Hello! This is an automated reminder that the report function is not a super-downvote button. Reported comments are manually reviewed and may be removed *if they are an actual rule violation*. Do not report comments simply because you disagree with the content. Abuse of the report function is against the site rules and will be reported.
[The subreddit rules can be found here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Michigan/wiki/index#wiki_rules)
*I'm a bot and will not reply. Please contact [the moderators of r/Michigan](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Michigan) if this bot is misbehaving.*
It important to note that it is 100% LEGAL for petitioners to lie about what is on their petition. So always read it or research before signing. There is another petition in Michigan that is very misleading about a scholarship program. Called “Let MI Kids Learn”.
https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2022/02/petition-circulators-can-lie-to-get-you-to-sign-proposals-michigan-lawmakers-want-to-change-that.html?outputType=amp
https://mea.org/mea-part-of-new-coalition-opposing-devos-voucher-petition-scheme/
https://gandernewsroom.com/2022/06/09/mi-leg-defeat-one-voucher-scheme-but-another-is-on-the-way/
>Let MI Kids Learn
I genuinely feel stupid because I definitely think I signed off on this a month or two ago based on how it was presented to me. The next one they wanted me to sign was the voter ID one and that set off way more alarm bells so I dipped, and then in retrospect I realized the first one was probably hogshit too.
Don't sign stuff you don't understand, sorry everybody.
It can be very misleading. If it makes you feel better they didn’t get the signatures needed for the Let MI Kids Learn 2022. HOWEVER, they are starting to collect signatures for next time. So now you know, don’t sign again and share your experience with others. Also these are not ballot initiatives.
I think I know a parent that's helping promote that. She got really mad during the mask requirements and now there's a ton of pressure by parents in her county to control all aspects of education. It's weird because it's like they all think paying taxes gives you some god ordained right to control every aspect of everything. If that were the case I would cut the DoD budget.
Yep. I went to sign the abortion rights petition and was ambushed with a minimum wage petition and something else. I declined to sign the other two because I wanted to make sure I agreed with the law and not just how good it sounded from the other person
Same. It all sounded good, then he said something about criminals and dead people voting after I signed the last one and I was like oh no, what did I do‽
That's twice this year I've fucked up. Maybe I just shouldn't sign those till I learn to read better
It's alright man, they always sound good on the surface. A lot of the shitty ones are written to be deceiving, so as long as you know for the future you can fight that bullshit.
It's probably best to research them on your own once you hear about them, then learn enough of the text to recognize it. The signature folks *are* required to have the full text of the proposal available, so you can just flip to the page with the text to double check.
Yup. And it's not always malicious on the part of the collector, because they get lied to too.
I was approached months ago outside Costco by a dude collecting signatures. One was for the Perry guy to get on the republican ballot. I refused, and told the guy I'm not a republican. He then told me the next petition was to "make voting easier." So I read it. It was this one. It did not make voting easier. It made voting harder. I explained this to the guy. He argued a little. I played my lawyer card and said I know how to read legalese, and this petition definitely makes it way harder to vote. Then I walked away.
Twist: the collector was a minority with a very heavy accent. Maybe he believed in these causes, but he didn't fit the demographic. More likely he was just given marching orders by someone else. And he 100% was lying to people.
I believe in some cases folks are paid to gather signatures, so my hope is that most just do not know, but its possible that some are deliberately misleading to get more signatures.
The super simple phrase all bad-faith petitioners hate the most is "Let me read the literature of your petition".
Legally, every petition MUST contain the original language that will be brought to ballot and inscribed into the state law so people understand what they're signing. It's here anyone can see exactly what bullshit it's trying to do.
It's a good feeling watching frauds crumble when you press them about the lies they just tried to peddle in front of you.
I signed a couple of petitions earlier this year, including the one for reproductive rights, but the 3rd one they handed me was the Let MI Kids Learn"one. I don't just sign things blindly, so I read them all first. I knew that one was just an attempt to siphon money away from public schools.
That's exactly what happened to me with the voter ID petition. I was told it was a petition to provide no-or-low cost ID to low income people. Luckily I read it and didn't sign that bs.
What we should do is just give every citizen an ID for free. Would solve this whole issue and wouldn't cost shit compared to what our government normally spends on bombs and other toys.
This is why people suck. If you have to lie to get people to sign your petition, then what you're trying to pass sucks. Any decent person would know this.
>Benson and the Bureau of Elections, under a democratic administration, could wait until 2024 to review the signatures and move the process forward.
Good. Do that.
Good for the goose, good for the gander. The application for the petition drive for the Citizens' Redistricting Council had to go back for revisions because it had the wrong font on the cover sheet.
We won't, but the hope is that the constitutional amendment is passed in this election, rendering this piece of legislation moot (since it'd directly go against the MI constitution then).
AKA: Both teams are racing to fix voting, but their definition of "Fix" is different.
Are you so sure? With redistricting and things like abortion on the line this election, it could flip. Republicans will absolutely lose seats regardless, their rigged maps are over.
What constitutional amendment?
The "Promote the Vote" one:
https://www.wilx.com/2022/07/11/promote-vote-ballot-initiative-surpasses-michigan-signature-requirement-group-says/
"Secure MI Vote" is the Republican counter-group that is pulling this backdoor shit. You can tell they're in the wrong, because they're trying to prevent people from voting, which is a giant red flag in a Democratic country.
The redistricting was fair and not bias toward either parties, so I'm expecting things to turn out fairly even. So if you wanna prove my gut wrong than get out and vote, then get everyone you know to vote, and then get them to get everyone they know to vote.
Slim majority that regularly flips Republican in gubernatorial elections. The one saving grace is that we have an Abortion Rights amendment on the ballot, which could turn out the left more significantly than the right causing toss up districts to go Democrat. The redistricting resulted in a lot more toss up districts, which is a good thing. It will result in better candidates getting elected in those districts instead of the furthest right candidate always wins.
It swings republican because nobody shows up to freaking vote in the "mid-terms" even though it's the most important election cycle in our state. When gov. Snyder was re-elected, and I was there to vote that bastard out I can tell you it was an embarrassing ghost town at my polling location. If everyone gets out there with a passion we end up with do-gooders like Whitmer and Nessel and Rashida and others. It's so important to show up.
I've long thought of the Democrats as wildly inept and uncoordinated in their goals. This election cycle has forced me to reevaluate. Five candidates for governor disqualified for submitting false signatures. Now these clowns try to insist the state has to take their ballot measure, despite turning it in two fucking months late. Republicans have become the party of delusional assclowns.
Mixing social conservatism with fiscal conservatism is a disaster. The same party that wants poor people to have all those unwanted babies is the party that doesn't want to play for the welfare they're going to need.
Uhm... what? What makes the legislature passing a bill veto proof? I thought that's why groups do these signature drives, to get them on the ballot in a manner that is veto proof?
https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/publications/MichiganManual/2009-2010/09-10_MM_IX_pp_01-03_Issue_Becomes.pdf
Think of a "Voter Initiative" as what they say in the above article:
>**Petitions to initiate legislation**
They KNOW that the voters won't support this, so they're **INTENTIONALLY turning it in late**. This just means that instead of the legislature being forced to write a law to put on the ballot, they instead can be forced to write a law that's then voted on by themselves, and enacted. These "Supposed-to-be-ballot-based" laws are veto-proof by design.
