• Back at the office or school? Still working from home? Need to vent, or just connect with other planner and built environment types? Come join us!

    Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, planning adjacent topics, and whatever else comes to mind. No ads, no spam, no social distancing or masks required.

NEVERENDING ♾️ The NEVERENDING Political Discussion Thread

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,738
Points
56
What?! Matt Gaetz is a terrible human? I would have never guessed it...

So this Infrastructure Bill is going to be interesting. I like the public transit funding concept, but hopefully it will require that we look at future solutions, not just funding the old broke solutions. And there are big numbers with vague details. I am very interested to see those details, because what could be a good bill, is looking more and more like an attempt to push social policy along with investment in infrastructure... which is going to make the infrastructure bill harder to actually get adopted.



I personally think the infrastructure part of this is terrific and I think that the course of action to make it happen is not unreasonable. I do think that in addition to increased taxes in some sectors, I also think that they need to cut a lot of the wasteful things that are being funded right now. I would love to see a greater focus on alternative transportation options such as train, hyperloop, electric charging station installations, and improved utilities.
 

Bubba

Cyburbian
Messages
5,781
Points
45
I personally think the infrastructure part of this is terrific and I think that the course of action to make it happen is not unreasonable. I do think that in addition to increased taxes in some sectors, I also think that they need to cut a lot of the wasteful things that are being funded right now. I would love to see a greater focus on alternative transportation options such as train, hyperloop, electric charging station installations, and improved utilities.

I'm torn on this bill. On one hand, my inner fiscal conservative rolls his eyes and groans. On the other hand, this is the infrastructure-development consultant part of my brain right now:

70b192e2fd16f1da72a2565951407c02.gif
 

Veloise

Cyburbian
Messages
6,024
Points
36
The voting restriction measures that are gradually creeping scross state legislatures are generating lots of discussion. On a media report about Delta pushing back against Georgia's new laws, there's an entertaining exchange.

Someone who lives in Boston: "pretty sure it’s always been against the law to give any voter, anything while standing in line as it can been seen as influential. Damn people of Georgia with the water
🙄
Bring your own if your that parched of a person!"
(doesn't she seem nice?)

Me: "actually ... it's not. Polling places have always extended amenities to those inside. I don't live in Georgia, but on my visits there I've noticed that it can be pretty warm. Can't imagine standing in a queue to vote, with hundreds of others, for hours.
Just be kind, it goes a lot further.
(y)
"

Her: [laugh react} "actually, it is illegal. Please learn the law. People need to bring their own water. No one stands in lines for “hours” to vote, so stop."

And she offered this expertise:

Actual quote from that link:
"QUESTION:
Is it legal under federal law to hand out food to voters waiting in line at polling places?
ANSWER:
Yes, as long as they are not asking for anything in return or trying to influence someone's vote."
 

Bubba

Cyburbian
Messages
5,781
Points
45
The voting restriction measures that are gradually creeping scross state legislatures are generating lots of discussion. On a media report about Delta pushing back against Georgia's new laws, there's an entertaining exchange...

As it's behind a paywall:

The public debate on Georgia’s new voting law has become a stew of falsehood, propaganda and panic. Part of the blame lies with the partisan distortion of Democrats, part with their media echoes, and now part with CEOs of major companies who are uninformed at best or cowardly at worst.

Start with President Biden, the great unifier, who on Wednesday to ESPN called the law “ Jim Crow on steroids,” while saying he’d “strongly support” moving the Major League Baseball all-star game out of Atlanta. He’s picking up the smear about Georgia from Stacey Abrams, who still hasn’t accepted that she lost the race for Peach State Governor in 2018.

“You’re going to close a polling place at 5 o’clock, when working people just get off?” he said to ESPN. “This is all about keeping working folks, and ordinary folks that I grew up with, from being able to vote.” Mr. Biden either doesn’t know what’s in the Georgia bill or he is lying about it. We’d like to believe it’s the former, but that gets harder to credit as his falsehoods multiply.

On Election Day in Georgia, anyone in line by 7 p.m. gets a ballot. The new law requires an extra Saturday of voting, while specifying early voting hours: The minimum is 9 a.m. to 5 p.m., but counties may run 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. In metro areas, “you might not notice a change,” explains Georgia Public Broadcasting. Elsewhere, “you will have an extra weekend day, and your weekday early voting hours will likely be longer.”

Then there are the big companies racing out PR statements of condemnation, though what’s often most conspicuous is their vagueness. The voting law “is unacceptable and does not match Delta’s values,” said the airline’s CEO, Ed Bastian. He groveled that he’d had “time to now fully understand all that is in the bill.”

