[Politics] Is a Photo ID requirement for Voting a Good Idea?

[Wardy's twin]

Thanks for posting that map as I have noticed Svalbard for the first time. Never knew it was there.

you can see it now because of global warming.....

 

[beorhthelm]

Let's be honest, this is not about voter fraud, it is about disenfranchisement. Tories saw Trump trying to do similar in the states and in their desperate state, they'll try anything

it's about introducing ID. when you look at the list of accepted ID, including bus passes for the elderly, PASS cards used by late teens, and a free ID card for the %'s not covered by these, it's hard to imagine who would be disenfranchised. you have to register to vote, when you register you get your ID too (if not having one). i can see far more problems on polling day with people who have ID but forgot it, than any particular demographic being excluded. and you can postal vote too and avoid the whole farce, which i predict will increase greatly.

we see here repeated comments that agree in principle, just dont like the missed IDs (under 65 rail/bus) and inconsistency. so the next stage will be to harmonise on a single ID issued to everyone, and we have the Home Office's beloved national ID card.

comparisons to Trump and US are pointless as they've decades of claims and counter-claims of voter fraud, where every state, even counties and cities, have different systems and processes.

 

[The Clamp]

No motorists were caught speeding on the A24 this morning.

Therefore no-one sped on the A24 this morning.

Do you agree with this?

Don’t be so silly.

Thousands upon thousands of motorists travel along motorways every minute of the day, every day. The incidents of speeding are going to be far above those recorded because the opportunity to do so is so vast.
According to the Home Office, there were over 6,000 motorists caught speeding every day in the UK last year. That’s 2,136,000 in 2021.
We can say with confidence that the occurrence of speeding is going to be accordingly high.

Voting takes place on specific days, for a few hours. The opportunity for fraud is very low and this is reflected in the detected figures. We can therefore say with confidence, that the occurrence of electoral fraud is going to be accordingly low.

Your analogy doesn’t hold water. You’re arguing for the sake of arguing.

 

[Zeberdi]

Where's the difference of opinion when I agree that electoral fraud in the UK is likely to be very low and not impacting our election results?

Again, that was not the statement I was referring to which I disagreed

It was this : “I just don't think anyone can say "electoral fraud isn't much of a problem" with any confidence at all”

so lets just agree to differ on that because I think the lack of evidence of widespread voter fraud gives a high level of confidence to say there isn’t any.

 

[Bozza]

you just proved a point about the difference between causation and correlation - of course one wouldn’t agree with that which is also unscientific - that's a different logistical conundrum though.

Ours is:

No motorists were caught speeding on the A24 this morning

Therefore there is no evidence to show that motorists were speeding.

Yours might be that but others, including @The Clamp a few posts up says "We do know" (...that electoral fraud is low because reported statistics of it are low).

Anyway, I've wasted enough time on a pedantic philosophical point which has nothing to do with the thread subject.

Back on topic-ish: mandatory voter ID is not going to save the Tories at the ballot box next time round.

 

[Thunder Bolt]

The ID card system used not just about voting. Along with smart ID it is used for endless stuff over here. Like booking your doctor's appointment online, logging into your online banking, logging into any government site for public use, signing for payments etc. It certainly makes life very simple

I know. I have carried an ID card for the vast majority of my working life.

 

[The Clamp]

Yours might be that but others, including @The Clamp a few posts up says "We do know" (...that electoral fraud is low because reported statistics of it are low).

Anyway, I've wasted enough time on a pedantic philosophical point which has nothing to do with the thread subject.

Back on topic-ish: mandatory voter ID is not going to save the Tories at the ballot box next time round.

It’s not pedantic though, is it. It’s the very (supposed) reason that ID cards are being bought in, the very essence of the argument; the size of the problem of voter fraud.

I’ve made my point, I’m not going to keep repeating it for those who chose to deliberately mis-understand.

 

[rippleman]

old passports are eligible for voter ID.

I hadn't realised. Thank you for that. But I look nothing like I did 35 odd years ago but if thems the rules I can see me having a right ruck at the polling station when the passport photo looks nothing like me.

