Yes, absolutely, there will always be a line. Unless voting is compulsory and not voting is a verifiable punishable offense, and I don't see that as a voting rights utopia. Although there is always a line, I do think there is something wrong if it moves in the wrong direction- and by that of course the direction of less representation by those in the fringes or close to the fringes.



Yes this is basically the argument that's at the heart of the matter- the ignorant stupid voter who doesn't even care enough to learn enough about the voter id requirements and how to get it, let alone read up on he candidates and issues. IMO, the voter fraud argument is a sham to cover the real reasons underlying this because admitting the real reasons can be unpleasant and people do their best not to do this. I really appreciate your willingness to discuss it.

Now let's discuss the ignorant/lazy voter. Odds are, the real distinguishing factor between him or her and someone who others wouldn't even suspect is ignorant or lazy is social class. Just because someone has money and has all the possible id's necessary for voting by default (like how someone who drives a car will have a valid driver's license) it doesn't mean this person is educated on the issues and candidates. All it means is that this person drives a car, has a driver's license and therefore will never by touched by voter id regulations.





Yes, I think this is a decent way to go- if you are going to tighten voter id laws you absolutely have to do everything possible to make sure that anyone who could vote before will be able to vote again. This will take a lot of resources.



The knowing thing- it's not that hard to mislead or intimidate people who aren't that confident of their voting rights in the first place. On one hand it's tempting to recall Jim Crow type examples, but this type of thing is done today. I linked to an example.