What a clumsy emergency landing. Last week Mr. Bastian said that “concerns remain” about the law, while he explained—accurately—that it “expands weekend voting, codifies Sunday voting and protects a voter’s ability to cast an absentee ballot without providing a reason.” He added: “For the first time, drop boxes have also been authorized for all counties statewide.”

What changed in the interim? Could it be that he has bowed to the woke mob, as the path of least political and commercial resistance? Why not stay silent if you don’t know what you’re talking about or can’t stand the heat?

Gov. Brian Kemp, who signed the bill, rightly called foul: “Today’s statement by Delta CEO Ed Bastian stands in stark contrast to our conversations with the company, ignores the content of the new law, and unfortunately continues to spread the same false attacks.”

Or take Coca-Cola’s watery statement. “We are disappointed in the outcome of the Georgia voting legislation,” said CEO James Quincey. “Our focus is now on supporting federal legislation that protects voting access and addresses voter suppression across the country.” He cited no specifics about either bill. Apparently Coke’s secret ingredient is pandering.

When woke progressives target a company with tactics like a “die-in,” as Coke received last month, CEOs seem to view a mealy-mouthed statement as cheap insurance. But surely we should expect more from senior business executives, who are supposed to have some backbone and concern for the facts. They’d react with high dudgeon if similar falsehoods were spread about their companies.

Yet so much of this CEO posturing cites no facts—or even fails to mention the word “Georgia.” American Express stands “against any efforts to suppress voting,” said CEO Steve Squeri. “ BlackRock is concerned about efforts that could limit access to the ballot,” said CEO Larry Fink. “Governments should be working to make it easier to vote, not harder,” said Cisco CEO Chuck Robbins.

Georgia’s law does make it easier to vote, though it also tries to reassure citizens about ballot integrity. The state provides far more days of early voting than New York. It offers no-excuse absentee ballots, unlike Mr. Biden’s beloved Delaware. So who’s really suppressing whom? Georgia’s new law puts limits on drop boxes, but as Delta’s Mr. Bastian now regrets pointing out last week, it also makes them a permanent part of the voting system. In 2019, before Covid, drop boxes were illegal.

***
CEOs may think there’s no downside to hopping on a bandwagon that insinuates that Georgia’s GOP leaders are inveterate racists. But far from dodging our partisan political warfare, they’re taking a side and promoting more division. They and their companies may pay the price when the woke mob decides to turn on them and they need GOP protection.
 
Messages
2,965
Points
23
I can't understand why there's even debate on this essential right. The reason why congress should not pass any laws restricting gun ownership is spelled out explicitly in the Constitution - it's so we can maintain militias! What is so hard to understand about that? That's why so many many of us patriots report once a month to the village green so that we can perform line drills with our muskets under the watchful eye of the Company commander (and what a dashing figure he cuts perched gallantly upon his stallion with sabre drawn). Sure, some of the poorer members lack the funds necessary to purchase those newfangled socketed bayonets and the grenadiers never seem to have the necessary supplies Continental Congress continually promises, but it is through such patriotic fervor that our lands are kept free from foreign kings and potentates.
Absolutely brilliant!!

Just logged on to say that. Now I'm logging off.
 

Bubba

Cyburbian
Messages
5,781
Points
45
Andy Marlette
Pensacola News Journal


c2e0bda8-90c0-4a97-880c-58824fd7a74d-2021.03.26-georgia-election-law.jpg
You know, @JNA, after four-plus years of you (rightfully) posting about Trump lying, it's pretty darn amusing that you're buying the left's lies about the recently passed Georgia voting law without a second thought. Maybe you should do yourself a favor and actually read what was passed, and then compare it to the state's voting regs in 2018 (the last pre-pandemic election), and then compare it to the multiple blue states with more restrictive voting laws than Georgia....or does than not fit this BS narrative?

EDIT: ...and now @JNA's post has been deleted. How craven is that? Man up and own your post, dude.
 
Last edited:

DVD

Cyburbian
Messages
15,493
Points
53
I just look at the whole Georgia thing this way, don't be making it harder for me to vote. I'm a lazy man and I like just signing my ballot and sending it in. Also Georgia, stop with the multiple run off elections. I just want to vote once - goes back to the lazy thing. Then again, I don't live in Georgia so it's not my problem. I will say stuff like handing out water to people in line is kind of lame, but I have a feeling there is more to the story that I don't care about.
 