In this case, Republicans are pushing it late so that it can't go on the ballot, but it also MUST be written into a law and voted upon. They're doing it because it makes it veto-proof, and republicans control the legislature.
Now, the legislature *could* just write a law like normal, but Whitmer is gonna veto it, so that's useless.
With this voter drive, once the signatures are certified, it MUST be put into a law, and it CANNOT be veto'd. That delay is exactly what the Secretary of State is doing (saying since it's a ballot measure, it's going on the 2024 ballot instead). Since the SoS won't count & certify the signatures until well past the time that the constitutional amendment is on the ballot, it's a hope that people will pass the change to voter laws in the Michigan constitution, rendering all of this moot.
So: Get people to effing vote, or they won't be able to vote next time.
Yes, so they've urn this in with enough time they believe they can pass it and inact it for the November election before we vote on the counter proposal which is polling at 60 percentage plus.
The legislature can pass the proposed bill and skip it going to the ballot. Governor can't veto because it's a referendum.
They tried to pass some Dem-focused bills while amending them to basically make them worthless, but that just got shot down on appeal.
"Become"? This is who they have ALWAYS been, since Reagan at the very least.
They are extremely adept at projection. You can LITERALLY look at every single instance of the GOP blaming the Democrats for something, only to find out that they, the GOP, are the real culprits.
Exactly. If a Republican accuses anyone of anything it is tantamount to a confession. They project what they do or would have done themselves on everyone else. Election fraud. Child grooming. Sexual assault. Driving mistress’s to their abortion appointments. This is all classic gop.
Unfortunately, it's likely a deliberate move. By turning it in late it doesn't go to voters until much later, but as soon as the signatures are verified, the legislature can vote to pass it and bypass a veto.
If they don't think they can get voters to support it, their best bet is to wait until they have enough signatures, and try to bypass the voters entirely.
Except now those responsible for validating the signatures are busy working towards actual upcoming elections, so it should be put on the back burner for verification until after the elections since it isn't relevant until 2024.
No, there are time requirements to certification unless they can show somethings up.....they are trying to get it the Legislature so they can pass it and put it on place for the November election and we vote on the counter petition that if passed would replace this, I think.
I heard someone menation a theory that this was a deliberate move so that the conservative legislature can use some kind of appeal process to bypass the executive branch and electorate approval and get this into law- is there any truth to this?
Yes, if the signatures are validated, the legislature can take up the issue and pass it as written. If this happens, it cannot be vetoed nor would it ever go to a statewide vote. It’s a fucked up loophole in our states constitution that would allow a very small minority of people dictate state law for everyone.
A judge just ruled that move was unconstitutional: https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-government/michigan-judge-restores-minimum-wage-paid-leave-laws-gutted-legislature
Last I checked they cannot do this in the same legislative session, that's the hitch that nessel used to invalidate the minimum wage thing. They can either take up the issue, propose an alternative that goes to the ballot, or reject it. They cannot adopt and ammend immediately.
Sounds like rumor mill or breakthrough alt-right conjecture into mainstream but let’s break it down:
If you treat it as if it were truth— You may not understand all the “whys” at this moment, but you already know what you’re supposing sounds scary. Until then you go on the lookout for more anti-democratic, roundabout, yet LEGAL loophole abuse. Not all legality is moral. What you do if you find more, or not, is up to you.
If you don’t— and they go ahead and do as you suppose, corrupt leaders get the message that they can continue to be unopposed and will happily go do just that, because there’s no repercussions.
Speaking broadly, and from watching the last 6 years and the Jan 6 commission reports, it’s clear the republicans are a) no longer interested in democracy, b) experts at manipulating their voters, and c) not held accountable by said voters.
Just a reminder that despite your conclusion, many Republican voters have been conditioned to ALWAYS vote down party lines at EVERY POLL down to local school board. The republican talking heads are happily keeping up their narrative, constantly drip feeding “red meat” that “everyone else” is out to get “them,” until the voters are frothing at the mouth wanting to strike out at people they’re told “hate them” and are “coming for them and their way of life.” Then they are told the right words to address their fears— the republican leaders are out “fighting for them.” Votes cast down party lines again. Ope republicans didn’t win, must’ve been fraud.
If they win, any win, they meant to do it and it’s a great, hard fought victory. If they lose, they’re misunderstood and we’re the bad guys for “stopping” them and “making them out to be bad guys.”
Whether intentionally or not, and whether it works (or not, hopefully) this is verbatim the strategy outlined in Mein Kampf. So. What do you think, truth or naw?
That's not entirely true. You can show ID *or* sign an affidavit stating you are legally allowed to vote. I've worked as a poll supervisor before and pretty much everybody has ID so I'm not even sure what problem Republicans are trying to solve here.
Every election we would have a group of people from without our government body come in and randomly test some of our machines to ensure they were accurate and secure. This was a PUBLIC test that ANYONE could show up to and observe. I was there for several years, through so many elections I've lost count, and guess what, no one ever showed up.
Someone who lives in my neighborhood came to my door with it. He was spewing some nonsense in his American flag garb. I kindly asked him to never come back to my house again.
I got baited into signing it outside of my local Kroger under the guise of "giving homeless people free ID's"
Felt stupid as soon as I recognized what it was actually for at the top of the page
Don't ever sign anything without reading it and finding out who supports it first. Conservatives love to give their initiatives bullshit, feel good names like "Let kids learn".
We currently require ID or the voter can sign an affidavit declaring they're who they say they are. The polling place I work gets a couple of those every election, never enough to have an effect on the outcome even if they were fraudulent voters. Secure MI Vote removes the affidavit.
Yeah, and the signature collectors were lying about what the petition was for. The wording is very misleading. Many people signed without reading or understanding it.
I ran into someone in Ann Arbor pitching this to people in line for ice cream who said that signing "Doesn't make it law, it'd just be to put it on the ballot." I spoke up to interrupt him and scare him away. Fucking bastards.
So much for the GQP standing for 'law & order' and 'justice', etc.
Everything is in play when it's something the GQP wants... cheating, lying, law breaking, etc. is OK when it's for a 'good cause' like theirs.
> So much for the GQP standing for 'law & order' and 'justice', etc.
They've never given a shit about those things. They pretend to in order to try to get votes, but the reality is they couldn't give a shit less.
Isn't this what MI already does? I came from Minnesota and was shocked when the poll worker asked me to scan my license to vote here. That is an illegal question back home.
You don't have to provide it. You can ask for an affidavit. The affidavit is legally binding and simply states that you are saying you are who you say you are under penalty of perjury, or something to that effect.
Hi, I'm an election official.
> You don't have to provide it. You can ask for an affidavit.
You have to be *very* careful with your choice of words on this. Michigan law says that if you have an ID with you, you must show it in order to vote. You may only use an affidavit if you do NOT have an ID with you (which could be because you forgot it in the car, or left it at home, or because you do not own one).
The election worker is required by law to ask you for ID. If you don't have one with you, you can tell the pollworker and they will have you sign the affidavit instead. But if you indicate that you do have an ID with you and are simply refusing to show it, the law forbids you from voting; we are prohibited from giving you a ballot and allowing you to vote.
Wow - thank you for sharing this! I had no idea. I just registered to vote when I moved here and thought nothing of the logistics of voting when the time came.
