Lying to Ourselves

 

We have a problem with our federal government, but it’s not exactly the one we’re used to thinking about. Frankly, we don’t want to think about it all – better to deny the reality entirely.  Easier to lie and lie and lie, and blame our problems on everyone else.  Easier to blame Liberals, or Wokesters, or (the current favorite among the increasingly reality-averse folks who still cannot face that Trump has immolated himself once and for all time) traitors and sabotage.  It is, of course, all lies.  Mind you, lies can be useful – especially when trying to avoiding hurt feelings (our own not the least), but they’re still lies.  At one time rebellions against ruling monarchs favored the lie “We’re not really rebelling against the King, he’s just the victim of bad advisors.” 

The lie we all tell ourselves today is that we are the helpless victims of “The DC Establishment” (or whatever other term you want to use).  Synonyms for this include “Wall Street,” “Big Tech,” and a host of others.  They are the “bad advisors” we blame for manipulating Congress, for stealing elections, or for disloyalty to Trump (fact check here: the only consistent disloyalty in the Trump administration came from Trump – watching his cabinet members go from vaunted heroes to filthy traitors and sellouts in the commentariat was much akin to studying Soviet photography for disappearing faces alongside Stalin).  We are very good at lying to ourselves about why Trump lost this or that political battle, about why Congress is a dysfunctional mess, and about why the “authoritarian ratchet” is inexorable.  The truth we cannot confront about it is all is simple, and we all bear the shame of it.  We do not really want any of our congress critters, our president, or our courts to lead us out of our morass, we want them to follow us into the pit of our own making.  And follow they blithely do.

Why should anyone really attempt to lead?  Why should anyone take any campaign rhetoric seriously?  I’m not even speaking for the Left here, I’m just talking about the entire right half of the political spectrum.  Think of all that we demand:

Repeal Obamacare! But get me my pills cheap! And you’d better not slash Medicare because Granny will be out on the street! Cut my taxes! But don’t touch Social Security, that’s my retirement! Slash regulations! But raise the minimum wage! And punish those rich Wall Street fat cats! No more bailouts! But bail out small businesses! No more stimulus checks… after the next one (and send a chaser too)!

Any time anyone in Congress actually tries to show real leadership he gets savaged. Paul Ryan was sent to Congress and proclaimed a hero as a fiscal wonk. Paul Ryan is now disgraced as a heartless fiscal wonk. Well? Which is it? He was the same Paul Ryan that entered as left – the truth is he violated the will of the voters, and the will of the voters is that the gravy train run to them, but not to other people they don’t like.  We hailed the Tea Party a decade ago for demanding fiscal accountability, and then it all wilted when we realized everyone would take a hit, not just the “bad guys”.  We wailed about Obama’s fiscal profligacy, then ignored Trump’s (even pre-COVID) because that spending was just better because it went to the right people.

We blame the Republican congress of 2017-2018 for not having a Repeal and Replace plan from Day 1 (nevermind that Trump promised he had his own too – and we never saw any of it).  Why would any sane and safe Republican bother to come up with a health care reform plan? Any real plan would gore everyone’s ox, but not equally, and that would be seized on as evidence of favoritism towards whoever was hurt less than someone else – and we would be as happy to denounce it as the Left, just for different reasons. Why bother with specifics? Why bother to stick your neck out?  Easier to campaign on an issue and then blame the other side when nothing ever happens later.  Keeps the issue alive for a few election cycles, until the voters fixate on something else for a few cycles.

It’s no wonder Congress is stuffed with hacks, charlatans, grifters, sell-outs, and bench warmers. It’s no wonder both parties spend like drunken sailors. It’s no wonder the debt keeps growing and growing – hardly anyone there dares to change the game. When they try, they’re denounced as traitors, or Elitists, or uncompassionate eggheads, or accused of being in some group’s pocket (which, while true, is a problem only because it’s the “wrong” group), and so turfed out.  Besides, they know what the voters really want better than the voters themselves: having someone else always around to blame.

It’s no wonder that both sides refuse to actually address electoral reforms too – that’s the gift that keeps giving.  That way you never have to take any blame on your side for nominating cultists and loonies.  That way you never have to take any blame for running a terrible campaign.  Even if you lose, you win!  After all, you were cheated!  And martyrs are always more beloved than Darwin-award winners, giving you a leg up on fundraising for the next round (that’s where the real money is made – paying your friends and relatives for “consulting fees” while you expense first-class flights).  Both sides play the game, and the money rolls in.