MD Planner

Cyburbian
Messages
2,955
Points
47
Well actually in some ways it might actually make it easier for you to vote. But don't let the facts get in the way of what's actually happening. That's not a slam at you DVD. Just at this full-blown hysteria ginned up by some folks folks talking about Jim Crow. Talk about hyperbole.

And for the record, I'm a pretty (unaffiliated) liberal guy. But I have exactly ZERO problem with having to provide identification in order to vote. Many states, including Georgia actually offer free state-issued ID's that can be used for voting purposes.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,738
Points
56
Absolutely brilliant!!

Just logged on to say that. Now I'm logging off.

It's still not correct if you read the writings of those who wrote and approved the bill of rights... but hey, why let facts get in the way of emotion.

Well actually in some ways it might actually make it easier for you to vote. But don't let the facts get in the way of what's actually happening. That's not a slam at you DVD. Just at this full-blown hysteria ginned up by some folks folks talking about Jim Crow. Talk about hyperbole.

And for the record, I'm a pretty (unaffiliated) liberal guy. But I have exactly ZERO problem with having to provide identification in order to vote. Many states, including Georgia actually offer free state-issued ID's that can be used for voting purposes.

Ok, I might be missing something with all of this. First let me say I am in favor of showing my ID when I go to vote. I am also in favor of making ID's free for anyone over a particular age. But I also support the idea of early voting and being able to to early vote at a location other than your primary polling place. I also think that there should be a standardized national system when it comes to presidential elections that allows early voting for 4 weeks before the election and roll right into the election. I think that all the polls should close at 8pm the night of the election and if you are in line, you get to vote. If you are not in line at 8:00 PM on local time, you don't vote. It does not matter how long the line is. I also think that no results should be provided until 48 hours until the close of the last poll. That way the results on the east coast will not influence the results on the west coast.

(I also had other thoughts about elimination of gerrymandering and not having states be a winner take all, but I have explained that in the past so I won't go into that again)


On a side note... what are your thoughts on this:
 
Last edited:

DVD

Cyburbian
Messages
15,493
Points
53
I'm just saying don't make it hard for me to vote. Arizona was floating an idea of making me notarize my mail in ballot. Somewhere was the idea that you had to mail them a copy of your license with the ballot. That's a big no. I don't want copies of my license floating around even if it is a supposedly secure voting location.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,738
Points
56
I'm just saying don't make it hard for me to vote. Arizona was floating an idea of making me notarize my mail in ballot. Somewhere was the idea that you had to mail them a copy of your license with the ballot. That's a big no. I don't want copies of my license floating around even if it is a supposedly secure voting location.
So are more concerned about a photo copy of your license than you are about your ballot?

My issues with mail-in ballots are that things like this would continue:
 

Dan

Dear Leader
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
19,177
Points
71
re: this post by @michaelskis:


... an somehow 25% of the households on our cul-de-sac are occupied by extremist liberals. (One called the cops on me because she heard that I own guns, another told me that he was offended because I have an American flag flying on my front porch.) ...

Do you let your politics influence how well you get along with your neighbors? I live in a very blue community. One of my next door neighbor is fairly conservative. We never talk about politics, but he has a few conservative bumper stickers up in his garage. Nonetheless, we're friendly, and we even share some responsibilities for our shared drive. (It's technically my property, but there's an easement for access to both of my neighbors. He clears snow; I maintain the pea gravel surface.)

I'm not outward about my left-leaning-but-not-woke ideology to my neighbors. There's a bunch of bumper stickers on one of my recycling bins; a few have environmental messages, but none of them are political. I fly the Stars and Stripes on national holidays, and try to maintain a turf lawn as best as I can with our clay soils. Around here, that might signal to others that we lean to the right. Anyhow, I've had nothing but positive exchanges with folks on my block -- except a grumpy, crunchy crone the next cluster over, whose animals all hate men for some reason.

As for gun-owning neighbors, that's none of my business. I know a lot of left-leaning people who own a gun or two, so I can't make assumptions. Even then, it doesn't matter.
 

WSU MUP Student

Cyburbian
Messages
11,106
Points
52
re: this post by @michaelskis:




Do you let your politics influence how well you get along with your neighbors? I live in a very blue community. One of my next door neighbor is fairly conservative. We never talk about politics, but he has a few conservative bumper stickers up in his garage. Nonetheless, we're friendly, and we even share some responsibilities for our shared drive. (It's technically my property, but there's an easement for access to both of my neighbors. He clears snow; I maintain the pea gravel surface.)

