“In contrast to many countries in Africa, nearly every Latin American country surveyed utilized a single national ID card for voter identification, with only minor variations. The existence of a single document that everyone must have in order to vote raises a number of concerns, including in regards to the percentage of potential voters who possess the ID and the capacity of individuals to easily acquire the required documentation.

While the single ID system functions well in some countries (where substantial resources have been devoted to making it work), in many South and Central American countries the single ID system has disenfranchised considerable numbers of citizens, for a number of reasons. Principal among them is the wide swath of citizens in many countries that are completely without any documents at all, including birth certificates, which are normally required to obtain the national identity document and to register to vote. These populations tend to be indigenous, poor, rural, and among the youth, as well as people who have been displaced due to armed conflict. The number of people in Latin America who are undocumented extends into the millions. These individuals cannot even begin the process of registering to vote.

For citizens who may have documentation, the cost of the national ID card and/or the indirect costs such as travel to urban centers can present barriers that are impossible to overcome. As is in some African countries, several Latin American countries simply do not have the capacity to register voters or to issue identity cards in a timely manner, resulting in the disenfranchisement of many people. Finally, in a few countries there have been reports that distribution of the cards is politically manipulated and voters who might oppose the incumbent administration are either denied identity documents or have their ID cards taken from them or bought outright.

It is important to note that there are a few Latin American countries where ID and registration systems work relatively well, as well as countries that have undertaken substantial efforts to improve these processes, especially with respect to addressing the problem of undocumented citizens.

OVERALL CONCLUSIONS

Requirements for proving identity to register to vote and to vote at the polls vary a great deal depending on numerous factors, including the political situation, capacity of the government, environment, culture, history of conflict, and poverty levels. Laws and policies governing proof of identity in the voting process can significantly impact the ability of citizens to register to vote and cast a ballot. At times they can be helpful in facilitating the process and increasing confidence, but too often they also cause substantial disenfranchisement, especially within certain communities.

This research shows that most countries in Africa and Latin America fail to meet the obligations outlined in international law with regard to voter registration. However, there are a few countries that may serve as regional examples of good practice. These countries have invested substantial resources into ensuring that citizens have documentation, or, given their respective sociopolitical conditions, have established a scheme that provides sufficient flexibility to be inclusive without incurring significant evidence of fraud. Panama, Chile, and Peru could be considered among the former, having placed significant emphasis on outreach and access measures. Countries that have employed, more or less successfully, a calculated pragmatism include Malawi, Liberia, and Ghana.“

https://www.cartercenter.org/resources/pdfs/peace/democracy/des/voter-identification-requirements.pdf

Ding ding ding.

These laws aren't struck down by courts because having an ID requirement is racist. They're struck down because the same law that implements voter ID also prevents access to them and access to voting locations in a way that intentionally harms certain races more than others.

The facts are that overwhelmingly most places around the globe require voter ID.

The subsequent analysis by a liberal think tank is basically cherry picking facts to reinforce a world view. ID's are not oppression, they're about living in a 21st century civilization.

lets just do away with government and voting so we dont have to worry about voter ID

Yes, and they do it poorly. Just because “other people are doing it” doesn’t mean it’s a model we should adopt. We should not be in a race to the bottom, attempting to adopt the policies of regressive third world countries.

"the rest of the world does it" is a terrible argument and would be bad for conservatives overall.....

want to apply that to tax rates? healthcare? gun laws? or like literally fucking anything lol?

As a communist, I agree. There must be no State and ad hoc committes are sufficient for self governance.

Lets not even look at all of the world but look at Scandinavian countries which are constantly used as model countries by leftists.

Both Norway and Sweden require photo ID to vote.

Like i honestly don't understand why the bar has to be lower in the US?

America doesnt get to be on an island when and where you choose it to be.

why do we have lax gun laws? why do we have low corporate tax rates? why dont we have universal healthcare?

you cant cherry pick an appeal to populism on topics it suits you. america is different, period. "the world does it" is a shit argument.

if you dont believe me wait a week until I use it on you in another thread on another topic.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Sep 17 2020 01:43pm

The actual argument is that voter ID laws are racist, discourages poor people and whatever.

My argument is all countries do it, even countries that are lauded as leftist utopias. The argument isn't we should do it because others do it, the argument is that having voter ID laws is the norm and no other place has an issue with it, even the leftist places that so many think is what we should look like.

In pretty much every country it's normal to prove your identity to vote, yet her the woke crowd is trying to frame it as a means of oppression? Like lol.