1998, and in that case, the judge declared the election fraudulent and called for a new election.

But voter fraud never happens amiright? It's not as if elections have ever been overturned for it?

Yonder wrote:

You are the one that sounds ridiculous. First of all you are leaving out the
3. I can't afford a wheelchair.

Why do you need a wheelchair?

This woman is 91 years old and admits that she can't stand for long periods of time and you're really going to just cling to the assertion that she doesn't have access to a folding chair?

bandit0013 wrote:
Yonder wrote:

You are the one that sounds ridiculous. First of all you are leaving out the
3. I can't afford a wheelchair.

Why do you need a wheelchair?

So for her to be able vote in your world she has to pay, yet you don't see that as disenfranchisement.

We make all kinds of accommodations for people with special circumstances already in many other, far less critical, situations. I don't see any reason why we can't accommodate something like this in one way or another.

Dr.Ghastly wrote:
bandit0013 wrote:
Yonder wrote:

You are the one that sounds ridiculous. First of all you are leaving out the
3. I can't afford a wheelchair.

Why do you need a wheelchair?

So for her to be able vote in your world she has to pay, yet you don't see that as disenfranchisement.

How is she going to handle the line at the polling station? She doesn't have any neighbors who have a folding chair? Her son doesn't know anyone who has a folding chair? She knows she has a physical ailment and refuses to take any measure to accommodate it and that invalidates the entire voting process? My point is I find it pretty inane that a woman under those circumstances has no access to a chair, and if she doesn't, well, $5 will get her one, sounds like she could use one in other situations, because it's not like the BMV is the only place on earth with a line.

bandit0013 wrote:
Dr.Ghastly wrote:
bandit0013 wrote:
Yonder wrote:

You are the one that sounds ridiculous. First of all you are leaving out the
3. I can't afford a wheelchair.

Why do you need a wheelchair?

So for her to be able vote in your world she has to pay, yet you don't see that as disenfranchisement.

How is she going to handle the line at the polling station? She doesn't have any neighbors who have a folding chair? Her son doesn't know anyone who has a folding chair? She knows she has a physical ailment and refuses to take any measure to accommodate it and that invalidates the entire voting process? My point is I find it pretty inane that a woman under those circumstances has no access to a chair, and if she doesn't, well, $5 will get her one, sounds like she could use one in other situations, because it's not like the BMV is the only place on earth with a line.

It is, however, one of the few places that a son can't go for you, so that you can stay at home. Especially if you have given that son the power of attorney.

Yonder wrote:

It is, however, one of the few places that a son can't go for you, so that you can stay at home. Especially if you have given that son the power of attorney.

http://www.dmvnow.com/webdoc/general/news/news.asp?id=6434

In the future, DMV 2 Go Roanoke will be scheduling visits to assisted living facilities and retirement communities, businesses, university and college campuses, and military bases. It is already scheduled to provide services at the Roanoke Public Library, Salem Civic Center and Mount Empire College in Big Stone Gap this fall, just to name a few.

In my area in ohio there is a bus service that has wheelchair rental as well. And if your BMV is located at a mall (we have several like that) you can get a wheelchair at the mall. Either way, my point is this woman with a minimum of planning, especially since she has her son to help, can get through that line. It in no way invalidates voter id.

Come to think of it, my polling station doesn't have any chairs, you just stand in line.

bandit0013 wrote:
Stengah wrote:

No weaker than the case for requiring a voter ID.

Educate yourselves

A notorious recent case of absentee ballot fraud was Miami’s mayoral election of 1998, and in that case, the judge declared the election fraudulent and called for a new election.

But voter fraud never happens amiright? It's not as if elections have ever been overturned for it?

Requiring a voter ID would do nothing to combat absentee ballot fraud.

I can see where bandit is coming from. If she is aware that she can't handle standing for long periods, perhaps the onus is on her to be prepared in that situation.

There are reasons, though, why I think that's a poor idea. For one, we already make accommodations for people with disabilities and physical ailments in so many other situations that it would not be even remotely illogical for her to assume they would be able to accommodate her. Plus, in my opinion, in civilized society, where we should all respect one another's rights and situations, we ought to be providing such accommodnations.

NSMike wrote:

Plus, in my opinion, in civilized society, where we should all respect one another's rights and situations, we ought to be providing such accommodnations.

This. Is it really that difficult to help an old lady out?

