General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsArtur Davis: Voter ID Laws Don't Disenfranchise Anybody
&feature=relmfuIn case you missed this earlier this week, which was probably easy to do unless you subscribe to the Heritage Foundation's Youtube Channel (ick) or caught it on CSPAN radio like I did, Artur Davis gave a nauseating interview to the Heritage Foundation explaining why he is now a Republican. It included all the usual stuff about how Democrats are out of touch with mainstream America, the healthcare bill sucked, Obama broke his promises, etc.
What really galled me of all the horrible things he said, however, was when he talked about how all the new Voter ID laws don't disenfranchise anybody. Unfortunately, as you can tell if you watch this clip, this is an edited interview. They played a longer version on CSPAN radio which was even worse than this. His reasoning included that he himself "needed an ID to get into a recent TV interview," that "we all need them to get on an airplane," and that he "could not go to work in Washington without showing an ID." The final one is a blatant lie. He used to work at the US Capitol, which everyone can get into without showing an ID. Why? Because we have a constitutional right to petition the government. They can't screen us out by requiring that we have an ID on us, and they don't (massive security, magnetometers, and X-ray machines, yes, but ID no).
Likewise, we don't have a constitutional right to get on a plane or into a TV station, but we do have a constitutional right to vote, so those are not even comparable (as a former member of the Judiciary Committee and Harvard Law Graduate should know). These comparisons to "we all show our ID every day" kill me. Yes, if you live a certain lifestyle, you may show your ID many times a day. But if you are 85, let your driver's license expire 10 years ago, do not travel out of the country or by plane, or write checks, you may not have any government issued photo ID. I.e., these people assume "all Americans" are middle class, so they cannot comprehend someone who isn't. It's bullshit.
I was just appalled and wanted to throw up at how much he has abandoned the people he used to represent.
ananda
(28,782 posts).. to see someone turn like that.
marmar
(76,982 posts)nt
OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)BumRushDaShow
(127,298 posts)Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)Has not seemed to hold on to any Democratic beliefs at all.
madashelltoo
(1,685 posts)I desperately want to stomp on their throat. Prayer and therapy. Prayer and therapy.
freeandequalpa
(45 posts)I repeatedly hear proponents of these photo ID laws claim that you need a photo ID to board an airplane. In addition to the valid reason noted by the author -- that the people likely burdened by the law are those that are doing little if any traveling -- the claim is simply factually incorrect. Just ask the TSA:
"We understand passengers occasionally arrive at the airport without an ID, due to lost items or inadvertently leaving them at home. Not having an ID, does not necessarily mean a passenger wont be allowed to fly. If passengers are willing to provide additional information, we have other means of substantiating someones identity, like using publicly available databases."
http://www.tsa.gov/travelers/airtravel/acceptable_documents.shtm
OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)Several people did not believe him. But I figured it HAD to be true because you could not force people to stay in Miami if they flew there and had their wallet stolen. There obviously have to be ways around the requirement. Thanks for posting. But these VOTER ID laws generally don't have equivalent exceptions, and treat voter as a privilege, not a right. Too bad people like Davis like to talk about the Constitution, but don't care much about what it actually says.
OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)Major Nikon
(36,814 posts)Freedom of movement is a right guaranteed by the Constitution.
OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)It's an implied right. Imagine it having greater protection, than, oh, say, the 15th Amendment.
la la
(1,855 posts)Jumping John
(930 posts)ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)Probably a lot of self-loathing here.
OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)and rake in generous donations from Koch Bros. et al. It's like an addiction with some of these elected officials. They think the office belongs to them and not to the People.
spanone
(135,633 posts)Gothmog
(143,999 posts)The actual TSA rules allows one to fly without a photo id http://www.huffingtonpost.com/debbie-hines/voter-id-laws_b_1247008.html
A comparison of these strict state photo voter ID laws to the Transportation Security Administration's (TSA) requirements to fly show it is harder to vote than it is to fly. Republican proponents of strict photo voter ID laws argue that the same documents are needed to fly. Everyone does not fly. And TSA is more flexible in its approach to airport security screening than the strict photo voter ID laws. TSA's web site states that where photo government documents are not available, there are other ways to verify the identity of the traveler. TSA will allow airport travelers to fly where the required documents are missing. A traveler can pass through security and fly if they do not own a driver's license, state photo ID or passport. According to TSA,
"Not having a {photo} ID, does not necessarily mean a passenger won't be allowed to fly. If passengers are willing to provide additional information, we have other means of substantiating someone's identity, like using publicly available databases."
OrwellwasRight
(5,170 posts)And one of those things is protected by a constitutional amendment and one isn't. Guess which is which.