I'm not outward about my left-leaning-but-not-woke ideology to my neighbors. There's a bunch of bumper stickers on one of my recycling bins; a few have environmental messages, but none of them are political. I fly the Stars and Stripes on national holidays, and try to maintain a turf lawn as best as I can with our clay soils. Around here, that might signal to others that we lean to the right. Anyhow, I've had nothing but positive exchanges with folks on my block -- except a grumpy, crunchy crone the next cluster over, whose animals all hate men for some reason.

As for gun-owning neighbors, that's none of my business. I know a lot of left-leaning people who own a gun or two, so I can't make assumptions. Even then, it doesn't matter.

I don't let my politics be known to my neighbors and they don't ask. If they did ask, I'd probably demure unless we were closer friends. That said, judging by the lawn signs my immediate neighbors put up this past cycle, we'd probably all get along pretty well on that front (though they probably think that my lack of Biden lawn sign and constant flying of the Marine Corps flag means I lean a lot more to the right than I actually do).

I know politics has seem to become our national pastime over the last decade and as somebody who works for electeds and has degrees in political science and public policy, you'd think I'd always be up for a political conversation but I'd rather just leave all that at the office.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,738
Points
56
re: this post by @michaelskis:




Do you let your politics influence how well you get along with your neighbors? I live in a very blue community. One of my next door neighbor is fairly conservative. We never talk about politics, but he has a few conservative bumper stickers up in his garage. Nonetheless, we're friendly, and we even share some responsibilities for our shared drive. (It's technically my property, but there's an easement for access to both of my neighbors. He clears snow; I maintain the pea gravel surface.)

I'm not outward about my left-leaning-but-not-woke ideology to my neighbors. There's a bunch of bumper stickers on one of my recycling bins; a few have environmental messages, but none of them are political. I fly the Stars and Stripes on national holidays, and try to maintain a turf lawn as best as I can with our clay soils. Around here, that might signal to others that we lean to the right. Anyhow, I've had nothing but positive exchanges with folks on my block -- except a grumpy, crunchy crone the next cluster over, whose animals all hate men for some reason.

As for gun-owning neighbors, that's none of my business. I know a lot of left-leaning people who own a gun or two, so I can't make assumptions. Even then, it doesn't matter.
I don't, but they do.

As I noted they are extremist and I am not their only target. There is a right wing person in the cul-de-sac that still has a Trump sign up on his yard but he normally keeps to himself, but he on a weekly basis one of the far left neighbors does a Facebook Live bashing this guy showing the Trump sign in the background.

We have tried multiple times to socialize with three of these families, but because we don't adhere to their political views, we are not worthy of their friendship. The extent of it is my kids playing with their kids, but even then one of them told my oldest that my wife and I must hate minorities because we didn't vote for Biden.

Other than the American Flag, we don't do campaign signs in our yard (because I don't believe they make a difference) but when someone asks, I don't hide my political views.
 

MD Planner

Cyburbian
Messages
2,955
Points
47
It used to be you didn't really talk about religion or politics unless it was someone you'd known well for a long time. Now I swear it's like one of the first things people want to know about you. I subscribe to some policies of the left and some from the right. Like many of us I'd imagine. I hate to be labeled. Here in South Carolina you don't choose a party when you register to vote. You just have to pick one party or another in a primary. The last several years I was in Maryland I was "unaffiliated" because like I said, I didn't care to be lumped into one particular group.

This is not an original thought but it rings true: If we'd concentrate more on the 90% of things we all agree on the whole world would be a lot better off.
 

mendelman

Unfrozen Caveman Planner
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
15,256
Points
59
Just a friendly reminder:

Neville Chamberlain is still on the wrong side of history.
 
Last edited:

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,738
Points
56
Today, President Biden will put forth several executive actions to curb gun violence.


In my reading of the information thus far, I question if these actions would have prevented any of the mass shootings that had occurred over the past few months, or years. What are your thoughts on these orders? Do you think that it is right for these to be executive orders vs actual bills from Congress? Do you think they too far or not far enough?

Frankly, I think that these are low hanging fruit and personally, I don't think they are going to have much of an impact. I am not in opposition to anything that was proposed, but I wonder if this is part of a larger intent.
 

MD Planner

Cyburbian
Messages
2,955
Points
47
It's an incredibly complicated issue (obviously) and I think the administration just wants to be able to say they've done SOMETHING. Not saying it will or won't have any impact but that they're paying some attention to it is what the takeaway is.
 

Hink

OH....IO
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
16,317
Points
59
Today, President Biden will put forth several executive actions to curb gun violence.


