Should the Feds send a Voter ID to every eligible voter?

[bullseyelqcs]

The simple answer is to seperate the two ballots. One national, one state. To vote in either, provide the proper ID. Each should be provided free of charge to every eligible voter.

Problem solved. If someone doesnt want to go apply for one, decisions have consequences.

 

[Helix]

I doubt that even legal immigrants or US citizens lacking real ID would vote “in droves”, but pretending that someone in possession of even a valid REAL ID means that one is (or remains) eligible to vote (or register to vote) in any particular federal election district is BS. It takes exactly one vote to cancel (or double) my vote.

The idea that voter ID should become optional (HR 1) and that a person may simply sign a document stating that they are eligible to vote forcing the state to try to prove a negative is ridiculous.

I would negotiate parts of HR1, but I support legislating voting rights to protect against voter suppression.

 

[Individual]

The closest thing to a federal ID card that I would find acceptable is a Real ID version of your drivers license or state ID card. You can google that if you don't know what it is.

Basically, what I've suggested would most likely created and maintained where drivers licenses are currently created and maintained.

 

[BlueTex]

You are wrong on both counts. Why have a national voter registration system for elections run by the state and local governments? the database would be massive. Registration is done with your local voter registrar. A national system would be far less secure. And a "Real ID accomplishes what you claim to want. Real ID works as well as any National ID card would. The states share the data with other states and the feds. Why is that not good enough for you?

LMAO... We have 50 different registration systems, that is the opposite of a national registration system.... How would a national system be less secure? Just think of the cost savings and security this would provide.

Even if we registered every single American, young and old, we are only talking about 330 million entries... A database of that size in laughably easy to manage...

I'm starting to think your objection is not really about security or "common sense" and you really object to making it easy to maintain registration...

 

[ttwtt78640]

I would negotiate parts of HR1, but I support legislating voting rights to protect against voter suppression.

HR1 will never pass since it can’t get 50 votes in the Senate.

I want a system where qualifications for having the right to vote and having the right to possess a gun are absolutely identical. My rationale is simple - those (currently) lacking the right to possess a gun (aka prohibited persons) are extremely likely to vote for having stricter “gun control” laws because they have nothing to lose by forcing others share (join) their 2A status.

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

LMAO... We have 50 different registration systems, that is the opposite of a national registration system.... How would a national system be less secure? Just think of the cost savings and security this would provide.

Even if we registered every single American, young and old, we are only talking about 330 million entries... A database of that size in laughably easy to manage...

I'm starting to think your objection is not really about security or "common sense" and you really object to making it easy to maintain registration...

Your spin is meaningless. My opposition is based on avoiding federalization of the voting process and the feds maintaining a massive database on all Americans. And again, The Real ID accomplishes what you claim you want a federal ID for. What's the problem?

 

[BlueTex]

Your spin is meaningless. My opposition is based on avoiding federalization of the voting process and the feds maintaining a massive database on all Americans. And again, The Real ID accomplishes what you claim you want a federal ID for. What's the problem?

Real ID is just a standard for state ID's... Do you think it's some kind of special ID card?

 

[ttwtt78640]

LMAO... We have 50 different registration systems, that is the opposite of a national registration system.... How would a national system be less secure? Just think of the cost savings and security this would provide.

Even if we registered every single American, young and old, we are only talking about 330 million entries... A database of that size in laughably easy to manage...

I'm starting to think your objection is not really about security or "common sense" and you really object to making it easy to maintain registration...

That (bolded above) is simply not so based on current reality:

Social Security scammers invented wild cover stories, posed as dead relatives, feds say

One man hired a homeless woman to pose as his dead mom; another faked a friend's murder. Here's how feds are targeting Social Security Scammers.

www.usatoday.com

Audit: Dead people have been collecting billions from Social Security as it goes bankrupt

Every year, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) audits the Social Security Administration (SSA) and publishes its findings.

www.thecentersquare.com

 

[BlueTex]

That (bolded above) is simply not so based on current reality:

Social Security scammers invented wild cover stories, posed as dead relatives, feds say

One man hired a homeless woman to pose as his dead mom; another faked a friend's murder. Here's how feds are targeting Social Security Scammers.

www.usatoday.com

Credit card companies regularly manage much larger numbers....

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

Real ID is just a standard for state ID's... Do you think it's some kind of special ID card?

No it's not the standard for state IDs, at least not yet. However yes it is special. It is accepted as if it were a federal ID card.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Credit card companies regularly manage much larger numbers....

Yep, but so long as profits are OK, then why bother changing the system?

 

[BlueTex]

No it's not the standard for state IDs, at least not yet. However yes it is special. It is accepted as if it were a federal ID card.

LMAO... No it's not a federal ID card.. It is a MINIMUM security standard for state issued ID's...

 

[LetsGoBrandon]

LMAO... No it's not a federal ID card.. It is a MINIMUM security standard for state issued ID's...

LMAO, I did not say it was a federal ID card. I did say it works as well as one. It serves every purpose a federal ID card would. Why is that so hard for you to understand? It's not the minimum standard for state issued IDs. You can get a state ID without the multiple documents you need to get a Real ID.

 

[Individual]

No.

No rational reason?

 

[Fried Kitten]

Yes, this is debatable.

16-year olds are often clueless about politics and don’t care, but since introducing the 16/17-year old voting age in 2007, schools put an emphasis on political science among those students and first time voters, with debates and lead candidates visiting schools.

Therefore, this age cohort is always very eager to vote and only later enthusiasm drops off when they are 20-30 years old (who are the laziest).

But experts say that letting them vote early is a good thing because the political science education they get and first voting experience means they will vote more often in the future, making them more responsible citizens later on.

VIEWPOINT

Educating high school students (Grades 7 - 12) in political science would likely not give them an understanding of how politics actually affect the country.

I take this position because I have met college students (over the age of 18) who study Economics and even as adult-students they don’t understand how policy and market dynamics really impact our wallet. However they believe that they have a good understanding because textbooks present content in a professional manner and thus they are convincing to the reader.

I am not opposed to teaching high school students the subject of political science but to suggest that this prepares them enough to responsibly vote is incorrect in my opinion.

THE FUTURE

Allowing 16 year-olds to vote early, even if they are unprepared due to extreme lack of real-world knowledge (if this is the case), for the sole purpose of them becoming more responsible citizens in the future seems like an act of negligence to me.

You would not allow an 11 year-old to drive a car in a densely-populated area for the purpose of giving him early exposure to driving which experience would make him a better driver in the future. Instead you determine that the 11 year-old is not ready yet and that allowing him to drive too early may cause damage.

But perhaps I am too focused on the American teenager and this causes me difficulty in seeing beyond my culture and this may make me unable to understand that in another land it can be a successful initiative.

I am not saying that Austria is wrong in allowing 16 year-olds to vote. I am simply saying that in my observation of this age group here, it would be a mistake to allow them to vote in the US. But it may also be a mistake to allow them to vote in Austria.