Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
What state? Here in Ohio, drivers' road tests are given by law enforcement officers. State troopers or county sheriff deputies.Who rode with you when you took your driver's test?You are ignoring a significant factor here. Most DMVs have cops on duty. And if somebody has an arrest warrant for even the most minor technical law violations, when they attempt to get or renew thier drivers license or state ID they could end up being arrested, and thrown in jail, and shoved in a cage with some psychotic murderer in the county jail.Really, what is the problem? You go down to the DMV or County Clerk’s Office or whatever set up your local town or hamlet has and get a photographic ID made so the poll workers can verify your sacred vote is cast by no one other than yourself. As long as there is no charge for the ID, there cannot be a serious allegation made that this is an undue burden to the person who wishes to vote.
I've never been in a DMV with a police officer on duty.
The DMV employee.
The problem with photo IDs is that there are lawfully registered voters who can’t obtain one.There is nothing wrong with photo ID in the least. The question usually revolves around what kind of photo ID is acceptable. Why in some states is a concealed gun permit acceptable but not a student ID from an accredited university?
The bigger concern is the closing of polling stations.
What state? Here in Ohio, drivers' road tests are given by law enforcement officers. State troopers or county sheriff deputies.Who rode with you when you took your driver's test?You are ignoring a significant factor here. Most DMVs have cops on duty. And if somebody has an arrest warrant for even the most minor technical law violations, when they attempt to get or renew thier drivers license or state ID they could end up being arrested, and thrown in jail, and shoved in a cage with some psychotic murderer in the county jail.Really, what is the problem? You go down to the DMV or County Clerk’s Office or whatever set up your local town or hamlet has and get a photographic ID made so the poll workers can verify your sacred vote is cast by no one other than yourself. As long as there is no charge for the ID, there cannot be a serious allegation made that this is an undue burden to the person who wishes to vote.
I've never been in a DMV with a police officer on duty.
The DMV employee.
There is that. I'm sure that most can be grandfathered in and a 70 y/o man won't have to get his birth certificate or what have you if he has no drivers licenses.“Really, what is the problem?”
The problem is that there are registered voters – citizens who have been voting consistently for decades – who lack the documentation required to obtain a photo ID.
Again, I'm sure that most can be grandfathered in. And I'm sure most already have a photo ID for other uses such as a drivers license.The problem is that when one registers to vote for the first time in a new jurisdiction, he’s required to provide a photo ID. As long as a citizen remains active and current on the registration rolls, there’s no need for the voter to continue to provide a photo ID.
Fraud? There is intentional fraud to vote several times and then there are simple mistakes that are made. People being allowed to vote for measures that don't affect them for example. Updating he voter rolls would help eliminate that.The problem is that voter ‘fraud’ by false identification is virtually non-existent to the extent that the requirements to obtain and provide a photo ID are not justified – particularly when it prohibits a lawfully registered voter from voting.
That is an opinion. If you can't muster the wherewithal to vote every 2 years or whatever...its because you aren't willing. There is no undue burden being placed on individuals.The problem is that voter ID laws are enacted in bad faith – seeking to suppress votes rather than prevent non-existent ‘fraud.’
Of all of the "over reach" in our governments, election security is a shocking under reach.The problem is that it’s a manifestation of government excess and overreach – the enactment of unwarranted laws that do nothing but increase the size and authority of the state at the expense of the right to vote. In order for government to lawfully place limits and restrictions on citizens’ rights, it must do so based on objective, documented evidence in support of those limits and restrictions; voter ID laws are devoid of justifying evidence.
No. That is nonsense.And the problem is that voter ID laws are predicated on a presumption of guilt; if elections officials suspect a voter is attempting to engage in fraud, that needs to be addressed on a case-by-case basis, not compel the voting public as a whole to ‘prove’ they’re not attempting to commit ‘fraud.’
Voting is a fundamental right – immune from attack by government motivated by capricious partisanism and baseless fears of ‘fraud.’
There is nothing wrong with photo ID in the least. The question usually revolves around what kind of photo ID is acceptable. Why in some states is a concealed gun permit acceptable but not a student ID from an accredited university?
The bigger concern is the closing of polling stations.
Your point is taken. That is why if you are going to require photo ID the list of acceptable ID should be expanded. There should be exceptions for those that cannot obtain photo ids provided they are reliable enough to verify your identity.The problem with photo IDs is that there are lawfully registered voters who can’t obtain one.There is nothing wrong with photo ID in the least. The question usually revolves around what kind of photo ID is acceptable. Why in some states is a concealed gun permit acceptable but not a student ID from an accredited university?
