Getting a photo ID so you can vote is easy. Unless you’re poor, black, Latino or elderly.
Supporters say that everyone should easily be able to get a photo ID and that the requirement is needed to combat voter fraud. But many election experts say that the process for obtaining a photo ID can be far more difficult than it looks for hundreds of thousands of people across the country who do not have the required photo identification cards. Those most likely to be affected are elderly citizens, African Americans, Hispanics and low-income residents.
“A lot of people don’t realize what it takes to obtain an ID without the proper identification and papers,” said Abbie Kamin, a lawyer who has worked with the Campaign Legal Center to help Texans obtain the proper identification to vote. “Many people will give up and not even bother trying to vote.”
A federal court in Texas found that 608,470 registered voters don’t have the forms of identification that the state now requires for voting. For example, residents can vote with their concealed-carry handgun licenses but not their state-issued student university IDs.
Across the country, about 11 percent of Americans do not have government-issued photo identification cards, such as a driver’s license or a passport, according to Wendy Weiser of the Democracy Program at the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law.
Courts are finally pointing out the racism behind voter ID laws
In North Carolina, the legislature requested racial data on the use of electoral mechanisms, then restricted all those disproportionately used by blacks, such as early voting, same-day registration and out-of-precinct voting. Absentee ballots, disproportionately used by white voters, were exempted from the voter ID requirement. The legislative record actually justified the elimination of one of the two days of Sunday voting because “counties with Sunday voting in 2014 were disproportionately black” and “disproportionately Democratic.”
The documents acceptable for proving voters’ identity in North Carolina were the ones disproportionately held by whites, such as driver’s licenses, U.S. passports, and veteran and military IDs, and the ones that were left out were the ones often held by poor minority voters, such as student IDs, government employee IDs and public assistance IDs. The Texas voter ID law was designed the same way: There, officials accepted concealed-weapon licenses but not student or state employee IDs. The Texas legislature was repeatedly advised of the likely effect on minority voters but rebuffed nearly all amendments that would have eased its harsh impact.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, typical regressive double speak and situational bullshit.
If a conservative mentions all the minorities on welfare, the left charges out, pointing at more whites being on welfare rolls than minorities.
Now a proposal is made that would effect ALL poor people exactly the same, but no, it's suddenly racist and disproportionately effects only poor minorities.
You fuckers are a real piece of work.
Do you know what disproportionately means? Didn't think so. You whioers are just plain dumber than sh*t.
Yep, I know exactly what it means, I can also recognize bullshit when I see it, and you're full of it.
If you knew what it meant, you would not have made the comment you did.
Say you have a bowl of red & green marbles where it is 20% red.
If I take some out & put them in a different bowl & this bowl had 40% red marbles, then it would be disproportionately Red even though there were more green marbles in both bowls.
Suppose that there are 40% of the people at are Republican & 40% Democrat & 20% other. If we stopped a million people at random from voting, then the resulting loss in votes would coincide with the expected.
If you stop a million poor people from voting, you stop a sample that is disproportionately poor & thereby disproportionately Democrat voters.
