Photo ID needed to vote? Please no.

[flashbac]

The government are bringing in (photo) voter ID meaning you'll need to show your passport or driving licence when going to cast your vote.

By all means reform the postal voting system but not this. Not everyone drives or goes abroad and this will bar many people from voting. Driving licences and passports are not cheap.

amp.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/10/queens-speech-photo-id-future-elections-social-care?

The obvious answer is to issue everyone with an ID card. I already need to ID to collect a passport from the Post Office ffs or click and collect at Waitrose, and will soon get a "passport" to prove I've had a Covid vaccine.
Everyone one had an ID card during WW2, which this government thinks we've just won, so it will probably happen pretty soon.

It's ridiculous that you don't have to show ID to vote. Whether election fraud is minimal or not its pretty crazy you don't have to show anything - even a bank card would be fine IMO. Labour were very quick to condemn this when it came up previously because of voter suppression but forgot they in the majority voted against National ID cards something I've never really understood the backlash against.

Actually, there have been four major voting fraud cases in this century. You might say “only four” but it was made clear the problem was much wider than that and each time the electoral commission failed to act. Eventually it put out a pitiful report but essentially could take no steps, especially where postal votes were involved.

I'm not spending ££s to renew my passport and my driving licence is paper. I'm the recent elections we had to wear face masks so I don't know how matching a masked face to photo id would work.

[quote flashbac]The government are bringing in (photo) voter ID meaning you'll need to show your passport or driving licence when going to cast your vote.

By all means reform the postal voting system but not this. Not everyone drives or goes abroad and this will bar many people from voting. Driving licences and passports are not cheap.

amp.theguardian.com/politics/2021/may/10/queens-speech-photo-id-future-elections-social-care?[/quote]
It's probably so they can bring in, by the back door, some kind of ID card that conveniently has your vaccine details on.

@Serpenta

Voter fraud in the UK is almost non-existent. This is just the Tories copying from the Republican's Big Book of Voter Suppression.

Please don’t compare to the US, in the US you need photo ID to do practically anything. But you can get a photo ID card for like ten bucks at the BMV if you don’t drive so it’s really not the same.

The OP said this:

The government are bringing in (photo) voter ID meaning you'll need to show your passport or driving licence when going to cast your vote.

And the Guardian article actually says this:

The government has previously said people would be able to apply for a voting ID card from their local council, although this would have to be done before polling day.

So it's a bit of a storm in a teacup really, to start getting all infuriated about people who can't afford passports or driving licences.

"So it's a bit of a storm in a teacup really, to start getting all infuriated about people who can't afford passports or driving licences."

Except there is strong evidence from the US and other countries which operate such systems that a requirement for voter ID presents a barrier to voting even if the cards are free. It's addressing a non-existent problem.

Except there is strong evidence from the US and other countries which operate such systems that a requirement for voter ID presents a barrier to voting even if the cards are free. It's addressing a non-existent problem.

And what were the reasons given for this free voter ID card presenting barriers? If someone doesn't feel terribly compelled to vote they won't vote whether they have to show ID or not. If someone is compelled to vote then I can't imagine why on earth they would fail to take advantage of a free voter ID card that allows them to vote.

What I found laughable was when Noris said it would be particularly effective for first time voters. Eh? The people I see at the polling station are people I have never seen before in my life so how would it make a difference if it was my first vote or my 15th!

It's voter suppression plain and simple. I have photo ID but plenty of people don't and can't afford to. The point is not about people being able to afford them either, it's about having to pay to vote essentially and that's not right, no one should have to pay money for voting! that's not what democracy is about, everyone should have the right to vote whether they can afford to pay £75 for a passport or not

@BashfulClam what's more laughable is these first time voters, who they want to disenfranchise, were the people who got them into power due to the fact they actually went out to vote in a 2016 referendum....

fastandcurious

Look at what the article actually said:

The government has previously said people would be able to apply for a voting ID card from their local council, although this would have to be done before polling day.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain the basis on which free voter ID cards for disadvantaged or marginalised people results in voter suppression.

@SunflowersAndLavender first time voters or vote very irregularly, don't decide to vote until the last minute or until someone, like one of my nephews, convinces them it is worth voting.

This is why it is voter suppression as these people won't be organised to get a card in advance.

Except there is strong evidence from the US and other countries which operate such systems that a requirement for voter ID presents a barrier to voting even if the cards are free. It's addressing a non-existent problem.

What evidence? And voter fraud isn’t nonexistent.

And voter fraud isn’t nonexistent

In UK, the problem is almost entirely with postal votes

@SunflowersAndLavender

I'm still waiting for someone to explain the basis on which free voter ID cards for disadvantaged or marginalised people results in voter suppression.

I agree. It’s a bit like saying you have to get a NINO in order to work is “worker suppression” and will prevent marginalised people from working. Very poor reasoning.

Okay thanks, understood Red

I don't really buy it as a reason not to have voter ID though. I imagine relatively few people in practice would be prevented from voting because of those circumstances. If they are then it's down to them.

I think it's far more important to prevent voter fraud than to worry about a handful of people who can't be bothered to organise themselves and take advantage of a free system designed to help them and ultimately to protect them from someone else stealing their vote.

@meditrina

And voter fraud isn’t nonexistent

In UK, the problem is almost entirely with postal votes

Reference my earlier post. Voter fraud in the U.K. is an unknown because it is solely tracked by allegations filed by witnesses and these are invariably witnesses to the postal vote processing by campaigners.

No inspections or audits are done on votes gotten at polling stations. U.K. has no idea if fraud is occurring there because it’s not being monitored at all.

I’d suggest the introduction of IDs isn’t about the voting, and much more about the government wanting to bring in identity cards for broader security purposes. Using an election won by the incumbent is a relatively uncontroversial way of slowly introducing this concept to the public.

The deterring people from voting 'last minute' argument is a bit like saying that driving licences and passports are unfair because they deter disorganised people from driving legally and going abroad on holiday.

Bring in free photo ID cards in order to access state benefits and free at the point of service access to the NHS. Then let's see just how many people are too disorganised to get around to applying for them.

When it comes down to it, if someone wants or needs something badly enough they will do what is required in order to get it. If they don't bother to get the card it's because they don't consider that there is enough direct benefit to them to make it worth their effort.

When I vote I have to tell the person my address, then my name. Why would anywhere ask you to confirm a detail by reading it out to you?!

@DogInATent

I used to be against national ID cards on principal, but I now look at the number of issues that could have been avoided if there was proof of identification, nationality, and residence (Windrush, EU citizens residency rights after Brexit, etc.) and now I'm much les sure it's a bad idea.

If anything is brought in for voter identification it must be free, and should apply to all - no exemptions even if you already have a diving licence and/or passport. It should not be possible to identify someone's social status as "too poor for a passport" from the identification they use at the polling station.

Windrush wouldn't have been prevented by ID cards. Windrush was caused by shit administration - all ID cards would have done is add another layer of it.

For all those people who "don't understand the opposition/backlash" to a national ID card scheme.
I'd like to remind you of the recent Post Office Horizon revelations, and of mistakes made by the DVLA, and the Windrush scandal.
These and many others are the reasons I don't want the government (via some badly awarded and executed massive IT contract) to manage my identity thanks - I happier managing it myself.
Most of the reasons touted for "needing" ID cards aren't correct, and for them to be really effective for most other issues, they'd have to be demanded at a level that would become intrusive.

They are cited as a cure-all to problems that either don't exist, or that they wouldn't address, or for issues that could and should be dealt with by better enforcement of existing laws.