SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The Daily Northwestern reports
The Illinois Senate voted 38-18 on [November 16] to override Gov. Bruce Rauner's veto of an automatic voter registration bill.
The bill [...] would automatically register voters who are seeking a new or updated license, or who are seeking other services from state departments such as Human Services or Healthcare and Family Services.
[...]The only two things a citizen should need to vote is being 18 years old and a citizen.
[...]The bill received bipartisan support when it passed through the House by a vote of 86-30 and the Senate with a vote of 42-16.
[...]To fully override Rauner's veto, the Illinois House will also have to vote to override, but it will not back in session until Nov. 29.
More information on Automatic Voter Registration can be found here.
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Sunday November 20 2016, @07:12PM
But the name on my Connecticut license is the same as the one on the official list of registered voters, so you're going to have to find some other straw man.
As I said, the ID laws themselves are not the problem so much as the suite of other voter-suppression laws that always accompany them.
Don't take it from me, ask someone who's actually passed some voter ID laws:
Georgia:
https://thinkprogress.org/georgia-state-senator-complains-that-voting-is-too-convenient-for-black-people-updated-a040b94bf160#.v5odiprc2 [thinkprogress.org]
Ohio:
https://www.thenation.com/article/ohio-gop-admits-early-voting-cutbacks-are-racially-motivated/ [thenation.com]
Florida:
http://www.cc.com/video-clips/dxhtvk/the-daily-show-with-jon-stewart-suppressing-the-vote [cc.com]
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday November 20 2016, @09:19PM
But the name on my Connecticut license is the same as the one on the official list of registered voters, so you're going to have to find some other straw man.
Again, I have to agree with the other poster here -- you seem to be deliberately obtuse here. I offered a number of reasons why Texas might not want to deal with accepting out-of-state licenses as official ID (viz., less familiarity of poll officials with them, more training or resources required to verify their validity -- I've been to at least one DMV where I had moved, and I noticed the clerk consulted a list of licenses from other states with photos to verify mine looked valid, or perhaps because there's not really a strong residency requirement in voter registration otherwise...), but you choose not to debate those, instead just calling this a "straw man," even though I explcitly and repeated have said I think such a policy of denying out-of-state licenses is "annoying and stupid."
Why would I be employing a "straw man" to try to speculate on the justification for a policy I don't even agree with?!? I'm just pointing out the clear and obvious criteria behind the system.
None of this changes the fact that Texas clearly has its standards for IDs (which are posted clearly at the link), and you showed up without any of the satisfactory ones. Deal with it.
As I said, the ID laws themselves are not the problem so much as the suite of other voter-suppression laws that always accompany them.
So this whole discussion was about nothing then? The voter ID laws "are not the problem"? I thought it was the fact they wouldn't take your faculty cards or student ID cards or working class "work IDs," but yet have the "interesting" feature of accepting gun registration ID?? That is a litany of groups of "liberal" voters whose votes you implied were being suppressed, while the gun-toting (presumably conservative) folks walk right through the line.
Sorry, professor, but your argumentation strategy was clear at the outset, and now you've completely changed your tune.
I should also qualify that I am definitely NOT a "conservative" by any stretch of the word (and have repeatedly noted my objection to overly restrictive laws), but I cannot stand poor argumentation. This sort of faulty logic is what gives liberals a bad name.
Anyhow, I'm done with this, but I'll leave you with a final anecdote:
Back when I was a college student, I needed to get some cash quickly one day. Although it wasn't ideal, the easiest way for me to do it was to take out a cash advance on a credit card (which I held jointly with my parents back then). I went to the closest bank, and they requested current photo ID.
Here's where it gets a bit weird. So, back then, my state actually would issue drivers licenses that said "VALID WITHOUT PHOTO" with no photo if you were absent from the state temporarily and couldn't come in to get a photo taken at the DMV for your renewal. My license was still where my parents lived (since I didn't drive while I was in college), and I was surprised when I received one of these photo-less licenses upon renewal in the mail. I think there was some instruction to carry your previous license with you to verify ID if needed.
So, I handed the bank teller my current license with VALID WITHOUT PHOTO on it, as well as my old expired license, which had my photo. She couldn't accept this -- they needed a current photo ID. So, I said, okay -- here's my student ID with my photo. (I'll note at this point that the bank in question was actually located within the student center of the university in question.) Nope, sorry. I started pulling out other credit cards and other stuff with my name on it... no dice. I was most disturbed by the fact that they wouldn't accept my bank card with my name on it that had actually be issued by that bank (though when it had a different name before a merger; I had since closed my account). Nope -- the bank card wasn't valid anymore AND it had no photo.
Finally, I ended up trekking back to my dorm room and returning with my passport 30 minutes later -- luckily I had a passport to be able to use. And this was just for a (relatively small) cash advance on a credit card.
I was annoyed about the whole experience that day, but they had their policies and rules to prevent fraud, and they had some logic behind them (even if I didn't agree with it). I really don't think they were trying deliberately to "suppress" my ability to get a cash advance.
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Sunday November 20 2016, @09:56PM
Yes, that was my original comment here. You're the one who went off about how Texas election officials aren't smart enough to see that a drivers license from another state, all of which have holographic fraud protection is really a drivers license.
My drivers license has a photo on it, but nice try to make some false equivalence.
And I still haven't heard a word about why states that have these voter suppression laws don't restrict absentee ballots.
Banks have evidence of people trying to commit bank fraud. There are still no meaningful statistics that show voter fraud.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by AthanasiusKircher on Sunday November 20 2016, @11:25PM
I'm truly sorry that you can't understand logical argumentation and can't seem to see how you have switched argumentation strategies repeatedly. I understand that you don't agree with the system, but your failure to recognize that it has a very logical and clear set of criteria baffles me. And the fact that you could not understand my anecdote as simply a story about how bureaucratic ID laws can fail in edge cases, but rather claimed that I was attempting to make "false equivalence" -- that also baffles me. I have tried repeatedly to put forth "olive branches" of agreement -- in hopes that we might come to a common understanding. But to no avail. In the process, I may have occasionally been a bit forceful in my argument, and I do apologize for any part I played in escalating the rhetoric.
I've never before been deliberately insulting to another poster on this site. However, as one academic to another, in this case, I'm actually a bit relieved to find out that you're "semi-retired" from teaching at colleges... I hope you move that to full retirement as soon as possible, or perhaps audit a logic course in the philosophy department. I say that sincerely, as someone who values reasoned discussion foremost.
Feel free to mod me down, if it makes you feel superior! Cheers!
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Monday November 21 2016, @04:11AM
You still haven't answered why states instituting these very logical voter ID laws have left such a gaping hole in the absentee ballot system.
Judging by your most recent reply, I assume you are one of the newer breed of academics that are easily-triggered and simply ignores any argument for which you do not have an answer. I'm a little more old-school, as it were.
You are still welcome on my lawn.