Hacker News Reader

Comment by angry-hacker | Hacker News Reader

I don't understand. ID is something everyone needs over there, no? Elections are after every 4 yours, people really can't take time to fix this problem?

I'm euro but with the whole id thing I agree with Republicand. This whole system screams FRAUD.

View on HN

Not really, in many cases. And no, a LOT of people can't afford to take time off in the US. Their employment systems really are that fucked up in certain cases. Plus, not all IDs are valid for voting!

Hell, it's a hassle here in Switzerland to get your ID renewed. We don't need it to vote, though.

Sorry, but that's a stupid excuse. Getting an ID takes time everywhere. For how long are they valid? If you use that excuse, Americans don't have time for a lot of things. Getting an ID should be a priority. It's common sense.

I don't understand Americans. One side thinks Earth is 6000 years old and other think that having ID to vote is racist. What is this bullshit?

It doesn't take the same amount of time everywhere though. It took me almost an hour last time I did it because the trip was 10 minutes each way plus waiting plus the actual procedure. That's in Switzerland, and if it were this efficient in the US, it would be a bad excuse.

However, with all the bullshit requirements (often introduced specifically to make it harder for people to get ID), overworked agencies and much greater distances involved in the US, the same process easily takes multiple hours - in a good case! Taking a day off is seriously not possible for many people in the US.

And voter ID in principle isn't racist. In practice, though, it is: "With race data in hand, the legislature amended the bill to exclude many of the alternative photo IDs used by African Americans." and "The bill retained only the kinds of IDs that white North Carolinians were more likely to possess." are direct quotes from a federal court striking down voter ID laws in North Carolina. That's intentional and that's why voter ID is treated as a racist idea.

To get your first ID in my state, you need to provide proof of signature, birthdate, social security number and residency.

The closest government office to me is a 15 min drive, 30 min bus ride, or a hour and a half walk.

The wait varies but I would say an hour minimum from my experience. The fee is between 10 and 20 dollars depending on your age.

All of these offices are only open during regular business hours(8 to 5:30 Monday through Friday. Closed on weekends).

Getting my first ID was a four hour and a half hour affair. I was lucky enough that my dad was able to take off work and also drive me. A quarter of my time was spent at the bank getting my Social security card out of my safety deposit box(we tried to use a photo copy but they only accept the actual card).

Renewing a license is easier because you just need the expired license, but my last renewal took 2 hours.

The process sucks and I imagine it sucks even more if you don't have a car or have a job that is m-f 9-5(or can't easily take a day off)

For how long is the ID valid? I mean if you do it only for voting, how often do you need to renew it?

The whole process sounds regular bureaucracy like in every other country. You need ID everywhere (at least in developed countries) to vote.

Having ID is common sense. It all sounds political pseudo-problem.

In my state I can renew my drivers license online, no hassle required.

No, for many people they would never need an ID until it came time to vote. The problem with most of these newly enacted voter ID laws are the additional restrictions on what type of ID is permitted, and the extra burden on getting said forms of ID. It's not so much the requirement of having proof of identification, as 31 states have had such laws for years.

For example, in some states, I would no longer be able to use my government-issued military ID -- which arguably has stricter requirements for obtaining than a driver's license. A lot of these new laws weren't enacted to reduce fraud (which isn't even that prevalent), but to make it harder for certain classes of voters to exercise their right to vote.

What are the difficulties you are talking about?

I live 75km from the biggest city. After every 4 years I need to fill a form I want a new ID. Wait. Then go and pick up new ID. Spending time the government building, as we all know bureaucracy is slow. I don't have a driving licence and don't drive. My friend helps me or I take a bus. This allows me to vote and do other necessary things where I have to identify myself and travel.

How is the system different in America? What are the problems? How many years does it take for the ID to expire?

I've heard this, but Indiana's voter ID law went to the Supreme Court [0]. The plaintiffs were unable to find a single case of someone who was unable to obtain an ID as a result of the law. Further, it was possible to vote early (up to 30 days before the election) by filling out a ballot at city hall -- so you didn't even need to go on the official election day.

It seems that if the ID is provided free of charge, then it does not burden the individual any more than normal voting does.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crawford_v._Marion_County_Elec...

Individuals most likely not to have the required ID are poor, and while the ID itself may be free of charge, the burden of obtaining it is not. Once you factor in time waiting, traveling and lost wages (many people don't have paid leave in the U.S.), that ID may very well cost them $75 - $400. For those living pay check to pay check, that may be a considerable amount of money. That's not necessarily the same burden as taking time off to vote, as most individuals won't need to, as their polls open early or after working hours unlike a DMV. Most states also have time off to vote laws, and some even require that it's paid time off.

Let's say you want to obtain a voter ID in South Carolina, for example, because you have no other photo ID. You'll need to present a birth certificate. What, can't find yours? Good luck, you'll need a photo ID to obtain a new copy of that birth certificate.

Perhaps you are an 18-year old high schooler in Alabama eligible to vote for the first time. You don't have a driver's license, because you can't afford a car and don't drive. Your closest DMV is 40 miles away and only open one day out of the week. There's no public transportation, so you'll have to coordinate a ride with someone who can take you on a day the DMV is open. Previously, this voter would be able to show up to their polling site on the day of the election with a bank statement and vote.

It would be one thing if voter fraud was prevalent and all these new measures needed enacted, but there isn't. The rate of fraud in U.S. elections is close to zero. Instead, they're yet another set of hurdles voters, particularly minorities and the poor, face when asserting their right to vote.

Once again, in the Supreme Court case, the plaintiffs could not find a single case of voter disenfranchisement due to the ID law.

You're hypotheticals are just that: hypothetical.

And since that time there have been numerous examples of legislative disenfranchisement via restrictive voter ID laws. You really have a hard-on for this one case, as though it somehow makes all forms of voter ID laws somehow magically valid. Law doesn't work that way, and the specifics of how this was implemented in Indiana vs the many other states which have tried even more restrictive forms of voter id and been slapped back by the courts should be a clue to you that this area is far from settled.

These are not hypotheticals, there are specific examples of legislators being caught on the record trying to craft voter ID laws such that they had the greatest effect upon poor and minority voters. We are still waiting on your to address these issues instead of repeatedly posting a link to this one case that happened to be the trigger for all of these laws that have now been found to be illegal.

That's because I'm proposing the law that was found to be legal.

If Law X is legal, and I support Law X, then stop telling me Law Y is illegal -- it's irrelevant.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com