In my reading of the information thus far, I question if these actions would have prevented any of the mass shootings that had occurred over the past few months, or years. What are your thoughts on these orders? Do you think that it is right for these to be executive orders vs actual bills from Congress? Do you think they too far or not far enough?

Frankly, I think that these are low hanging fruit and personally, I don't think they are going to have much of an impact. I am not in opposition to anything that was proposed, but I wonder if this is part of a larger intent.
No, they should be passing comprehensive gun legislation, but that isn't possible with one side of the aisle not willing to even talk about anything.

I dislike executive orders. I didn't like Trump executive orders and I don't like Biden executive orders. The legislative branch should do their job and find ways to get along and make laws. The system is clearly broken if we have to have our President's continually do what they want.
 

Planit

Cyburbian
Messages
14,065
Points
57
First steps I believe.

Some say the Assault Weapons Ban wasn't effective. It looks like there was a drop...

1617902869258.png

Source Mother Jones.


...can we reimplement/reauthorize that as another step?
 

gtpeach

Cyburbian
Messages
2,252
Points
25
The slow trickle of news about the Matt Gaetz scandal is by far the most interesting political story of the post-trump era so far.
I feel like a lot of my thoughts might be better left unsaid, but the more these types of abuses come out, the more sickened I become. I'm hoping for accountability of all, and that both parties can put ethics and integrity ahead of politics. When that can't happen in these especially extreme situations, our system is irreparably broken. It feels like we're desperately close to that being the case.
 

Veloise

Cyburbian
Messages
6,024
Points
36
This pathetic loser actually gave a news interview after he was IDed in Capitol event videos. The MLive link is cited in the charging documents.


He mentioned running for office. When this article appeared, someone helpfully provided a link to his campaign FB page.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,738
Points
56
...can we reimplement/reauthorize that as another step?
Maybe. What guns will be banned as part of that bill, and why are those guns selected? More so, since the assault weapons ban was lifted, how many deaths occurred due to those weapons compared to other weapons?
 

TOFB

Cyburbian
Messages
2,916
Points
38
The giant Tulsi billboard along I-80 has finally been removed.

The 2020 election in Iowa is over.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,738
Points
56
So the ID and Voter question seems to be up again. For those of you who got the vaccine, did you need to show an ID? What about to buy a cell phone, open a bank account, buy a gun, buy a car, register to vote, rent an apartment, or start a job? Did you have to show an ID for any of those? If so, why not not show it to vote?
 

WSU MUP Student

Cyburbian
Messages
11,106
Points
52
So the ID and Voter question seems to be up again. For those of you who got the vaccine, did you need to show an ID? What about to buy a cell phone, open a bank account, buy a gun, buy a car, register to vote, rent an apartment, or start a job? Did you have to show an ID for any of those? If so, why not not show it to vote?

I often see people equate showing an ID to buy a gun with showing an ID to vote but it's a false equivalency. In most instances, when you buy a gun you show your ID. The equivalent in terms of voting would be showing your ID to register to vote, not for the act of actually voting. My cursory look at a list of registering laws shows that every state requires a government issued ID or a sworn affidavit (and then the county or state verifies).

If your eligibility to own it has already been determined, do you have to show an ID every time you fire your gun? No? Why should somebody whose eligibility to vote has already been determined have to show an ID every time they cast a ballot?

FWIW, I did not have to show ID to get my vaccine at the VA since I was already registered in the VAs system and the VA verified my identity at that time.
 

Gedunker

Moderating
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,791
Points
46
^^^ This. And, it isn't about showing an ID, it's about getting one. The fact is that it is harder for many Black and Latinx people to get that ID. Hell, when I got my first secure ID I had to make two additional trips to the BMV because there were discrepancies in my supporting documents (one didn't include the word "East" in my street address and one did, therefore cancelling each other:r:). Had I been dependent on someone to provide me a ride, it would have been asking a gi-hugic favor to make those additional trips to get that state-issued ID.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,738
Points
56
I often see people equate showing an ID to buy a gun with showing an ID to vote but it's a false equivalency. In most instances, when you buy a gun you show your ID. The equivalent in terms of voting would be showing your ID to register to vote, not for the act of actually voting. My cursory look at a list of registering laws shows that every state requires a government issued ID or a sworn affidavit (and then the county or state verifies).

If your eligibility to own it has already been determined, do you have to show an ID every time you fire your gun? No? Why should somebody whose eligibility to vote has already been determined have to show an ID every time they cast a ballot?