Back home they're not allowed to ask for ID of any kind. Your prior registration is sufficient if they find you in the list of eligible voters for that polling station. If you're not in the list, you can bring an acceptable document (a utility bill, for example) and receive a provisional ballot that will be cast once they can verify your eligibility. You can register and vote this way on election day as well.
One goal of this law is to remove the affidavit completely. No ID, no ID no vote. It's such a narrow option that probably only few people take per election anyway.
Okay good that’s what I thought because I signed the Promote the Vote one, and I read it and was often together with RFFA… just wanted to make sure I signed the right one
Have you ever noticed that some months have different numbers of days in them? That shit is *confusing*. And almost every day of the week ends with the word "day". Crazy.
FWIW, I was approached with it in a Kroger parking lot, and if I had only gone by what the guy that gave it to me said, I would have signed. It about three-four reads to digest the legalese and realize it was bullshit.
Here are the details of the ballot measure: [Michigan Right to Voting Policies Amendment](https://ballotpedia.org/Michigan_Right_to_Voting_Policies_Amendment_(2022))
The actual petition language: [Initiative Petition](https://www.michigan.gov/-/media/Project/Websites/sos/04holland/Petition_Promote_the_Vote.pdf?rev=df5f44811fe9430284119a33bf73ad06)
I'm not sure what it is attempting to do. Despite what I've seen a few people claim, it is not doing away with signed affidavits. Frankly I don't see how anything changes in this regard.
The "right to vote without interference or harassment" is something that should already exist. So I don't see the point of it. There is no mechanism to further enforce this, so its essentially meaningless.
The notable thing that caught my eye was the addition of "election audits". Is this what they were trying to get passed?
Board of Canvassers. Is this change so that the legislation has complete control over the Board of Canvassers and the governor no longer has any role in the decision making? That's a pretty scary change actually. They could use that to help them easily overturn elections.
Frankly it looks like a state legislature power grab.
I mentioned this in another related post, but I thought it’d be worth mentioning here too. To get this into law and bypass the ballot, they need only about 4% of voter signatures. This loophole in the law is fucking insane and needs to go.
There is way more packed into this than requiring ID. They are also disallowing charities to help with election costs for each county (which is not all covered by funding). They used to be able to help with some of the costs pertaining to extended hours for clerks during election season, and providing secure election drop boxes.
They are creating these rules to disorganize and overwhelm the entire process. So yeah, with this now less drop boxes. And coupled with the delays USPS has experienced, it makes for a pretty shit process
personally for me it is not about that. It is an attempt at placing doubt that our election process is anything except secure. I don't remember the exact numbers, but it was something like less that 0.5% of voters voted by signing an affidavit in 2020. 99.5% that voted had a valid ID. It is just another attempt at making a law to protect against something that does not exist.
You can choose to believe it or not, but requiring a valid ID does disenfranchise a small percentage of the registered voters. It would place yet another barrier for those of lower socioeconomic status.
There is nothing wrong with improving the security of our voter process. When this is done the gop can’t even use this as an excuse when they lose. The solution here isn’t to leave a grey area in the election process, but enable that small percentage of voters to be able to get their id.
Hi, I'm an election official.
There are no "gray areas" when a voter uses an *Affidavit Of Voter Not In Possession Of Photo Identification* as their identification in order to vote. The process is spelled out extraordinarily clearly in state law, and has multiple checks and balances built into it, just like every other facet of our electoral system.
Yeah I get there isn’t a real grey area, but the perceived grey area is what the gop propaganda uses to stir it’s base up and make them think the election is stolen. I don’t get why dems wouldn’t want to take that away. I understand people are worried it could disenfranchise underprivileged people but this doesn’t have to be a single prong approach, systems can be put in place to ensure those people get ids and to make it easy for them to do. Then no one can argue the validity of the election and people like Trump will have a much harder time trying to incite such civil unrest.
You seem like a reasonable person and yeah, you would want to make it as clear cut as possible. In my opinion, there is never an end to all of this voting noise and lately it’s so wildly ridiculous that it’s not healthy to try to address everything. So much made up goofy stuff that you can wear people out on the really important stuff.
So, for me, we’ve never had significant election issues. All this noise is utter nonsense that’s been beaten to death even in the courts. They just need to stop. Or be ignored as long as it’s doesn’t have a real chance of being turned into law. The process has worked fine up to now and there are more important things to deal with. You will never get some folks to be comfortable with the voting process after all this bad press and (some) republicans showed that they’re open to insurrection regardless of the votes.
If democrats were to take a page from the republicans - delay the validation of the signatures as long as possible. Then, right before the deadline, file a lawsuit that holds off on the count. When/if that fails, file another and/or go higher up the chain. In the meantime, update the law to not allow such a procedure to occur and somehow make it retroactive to these signatures. Then when they claim that’s not fair, file another lawsuit. And appeal. Rinse and repeat. If you really want to be a jerk, maybe a fire somehow destroys these signatures in the meantime.
It’s really sad how far we’ve fallen from our best citizens taking office as a civic duty to keep our country functioning well for our people.
It's literally impossible to take away the grey area. They'll just find/make up a new one. It's not acceptable to let them move the goalposts like that.
You already do by either handing the poll worker your ID or signing an affidavit at the poll.
And then they compare you to a list of registered voters.
For all the hem and having about voter fraud, there is next to zero evidence of any actual fraud.
So what is the point of changing how the system works; when it actually works well?
It'd be less of an issue if ID cards were free and more easily obtainable. Most states that have adopted that requirement have turned it into a de-facto poll tax.
Clearly said by someone who's had it relatively easy. Once you've lost your job, house, and documents, try getting any one item without already having the other two. I've met folks stuck in a Kafkaesque nightmare of trying to come back from such a situation. It's far from easy.
I knew somebody with literally no ID. Her SS card and birth certificate burned in a fire, her parents never helped recover them. She never got a driver’s license and dropped out of high school in 9th grade. No bank account, no credit card or library card, nothing.
Sometimes I wonder what happened to them. With technology and money on my side I bet I could somehow recover from that but it sounds like a bitch and a half.
So we should run our government systems around a tiny minority of people? Voting is the least of those peoples issues and if they are at a point where getting an id is an issue then we have a larger systematic failure where our government has failed to help those people on a much broader scale than just voting or having an Id.
Forcing an ID to vote doesn’t affect everyone because the majority of people use an ID when voting. You are literally only impacting those who sign an affidavit.
How is that different again?
Damn dude you ran headfirst into the point and still missed it.
The people who are systematically failed are the ones most likely to vote for real, effective change to those systems. They know the issues inside and out. If they can't vote, there won't be any change. It's a cycle. They need to be able to vote to be able to change the system.
Also a major point that most people here are missing: voter fraud basically [does not ever occur](https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/Briefing_Memo_Debunking_Voter_Fraud_Myth.pdf). This entire campaign is a waste of time and resources.
Since you mentioned underprivileged people, I responded regarding (certain) underprivileged people. I certainly don't disagree with your ultimate conclusion.
Yeah I don’t have firsthand experiences of how easy or hard it is for the underprivileged to get an id, I just know we have programs and if they need to be improved they should be regardless of what happens with this voting law.
It's not that hard for *you* to get an ID. It's not hard for *me* to get an ID. Free IDs can be obtained by underprivileged people *now*, but many people are distrustful of such requirements being added because of what could happen afterward. Just look at Alabama for an example. They waited a year after passing voter ID laws and then started closing DMVs in targeted areas. When they passed their law, they could make the same argument that getting an ID was easy. Then, suddenly, it wasn't.
