In an interview on MSNBC’s Morning Joe, Shapiro said everyone who goes to the Department of Motor Vehicles to get a new or renewed driver’s license will be automatically registered to vote, unless the individual chooses to opt out.
That’s not quite automatic, but still a great step
It’s like that in other states. You get or renew your license/ID and part of that form is voting registration.
The main difference is opt in vs opt out. Still not the same as automatic registration
Why would you opt in every time? I’ve renewed my license twice and nothing changed about my voting info. There’s a lot of other government forms that have voting registration on them too.
deleted by creator
Because if they did that Republicans would never win another election.
Racism, sexism, control. All these ideas have roots somewhere in there.
No, no, no. It’s about State rights! /s
You only opt in once
In Canada, there’s a box you can tick on your taxes to pass along your info to Elections Canada. Not sure how hard this would be to implement as well.
The trick is getting the fourth line to connect with the first line
I don’t follow. What do you mean by “fourth line” and “first line”?
They were being a wiseass about literally adding a box to the form rather than the work it would take to include voter registration in the process.
goddamn we’ve been trying to get motor voter legislation for 30+ years… and the conservatives know more voters is their death knell so they’ve fought it tooth and nail everywhere. GOOD ON PA.
It’s calculated to devalue the votes of city dwellers who don’t have or need a license. Still, more voters is always good.
Its not calculated that way. Dems are the only group pushing automatic register voters anywhere, and they aren’t going to cut into their city advantage if possible.
Its done this way because it’s logistically simpler to implement, and DMVs tend to handle ID cards as well for those that dont drive.
What? How does getting easier access to registration for one group cut out the existing conditions for access from another?
I don’t necessarily agree in this case that it’s specifically calculated to do this but the idea is that it’s not taking away an option from another group it’s just only opening up a new option to a certain subset of a group.
Hypothetically, if two groups have 100 voters each right now they’re split 50-50 right? Now this rule comes out and it means that for group A, 50 new people who had previously gone unregistered are now suddenly registered automatically but for group B only 25 new people are registered automatically, then now suddenly A has 150 registered voters but B has only 125. A suddenly has an advantage they didn’t have before because their group benefited disproportionately from adding that method of registering.
Those people get government IDs. It’s the same form.
They could. But why would they?
Are you asking why someone would get an ID? Lol what
Ok. Where does that give any reasons people decide not to get an ID?
Because many people don’t have them. Why would you need one if you don’t drive or drink?
To vote?
There’s more things in life than alcohol and cars.
Lies!
You could just use the googles. But the fact doesn’t change, not every eligible voter has a government issued ID and tying voting to getting one leaves out millions of people who could be voting.
You already need an ID to vote in PA, which is itself problematic, but automatic registration is purely an improvement
You can still get an ID without getting a liscense…
Republicans going hate that wonder how long until the lawsuit.
A lawsuit when 23 states were already doing it? GOP’s voter rolls are going to grow too.
The GOP of late has been doing everything in their power to make it tougher to vote. They’ve gone through in multiple states and purged voter registrations which many people didn’t find out about until they actually went to vote and found out they were no longer registered.
GOP’s voter rolls are going to grow too.
The GOP is trying to bank on the fact that their voters tend to be far more motivated to vote. The DNC has more actual supporters than the GOP and if there was 100% voter turnout the GOP would never win another election, but since we only get something like 40% voter turnout, and nearly all Republican voters show up to the polls every time, that lets the GOP keep scoring election wins. They know that if they make it more difficult to register to vote, the vast majority of their supporters will go through the extra effort, while a significant chunk of Democrat voters will be discouraged by the extra hoops to jump through and will give up before actually getting registered or voting.
But often, voter registration ends up disenfranchising marginalized people.
i’m very stupid – i’ve never understood this whole registration system at all. why is it not just based on your ID or social security or something? (oh, so prisoners can’t vote? great, i’m glad we introduced more complexity to disenfranchise more people.)
Some Americans, particularly evangelical Christians and libertarians, are vehemently against the idea of a national identification system. To them it’s either the beginning of a New World Order government or the Mark of the Beast or both. So having a national ID card will never fly. Social Security Numbers aren’t even supposed to be used for identification, despite the fact that they’re used that way everywhere.
There’s also the case that not everyone has an ID. Racist southern states, for example, enact voter ID laws and then remove all places where you can get an ID from majority black areas. Having to show an ID to vote is, therefore, going to disenfranchise some people. You could get around this by broadening valid identification to include simply bringing a piece of mail with your name and address on it.
Actually SSN’s ARE supposed to be used that way now. It wasn’t intended when the system started because it was difficult to get everyone one. But once the system was established they started pushing federal agencies to use them. Then in the ‘60’s when the digital revolution began it just made sense to use them. But the law has been changed since 1943. The new cards don’t even have that line on them anymore.
They are terrible ids, they used to be assigned sequentially and geographically based. So you could figure out the first 3-5 digits from basic information and get in a ballpark number if you had a birthday.
oh, so prisoners can’t vote
It seems like not having a polling location inside the prison would also address that concern.
You know weirdly in Australia it’s mandatory to vote, all government departments exchange information and yet we still need to register to vote… you get fined for not voting and you can’t get a passport if you’re 18+ and not enrolled.