NSMike wrote:

I can see where bandit is coming from. If she is aware that she can't handle standing for long periods, perhaps the onus is on her to be prepared in that situation.

There are reasons, though, why I think that's a poor idea. For one, we already make accommodations for people with disabilities and physical ailments in so many other situations that it would not be even remotely illogical for her to assume they would be able to accommodate her. Plus, in my opinion, in civilized society, where we should all respect one another's rights and situations, we ought to be providing such accommodnations.

I agree we should help the lady out, however we do that by having wheelchair ramps etc. It is unreasonable for every agency to have to have spare wheelchairs laying around just in case someone like her comes in. It is perfectly reasonable to have access ramps, etc however.

I'm not even necessarily proposing something that complex, though, bandit. Most polling places are schools. Most schools have loads of folding chairs, and it would take very little to have some set aside with a sign on them like you see in a subway, where those seats are reserved or should be relinquished to the elderly or infirmed.

Exactly, how hard is it to provide a chair and a spot in the line?

I'd rather have my vote cancelled out by someone voting the other way committing voter fraud than have my vote cancelled out because someone who was going to vote the same way I did didn't get to legitimately vote because of voter ID laws.

gregrampage wrote:

Exactly, how hard is it to provide a chair and a spot in the line?

I wager there were chairs that other people were sitting in. I don't think I've ever been in a bmv that didn't have a few chairs off to the side

bandit0013 wrote:
gregrampage wrote:

Exactly, how hard is it to provide a chair and a spot in the line?

I wager there were chairs that other people were sitting in. I don't think I've ever been in a bmv that didn't have a few chairs off to the side

Yeah, you're right, according to the article. So I change my question, how hard is it for an employee to ask "Will anyone give up their seat for this woman?" According to the article, they said "there's nothing we can do."

And even here, bandit, when we're showing you a concrete example of a good woman who's being prevented from voting because of advanced age, you still cling to the idea that this is somehow a good idea.

The purpose of these rules is to disenfranchise people like this woman, the marginal members of society, the ones that can't easily conform to the conservative ideal of how to live one's life.

Malor wrote:

And even here, bandit, when we're showing you a concrete example of a good woman who's being prevented from voting because of advanced age, you still cling to the idea that this is somehow a good idea.

The purpose of these rules is to disenfranchise people like this woman, the marginal members of society, the ones that can't easily conform to the conservative ideal of how to live one's life.

Yes, I'm aware that in your world there is a dimly lit room where a bunch of evil rich guys say "hey, you know what we need to do? stop 91 yr old women who can't stand in a line from voting. Make it so my minions"

gregrampage wrote:
bandit0013 wrote:
gregrampage wrote:

Exactly, how hard is it to provide a chair and a spot in the line?

I wager there were chairs that other people were sitting in. I don't think I've ever been in a bmv that didn't have a few chairs off to the side

Yeah, you're right, according to the article. So I change my question, how hard is it for an employee to ask "Will anyone give up their seat for this woman?" According to the article, they said "there's nothing we can do."

Do they have the power to actually force someone to give up their seat? If you were a clerk behind the counter how would you handle it if the seats were taken? How would you handle it if you asked and no one volunteered?

bandit0013 wrote:
Malor wrote:

And even here, bandit, when we're showing you a concrete example of a good woman who's being prevented from voting because of advanced age, you still cling to the idea that this is somehow a good idea.

The purpose of these rules is to disenfranchise people like this woman, the marginal members of society, the ones that can't easily conform to the conservative ideal of how to live one's life.

Yes, I'm aware that in your world there is a dimly lit room where a bunch of evil rich guys say "hey, you know what we need to do? stop 91 yr old women who can't stand in a line from voting. Make it so my minions"

And in your world there's a cabal of illegal immigrants with a diabolical plan to somehow undermine our country by voting illegally in such small numbers as to be statistically insignificant.

Most of your examples of voter fraud were cases of actual fraud. Requiring a person to show a card to get into the voting booth would not have prevented them from occurring. They would not prevent the corrupt poll-worker from stuffing the ballot box, fraudulent absentee ballots, or someone installing vote switching software on a voting machine. All a voter ID would prevent is someone the people who vote when they aren't allowed to (illegal immigrants, college students who aren't residents of the state they vote in, people who live in the area but are non-citizens). It's an admirable goal, but the cost to implement it is far worse than the cost illegal voters actually cost us.

bandit0013 wrote:
gregrampage wrote:
bandit0013 wrote:
gregrampage wrote:

Exactly, how hard is it to provide a chair and a spot in the line?