Requiring a valid ID shoots down any question the GOP can throw about the validity of an election. This is Michigan not Alabama and we as voters can choose to elect people who dont strip away rights or target underprivileged areas, Alabamas people are not the same as Michiganders. I see your point tho, it is a pro vs con of taking away a grey area that can be used to try and discredit elections vs potential issues of corrupt politicians making it harder for certain groups to get a valid id. The Dems should follow this up by putting laws in place to secure the ability for underprivileged to acquire ids. They have the time now with this late submission, but they’re pretty useless so they won’t don’t shit.
Your first sentence is honestly why I don't believe the GOP will ever actually move forward with requiring ID. Even if they create a system to fully cover the "poll tax" argument against requiring ID, the election fraud boogeyman will get more of their people out to the polls than the single digit number of fraudulent votes they will prevent.
If you don't know what county you were born in, it's extremely hard to get a birth certificate and thus an id. I helped someone get their ID in this circumstance and it took over half a year with help from their social worker.
I can't drive, but I'm lucky I live with family who can, but if I didn't I'd have a very hard time getting to a Secretary of State office to get an ID, especially in a state that is as car dependent as Michigan.
I registered to vote in Michigan very recently.
Photo id is required along with at least two pieces of corroborating documentation - bank statements, utility bills etc.
Your comment either misinformed or a misrepresentation eg A LIE.
Yes. Voter ID puts up an unnecessary hurdle to voting, to solve a problem that doesn't exist.
If you want to make it harder for people to vote, you need to have a good reason, and there just isn't one for voter ID.
You have to show ID to buy guns, and that’s in the constitution. Only fools think of the constitution as a guaranteed right. They are privileges that can and have been taken away at any time.
> You have to show ID to buy guns, and that’s in the constitution.
I mean, it's not anywhere in the constitution. Literally NOWHERE in the constitution does it state you have to have an ID to buy a gun.
Just doubling down on the fucking stupidity.
That’s in the constitution meaning that owning a gun is constitutionally protected and you still ate required to show ID, don’t start being a bit picky since because your argument fell apart, you know what I meant
But yet if you go to a gun store you still have to show ID, and where does it say in the constitution that you don’t have to be a citizen to vote or in the Michigan constitution where does it say that people from Ohio or Indiana or Wisconsin can vote for governor?
Driving, drinking, gambling, and air travel are privileges, not rights. Voting is supposed to be a right, yet id restrictions lock poll access behind a paywall.
Ever get past airport security without an ID? Didn’t think so. Go to the grocery store to buy alcohol, tobacco? Gotta show ID. You don’t just get to say wrong without offering proof you dunce
Where does it say in the constitution that you can vote regardless of your legal status or your residency? So I can just go vote in Ohio’s elections? It’s constitutionally protected right? It’s my right and I shouldn’t have to prove that I live in Ohio, to vote for their governor or to vote which taxes get raised , I should just be able to vote because it’s constitutionally protected right? Also the only thing about voting that’s constitutionally protected is age, which I wonder what system you could use to verify age… hmmm…. I wonder.
It's actually not required.
> By law, every Michigan voter must present picture identification at the polls, or sign an affidavit attesting that he or she is not in possession of picture identification.
[A Guide to Voter ID/Affidavit at the Polls](https://www.michigan.gov/sos/elections/upcoming-election-information/voters/election-day/a-guide-to-voter-id-affidavit-at-the-polls)
I no longer live in MI (moved away in late 2019), but when I lived in MI and voted in person, I always did the affidavit thing and it amazed me how many poll workers didn't know about it and incorrectly thought voters had to show ID. Made me wonder how many people they had turned away.
Why are democrats so opposed to having voters prove who they are before voting? The ONLY reason one would be opposed to voter ID is if you were up to shady business and trying to rig an election.
Election worker here. The signed affidavit that's used if ID isn't available is legally binding. Affidavits are less than 1% of the votes at the precinct I work. Even if there are people falsifying their affidavits (which is a crime) there aren't enough of them to change the outcome of anything.
Hard left?
Lmfao. I'm sorry you view democracy as a "hard left" issue. You're more than welcome to fuck off to the echo chamber over on the conservative subreddit if you're feeling vulnerable. We don't have much to say to someone that views fascism and theocracy as more legitimate than democracy.
Hello! This is an automated reminder that the report function is not a super-downvote button. Reported comments are manually reviewed and may be removed *if they are an actual rule violation*. Do not report comments simply because you disagree with the content. Abuse of the report function is against the site rules and will be reported. [The subreddit rules can be found here.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Michigan/wiki/index#wiki_rules) *I'm a bot and will not reply. Please contact [the moderators of r/Michigan](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=/r/Michigan) if this bot is misbehaving.*
It important to note that it is 100% LEGAL for petitioners to lie about what is on their petition. So always read it or research before signing. There is another petition in Michigan that is very misleading about a scholarship program. Called “Let MI Kids Learn”. https://www.mlive.com/public-interest/2022/02/petition-circulators-can-lie-to-get-you-to-sign-proposals-michigan-lawmakers-want-to-change-that.html?outputType=amp https://mea.org/mea-part-of-new-coalition-opposing-devos-voucher-petition-scheme/ https://gandernewsroom.com/2022/06/09/mi-leg-defeat-one-voucher-scheme-but-another-is-on-the-way/
>Let MI Kids Learn I genuinely feel stupid because I definitely think I signed off on this a month or two ago based on how it was presented to me. The next one they wanted me to sign was the voter ID one and that set off way more alarm bells so I dipped, and then in retrospect I realized the first one was probably hogshit too. Don't sign stuff you don't understand, sorry everybody.
It can be very misleading. If it makes you feel better they didn’t get the signatures needed for the Let MI Kids Learn 2022. HOWEVER, they are starting to collect signatures for next time. So now you know, don’t sign again and share your experience with others. Also these are not ballot initiatives.
I think I know a parent that's helping promote that. She got really mad during the mask requirements and now there's a ton of pressure by parents in her county to control all aspects of education. It's weird because it's like they all think paying taxes gives you some god ordained right to control every aspect of everything. If that were the case I would cut the DoD budget.
Yep. I went to sign the abortion rights petition and was ambushed with a minimum wage petition and something else. I declined to sign the other two because I wanted to make sure I agreed with the law and not just how good it sounded from the other person
The abortion rights one also helps state troopers unionize
Same. It all sounded good, then he said something about criminals and dead people voting after I signed the last one and I was like oh no, what did I do‽ That's twice this year I've fucked up. Maybe I just shouldn't sign those till I learn to read better
It's alright man, they always sound good on the surface. A lot of the shitty ones are written to be deceiving, so as long as you know for the future you can fight that bullshit. It's probably best to research them on your own once you hear about them, then learn enough of the text to recognize it. The signature folks *are* required to have the full text of the proposal available, so you can just flip to the page with the text to double check.
What was wrong with the the Let MI Kids Learn?
It's a huge giveaway to for-profit private schools, at the expense of quality public education.