Just as a bit of an afterthought, why wouldn't the club allow my old passport as "valid photo id" when the law of the land accepts it for voting in elections?

 

[Zeberdi]

Anyway, I've wasted enough time on a pedantic philosophical point which has nothing to do with the thread subject.

It has everything to do with the thread topic - read the pole - option: 2.

’No’ I do not agree with PhotoIDs because there is no evidence that election fraud is an issue” and it’s an unnecessary expense

If you dont agree with that, or feel ‘confident’ in saying that, fine, that’s the point of a poll but it seems that you are the one derailing the thread with pedantry!

I’ve have things to do as I’m travelling later so as, said several posts back, lets agree to differ on this point

 

[Bozza]

It’s not pedantic though, is it. It’s the very (supposed) reason that ID cards are being bought in, the very essence of the argument; the size of the problem of voter fraud.

I’ve made my point, I’m not going to keep repeating it for those who chose to deliberately mis-understand.

Essentially my point was nothing to do with elections nor mandatory ID which is why I'm describing MY OWN POSTS as pedantic.

 

[beorhthelm]

I hadn't realised. Thank you for that. But I look nothing like I did 35 odd years ago but if thems the rules I can see me having a right ruck at the polling station when the passport photo looks nothing like me.

Just as a bit of an afterthought, why wouldn't the club allow my old passport as "valid photo id" when the law of the land accepts it for voting in elections?

thats a question of the ages, why organisations not requiring formal ID choose to have strict ID requests.

polling days will be a mess with ID cards that are old, damaged, missing from the wallet or purse, and overzealous tellers enforcing their new power.

 

[nwgull]

At face value (without reading the details, or the thread) it's a shit idea if it potentially costs voters money. My mum's passport has expired (which may not be a bad thing) but eldest jnr's has expired as well.

Expired passports are still valid forms of ID for the purpose of voting according to this link:

Voter ID list gives few options for younger voters

Long-awaited details of the government’s voter ID scheme have now finally been released including details of which IDs will be accepted at the polling station.With no alternatives for

www.electoral-reform.org.uk

It's still a load of bollocks though, and I'm in no doubt that voter fraud is negligible and this is nothing more than an attempt to suppress the non-tory vote.

 

[Bozza]

It has everything to do with the thread topic - read the pole - option: 2.

’No’ I do not agree with PhotoIDs because there is no evidence that election fraud is an issue” and it’s an unnecessary expense

If you dont agree with that, or feel ‘confident’ in saying that, fine, that’s the point of a poll but it seems that you are the one derailing the thread with pedantry!

I’ve have things to do as I’m travelling later so as, said several posts back, lets agree to differ on this point

The pole [sic] was of no interest to me. For a start, it's been configured so anyone can vote for all options at the same time.

I was interested in some of the posts made on the thread. It turns out everyone seems to be in the same place as I am: we all have trust in the high integrity of our electoral process as it stands today.

 

[Wardy's twin]

I'm not going to keep saying the same thing that I and others have said on the earlier pages of this thread, if you don't want to read them or try to understand them.

Any reports can only detail *detected* electoral fraud.

As I keep saying I agree it's likely low and our election results are entirely legitimate. But I can't possibly know that.

If, as I suspect, no motorists were caught breaking the speed limit of the A24 this morning, does it mean that no-one sped on the A24 this morning? (Hint: I saw someone doing, at a guess. 60mph in a 40)

You are correct we don't know what the exact figures are but what we have ( from the electoral commission) are figures for 2019 that show 600 cases of fraud out of 30 million(?) votes. Now your key word is detected and inference that there is a lot of undetected fraud , given most of those votes are people turning up and ticking off a list then there is a strong indicator that we are not getting people turning up and using someone else's vote as they would show as duplicates. Clearly there is scope for someone to turn up and vote as their neighbour (who has told them they never vote ) but to suggest that it is rife is a bit of a stretch.

This is a diversionary tactic by a government clutching at straws to maintain power. Some people my say its the first phase of a stolen election campaign....