The bigger concern is the closing of polling stations.
For those concerned with non-existent voter ‘fraud,’ it would be appropriate to require voters to identify themselves with a paycheck stub, utility bill, or property tax document.
A nationwide voter ID card would never get approved as it would be analogous to a national ID card that many conservative groups in particular would oppose.There is nothing wrong with photo ID in the least. The question usually revolves around what kind of photo ID is acceptable. Why in some states is a concealed gun permit acceptable but not a student ID from an accredited university?
The bigger concern is the closing of polling stations.
The nationwide-standardized voting ID card would fix a lot of that.
What's the problem? This is nothing more than a way to divide people. If states wanted to enact this they could have long ago. Everyone that votes has to register to vote. You give them a photo I.D. when they register. When you go to renew your D.L. you give people a voters I.D. Before long the vast majority of people would have one.
Why is it not done? Then it wouldn't be a wedge issue. Nothing is actually ever done about many wedge issues. Abortion, guns, immigration and this.
The question is asked "why don't we". The only reason we don't is because we don't.
What's the problem? This is nothing more than a way to divide people. If states wanted to enact this they could have long ago. Everyone that votes has to register to vote. You give them a photo I.D. when they register. When you go to renew your D.L. you give people a voters I.D. Before long the vast majority of people would have one.
Why is it not done? Then it wouldn't be a wedge issue. Nothing is actually ever done about many wedge issues. Abortion, guns, immigration and this.
The question is asked "why don't we". The only reason we don't is because we don't.
Just simply take your passport in. If you don't have one, simply apply for one.
In the UK, we have driving licences with your picture and the same with passports. Why would anyone get their knickers in a twist over some kind of photo ID is rather strange. You need ID for thousands of reasons, why so uptight over voting?
You are absolutely correct about voter fraud. Voter fraud is a fraud. I’ll have to rethink my photo ID position as you right about the disenfranchisement of those unable to obtain photo ID.“Extensive research reveals that fraud is very rare. Yet repeated, false allegations of fraud can make it harder for millions of eligible Americans to participate in elections.”
The Myth of Voter Fraud
Extensive research reveals that fraud is very rare. Yet repeated, false allegations of fraud can make it harder for millions of eligible Americans to participate in elections.www.brennancenter.org
And yet Republican lawmakers and most on the right ignore that research, enacting measures such as photo ID laws that indeed make it harder for millions of eligible Americans to participate in elections.
How ‘easy’ it might be to obtain a photo ID misses the point.I just renewed my husband DL online. All I needed was his DL. Next time he has to go in to have his eyes checked and to renew his picture, every 8th year you have to go back in , in MI.
I also got a duplicate DL, we have to show our voters ID and also the DL ID or state ID when we go to the polls.
Now we have NO EXCUSE absentee ballots and for that you have to have (which people voted on):
To use this website, you need to be registered to vote in Michigan and have a valid Michigan driver’s license or state ID. If you need to register to vote, click on "Registering To Vote." If you don’t have a Michigan driver’s license or state ID but you are registered to vote, click on "Absentee Voting" for more information on how you can apply for an absent voter ballot.
and you have to register to vote:
Some clerk’s offices have opened satellite offices for voter registration. You must show proof of where you live. Documents must have your name and current address. You can show a digital copy of any document. Acceptable documents include:
Michigan driver’s license or State ID card
Current utility bill
Bank statement
Paycheck or government check
Other government document
After registering, you can vote an absent voter ballot at the clerk’s office or you can vote at your polling place on Election Day.
Military and overseas civilian voters have additional options to register. For more information, visit this page.
__________________________________-
I pretty much think all states are like this.
It takes a hell of a lot more people and time to process mail in ballots. Your argument is a weak and contrived attempt, used to manipulate elections.Bring that photo ID with you to the polls unless you're out of state due to work. There's no other reason to vote by mail.
There is no reason to insist on in-person voting. Especially since the voting apparatus is severely understaffed.
Are you a "person of color"? Am I a "person of color"? If not, how do I become a "person of color"?persons of color
A signature has worked for hundreds of years.Really, what is the problem? You go down to the DMV or County Clerk’s Office or whatever set up your local town or hamlet has and get a photographic ID made so the poll workers can verify your sacred vote is cast by no one other than yourself. As long as there is no charge for the ID, there cannot be a serious allegation made that this is an undue burden to the person who wishes to vote. Nor, as long as it is made available to any and all who wish to seek to register for the picture ID, can one seriously contend that this is some form of voter suppression. I may listen to an argument about forcing someone to do it every year but once every 2-4 years doesn't seem like too much of an imposition to me.