The truth of the matter is, Americans of all stripes really do not want reform. They do not want leaders. They do not want any hard choices. They want the status quo, but also want the moral high ground of blaming it on everybody else.  And the government they claim to hate so much?  It’s just following along.  If we really wanted reform, we’d stop blaming the “swamp”, or whatever other excuses we have at hand.  Instead, we would admit to ourselves that, like losing weight we are the ones who have to change first.

Published in Politics
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 262 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    SkipSul: The lie we all tell ourselves today is that we are the helpless victims of “The DC Establishment” (or whatever other term you want to use). Synonyms for this include “Wall Street,” “Big Tech,” and a host of others.

    What do you recommend?

     

     

     

    • #121
  2. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    SkipSul: The truth of the matter is, Americans of all stripes really do not want reform.

    The problem is, it’s too late.

     

     

     

    • #122
  3. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    HeavyWater (View Comment):

    This is a brilliant post. You wrote what I would have written if I had been able to put my thoughts onto the electronic “paper.”

    The fact of the matter is that governing is very difficult. The wants and needs of 330 million Americans simply can not be satisfied. Many on the Left have very unreasonable ideas about what the government can do and what the people will tolerate. But the Right might be trying to see through similar blinders.

    I have my free market, libertarian leanings on economic policy. So, I appreciated Paul Ryan’s courage and vision. But these days I wonder, if politics is the art of the possible, what is possible? How can anyone be a leader in a country so divided?

    You are going to say something specific about all of this any day now I’m sure.

    • #123
  4. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    Ed G. (View Comment):

    MWD B612 "Dawg" (View Comment):

    HankRhody Freelance Philosopher (View Comment):
    The way I remember it the Tea Party was a protest movement that got subsumed into the 2010 midterm election, which produced a new crop of congressmen and senators which… turned out to be similar to the old crop of congressmen and senators. Meanwhile half the organizations attempting to keep the movement running were audited by the IRS, and the other half were people trying to grift a quick buck.

    You remember it correctly, Hank. I’ll add that we Tea Partiers were smeared as racist Klan wannabes, and the GOP really didn’t push back on that. After a while it became clear we got the worst of both worlds: we were smeared as racists AND the GOP just paid lip service to our issues, with no intention of actually doing anything.

    AND grifters took over the skinsuit.

    I also remember that Rick Santelli’s rant was in an economic/finance context but I also remembr the rant and spirit being more of a moral argument and about good governance.

    I also remember that this was squashed in about 100 different ways.

    Lois Lerner. That’s why you are better off with Trump.

    • #124
  5. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    SkipSul (View Comment):
    There was another failure then: the impeachment madness against Clinton. That sucked all the air out of the room for anything else until Clinton was gone, but by that time the hacks had moved in.

    I have no idea what the right thing to do was, but he lied under oath as an officer of the court and the head of the justice system.

    • #125
  6. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    James Lileks (View Comment):
    If the Biden Administration jump-starts AFFR and uses the instruments of the state to alter the economic demographics of every zip code, as they’ve said they will, some of the comfy burbs may balk. Say, we wanted you to help Those People, but we didn’t mean we wanted them to live next door. C’mon, man. 

    This

    • #126
  7. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    EHerring (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    GFHandle (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    GFHandle (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):
    .

    The Voter ID is a fake issue. It is too bad people fall for it. Have you noticed that they only dismiss IDs for voting? Want into a government building? Want I to a school building? Want to see a doctor and pick up a prescription at the pharmacy? Want to open a bank account? Cash a check? Drive? Buy a gun? Get a cell phone account? Democrats fought voter IDs even when states offered them for free. Even a poorer country like Mexico has voter ID. In fact, they have a separate picture ID with hologram specifically for voting. Everyone can afford a voter ID.

    Even if there are free, there are compliance costs, as I mentioned. If voter ideas laws were to become even more strict, the costs would go up and fall most heavily upon the poor, regardless of their absolute burden among the electorate.

