many people eligible to vote do not have the requisite ID and are unlikely to get it
Just trying to understand as a non-American: which people are eligible to vote, but are unlikely to get an ID?
Just trying to understand as a non-American: which people are eligible to vote, but are unlikely to get an ID?
Most (if not all?) states and provinces will have some form of "non driving" ID available if needed. However, it is optional, costs money and requires other documentation to get it, such as an original copy of a birth certificate.
It's not that uncommon for an adult to not have an official ID. Either they never had one or have lost theirs and they haven't bothered/can't afford to get a new one.
The argument is that Republicans are exploiting the fact that this will disproportionately affect Democratic voters. Would some Republican voters be turned away? Of course. Would more Democratic voters be turned away than Republicans? Very very likely, and that's the point. It's a net win for one party to enforce voting ID laws while also not supporting some sort of free/cheap universal identity system.
It’s extremely uncommon.
You need an ID to buy beer, open a bank account, prove you are eligible for employment, pick up a prescription at the pharmacy, book a hotel room, the list is very long. You cannot function in society without some form of ID.
The idea that a large number of Americans are being disenfranchised because they don’t have ID is farcical.
34 million people [1] or about 10 percent of the US population lack a form of ID that would be required under a voter ID law.
The fact that you assert otherwise, without evide, shows that you live in a privilege bubble. None of your friends lack an ID, so you conclude it's rare.
[1] https://voteriders.org/article/who-doesnt-have-an-id-in-amer...
"Nearly 21 million voting-age U.S. citizens do not have a current (non-expired) driver’s license."
A driver's license is not the only form of ID permissible to vote. You can vote using other forms of ID. Additionally, most states allow people over a certain age to use an expired ID to vote.
"Another 12% (28.6 million) have a non-expired license, but it does not have both their current address and current name."
People move and people get married. The average American will move 12 times in their lives and get married at least once. These people will get their license updated. They have one in the first place that isn't expired, after all.
Again, you can vote using other forms of ID beyond a driver's license, and furthermore, a driver's license with an old address is still valid to prove your identity.
"Millions of Americans across political parties do not have a license."
Again, the fixation on driver's licenses is a canard. Millions of American's aren't eligible to drive, so you would expect them not to have driver's licenses.
"People with less education and lower annual incomes are more likely to lack a current driver’s license."
Yes, people who can't afford to own a car are less likely to have a driver's license.
"People with a disability are far more likely to lack a current driver’s license."
Wow, what an insightful finding. People that are not able to drive don't have driver's licenses.
Here's a fun quote from your own link that refutes exactly what you are claiming:
Only "nineteen percent of individuals without a driver’s license cite bureaucratic or economic factors as the reasons for which they do not have a license." The rest weren't interested, or weren't eligible due to legal difficulties.
That means that only 4 million of the 21 million people who don't have a license can't get a license for the reason you're claiming. That's 1% of the entire country.
In a nutshell, only 1% of Americans are too incompetent to figure out how to apply for a license or too lazy to stand in line and fill out the paperwork to get one. Everybody else either has one, has a good reason they don't want one, or should not have one.
And that doesn't even mean that these people can't vote, only that they don't have a driver's license. It's entirely possible those people have other forms of ID.
Open your eyes friend. People are disenfranchised everyday, but it isn't because the mean old DMV denied them a driver's license.
False. Every state in the US has a free voter ID option.
Even if there is no financial cost, it requires documentation and time to get voter ID. It is not issued automatically. That's why 10% of the US population doesn't have form of ID that could be used to vote and will be disenfranchised under Republican voter ID requirements. Until that issue is fixed, voter ID is not something I can support.
No I'm not.
>Even if there is no financial cost, it requires documentation and time to get voter ID.
Yes, you must prove your eligibility to vote.
>It is not issued automatically.
They are issued automatically after proving eligibility.
>That's why 10% of the US population doesn't have form of ID that could be used to vote
Correlation != causation
>and will be disenfranchised under Republican voter ID requirements.
No they won't.
>Until that issue is fixed, voter ID is not something I can support.
There are no issues to fix.
Can you explain this further?
A person who can legally vote today, but in the future cannot vote because of election restrictions, will be disenfranchised. You are supporting election restrictions that disenfranchise 10% of the US population.
>>That's why 10% of the US population doesn't have form of ID that could be used to vote
>Correlation != causation
I never made a claim of causation. I just said that 10% of legal US voting-eligible citizens don't have ID and will therefore be disenfranchised by your proposal.
> They are issued automatically after proving eligibility.
That's not what "automatic" means.
Yes, voter ID laws do not disenfranchise voters. The Supreme Court agrees with this statement.
>A person who can legally vote today, but in the future cannot vote because of election restrictions, will be disenfranchised.
Voter ID laws are not "election restrictions" the same way as registering to vote is not an "election restriction."
>I just said that 10% of legal US voting-eligible citizens don't have ID and will therefore be disenfranchised by your proposal.
That's not what the stat says. Nowhere does it say 10% of "voter-eligible" US citizens don't have IDs.
>That's not what "automatic" means.
Wrong, that is what automatic means.
Many who were born before segregation ended in the mid-1960s were not granted birth certificates, as their mothers were forced to use midwives during birth because local hospitals were whites only and turned them away.
See: https://atlantablackstar.com/2025/05/07/florida-woman-real-i...
See: https://chicagodefender.com/black-woman-born-during-jim-crow...
See: https://academic.oup.com/north-carolina-scholarship-online/b...