3) Voter Elligibility
- This also varies state by state and quite dramatically, so it is worth pointing out.
- Let's look at two states - CA - well known to be "liberal" and Ohio, which tends to be more conservative.
Ohio
- In OH, any citizen (or dual citizen), 18 years or older, can vote
- There is strong support for the idea that you have to show some kind of picture ID that includes your address so that you are in fact voting in only one location, and not voting at multiple locations.
- This ID is very easy to get and cheap. If you cannot afford it, the state will help you, as will various religious and political organizations interested in elections and voting.
- If they have committed a felony (example illegal drug use), they cannot vote while in prison
- After they are released, their voting rights are automatically fully restored
- One year after they are released, if they are trying to live a "normal life and attempting to or have a job", they can apply for having their recored "cleaned" and gain complete full citizenship rights that are valid nation wide.
- The idea is that they messed up, and hopefully now will get back on track and live a reasonably normal, productive life.
There most likely is some gerrymandering, but the party line voting is so regional, it probably doesn't affect it all that much.
California
- Similar to OH, any citizen, or dual citizen, 18 years or older can vote
- If you are convicted of a felony (example illegal drug use), you loose your right to vote while in prison
- Once you are released from prison, you are considered a "Felon" for life, and never allowed to vote again = for your entire life.
- You are also highly unlikely to ever gain your full citizenship rights in other areas as well.
- As a result of having a felony record, insurance companies will make it difficult for companies to hire you as an employee, so getting a job, even a menial one, is very difficult.
- Since it is so hard to get a job, it is highly likely that you will have to do something illegal for a living, making it even more likely to end back up in prison again.
- The end result is that people in low socio - economic classes, especially black communities, where having a felony is highly likely, are almost completely blocked from voting.
(BTW, I am not making a racist comment about black communities, I am referring to the very real situation that statistically exists in these communities as people try to find a way to eat and live) When you and your family are hungry and about to loose the little you have, you do what it takes to survive, legal or not.
- Nonetheless, since CA doesn't require any kind of ID in order to vote, it is entirely possible for people who are not citizens to vote (which does in fact happen) and for people to vote at multiple locations (because there are no checks on registering or voting in multiple locations).
The gerrymandering here is completely crazy. It is so obvious that it is done to make sure areas that only party specific people can be elected that it defies any logic. It is so bad that all of the parties think it is crazy.
So, given that OH tends to like the idea of having an ID to vote, and CA doesn't:
Which of these two states do you think has a more reasonable election "fairness"?
EDITED: 19 May 2017 05:53 by HARRYN