    If a poor person can’t afford a $5 ID, then he is wasting money on booze, cigarettes, drugs, cell phones, fancy tennis shoes….. Walter E. Williams has written articles over the years about how our “poor” live better than the middle class in Europe, more living space, cars, AC, etc, and better than most of the world. That is why we have an illegal immigration problem. The secret to escaping poverty is getting an education, not having children until you are married, staying married, and having a good work ethic while avoiding crime and drugs. Best indicator of poverty is not growing up in a single parent household. The poor who stay poor don’t follow the rules and I am inclined not to be sympathetic re voting inconveniences for those who break those simple rules, and we should not bastardize our voting system for them.

    [edited, as always, because autocorrect, touchscreen keyboards, and I don’t get along]

    • #127
  8. aardo vozz Member
    aardo vozz
    @aardovozz

    Amy Schley, Longcat Shrinker (View Comment):

    Despair.com does have some great stuff 

    • #128
  9. lowtech redneck Coolidge
    lowtech redneck
    @lowtech redneck

    Flicker (View Comment):

    No, but that doesn’t mean much. I don’t know very many extremely poor people.

    That’s my point. Your theory doesn’t match up with, and isn’t based on, reality.

    https://monsterhunternation.com/2018/02/12/fisking-the-stop-telling-poor-people-to-cook-doofus-with-special-guest-my-mom/

     

     

    • #129
  10. HeavyWater Inactive
    HeavyWater
    @HeavyWater

    Knotwise the Poet (View Comment):

    SkipSul:

    They are the “bad advisors” we blame for manipulating Congress, for stealing elections, or for disloyalty to Trump (fact check here: the only consistent disloyalty in the Trump administration came from Trump – watching his cabinet members go from vaunted heroes to filthy traitors and sellouts in the commentariat was much akin to studying Soviet photography for disappearing faces alongside Stalin).

    This was something I always found very unnerving about the whole Trump saga these past four years. Again and again I’d see Trump appointing somebody previously generally well-regarded among conservatives, hear people praise the choice, and then when the appointee and Trump finally have a falling out, the appointee would suddenly become just another despicable swamp-dweller. Bolton, Mattis, Barr, now the conservative judges…the idea that all these people are compromised, corrupt slugs and the one true patriot and force for good in all of DC is Trump, that in every dispute over a policy or the Constitution Trump is always the one who’s correct…just…really?

    I remember during the Obama years looking askance at the cult of personality I saw on the Left. The Trump years (and btw, I did vote for him both times) have disabused me of a lot of notions I had about the intellectual consistency and honesty of the Right versus that of the Left.

    This is has been the most disturbing feature of the last 4 years.  Anyone who was hired by Trump and ended up getting fired by Trump or resigning was assumed to be a swamp creature.  The cause of conservatism became the cause of supporting Trump under any and all conditions. 

    I suppose this tendency presents itself among Republicans under most Republican presidents.  For a while, post 9-11, there was a sort of “cult of George W Bush,” as people had the image of Bush with that bullhorn in New York City saying, “I can hear you and the people who tore these buildings down will hear us all soon,” etched in their minds.  

    When you nominate a candidate for president, a mid-course correction isn’t really possible.  

    • #130
  11. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    HeavyWater (View Comment):
    Anyone who was hired by Trump and ended up getting fired by Trump or resigning was assumed to be a swamp creature.

    I think this is a pretty dependable assumption. He screwed up in his hiring.

    • #131
  12. Aaron Miller Inactive
    Aaron Miller
    @AaronMiller

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    Do you know one person age 18 or above that doesn’t have an ID? Seriously.

    No, but that doesn’t mean much. I don’t know very many extremely poor people.

    Our government has been spending trillions of dollars in giant pork-laden bills. It can afford to spend money where it most matters, on ensuring valid elections by providing identification to every citizen.

    But it already does that in the form of Social Security cards. SS cards are insufficient not by nature but by willful practice. Officials refuse to responsibly purge deceased citizens, duplicates, and other illegal voters from their voter rolls before elections. Officials refuse to grant ballots as much security as the thousands of ATM and bank transfers made every single day in America.

    The fundamental problem is not the letter of the law. It is rule of law. A majority of Democrat and Republican officials throughout the United States evidently prefer unsecure elections.

    • #132
  13. Viruscop Inactive
    Viruscop
    @Viruscop

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    Do you know one person age 18 or above that doesn’t have an ID? Seriously.

    No, but that doesn’t mean much. I don’t know very many extremely poor people.