I wager there were chairs that other people were sitting in. I don't think I've ever been in a bmv that didn't have a few chairs off to the side

Yeah, you're right, according to the article. So I change my question, how hard is it for an employee to ask "Will anyone give up their seat for this woman?" According to the article, they said "there's nothing we can do."

Do they have the power to actually force someone to give up their seat? If you were a clerk behind the counter how would you handle it if the seats were taken? How would you handle it if you asked and no one volunteered?

I would have asked for a volunteer first, then force one of the employees to give up their seat, or to go search the damn building for a chair for her to use.

Stengah wrote:
bandit0013 wrote:
gregrampage wrote:
bandit0013 wrote:
gregrampage wrote:

Exactly, how hard is it to provide a chair and a spot in the line?

I wager there were chairs that other people were sitting in. I don't think I've ever been in a bmv that didn't have a few chairs off to the side

Yeah, you're right, according to the article. So I change my question, how hard is it for an employee to ask "Will anyone give up their seat for this woman?" According to the article, they said "there's nothing we can do."

Do they have the power to actually force someone to give up their seat? If you were a clerk behind the counter how would you handle it if the seats were taken? How would you handle it if you asked and no one volunteered?

I would have asked for a volunteer first, then force one of the employees to give up their seat, or to go search the damn building for a chair for her to use.

More or less what I was going to say. If no one will give up a seat and there are no other options...ok. At least an attempt was made and she wasn't just turned away with "there's nothing we can do." The actual odds of a room full of people not giving up a single chair for a 91 year old who can't stand are so small that I'm not really worried about that situation anyway.

Or she could just submit an absentee ballot. Or she could have, before the system got allegedly fixed to deal with the supposed problem.

Right, there's no benefit to doing this; there is no real evil that's being fixed. The ACTUAL impact is that marginal people can't vote, and that's the deliberate plan. Democrats do better when non-mainstream people can get to the polls, so the Republicans are doing their damndest to make sure they can't.

That's what this is really about. Everything else is noise.

Even before we get to the voterID thing, this is a problem.

According to the Americans With Disabilities act, as a government accommodation subject to Title II, the BMV has to follow the most stringent interpretations of the ADA and provide her whatever assistance she requires, even to actually having a staffer assist her personally to get the job done if they didn't have the physical setup to help her. All she should have had to do was ask.

To quote their website:
Complaints of title II violations may be filed with the Department of Justice within 180 days of the date of discrimination. In certain situations, cases may be referred to a mediation program sponsored by the Department. The Department may bring a lawsuit where it has investigated a matter and has been unable to resolve violations. For more information, contact:

U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Rights Division
950 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Disability Rights Section - NYAV
Washington, D.C. 20530

I hope her son finds a competent lawyer and helps her report this.

bandit0013 wrote:
Malor wrote:

And even here, bandit, when we're showing you a concrete example of a good woman who's being prevented from voting because of advanced age, you still cling to the idea that this is somehow a good idea.

The purpose of these rules is to disenfranchise people like this woman, the marginal members of society, the ones that can't easily conform to the conservative ideal of how to live one's life.

Yes, I'm aware that in your world there is a dimly lit room where a bunch of evil rich guys say "hey, you know what we need to do? stop 91 yr old women who can't stand in a line from voting. Make it so my minions"

Well, except for the fact that (as discussed in the "GOP War on Voting" thread), some of them have been caught saying things awfully close to that.

Meanwhile, the studies available show the kind of voter fraud ID laws would prevent occur at statistically-nonexistent levels. As discussed in the War on Voting thread and elsewhere, a 2004 Ohio study showed voter fraud like that was 0.00004%. An investigation into allegations of Wisconsin vote fraud (warning, PDF) found that mistakes and fraud by election workers were a far more significant risk.

Here's the crux of the matter for me. Any services provided by the government have a cost of either money, liberty, or both. Reasonable people can draw the line for acceptable cost/benefit tradeoffs in different places - for example, the extreme premium Libertarians place on liberty means they're unhappy with many government services I view as essential. Compulsory nationalized ID cards would require sacrificing money and liberty for benefits which seem speculative at best.

[Edit to fix parentheses, and replace payment with cost]