The OK case

[Dill]

(04-06-2017, 12:48 AM)hollodero Wrote: So it goes on the taxpayer. I don't mind.
Let the gun licence money go to funding IDs (not just for voting, but IDs with picture, useful in many situations apart from voting) for poor people. Now who could be against that. :)

I heard. Doesn't mean the policy is inherently wrong.

In 2012 in Minnesota, a voter education campaign managed to counteract Republican disinformation about millions of illegals voting to quash a voter id proposal. They did this by explaining the PRACTICAL hurdles in the way of implementation--the difficulty for seniors in nursing home, for military serving overseas, country people who normally vote by mail, etc. Those people don't care if the id law is ok "in principle."  And in a state of less than 6 million people, a tax bill of somewhere between 8-23 million dollars for the first year alone spent to prevent a crime which apparently had not occured in Minnesota for over two decades doesn't sound right. You'd have to sell a lot of gun licenses to get that money.  Non-socialist Americans start thinking of how those taxes could be spent on something useful or returned to the people, not whether the policy is "inherently wrong."

http://www.mn2020.org/issues-that-matter/fiscal-policy/the-fiscal-costs-of-minnesotas-voter-id-amendment
https://www.minnpost.com/community-voices/2012/09/minnesota-voting-amendment-would-change-much-more-you-might-think