Deacon923
Scooter Banks
Gosh, it's hard to understand why black people don't think the GOP have their best interests at heart.
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk
Explanation:
JHMD will defend
Okay, thanks for posting, but I don't understand why AAs 'disproportionately lacked" IDs or were more likely to "socioeconomic factors that may hinder their political participation." What is this based on? Hunch? Feels? They just got finished saying that "African American voter turnout had expanded to almost the rates of whites".
I mean we've been having this same argument for years. Conservatives are well aware of the problem, why haven't they pushed a measurement to ensure that everyone has a state ID?
You say it's not a poll tax, well prove it.
I think it's relying on the fact that they sought out data to determine why people did/did not have ID's. Those were broken down into a variety of reasons (obviously). Some of those reasons were shared across SES and races, some were not. The law then targeted specifically "with surgical precision" the factors that caused African Americans to not have ID's.
I don't disagree that people should have a form of ID to vote. That's a strawman argument if you're going to attempt to debate and engage me on it.
Headline: "Fourth Circuit Strikes Down Voter I.D. Law"
I feel like this was yet another solvable problem that didn't need to turn into a "us" versus "them" racial divide.
Do we really want people so divorced from society that they have no ID in 2016 to decide who is going to run the government?
To your point, I don't know what the practices are that discriminate against African-Americans specifically are. I would have to read the bill thoroughly and then know what causes African-Americans specifically to not be able to obtain ID's/correct ID's.
To me, the bill was poorly written because it shortened the amount of time for early registration voting, didn't allow for one-stop voting, and also added to the amount of time it took to get the appropriate ID to vote. That disenfranchises people who cannot afford to take the time off of work to both get the ID and also vote. I have no idea how that proportionally impacts African-Americans vs. other races, but I assume the judges on the Appeals Court do know that, hence why they ruled the way they did.
I know this is absolute heresy, but laws that encourage people to get things that will actually help them in society aren't always pernicious raciosm. Who is so busy going back and forth to work that they don't have time to get a free document (that is essential in getting to and from work, for the 99.999% of us that don't live on the Charlotte light rail line)?
So we are clear, it's not JUST that they "don't have ID's". It's that ID's don't match birth certificates, married names have changed, addresses have changed.
To simplify it down to "well anybody can get an ID" is disingenuous in my opinion.
Do we really want people so divorced from society that they have no ID in 2016 to decide who is going to run the government?
That's not the point. Enacting a Voter ID law for legitimate reasons is ok, as long as it doesn't have too big of a discriminatory effect. Enacting a Voter ID law with the intent to disenfranchise black voters is never ok. That's what happened here
Even apart from the ID portion, pre-registration and provisional voting were used much more by AA than whites. State lawmakers looked at that data and decided to remove those options without a reasonable explanation. Hence the line about the surgical precision of targeting AAs.