To be fair, voting is handled by the states, so that is one reason it’s complicated.
I don’t know why Republicans wouldn’t want prisoners to vote. The don’t need to avoid consequences’ group and acting overly tough to the point of making life much harder on themselves is their entire base
Because they don’t want black people to vote and the majority of people in prison, are black.
I’d even argue we have laws on the books specifically for this intention. To disinfranchise black voters, by putting them in prison.
In other words, you’re kinda missing the point of the prison industrial complex.
You can’t be Tough On Crimetm if you allow prisoners to vote. What if -gasp!- they vote to abolish all crimes! Our streets would be RAMPANT with undesirables! /s
Also, think about the demographic make-up of America’s penal system, and you’ll find another reason Republicans don’t want prisoners to vote.
Also, think about the demographic make-up of America’s penal system, and you’ll find another reason Republicans don’t want prisoners to vote.
Pretty sure that is the actual reason.
-
Lose civil war. Have to free your black slaves.
-
Create laws and law enforcement culture that disproportionately impact black folks.
-
Steadfastly pretend you have done neither of those things.
-
Lock 'em up!
-
Sorry, prisoners can’t vote. Really, our hands are tied. Someone think of the children.
Closest thing to a confession I’m aware of:
“The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people,” former Nixon domestic policy chief John Ehrlichman told Harper’s writer Dan Baum for the April cover story published Tuesday.
“We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news.”
“Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”
https://www.businessinsider.com/nixon-adviser-ehrlichman-anti-left-anti-black-war-on-drugs-2019-7
Here’s older evidence that goes back to much earlier.
Marijuana was Anslinger’s golden ticket. He used his office to trumpet the association between weed and violence, so that it could be criminalized. “You smoke a joint and you’re likely to kill your brother,” he was known to have said. McWilliams explains that in this effort, “Anslinger appealed to many organizations whose members were predominantly white Protestant.”
From the beginning, Anslinger conflated drug use, race, and music. “Reefer makes darkies think they’re as good as white men,” he was quoted as saying. “There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the U.S., and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers and any others.”
https://timeline.com/harry-anslinger-racist-war-on-drugs-prison-industrial-complex-fb5cbc281189
-
When one thinks too hard about it, the whole “we can’t trust prisoners to vote, they’ll vote to legalize crime!” argument is pretty ridiculous too. Criminals don’t just universally love crime, like a guy in for having weed isn’t likely to want to legalize murder or something, he doesn’t want to be murdered or see people murdered any more than anyone else, and anyone actually crazy enough to want to legalize that is going to be an irrelevant minority of the vote anyway (prisoners in general will be a minority, unless most of your population is locked up, in which case you either actually do have way too many crimes that shouldn’t be illegal, or your society is so terminally dysfunctional that it’s laws won’t much matter anyway).
Oops, it looks like you tried having a deep thought, unfortunately thoughts deeper than surface level are dangerous to Conservative minds as they are prone to drowning, and have been subsequently banned.
I voted for Governor Shapiro because I’ve always loved his YouTube videos, but I don’t agree with a move like this. Voting shouldn’t be too easy or people won’t cherish it for the special thing that it is.
I’m usually pretty good at detecting sarcasm but I cannot tell based on this post.
Voting is so important, it’s a rite of passage and a symbolic, almost religious ceremony. If you just sign everybody up to do it willy-nilly, they won’t take it seriously. Better that people should have to jump through a few hoops so only the people that really care can partake.
It’s a right not a rite.
I think I spelled “rite” right, all right?
You did spell it correctly in your usage, but I believe the other commentor is saying that voting is a right, rather than a rite of passage.
A lot of the people who “really care” about voting don’t have any clue about the candidates, democracy, or the Constitution. They just have a lot of time on their hands and watch a lot of TV telling them what to be afraid of and who to vote for, basically straight Republican.
I also cannot tell if this is sarcasm
I’m for it. Pre-Trump and all the recent GOP voter blocking nonsense, I was automatically purged from Florida’s rolls for not having voted recently enough? Something like that.
Aye, last year a poll worker started about my license not matching my voting address. I’d heard shenans were to be expected so I plopped my voter registration poll card down and she stfu. The result? I am now trained and going to work the polls. What did I learn in training? She was wrong wrong wrong wrong and what she did was harassment. But you know what? That’s OK, bc now I’m showing up, maybe I’ll get to sit next to her this year and turn her in.
See that’s what I’m talking about. If you didn’t vote recently then you probably don’t really care about it and should have to go re-register to prove that you’re really committed to democracy before being able to vote again. That’s how we make sure only the real democracy cherishers can vote, and that’s how we defeat authoritarian demagogues.
Do you also like to stab people to help them cherish their lives more?
Wtf
Here’s the thing, if you reduce the amount of people who will vote, it increases the cost of a singe vote and by extension incentivises falsifications by the ruling party.
Being able to vote isn’t a privelege to cherish it, it’s a right.
When it comes to such things, always remember how they can be abused, because they likely will be.
This is how informational autocracies do it. The deincentivise participation and use state employees to vote for people who didn’t participate. This is how it works in Russia, Belarus, and many more other countries.
lol
Exactly. If someone can’t figure out for themselves how to register to vote, they don’t deserve to. There should be a bare minimum of intelligence and responsibility required to vote