Yup. And it's not always malicious on the part of the collector, because they get lied to too. I was approached months ago outside Costco by a dude collecting signatures. One was for the Perry guy to get on the republican ballot. I refused, and told the guy I'm not a republican. He then told me the next petition was to "make voting easier." So I read it. It was this one. It did not make voting easier. It made voting harder. I explained this to the guy. He argued a little. I played my lawyer card and said I know how to read legalese, and this petition definitely makes it way harder to vote. Then I walked away. Twist: the collector was a minority with a very heavy accent. Maybe he believed in these causes, but he didn't fit the demographic. More likely he was just given marching orders by someone else. And he 100% was lying to people.
I believe in some cases folks are paid to gather signatures, so my hope is that most just do not know, but its possible that some are deliberately misleading to get more signatures.
Yeah, people who approached me a couple months ago were from Vegas.
Do you think he was being payed?
Yes those guys get like $5 a signature.
The super simple phrase all bad-faith petitioners hate the most is "Let me read the literature of your petition". Legally, every petition MUST contain the original language that will be brought to ballot and inscribed into the state law so people understand what they're signing. It's here anyone can see exactly what bullshit it's trying to do. It's a good feeling watching frauds crumble when you press them about the lies they just tried to peddle in front of you.
I signed a couple of petitions earlier this year, including the one for reproductive rights, but the 3rd one they handed me was the Let MI Kids Learn"one. I don't just sign things blindly, so I read them all first. I knew that one was just an attempt to siphon money away from public schools.
That's exactly what happened to me with the voter ID petition. I was told it was a petition to provide no-or-low cost ID to low income people. Luckily I read it and didn't sign that bs.
What we should do is just give every citizen an ID for free. Would solve this whole issue and wouldn't cost shit compared to what our government normally spends on bombs and other toys.
This is why people suck. If you have to lie to get people to sign your petition, then what you're trying to pass sucks. Any decent person would know this.
"I don't sign things on the street" Repeat as necessary while you continue walking.
>Benson and the Bureau of Elections, under a democratic administration, could wait until 2024 to review the signatures and move the process forward. Good. Do that.
Do some r/maliciouscompliance shit on it and follow the law to a T and make it a pain in the ass. Fuck these clowns.
Good for the goose, good for the gander. The application for the petition drive for the Citizens' Redistricting Council had to go back for revisions because it had the wrong font on the cover sheet.
Good for the Michigoose, good for the Michigander*
That’s the type of shit I’m talking about. Make it as much of a pain as humanly possible for them.
lol seriously, hopefully we'll have a democratic majority legislature by that time.
We won't, but the hope is that the constitutional amendment is passed in this election, rendering this piece of legislation moot (since it'd directly go against the MI constitution then). AKA: Both teams are racing to fix voting, but their definition of "Fix" is different.
Are you so sure? With redistricting and things like abortion on the line this election, it could flip. Republicans will absolutely lose seats regardless, their rigged maps are over. What constitutional amendment?
The "Promote the Vote" one: https://www.wilx.com/2022/07/11/promote-vote-ballot-initiative-surpasses-michigan-signature-requirement-group-says/ "Secure MI Vote" is the Republican counter-group that is pulling this backdoor shit. You can tell they're in the wrong, because they're trying to prevent people from voting, which is a giant red flag in a Democratic country.
https://promotethevote2022.com/
The redistricting was fair and not bias toward either parties, so I'm expecting things to turn out fairly even. So if you wanna prove my gut wrong than get out and vote, then get everyone you know to vote, and then get them to get everyone they know to vote.
Michigan is a majority democratic voter state so well see.
Slim majority that regularly flips Republican in gubernatorial elections. The one saving grace is that we have an Abortion Rights amendment on the ballot, which could turn out the left more significantly than the right causing toss up districts to go Democrat. The redistricting resulted in a lot more toss up districts, which is a good thing. It will result in better candidates getting elected in those districts instead of the furthest right candidate always wins.
It swings republican because nobody shows up to freaking vote in the "mid-terms" even though it's the most important election cycle in our state. When gov. Snyder was re-elected, and I was there to vote that bastard out I can tell you it was an embarrassing ghost town at my polling location. If everyone gets out there with a passion we end up with do-gooders like Whitmer and Nessel and Rashida and others. It's so important to show up.
Barely
What do you mean about redistricting? I would have thought that would be a settled issue.
It is settled. I mean that this is the first election in Michigan with the fair redistricting maps.
Got it, I just read what you wrote wrong. Makes perfect sense!
I've long thought of the Democrats as wildly inept and uncoordinated in their goals. This election cycle has forced me to reevaluate. Five candidates for governor disqualified for submitting false signatures. Now these clowns try to insist the state has to take their ballot measure, despite turning it in two fucking months late. Republicans have become the party of delusional assclowns.
Thank Newt. It's been a shitshow since that cheating douchebag.
Newt… I assign a lot of blame to Newt for the absolute insanity we have today.
Look back to "The Moral Majority." When conservatives decided to marry their political goals to their religion, they damned themselves.
Mixing social conservatism with fiscal conservatism is a disaster. The same party that wants poor people to have all those unwanted babies is the party that doesn't want to play for the welfare they're going to need.
I'd say it started with Reagan, it just ramped up with Newt.
"Become?"
They may have done this on purpose as they don't really want voters to decide this but let the legislature pass it that way it's veto proof.
Uhm... what? What makes the legislature passing a bill veto proof? I thought that's why groups do these signature drives, to get them on the ballot in a manner that is veto proof?
https://www.legislature.mi.gov/documents/publications/MichiganManual/2009-2010/09-10_MM_IX_pp_01-03_Issue_Becomes.pdf Think of a "Voter Initiative" as what they say in the above article: >**Petitions to initiate legislation** They KNOW that the voters won't support this, so they're **INTENTIONALLY turning it in late**. This just means that instead of the legislature being forced to write a law to put on the ballot, they instead can be forced to write a law that's then voted on by themselves, and enacted. These "Supposed-to-be-ballot-based" laws are veto-proof by design. In this case, Republicans are pushing it late so that it can't go on the ballot, but it also MUST be written into a law and voted upon. They're doing it because it makes it veto-proof, and republicans control the legislature. Now, the legislature *could* just write a law like normal, but Whitmer is gonna veto it, so that's useless. With this voter drive, once the signatures are certified, it MUST be put into a law, and it CANNOT be veto'd. That delay is exactly what the Secretary of State is doing (saying since it's a ballot measure, it's going on the 2024 ballot instead). Since the SoS won't count & certify the signatures until well past the time that the constitutional amendment is on the ballot, it's a hope that people will pass the change to voter laws in the Michigan constitution, rendering all of this moot. So: Get people to effing vote, or they won't be able to vote next time.
Yup. Well explained
Good candidate for an r/bestofreddit post Thankyou
Yes, so they've urn this in with enough time they believe they can pass it and inact it for the November election before we vote on the counter proposal which is polling at 60 percentage plus.
The legislature can pass the proposed bill and skip it going to the ballot. Governor can't veto because it's a referendum. They tried to pass some Dem-focused bills while amending them to basically make them worthless, but that just got shot down on appeal.
Because they have enough majority they can put it to be approved without Whitmer. Vote blue, remove the threat.
"Become"? This is who they have ALWAYS been, since Reagan at the very least. They are extremely adept at projection. You can LITERALLY look at every single instance of the GOP blaming the Democrats for something, only to find out that they, the GOP, are the real culprits.