FWIW, I did not have to show ID to get my vaccine at the VA since I was already registered in the VAs system and the VA verified my identity at that time.
I disagree. In many locations, you show your ID to obtain a purchase permit for a gun, an ID when you complete a concealed pistol permit class to obtain the certificate, an ID to do a background check as part of the background check with law enforcment when obtaining the concealed pistol permit, and then you still have to show it when you go to buy a gun. Many public gun ranges also require you provide your ID before you use the range as well. Many places require you show an ID when you buy some types of ammo as well.

How did the VA identify you at the time of your shot to confirm that you are the same person in their system if you didn't show an ID?
^^^ This. And, it isn't about showing an ID, it's about getting one. The fact is that it is harder for many Black and Latinx people to get that ID. Hell, when I got my first secure ID I had to make two additional trips to the BMV because there were discrepancies in my supporting documents (one didn't include the word "East" in my street address and one did, therefore cancelling each other:r:). Had I been dependent on someone to provide me a ride, it would have been asking a gi-hugic favor to make those additional trips to get that state-issued ID.
Why and what needs to happen to eliminate those hurdles to provide for equal access? Don't they need an ID to register to vote, so my guess is that if they are registered, they should already have it when it is time to vote?
 

MD Planner

Cyburbian
Messages
2,955
Points
47
^^^ This. And, it isn't about showing an ID, it's about getting one. The fact is that it is harder for many Black and Latinx people to get that ID. Hell, when I got my first secure ID I had to make two additional trips to the BMV because there were discrepancies in my supporting documents (one didn't include the word "East" in my street address and one did, therefore cancelling each other:r:). Had I been dependent on someone to provide me a ride, it would have been asking a gi-hugic favor to make those additional trips to get that state-issued ID.

But see, that's where I take issue with that. You need an ID for practically anything in this country. So you should have one. Most states offer a non-driver ID that's free. Democracy is not easy. You have to want it. There has to be some personal responsibility and some desire to participate.
 

Gedunker

Moderating
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,791
Points
46
But see, that's where I take issue with that. You need an ID for practically anything in this country. So you should have one. Most states offer a non-driver ID that's free. Democracy is not easy. You have to want it. There has to be some personal responsibility and some desire to participate.
Fair enough. But there are still people that have no bank account, so they can't use the monthly statement as a proof of residence needed to acquire ID. No bank account probably means no credit card, so no credit card statement either (another form of proof of residence). Maybe the landlord pays all the utilities, so no monthly light bill, etc.

There are lots and lots of obstacles to getting state issued IDs, and they disproportionately effect minority and poor people. Call me jaded, but they are also people most likely to vote D, and I think those facts are related.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,738
Points
56
Fair enough. But there are still people that have no bank account, so they can't use the monthly statement as a proof of residence needed to acquire ID. No bank account probably means no credit card, so no credit card statement either (another form of proof of residence). Maybe the landlord pays all the utilities, so no monthly light bill, etc.

There are lots and lots of obstacles to getting state issued IDs, and they disproportionately effect minority and poor people. Call me jaded, but they are also people most likely to vote D, and I think those facts are related.
Do these people have a lease agreement? Do they have a phone (cell or land line)? Do they have a job with a paystub or some type of government assistance as they all provide some level of a statement. If they are homeless, how is the appropriate voting district determined for them and how did they register to vote? For me, the objections to a voter ID requirement does not seem valid given the society that we live in.

As a deeper question, why do you feel that those who have obstacles in getting an ID more likely to vote D? Furthermore, instead of fighting for these people to not have an ID to vote, why not fight to eliminate the obstacles in them getting an ID.
 

WSU MUP Student

Cyburbian
Messages
11,106
Points
52
I disagree. In many locations, you show your ID to obtain a purchase permit for a gun, an ID when you complete a concealed pistol permit class to obtain the certificate, an ID to do a background check as part of the background check with law enforcment when obtaining the concealed pistol permit, and then you still have to show it when you go to buy a gun. Many public gun ranges also require you provide your ID before you use the range as well. Many places require you show an ID when you buy some types of ammo as well.

How did the VA identify you at the time of your shot to confirm that you are the same person in their system if you didn't show an ID?

The VA verified my identity when I got my shot by asking me for the last 4-digits of my SSN and my address and checking that against their system. In Michigan when I vote the staff verify my identity by asking for my name and address and verifying that against their voter rolls (FWIW, Michigan asks for ID, but it's not required and I don't show it).

As for the ID requirements you outlined in terms of gun ownership, those are all there in service of you acquiring the weapon, not actually using it (the gun range and the ammo are different but those are not being operated by the government, going to a shooting range is not a protected right and neither is purchasing ammo).

