Voter ID ruling creating confusion for primary

news times ^ | 8-10-2014 | SCOTT BAUER

[Citizen Zed]

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Voters will not have to show photo identification to cast a ballot in Tuesday's primary election, but poll watchers say they're still concerned there could be confusion thanks to a recent state Supreme Court ruling that the photo ID law is constitutional.

The court's decision didn't reinstate the law because the photo ID requirement was previously blocked in federal court. Republican Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen is trying to get that ruling put on hold in time for the November general election.

The opposing legal views create confusion, especially for voters who aren't paying close attention or may be misinformed, said Larry Dupuis, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union in Wisconsin. The biggest concern is that someone without an ID may assume they can't vote, so they won't show up, Dupuis said.

"There's certainly some potential for confusion," he said. "There's always some risk because if people only see a headline or the beginning of a TV news report and the takeaway is it's been upheld, there's a risk people won't look beyond that. And there's also the rumor mill."

[Citizen Zed]

Some are afraid that the rumor of voter fraud enforcement will prevent voter fraud.

[BobL]

Easy solution - bring your ID with you when you vote and show it to whoever asks.

Not very confusing to some of us.

[rawcatslyentist]

What's wrong with ink fingers?

Cheap and effective way to prevent multiple voting! No ID required!

[Grampa Dave]

“Some are afraid that the rumor of voter fraud enforcement will prevent voter fraud.”

How often each week are we asked to show our IDs to use a credit card, even to buy wine/beer or liquor when we are often three times the age of those asking for the id.

We recently applied for an equity line of credit and had to show more ids and background proof of financial holdings at every stage of the process, than required to get a top secret clearance.

Our primary family doc retired last year, and I had outpatient foot surgery, and my wife had a new controllable disease. Before, we could see a doctor or get lab tests run, we had to show driver’s licenses and proofs of insurance at every level.

Yet for the most important action as an American adult, we are not asked to prove, who we are to vote.

Cui Bono or who benefits when a large % of voters don’t have show an ID to prove that they are a legitimate voter?

[Grampa Dave]

Thanks.

Please look at my new tag line.

[RedMDer]

All contributions are for the current quarter expenses.


FReepathon day 40.

Two percent a day keeps the 404 away.

[exDemMom]

The biggest concern is that someone without an ID may assume they can't vote, so they won't show up, Dupuis said.

I'm not at all concerned that people without IDs can't vote. If they are legitimate, they have ID. Period.

[Citizen Zed]

Ping!

[Bigg Red]

Bingo!

****
The opposing legal views create confusion, especially for voters who aren’t paying close attention or may be misinformed, said Larry Dupuis, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union in Wisconsin. The biggest concern is that someone without an ID may assume they can’t vote, so they won’t show up, Dupuis said.

&&
If that was actually the truth, Larry Dupuis, I would say people who are that willfully uninformed probably have no business voting.

[Oatka]

How often each week are we asked to show our IDs

I just renewed my library card and had to show my ID. (!!!)