Now, for the record, I’m fully in favor of having federal laws that require states to provide absentee voting prior to the official election day –the Tuesday after the first Monday in November—for at least a week. Voting by mail has been done for nearly 100 years without any issues. Those who think this is a portal to fraud are just not thinking it through. Even more heinous is the position that you have to have a “good reason” to vote absentee; as if it is some sort of business of the State why you feel more comfortable about voting from your living room as opposed to going to the local school house. I am also for standardization of the voting devices as well as the picture ID I sponsored in the first paragraph. Meaning that someone from Peoria who happens to be in Pittsburgh and wishes to vote simply goes to the polling place, swipes their standard uniform voter ID card into the uniform and standardized voting device and their local ballot from Peoria comes up on the screen. They make their selections and go about their merry way just as they would do in person at their high school or fire department.
The resistance to having an ID to vote comes mainly from the left of which I’m a member in good standing in most of the online tests I have taken. I’m for a woman’s right to privacy, oppose Trump, am in favor or equal pay for equal work, am for raising the minimum wage incrementally to $10.00 an hour, am against separating families at the border except as a last resort, support the ACA, etc… However, on this topic, I have to call BS on those who think obtaining a picture ID card to vote is an undue burden or, more troubling, is unnecessary. I covered the “undue burden” argument already. As for the argument that it is not necessary, one should consider that every two years, there are a lot of local initiatives on the same ballot as the federal offices. These “down ballot” races do not get a lot of attention nationally and in some cases even locally. Raising the local tax rate or allowing the City or State to have more power can affect your family for decades. Wouldn’t you want the vote for such laws and ordinances to be of persons from your locality or State? And this is just the bi-annual elections. What about off year and primary races where the turnout is in the hundreds and a few votes cast inaccurately (either by accident or on purpose) can sway who the nominee becomes? Thinking it is unnecessary and reality are two different things.
Whatsmore is this; if we have the tools for accuracy….why not just make it as accurate as possible? It seems like a no-brainer to me.
Why bother voting? It clearly makes no difference.There is that. I'm sure that most can be grandfathered in and a 70 y/o man won't have to get his birth certificate or what have you if he has no drivers licenses.“Really, what is the problem?”
The problem is that there are registered voters – citizens who have been voting consistently for decades – who lack the documentation required to obtain a photo ID.
Again, I'm sure that most can be grandfathered in. And I'm sure most already have a photo ID for other uses such as a drivers license.The problem is that when one registers to vote for the first time in a new jurisdiction, he’s required to provide a photo ID. As long as a citizen remains active and current on the registration rolls, there’s no need for the voter to continue to provide a photo ID.
Fraud? There is intentional fraud to vote several times and then there are simple mistakes that are made. People being allowed to vote for measures that don't affect them for example. Updating he voter rolls would help eliminate that.The problem is that voter ‘fraud’ by false identification is virtually non-existent to the extent that the requirements to obtain and provide a photo ID are not justified – particularly when it prohibits a lawfully registered voter from voting.
That is an opinion. If you can't muster the wherewithal to vote every 2 years or whatever...its because you aren't willing. There is no undue burden being placed on individuals.The problem is that voter ID laws are enacted in bad faith – seeking to suppress votes rather than prevent non-existent ‘fraud.’
Of all of the "over reach" in our governments, election security is a shocking under reach.The problem is that it’s a manifestation of government excess and overreach – the enactment of unwarranted laws that do nothing but increase the size and authority of the state at the expense of the right to vote. In order for government to lawfully place limits and restrictions on citizens’ rights, it must do so based on objective, documented evidence in support of those limits and restrictions; voter ID laws are devoid of justifying evidence.
No. That is nonsense.And the problem is that voter ID laws are predicated on a presumption of guilt; if elections officials suspect a voter is attempting to engage in fraud, that needs to be addressed on a case-by-case basis, not compel the voting public as a whole to ‘prove’ they’re not attempting to commit ‘fraud.’
Voting is a fundamental right – immune from attack by government motivated by capricious partisanism and baseless fears of ‘fraud.’
All persons voting would be required to provide the same ID. There is no partisanship on this issue. If a Party is reliant upon non-motivated persons...that is their problem.