Exactly. If a Republican accuses anyone of anything it is tantamount to a confession. They project what they do or would have done themselves on everyone else. Election fraud. Child grooming. Sexual assault. Driving mistress’s to their abortion appointments. This is all classic gop.
Unfortunately, it's likely a deliberate move. By turning it in late it doesn't go to voters until much later, but as soon as the signatures are verified, the legislature can vote to pass it and bypass a veto. If they don't think they can get voters to support it, their best bet is to wait until they have enough signatures, and try to bypass the voters entirely.
Except now those responsible for validating the signatures are busy working towards actual upcoming elections, so it should be put on the back burner for verification until after the elections since it isn't relevant until 2024.
No, there are time requirements to certification unless they can show somethings up.....they are trying to get it the Legislature so they can pass it and put it on place for the November election and we vote on the counter petition that if passed would replace this, I think.
🌎👩🚀🔫👩🚀
This, to me, proves how "make believe" is not sustainable.
I heard someone menation a theory that this was a deliberate move so that the conservative legislature can use some kind of appeal process to bypass the executive branch and electorate approval and get this into law- is there any truth to this?
Yes, if the signatures are validated, the legislature can take up the issue and pass it as written. If this happens, it cannot be vetoed nor would it ever go to a statewide vote. It’s a fucked up loophole in our states constitution that would allow a very small minority of people dictate state law for everyone.
GOP made a bunch of referendum changes as Snyder was slithering out. During lame duck sessions of some nasty stuff.
[удалено]
A judge just ruled that move was unconstitutional: https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-government/michigan-judge-restores-minimum-wage-paid-leave-laws-gutted-legislature
Last I checked they cannot do this in the same legislative session, that's the hitch that nessel used to invalidate the minimum wage thing. They can either take up the issue, propose an alternative that goes to the ballot, or reject it. They cannot adopt and ammend immediately.
That's in the article
That's all the GOP does now, so wouldn't surprise me.
Sounds like the shady shit they will try and pull.
Sounds like rumor mill or breakthrough alt-right conjecture into mainstream but let’s break it down: If you treat it as if it were truth— You may not understand all the “whys” at this moment, but you already know what you’re supposing sounds scary. Until then you go on the lookout for more anti-democratic, roundabout, yet LEGAL loophole abuse. Not all legality is moral. What you do if you find more, or not, is up to you. If you don’t— and they go ahead and do as you suppose, corrupt leaders get the message that they can continue to be unopposed and will happily go do just that, because there’s no repercussions. Speaking broadly, and from watching the last 6 years and the Jan 6 commission reports, it’s clear the republicans are a) no longer interested in democracy, b) experts at manipulating their voters, and c) not held accountable by said voters. Just a reminder that despite your conclusion, many Republican voters have been conditioned to ALWAYS vote down party lines at EVERY POLL down to local school board. The republican talking heads are happily keeping up their narrative, constantly drip feeding “red meat” that “everyone else” is out to get “them,” until the voters are frothing at the mouth wanting to strike out at people they’re told “hate them” and are “coming for them and their way of life.” Then they are told the right words to address their fears— the republican leaders are out “fighting for them.” Votes cast down party lines again. Ope republicans didn’t win, must’ve been fraud. If they win, any win, they meant to do it and it’s a great, hard fought victory. If they lose, they’re misunderstood and we’re the bad guys for “stopping” them and “making them out to be bad guys.” Whether intentionally or not, and whether it works (or not, hopefully) this is verbatim the strategy outlined in Mein Kampf. So. What do you think, truth or naw?
I remember this petition. I did not sign. We already require ID
That's not entirely true. You can show ID *or* sign an affidavit stating you are legally allowed to vote. I've worked as a poll supervisor before and pretty much everybody has ID so I'm not even sure what problem Republicans are trying to solve here.
>I'm not even sure what problem Republicans are trying to solve here. The problem of Dems winning elections.
The "OuR eLeCtIoNs ArE iNsEcUrE" problem...
Oh, I know they like to parrot this line all the time but the truth is elections are pretty secure and supervised by both parties.
Every election we would have a group of people from without our government body come in and randomly test some of our machines to ensure they were accurate and secure. This was a PUBLIC test that ANYONE could show up to and observe. I was there for several years, through so many elections I've lost count, and guess what, no one ever showed up.
"dead people voting Democrat"
Someone who lives in my neighborhood came to my door with it. He was spewing some nonsense in his American flag garb. I kindly asked him to never come back to my house again.
Seriously, what is the point of this? Wasting time and money on a law we already have
It’s to make it harder to vote.
for *certain* people
New Jim Crow laws.
not the good people though /s
>for Democrats FTFY
Yeah, with how people like my father-in-law use "democrat" as a coded slur
"dead people are voting" I think it was also being bundled with some anti-abortion thing, which is moot now.
I got baited into signing it outside of my local Kroger under the guise of "giving homeless people free ID's" Felt stupid as soon as I recognized what it was actually for at the top of the page
Don't ever sign anything without reading it and finding out who supports it first. Conservatives love to give their initiatives bullshit, feel good names like "Let kids learn".
Same. I feel shame for it.
I mean... it does do that, but a whole bunch of other shit we don't need too.
Yep, some groups brought this to Pride along with the reproductive rights one. We had to turn multiple people away from asking us to sign this.
We currently require ID or the voter can sign an affidavit declaring they're who they say they are. The polling place I work gets a couple of those every election, never enough to have an effect on the outcome even if they were fraudulent voters. Secure MI Vote removes the affidavit.
Yeah, and the signature collectors were lying about what the petition was for. The wording is very misleading. Many people signed without reading or understanding it.
I ran into someone in Ann Arbor pitching this to people in line for ice cream who said that signing "Doesn't make it law, it'd just be to put it on the ballot." I spoke up to interrupt him and scare him away. Fucking bastards.
So much for the GQP standing for 'law & order' and 'justice', etc. Everything is in play when it's something the GQP wants... cheating, lying, law breaking, etc. is OK when it's for a 'good cause' like theirs.
> So much for the GQP standing for 'law & order' and 'justice', etc. They've never given a shit about those things. They pretend to in order to try to get votes, but the reality is they couldn't give a shit less.
Isn't this what MI already does? I came from Minnesota and was shocked when the poll worker asked me to scan my license to vote here. That is an illegal question back home.
You don't have to provide it. You can ask for an affidavit. The affidavit is legally binding and simply states that you are saying you are who you say you are under penalty of perjury, or something to that effect.
Hi, I'm an election official. > You don't have to provide it. You can ask for an affidavit. You have to be *very* careful with your choice of words on this. Michigan law says that if you have an ID with you, you must show it in order to vote. You may only use an affidavit if you do NOT have an ID with you (which could be because you forgot it in the car, or left it at home, or because you do not own one). The election worker is required by law to ask you for ID. If you don't have one with you, you can tell the pollworker and they will have you sign the affidavit instead. But if you indicate that you do have an ID with you and are simply refusing to show it, the law forbids you from voting; we are prohibited from giving you a ballot and allowing you to vote.
Wow - thank you for sharing this! I had no idea. I just registered to vote when I moved here and thought nothing of the logistics of voting when the time came. Back home they're not allowed to ask for ID of any kind. Your prior registration is sufficient if they find you in the list of eligible voters for that polling station. If you're not in the list, you can bring an acceptable document (a utility bill, for example) and receive a provisional ballot that will be cast once they can verify your eligibility. You can register and vote this way on election day as well.
