On 8 January 2014 12:00, Gervase Markham <[email protected]> wrote: > I would like someone to make a cogent case that it's entirely reasonable > for people not to have to prove, to at least some degree, they are > person X before they cast person X's vote. > I agree that a voter ID law should not be used to introduce ID cards by > the back door, and I agree that we don't need passport-level ID proofs > to keep fraud at acceptable levels (which is what "fraud prevention" > really does). But I'm uneasy about ORG campaigning for the idea that > identifying a voter is who they claim to be is in no way important.
No, they're arguing that this solves a problem we don't have, and causes a problem we don't yet have. You're reframing it as a stronger claim, that is not actually being made. - d. -- Please support ORG's work - join and help fund our future: https://www.openrightsgroup.org/join To unsubscribe, send a blank email to [email protected] or use https://lists.openrightsgroup.org/listinfo/org-discuss
