Things become a whole lot simpler when stuff can just get tacked on to your ID, and appropriate institutions can check the status of such endorsements in a central database.
> In theory, this should make both sides happy.
One side will never be happy, because their entire strategy (according to leaked internal documents) is voter suppression.
A reminder: there is very, very little voter fraud in the US. Most of cases of fraud that have been discovered turned out to be members of that side that is so very concerned with voter fraud.
I am all for a national ID (please, PLEASE end using Social Security for this), and migrating to a national standard for driving that generalizes most of the 'how to drive' and 'how signs must look'; ideally also some minimum of how roads should be designed (less enforced, more of a guide).
This is really key here. Practice shows 2 things: (1) a national ID is needed to operate the United States and (2) in lieu of a proper system, a much worse system is being used with ongoing catastrophic impacts to people's lives from fraud and identity theft as well as the commensurate cost to the state at every level.
Why does it get bipartisan support in Oregon, a state known for intense partisan demonstrations and showdowns? Because it’s so much easier that you’ll never want to do it another way.
Mail-in voting has a lot of benefits:
- It’s automatic. You’ll get a ballot every election at your home, so you don’t need to remember about elections.
- You get a pamphlet with statements from each candidate and supporting organizations. This helps you get informed about everyone.
- You have time to send it back. This allows you to make a more deliberate choice.
- You don’t have to take time off or go anywhere.
- You can verify via a web portal that your ballot was received and counted.
Is voter ID actually solving any real problems with the system? To my knowledge, fraud is normally sniffed out and prosecuted. I think a well-oiled mail voting system provides so many clear benefits to voters that we should be encouraging it in more places.
From what I understand, signature-based validation is secure enough to prevent most fraud problems. At least to the extent that it’s not much different from any other voting system.
Again, I support federal ID, but to me that’s separate from voting. Maybe I put my federal ID number on the ballot, and then states can ensure it was only used once.
Adding things to the FEC responsibility is not a solution, because the FEC is by structural design nonfunctional in normal conditions, and has sometimes been (e.g., most of 2020) completely nonfunctional due to lack of a quorum.
I think you mean paid for by taxes and/or insurance, not quite the same as free
Rumors are the mob delivered the election for Kennedy; even those historians who argue otherwise essentially characterize it as the democratic party stealing the election "An order from the mob to work for Kennedy only insured a total Chicago effort of the kind that historically had been known to work miracles in the early-morning hours of vote counting"
Lyndon Johnson famously stole his 1948 senate election
Democrats were plenty happy to use vote harvesting to take Orange County, Ca while arguing against it in Georgia (2018).
[ed] And a new one just hitting news today, https://www.phillymag.com/news/2021/10/13/marie-beren-voter-...
I would respectfully disagree with your assertion this is a one party issue
You'll find that the right opposes this idea. National IDs spook the "don't tread on me" crowd and cutting DMV availability is a common "money saving" approach taken by the same people demanding additional documentation for voting.