This thread is either ignoring the actual discussion that is going on in this nation, or is purposly distorting the actual elements of the discussion.
No political group is actually proposing that people should be able to walk into a voting location and based on oral identification only, be given a ballot.
That is how it is today.
It wasn't "proposed." It "just happened."
Require that people bring their card showing that they registered to vote if you like. Some states have made registration dependent on the potential voter bringing a utility bill or some other (rather flimsy) proof of where you live. (For local elections, it is important to prove you are in the correct precinct or ward.)
The whole fight is about states that require PHOTO ID and then narrow down very strictly which photos may be used.
That's hardly "the whole fight."
That might be where most of the discussion takes place, and most of the boogeyman-creating goes on.
Let's lay the cards... on the table... FACE UP. To the best of my knowledge, this "photo required" is ONLY enacted in states where Republicans have control of the legislature and the governor.
Does that mean it can't be discussed anywhere else?
The reason Democrats get so very picky and childish about this issue is because anecdotal evidence indicates that on election day,
or during the two weeks of early voting in many places?
people manning the poling place will then also get picky about "what is an acceptable photo" and if Republicans dominate the local apparatus, when there is an appeal that somewone was wrongly denied the opportunity to vote, the appeal mechanism is also stacked.
And they aren't already stacked in places where Democrats dominate the local apparatus?
They aren't prone to accepting anyone's word about their name and address? No one's heard "You already voted, Mr. Kimball" anywhere?
It's only a "Republican-control phenomenon?"
Someone suggested that the states should make a photo generating system to assist those who do not have, need or qualify for a drivers licesne In states where the photo ID laws are put in place and aggressively enforced, there are reports the the state provided photo creating mechanism mysteriously and consistently breaks down and doesn't show up where it is supposed to be.
What states has this been done in, in order for reports about mysterious, consistent breakdowns to occur?
For most of America, this whole discussion seems like a non-issue, not worthy of all the heat and attention. Many of us vote in comfortable, stable neighborhoods where voters and election workers greet each other by first name. We have trouble visualizing what may be happening to refuse and discourage voters three counties over from us.
We forget there are little old widows who either walk to work or ride the bus,
Nobody forgets that. Give the little old widows in the small demographic some credit. They're not invalid, feeble, incapable.
and spend their days washing butts and mopping floors in nursing homes who cannot get to picture taking locations during business hours unless they take a day off from work and find someone who can drive them to the picture loction. (How many drivers license branches are located along bus routes?)
How many really, in the course of a move to a new precinct, or whatever job situation they might find themselves in, cannot get to a DMV bureau, or other location? How many could not call up their party headquarters, and have someone drive them down, even?
Why excuse their inaction, just because you fear they are being "forgotten?" They're not forgotten, at all.
If they wash butts and mop floors in a nursing home, odds are they went through some background checks that required them to be some other place at some other time other than a day when they were washing butts or mopping floors in order for them to start work. You have to show some kind of ID when you do a drug test, the ones I've been to.
This is a legitimate discussion that is going to be noisy for some time yet.
It would be a lot easier if the cards on the table reflected more bits of reality, and less conjecture in the name of personal "compassion."