The GOP war on voting

[Gaspar]

Except you need a photo ID for many other reasons, voting being a small portion of it:

Flying, bank transactions, using a credit or debit card (that's pretty inconsistent), cashing a personal or third party check, opening a bank account, getting government assistance, and many other things I'm not even considering.

And, I agree, make the ID's free if you are going to require them for ANY government-related function

By law, the government can not require you to purchase something, and or penalize you for not doing so.  So if an ID is required to vote, it must be provided free of cost.

The liberal argument is that the energy or effort necessary to obtain a photo ID is to great and constitutes a burden or poll tax.  This is a silly argument because the act of transporting yourself to the polling place, acquiring an absentee ballot, reporting for jury duty (also requires an ID) or any other function of participation in self governance, takes no lesser amount of effort, and in most cases degree of documentation.

When you argue this point liberals come back with the "well, some people don't want identification, or don't trust the government, and they shouldn't be forced to."  Unfortunately there is a tiny price to pay to live in a free society.  As a Libertarian, I am of the opinion that you mitigate infringement on individual liberty as much as possible, so I can identify with this concern; However, from a Liberal, it is ingenuous, because liberals believe in acts of resource redistribution "for the greater good."  So, to argue that it would be fair for the government to require labor or resources from an individual to promote the greater good in one area, but it would not be fair to require a far smaller degree of labor or resources to promote the greater good in another is a logical conundrum.

[Conan71]

By law, the government can not require you to purchase something, and or penalize you for not doing so.  

No, but apparently they can impose a tax on you if you don't purchase a certain something.

[Hoss]

Except you need a photo ID for many other reasons, voting being a small portion of it:

Flying, bank transactions, using a credit or debit card (that's pretty inconsistent), cashing a personal or third party check, opening a bank account, getting government assistance, and many other things I'm not even considering.

And, I agree, make the ID's free if you are going to require them for ANY government-related function

And just to clarify...I don't mind paying for a DL or ID issued by the state.  I understand it's a revenue generator and the larger cost of the DL is for the privilege of driving.

However, if you are going to start legislating that you need a photo ID to vote, then issue a photo ID voter registration card.  Wouldn't that be a better solution?  I'm sure it would be more costly in the long run, but sometimes you have to compromise to make most happy.  I see this as that compromise.

[Townsend]

However, if you are going to start legislating that you need a photo ID to vote, then issue a photo ID voter registration card.  Wouldn't that be a better solution?  I'm sure it would be more costly in the long run, but sometimes you have to compromise to make most happy.  I see this as that compromise.

That's when the massive liberal fake voter photo ID business would blow the hell up.  You realize this don't you man?  For God's sake, we've got to protect the wealthy and all that stuff there...

[Hoss]

That's when the massive liberal fake voter photo ID business would blow the hell up.  You realize this don't you man?  For God's sake, we've got to protect the wealthy and all that stuff there...

Maybe we should just start tattooing barcodes on our forearms?

Or on the back of the neck?

[Townsend]

Maybe we should just start tattooing barcodes on our forearms?

Or on the back of the neck?

Then the whole anti-Christ thing pops up and suddenly we've got Pat Robertson running for president again.

[Hoss]

Then the whole anti-Christ thing pops up and suddenly we've got Pat Robertson running for president again.

I'm betting they'd have to install a wider-than-normal bathroom stall in the West Wing then...

[Townsend]

I'm betting they'd have to install a wider-than-normal bathroom stall in the West Wing then...

Not an issue:

Did you know that Pat Robertson, through rigorous training, leg-pressed 2,000 pounds!

http://www.cbn.com/communitypublic/shake.aspx

He poops bigger'an you.

[Conan71]

And just to clarify...I don't mind paying for a DL or ID issued by the state.  I understand it's a revenue generator and the larger cost of the DL is for the privilege of driving.

However, if you are going to start legislating that you need a photo ID to vote, then issue a photo ID voter registration card.  Wouldn't that be a better solution?  I'm sure it would be more costly in the long run, but sometimes you have to compromise to make most happy.  I see this as that compromise.

100% agreement.

[Gaspar]

And just to clarify...I don't mind paying for a DL or ID issued by the state.  I understand it's a revenue generator and the larger cost of the DL is for the privilege of driving.

However, if you are going to start legislating that you need a photo ID to vote, then issue a photo ID voter registration card.  Wouldn't that be a better solution?  I'm sure it would be more costly in the long run, but sometimes you have to compromise to make most happy.  I see this as that compromise.

Good!  A solution we all agree on.  Excellent compromise.

[nathanm]

As a Libertarian, I am of the opinion that you mitigate infringement on individual liberty as much as possible, so I can identify with this concern; However, from a Liberal, it is ingenuous, because liberals believe in acts of resource redistribution "for the greater good."  So, to argue that it would be fair for the government to require labor or resources from an individual to promote the greater good in one area, but it would not be fair to require a far smaller degree of labor or resources to promote the greater good in another is a logical conundrum.

You know what's awesome? When you talk about "liberals" and what they're like when it's clear you don't know a damn thing about anything but the caricatures you read about.

[Gaspar]

You know what's awesome? When you talk about "liberals" and what they're like when it's clear you don't know a damn thing about anything but the caricatures you read about.

Do you believe in resource redistribution?

[nathanm]

Do you believe in resource redistribution?

Do you believe that someone's right to vote depends on their possession of a certain piece of paper rather than their merely being an eligible voter?

[Gaspar]

Do you believe that someone's right to vote depends on their possession of a certain piece of paper rather than their merely being an eligible voter?

Excellent mis-direction.  Define "éligible voter."

[nathanm]

Define "éeligible voter."

Someone who meets the requirements set out in state law to be legally registered to vote. If you actually believed what you say about libertarianism, you wouldn't fall in line with the Republicans every time they try to restrict the people's rights. Libertarianism and modern Republican policy are not compatible, unless your conception of libertarianism is solely driven by taxes.