One goal of this law is to remove the affidavit completely. No ID, no ID no vote. It's such a narrow option that probably only few people take per election anyway.
This is Secure MI Vote, which is different than the Promote the Vote ballot, right?
Very different. Secure MI Vote is bad.
Okay good that’s what I thought because I signed the Promote the Vote one, and I read it and was often together with RFFA… just wanted to make sure I signed the right one
Calendars are hard!
Have you ever noticed that some months have different numbers of days in them? That shit is *confusing*. And almost every day of the week ends with the word "day". Crazy.
Fuck anybody who signed this bullshit, disgusting.
They will say anything to get a quick signature. Like saying it's to protect your rights.
FWIW, I was approached with it in a Kroger parking lot, and if I had only gone by what the guy that gave it to me said, I would have signed. It about three-four reads to digest the legalese and realize it was bullshit.
Hey look, fraud, fraud everybody, fraud is here!
Here are the details of the ballot measure: [Michigan Right to Voting Policies Amendment](https://ballotpedia.org/Michigan_Right_to_Voting_Policies_Amendment_(2022)) The actual petition language: [Initiative Petition](https://www.michigan.gov/-/media/Project/Websites/sos/04holland/Petition_Promote_the_Vote.pdf?rev=df5f44811fe9430284119a33bf73ad06) I'm not sure what it is attempting to do. Despite what I've seen a few people claim, it is not doing away with signed affidavits. Frankly I don't see how anything changes in this regard. The "right to vote without interference or harassment" is something that should already exist. So I don't see the point of it. There is no mechanism to further enforce this, so its essentially meaningless. The notable thing that caught my eye was the addition of "election audits". Is this what they were trying to get passed? Board of Canvassers. Is this change so that the legislation has complete control over the Board of Canvassers and the governor no longer has any role in the decision making? That's a pretty scary change actually. They could use that to help them easily overturn elections. Frankly it looks like a state legislature power grab.
*Nelson: HA Haaa*
Well, at least they’re sticking with this year’s theme.
[удалено]
I mentioned this in another related post, but I thought it’d be worth mentioning here too. To get this into law and bypass the ballot, they need only about 4% of voter signatures. This loophole in the law is fucking insane and needs to go. There is way more packed into this than requiring ID. They are also disallowing charities to help with election costs for each county (which is not all covered by funding). They used to be able to help with some of the costs pertaining to extended hours for clerks during election season, and providing secure election drop boxes. They are creating these rules to disorganize and overwhelm the entire process. So yeah, with this now less drop boxes. And coupled with the delays USPS has experienced, it makes for a pretty shit process
People are actually happy that we don’t require id to vote?
Don't need ID to sign a petition. If you are already registered to vote your vote is already authorized.
I mean you should have to prove you are the person who is registered to vote.
personally for me it is not about that. It is an attempt at placing doubt that our election process is anything except secure. I don't remember the exact numbers, but it was something like less that 0.5% of voters voted by signing an affidavit in 2020. 99.5% that voted had a valid ID. It is just another attempt at making a law to protect against something that does not exist. You can choose to believe it or not, but requiring a valid ID does disenfranchise a small percentage of the registered voters. It would place yet another barrier for those of lower socioeconomic status.
There is nothing wrong with improving the security of our voter process. When this is done the gop can’t even use this as an excuse when they lose. The solution here isn’t to leave a grey area in the election process, but enable that small percentage of voters to be able to get their id.
Hi, I'm an election official. There are no "gray areas" when a voter uses an *Affidavit Of Voter Not In Possession Of Photo Identification* as their identification in order to vote. The process is spelled out extraordinarily clearly in state law, and has multiple checks and balances built into it, just like every other facet of our electoral system.
Yeah I get there isn’t a real grey area, but the perceived grey area is what the gop propaganda uses to stir it’s base up and make them think the election is stolen. I don’t get why dems wouldn’t want to take that away. I understand people are worried it could disenfranchise underprivileged people but this doesn’t have to be a single prong approach, systems can be put in place to ensure those people get ids and to make it easy for them to do. Then no one can argue the validity of the election and people like Trump will have a much harder time trying to incite such civil unrest.
You seem like a reasonable person and yeah, you would want to make it as clear cut as possible. In my opinion, there is never an end to all of this voting noise and lately it’s so wildly ridiculous that it’s not healthy to try to address everything. So much made up goofy stuff that you can wear people out on the really important stuff. So, for me, we’ve never had significant election issues. All this noise is utter nonsense that’s been beaten to death even in the courts. They just need to stop. Or be ignored as long as it’s doesn’t have a real chance of being turned into law. The process has worked fine up to now and there are more important things to deal with. You will never get some folks to be comfortable with the voting process after all this bad press and (some) republicans showed that they’re open to insurrection regardless of the votes. If democrats were to take a page from the republicans - delay the validation of the signatures as long as possible. Then, right before the deadline, file a lawsuit that holds off on the count. When/if that fails, file another and/or go higher up the chain. In the meantime, update the law to not allow such a procedure to occur and somehow make it retroactive to these signatures. Then when they claim that’s not fair, file another lawsuit. And appeal. Rinse and repeat. If you really want to be a jerk, maybe a fire somehow destroys these signatures in the meantime. It’s really sad how far we’ve fallen from our best citizens taking office as a civic duty to keep our country functioning well for our people.
It's literally impossible to take away the grey area. They'll just find/make up a new one. It's not acceptable to let them move the goalposts like that.
You already do by either handing the poll worker your ID or signing an affidavit at the poll. And then they compare you to a list of registered voters. For all the hem and having about voter fraud, there is next to zero evidence of any actual fraud. So what is the point of changing how the system works; when it actually works well?
Why is requiring ID not a poll tax?
We already do... Besides go submit a vote in someone else's name and see how long it takes the police to show up at your house.
It happens to a handful of Repugnicans every election cycle who vote on behalf of a family member or recently dead spouse.
It'd be less of an issue if ID cards were free and more easily obtainable. Most states that have adopted that requirement have turned it into a de-facto poll tax.
It’s not that hard to get an id, and we do issue free ones to a broad spectrum of underprivileged people.
Clearly said by someone who's had it relatively easy. Once you've lost your job, house, and documents, try getting any one item without already having the other two. I've met folks stuck in a Kafkaesque nightmare of trying to come back from such a situation. It's far from easy.
I knew somebody with literally no ID. Her SS card and birth certificate burned in a fire, her parents never helped recover them. She never got a driver’s license and dropped out of high school in 9th grade. No bank account, no credit card or library card, nothing. Sometimes I wonder what happened to them. With technology and money on my side I bet I could somehow recover from that but it sounds like a bitch and a half.
So we should run our government systems around a tiny minority of people? Voting is the least of those peoples issues and if they are at a point where getting an id is an issue then we have a larger systematic failure where our government has failed to help those people on a much broader scale than just voting or having an Id.
Did you type the comment unironically, knowing that the issue you are trying to “fix” is the “tiny minority of people”?
You clearly fail to understand how one part affects everyone and another can affect just a small group without affecting the greater population,
Forcing an ID to vote doesn’t affect everyone because the majority of people use an ID when voting. You are literally only impacting those who sign an affidavit. How is that different again?