As I said earlier I am not against ID , would love to see all the actual (rather than theoretical) pros and cons written down succinctly but that should be part of a comprehensive discussion about using ID for many things not voting.

 

[Wardy's twin]

it's about introducing ID. when you look at the list of accepted ID, including bus passes for the elderly, PASS cards used by late teens, and a free ID card for the %'s not covered by these, it's hard to imagine who would be disenfranchised. you have to register to vote, when you register you get your ID too (if not having one). i can see far more problems on polling day with people who have ID but forgot it, than any particular demographic being excluded. and you can postal vote too and avoid the whole farce, which i predict will increase greatly.

we see here repeated comments that agree in principle, just dont like the missed IDs (under 65 rail/bus) and inconsistency. so the next stage will be to harmonise on a single ID issued to everyone, and we have the Home Office's beloved national ID card.

comparisons to Trump and US are pointless as they've decades of claims and counter-claims of voter fraud, where every state, even counties and cities, have different systems and processes.

Comparisons to Trump aren't pointless , we had an individual claiming the election was stolen by fraud and we now have a government who are now indicating (even before the votes are cast) that the election is subject to fraud. The same government that challenged the purpose of the 3 judges that blocked BREXIT even though the High Court is part of our checks and balances system. Same government decrying the value of MPs around BREXIT even though parliament is (was?) the cornerstone of our democracy i.e. we vote for people to make decisions for us rather than have a rabble fighting for what they want.

ID is not an issue for me, what's happening with this corrupt government is.

 

[chickens]

I really dont mind being against national ID cards, I find it refreshing... but the idea that this is some kind of America only-thing is just pretty wild.

View attachment 155902

Appreciate the concerns about surveillance etc... but that ship sailed a very long time ago.

ID cards are part of this conversation, but this is specifically about introducing Voter ID requirements at polling stations. The US is the western democracy where we have the most recent introduction of this, and due to the level of scrutiny, have some idea as to outcomes. Your points re: ID cards are absolutely accurate, but ID cards in and of themselves are only part of this one.

 

[Since1982]

I’ve always found it remarkable that I can pitch up to vote with nothing more than an address and name to quote to the staff and that my participation is marked by a pencil line being drawn through the name I have given. But, I don’t trust this government and assume that everything they do is in the interests of the Conservative Party, not the country. When an independent, expert body recommends an id to vote system then I’d be more inclined to think it a good idea - and they may have already done so but I’ve not seen it.

 

[Zeberdi]

The pole [sic] was of no interest to me. For a start, it's been configured so anyone can vote for all options at the same time.

I asked the mods in my second post to delete the last two pole questions they were not meant to be there and I also had not finished setting up the pole- as stated I pressed the save button by mistake on my phone while still working out the pole and there is no way of editing what had been already been added or changing the pole settings once saved. However, that was not done and the poll looks a bit confusing It doesn’t really matter about the polls on threads imo other than they provide a framework of sorts to have a discussion and invite alternative views on any given issue - Thank you for your input though

 

[Bozza]

You are correct we don't know what the exact figures are but what we have ( from the electoral commission) are figures for 2019 that show 600 cases of fraud out of 30 million(?) votes. Now your key word is detected and inference that there is a lot of undetected fraud ,

Inference? How about we actually deal with what I've said explicitly and repeatedly, namely that I don't believe there is widescale electoral fraud and, like others on this thread, have high confidence in our current electoral system.

 

[Randy McNob]

How on earth could voter fraud exist anyway - you would need hundreds of thousands of people colluding to have any impact over the result of an election, unless it's the political system itself which is rigged but then Voter ID wouldn't make any difference anyway

Tories are in favour because they benefit from voter apathy, the more apathetical the electorate is the less chance of more swing votes to for them to lose seats, all they need is the hardcore tory voters from their tory heartlands to stay blue, there's no other right wing choice and they can rely on the left vote being split between Lab / Lid Dem / SNP / Green. So in our unfair FPTP system they will probably get a smaller share of the overall but still retain power. Voter ID helps cement it