| >The Texas Election Identification Certificate ID is free. Which itself requires ID to acquire defeating its purpose as an alternative ID for people without ID. >Wrong. Military and veteran IDs are federal IDs that are free of charge. I was referring to the IDs available to the general public. A military ID being free is irrelevant to a huge majority of the US. >They wouldn't have been allowed to vote under the previous system either. This is a red herring. How is that a red herring? A flaw existing in both the old and new system doesn't mean it isn't a flaw. Do you think disenfranchising homeless people is acceptable? >There is no "further scrutiny". You either have the documentation that proves your eligibility to vote in your locality, or you don't. Studies showed that Voter ID laws have little to no effect on turn out. It takes added time and requires further documentation. The time it takes to vote has been shown to have an impact on voter turnout. Also I don't know what studies you are talking about. Here is one from a nonpartisan Government Accountability Office that says the exact opposite[1]. Your other points all rely on something refuted in the above points. [1]- https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/10/09/ga... |
You need documentation to prove you're eligible to vote in your locality in order to be able to vote in your locality. The is the same logic behind any type of identification/registration, Voter ID or not.
>I was referring to the IDs available to the general public. A military ID being free is irrelevant to a huge majority of the US.
You specifically stated "all the federal IDs require money", which is patently false, QED.
>How is that a red herring? A flaw existing in both the old and new system doesn't mean it isn't a flaw. Do you think disenfranchising homeless people is acceptable?
It is by definition a red herring because being a flaw or not is immaterial to the discussion at hand since it is not specific to Voter ID laws. You asking the question is a textbook logical fallacy.
>It takes added time and requires further documentation. The time it takes to vote has been shown to have an impact on voter turnout.
Sometimes it takes time to leverage your rights. Gun background checks is an example of that, as are voter ID laws. There is no conclusive study that has shown voter ID laws impact turnout.
> Also I don't know what studies you are talking about. Here is one from a nonpartisan Government Accountability Office that says the exact opposite
You linked a piece from a laughably biased news source. It even states opposite of your claim: "That change wasn't entirely due to voter ID, of course, but the GAO report suggests it played a part."
"In a 2014 review by the Government Accountability Office of the academic literature, five studies out of ten found that voter ID laws had no significant effect on overall turnout, four studies found that voter ID laws decreased overall turnout, and one study found that the laws increased overall turnout."
"Studies of the effects of voter ID laws on turnout in the United States have generally found that such laws have little, if any, effect on turnout."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_ID_laws_in_the_United_...