Again, when you go hunting or target shooting, are you being asked to show an ID with every bullet you cast? No, that would be onerous since you identity has already been verified when you got the permit and bought the weapon and you are now exercising your right to use it. If it's found that you've used it illegally after the fact there are remedies for that in terms of fines and imprisonment.

When I go voting and my ID has already been verified when I got the permit to vote (the voting registration), why am I asked to show ID with every ballot I cast? Just like in the shooting example, regardless of whether or not ID is shown, there are still remedies in terms of fines and imprisonment if I vote illegally.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,738
Points
56
The VA verified my identity when I got my shot by asking me for the last 4-digits of my SSN and my address and checking that against their system. In Michigan when I vote the staff verify my identity by asking for my name and address and verifying that against their voter rolls (FWIW, Michigan asks for ID, but it's not required and I don't show it).

As for the ID requirements you outlined in terms of gun ownership, those are all there in service of you acquiring the weapon, not actually using it (the gun range and the ammo are different but those are not being operated by the government, going to a shooting range is not a protected right and neither is purchasing ammo).

Again, when you go hunting or target shooting, are you being asked to show an ID with every bullet you cast? No, that would be onerous since you identity has already been verified when you got the permit and bought the weapon and you are now exercising your right to use it. If it's found that you've used it illegally after the fact there are remedies for that in terms of fines and imprisonment.

When I go voting and my ID has already been verified when I got the permit to vote (the voting registration), why am I asked to show ID with every ballot I cast? Just like in the shooting example, regardless of whether or not ID is shown, there are still remedies in terms of fines and imprisonment if I vote illegally.
You are missing the correlation. When I go to the gun range, I show my ID once per visit, regarding how many rounds I send. When I vote, I think it should be required to show an ID per visit, regardless of how many options are on the ballot.... even if there are selections on the back. The range that I go to is a membership format and they have my information on file. Most of the time it is the same person, but they look at the photo to confirm that it is me.

Under your situation where they asked your name and your address when you voted... how hard would it be to show up at multiple precincts with the information found here.... https://gis.kentcountymi.gov/public/publicviewerjs/ or https://ocmideeds.com/ or one of the many other online resources?



On an unrelated note, what are your thoughts on the news of the MN Police Officer being charged with second degree manslaughter in the death of Daunte Wright. https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/14/us/daunte-wright-minnesota-shooting-wednesday/index.html

Do you think now that she has been arrested and charged, that the riots, protests, and civil unrest will subside?
 
Last edited:

DVD

Cyburbian
Messages
15,493
Points
53
I actually have no problem with the voter ID thing, but I have no problem getting an ID. My problem is that the forces of evil are using this as a voter suppression tool. We should not be trying to suppress votes of anyone. We should be trying to make access to voting easier. Also, it's not like we have a giant voter fraud problem. So what are you trying to solve?
 

Dan

Dear Leader
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
19,177
Points
71
EDIT: ...and now @JNA's post has been deleted. How craven is that? Man up and own your post, dude.
Not conservative, but I agree about owning your opinions. I've recently posted about a few planning-related subjects where my point of view runs counter to that of the "greater planning and urbanist community". I've researched everything behind my posts, often experienced aspects of what they cover firsthand, and stand behind them.

As I get older, I'm finding that Occam's Razor is really kind of dull.

FWIW, I've been starting to read some of Thomas Sowell's works.
 

PennPlanner

Cyburbian
Messages
440
Points
13
I actually have no problem with the voter ID thing, but I have no problem getting an ID. My problem is that the forces of evil are using this as a voter suppression tool. We should not be trying to suppress votes of anyone. We should be trying to make access to voting easier. Also, it's not like we have a giant voter fraud problem. So what are you trying to solve?

I've never understood why access to voting should be easier. Why should we allow people a month or more to vote? If you can't be bothered to organize your life to be able to vote on election day or a very short voting period spanning no more than a week, then perhaps you shouldn't bother voting? Voting used to be considered a privilege and people treated it seriously and understood that they needed to take steps to vote. It did bother me that something like 1/3 of all 2020 election votes were cast before the first presidential primary. A lot of things can happen in the last few weeks of the election to make you want to change your vote.