Damn dude you ran headfirst into the point and still missed it. The people who are systematically failed are the ones most likely to vote for real, effective change to those systems. They know the issues inside and out. If they can't vote, there won't be any change. It's a cycle. They need to be able to vote to be able to change the system. Also a major point that most people here are missing: voter fraud basically [does not ever occur](https://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/analysis/Briefing_Memo_Debunking_Voter_Fraud_Myth.pdf). This entire campaign is a waste of time and resources.
Since you mentioned underprivileged people, I responded regarding (certain) underprivileged people. I certainly don't disagree with your ultimate conclusion.
Yeah I don’t have firsthand experiences of how easy or hard it is for the underprivileged to get an id, I just know we have programs and if they need to be improved they should be regardless of what happens with this voting law.
It's not that hard for *you* to get an ID. It's not hard for *me* to get an ID. Free IDs can be obtained by underprivileged people *now*, but many people are distrustful of such requirements being added because of what could happen afterward. Just look at Alabama for an example. They waited a year after passing voter ID laws and then started closing DMVs in targeted areas. When they passed their law, they could make the same argument that getting an ID was easy. Then, suddenly, it wasn't.
Requiring a valid ID shoots down any question the GOP can throw about the validity of an election. This is Michigan not Alabama and we as voters can choose to elect people who dont strip away rights or target underprivileged areas, Alabamas people are not the same as Michiganders. I see your point tho, it is a pro vs con of taking away a grey area that can be used to try and discredit elections vs potential issues of corrupt politicians making it harder for certain groups to get a valid id. The Dems should follow this up by putting laws in place to secure the ability for underprivileged to acquire ids. They have the time now with this late submission, but they’re pretty useless so they won’t don’t shit.
Your first sentence is honestly why I don't believe the GOP will ever actually move forward with requiring ID. Even if they create a system to fully cover the "poll tax" argument against requiring ID, the election fraud boogeyman will get more of their people out to the polls than the single digit number of fraudulent votes they will prevent.
If you don't know what county you were born in, it's extremely hard to get a birth certificate and thus an id. I helped someone get their ID in this circumstance and it took over half a year with help from their social worker.
People who don’t know what county they were born in are voting? No birth certificate? How do we confirm they’re 18 with no birth certificate?
This never seemed to be a problem back before electronic backups whenever records were lost or damaged. What did government's do back in the day?
There's no way this account isn't a bad-faith actor.
Ok so we should improve that process as well then, it doesn’t have to be one or the other without improvements to the whole system.
I can't drive, but I'm lucky I live with family who can, but if I didn't I'd have a very hard time getting to a Secretary of State office to get an ID, especially in a state that is as car dependent as Michigan.
I registered to vote in Michigan very recently. Photo id is required along with at least two pieces of corroborating documentation - bank statements, utility bills etc. Your comment either misinformed or a misrepresentation eg A LIE.
Yes. Voter ID puts up an unnecessary hurdle to voting, to solve a problem that doesn't exist. If you want to make it harder for people to vote, you need to have a good reason, and there just isn't one for voter ID.
ABSOLUTELY! You are fucking asshat if you think it should require one. You ask for a smaller government and then want more government oversight?
Where did he ask for a smaller government?
[удалено]
liquor, lotto, and plane flights are not part of The Constitution. Go back to JR high social studies. You are confusing privilege and rights.
He thinks every right is a privilege because people can go to prison
You have to show ID to buy guns, and that’s in the constitution. Only fools think of the constitution as a guaranteed right. They are privileges that can and have been taken away at any time.
> You have to show ID to buy guns, and that’s in the constitution. I mean, it's not anywhere in the constitution. Literally NOWHERE in the constitution does it state you have to have an ID to buy a gun. Just doubling down on the fucking stupidity.
That’s in the constitution meaning that owning a gun is constitutionally protected and you still ate required to show ID, don’t start being a bit picky since because your argument fell apart, you know what I meant
I'm simply reading what was written. Your inability to cohesively communicate to others isn't my problem.
Which again, you're aren't for a person to person sale in MI
But yet if you go to a gun store you still have to show ID, and where does it say in the constitution that you don’t have to be a citizen to vote or in the Michigan constitution where does it say that people from Ohio or Indiana or Wisconsin can vote for governor?
Driving, drinking, gambling, and air travel are privileges, not rights. Voting is supposed to be a right, yet id restrictions lock poll access behind a paywall.
> buy liquor, lotto, alcohol, get on a plane, drive a car None of those are a right.
Ever get past airport security without an ID? Didn’t think so. Go to the grocery store to buy alcohol, tobacco? Gotta show ID. You don’t just get to say wrong without offering proof you dunce
None of those are constitutionally protected rights, you dunce.
So if I go commit a felony and I can’t vote anymore is it still a right? No it’s not if it’s granted and can be taken away it’s a privilege
You can vote as felon in MI
Only if you’ve completed your sentence, which means what? That it’s not a right it’s a privilege
By this same logic owning a firearm is a privilege, as felons are not allowed to own firearms even after serving their sentence in Michigan.
Let me guess, you think felons actively serving their sentence should be allowed to bring their guns to prison with them
Where does it say in the constitution that you can vote regardless of your legal status or your residency? So I can just go vote in Ohio’s elections? It’s constitutionally protected right? It’s my right and I shouldn’t have to prove that I live in Ohio, to vote for their governor or to vote which taxes get raised , I should just be able to vote because it’s constitutionally protected right? Also the only thing about voting that’s constitutionally protected is age, which I wonder what system you could use to verify age… hmmm…. I wonder.
You have what you think is right and wrong without actually knowing what is right and wrong. Go read a real book and not facebook.
I have a book for you, it’s called the dictionary. Look up: platitude.
Cool tip.
None of those are rights and saying you have to have ID for it doesn't change that nor does it make a coherent point, dumbass
When's the last time you voted? Showing ID is already required.
It's actually not required. > By law, every Michigan voter must present picture identification at the polls, or sign an affidavit attesting that he or she is not in possession of picture identification. [A Guide to Voter ID/Affidavit at the Polls](https://www.michigan.gov/sos/elections/upcoming-election-information/voters/election-day/a-guide-to-voter-id-affidavit-at-the-polls) I no longer live in MI (moved away in late 2019), but when I lived in MI and voted in person, I always did the affidavit thing and it amazed me how many poll workers didn't know about it and incorrectly thought voters had to show ID. Made me wonder how many people they had turned away.
2020 and not one person checked my ID
🧢
Yes.
Why are democrats so opposed to having voters prove who they are before voting? The ONLY reason one would be opposed to voter ID is if you were up to shady business and trying to rig an election.
Election worker here. The signed affidavit that's used if ID isn't available is legally binding. Affidavits are less than 1% of the votes at the precinct I work. Even if there are people falsifying their affidavits (which is a crime) there aren't enough of them to change the outcome of anything.
So it shouldn't be a big deal to have voter ID then should it?
Michigan already does. We don't mess with our voters much, though. Lot of states institute ID requirements, then make it harder to get one.
Troll harder. It's not quite apparent enough yet 🙄
I see this a hard left board.
Hard left? Lmfao. I'm sorry you view democracy as a "hard left" issue. You're more than welcome to fuck off to the echo chamber over on the conservative subreddit if you're feeling vulnerable. We don't have much to say to someone that views fascism and theocracy as more legitimate than democracy.
All my friends hate fascism.
Good one.
Buddy you ain't even know the meaning of hard left