The Democrats have been very pro regulation, pro nanny state, pro big big government, but yet staunchly anti voter ID. The same party that has people openly pushing for COVID passports (yet another form of mandated ID) is suddenly staunchly anti voter ID. We know why - because it makes it much harder to harvest votes, and it was ballot harvesting that gave the Democrats their margin of victory in several states and senate elections. And ballot harvesting is really the real voter "fraud," it's technically legal but ethically dubious, difficult to monitor, and banned in most democracies, including our neighbors in Canada. And a great deal of ballot harvesting occurs among people who are effectively told who to vote for by the people organizing the ballot harvesting.

The Republicans, generally libertarian, are very pro voter ID for the simple reason that it would weed out the marginal voters who do favor the Democrats if and when they bother to vote, and especially limit the effectiveness of ballot harvesting. It is to their advantage to require IDs. But is requiring ID really voter suppression? The percentage of Americans whose lives are so complicated (or uncomplicated) that they don't have any form of legitimate ID is surely so small that it should be easily addressed simply by applying for and obtaining a state ID for free. After all, it's now almost next to impossible to function as a normal citizen without a phone number due to so many places requiring phone numbers for security and access codes. Really, how many people are we talking about who are affected by not having either a driver's license, or can't easily get a state ID in one form or another. And if voting is that important to you, how difficult is it to get an ID and why would requiring an ID be suppression - unless, of course, you're not really qualified to vote.... And if you can't be bothered to vote unless you're bribed with food and water or by someone bringing a bunch of ballots to a community picnic (with, naturally, drinks and food)....
 

WSU MUP Student

Cyburbian
Messages
11,106
Points
52
I've never understood why access to voting should be easier. Why should we allow people a month or more to vote? If you can't be bothered to organize your life to be able to vote on election day or a very short voting period spanning no more than a week, then perhaps you shouldn't bother voting? Voting used to be considered a privilege and people treated it seriously and understood that they needed to take steps to vote. It did bother me that something like 1/3 of all 2020 election votes were cast before the first presidential primary...

Wait, what?

You lost me there.

The first primary was February 11th in New Hampshire (I'm not counting the 2020 caucus debacle in Iowa). Who was casting votes before then?
 

PennPlanner

Cyburbian
Messages
440
Points
13
Wait, what?

You lost me there.

The first primary was February 11th in New Hampshire (I'm not counting the 2020 caucus debacle in Iowa). Who was casting votes before then?
Misstated. Meant presidential debates. By the date of the first debate between Trump and Biden a significant percentage of votes had already been cast.

As a kid growing up in the 1980s-1990s the only early voting I'm aware of were absentee ballets and those were for people who had genuine reasons for needing to have more time to cast a ballot - such as expats or soldiers deployed abroad.
 

DVD

Cyburbian
Messages
15,493
Points
53
So what you're saying is the voter ID law serves one party and not another and does not serve the people. Again, what problem are we trying to solve? Voter fraud? Removing people we don't think should vote for some reason? This is specifically trying to game the system to increase votes for one party or another without the party providing value. I don't like it.

I do like the idea of shortening the voting period to a week or a month. Mostly because I don't need to see months and months of political attach adds. I would prefer to open things like mail in or some kind of electronic voting. Why do people stand in line to vote when we have the technology to vote from home?
 

mendelman

Unfrozen Caveman Planner
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
15,256
Points
59
We have early in-person voting here and I love it.
Here in my state too and I also love it.

I disagree with the sentiment about keeping it to a much shorter or one day period as it doesn't/won't really work for a nation of ~145,000,000 voters.

2020 was the most liberated and accommodating voting in US history with demonstrably and objectively no real fraud as repeated again and again by Republican and Democratic run/managed elections across the 50 states.

I know that the system used in 2020 is the exemplar of permitting as much access to voting for all. We should keep it, if we can. (to quote B. Franklin slightly out of context)
 
Last edited:

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,738
Points
56
Here in my state too and I also love it.

I disagree with the sentiment about keeping it to a much shorter or one day period as it doesn't/won't really work for a nation of ~145,000,000 voters.

2020 was the most liberated and accommodating voting in US history with demonstrably and objectively no real fraud as repeated again and again by Republican and Democratic electeds running the elections across the 50 states.

I know that the system used in 2020 is the exemplar of permitting as much access to voting for all. We should keep it, if we can. (to quote B. Franklin slightly out of context)
The way they structure it here is they have a handful of 'early voting sites' spread throughout the County (County runs the elections here) and if you live in that county, you can show up at any of them to vote. They check you off on a paper and a computer form to indicate that you have voted, and they hand you the proper ballot. It works out great for me because it allows me not only time, but location flexibility and the computer check in synchronized with the other polling places to prevent me from going to multiple locations and voting more than once.

If you vote on election day, you have to go to your assigned polling place.
 
Top