    Our government has been spending trillions of dollars in giant pork-laden bills. It can afford to spend money where it most matters, on ensuring valid elections by providing identification to every citizen.

    But it already does that in the form of Social Security cards. SS cards are insufficient not by nature but by willful practice. Officials refuse to responsibly purge deceased citizens, duplicates, and other illegal voters from their voter rolls before elections. Officials refuse to grant ballots as much security as the thousands of ATM and bank transfers made every single day in America.

    The fundamental problem is not the letter of the law. It is rule of law. A majority of Democrat and Republican officials throughout the United States evidently prefer unsecure elections.

    As I said, I’m fine with using updated SS cards as voter ID, but I’m not ok going beyond this with respect to voter ID laws.

    • #133
  14. Viruscop Inactive
    Viruscop
    @Viruscop

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    There are two reasons why I think this might be the case:

    1. A shift has taken place in coalitions. The suburbs have gone to the Dems.

    That’s an interesting development, and we’ll see how that plays out. The “suburbs” are an elastic concept, for starters; inner-ring burbs are different from outer-ring, and exurbs, and have different different compositions as post-war housing stock becomes affordable to new arrivals. It will be more difficult for the Left to excoriate suburbs for all the usual tired reasons when they’re increasingly Hispanic and Asian, particularly if those groups are protective of their own school systems and local rule.

    If the Biden Administration jump-starts AFFR and uses the instruments of the state to alter the economic demographics of every zip code, as they’ve said they will, some of the comfy burbs may balk. Say, we wanted you to help Those People, but we didn’t mean we wanted them to live next door. C’mon, man.

    That could happen, but I also think January 6th changed everything. Hippies poisoned the perception of the left throughout the country during the 60’s and 70’s. I would argue that the terrorists on the 6th will be at least as harmful to the right as the hippies were to the left.

    • #134
  15. Steve C. Member
    Steve C.
    @user_531302

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    There are two reasons why I think this might be the case:

    1. A shift has taken place in coalitions. The suburbs have gone to the Dems.

    That’s an interesting development, and we’ll see how that plays out. The “suburbs” are an elastic concept, for starters; inner-ring burbs are different from outer-ring, and exurbs, and have different different compositions as post-war housing stock becomes affordable to new arrivals. It will be more difficult for the Left to excoriate suburbs for all the usual tired reasons when they’re increasingly Hispanic and Asian, particularly if those groups are protective of their own school systems and local rule.

    If the Biden Administration jump-starts AFFR and uses the instruments of the state to alter the economic demographics of every zip code, as they’ve said they will, some of the comfy burbs may balk. Say, we wanted you to help Those People, but we didn’t mean we wanted them to live next door. C’mon, man.

    That could happen, but I also think January 6th changed everything. Hippies poisoned the perception of the left throughout the country during the 60’s and 70’s. I would argue that the terrorists on the 6th will be at least as harmful to the right as the hippies were to the left.

    I would argue this will all be forgotten in 3 months. Except Conservative Inc. will use it as a stick to beat anyone they find insufficiently “pure”.

    • #135
  16. dukenaltum Inactive
    dukenaltum
    @dukenaltum

    Like every other democracy and republic in history we’re doomed because people are terrible.  The culture is rotten, most people are weak, corrupt, and morally degenerate rent seekers and every four years we are given a binary choice between the candidate of the most morally depraved and corrupt political party in the history of representative democracies and a guy selected by a deceived or deluded majority of our fellow Republicans.  

    I have only voted for one candidate in the primaries that went on to general election: Reagan.  Every other general election candidate was a choice of others who claimed a deeper understanding of America or had more money than I had so I acquiesced in supporting and voting like the simpleminded cannon fodder I am considered. 

    So, Politicians and People lie but we don’t have to pretend that our positions are untenable or deny our desire for freedom from the depredation of our fellow citizen/parasites.  I have never subscribed to any of the delusions in the article.  I defend against the depravity of the Left not for salvation by the Right. 

    We are in the waning twilight of this republic and should be thankful that the General Staff of the Military are such inept martinets that they lack the requisite ambition to win a war after winning every battle to even consider the inspiration to seize power. Eventually even they will figure it out but only after a sharp and prolonged Civil War.  

    p.s. I still like Paul Ryan.   

    • #136
  17. lowtech redneck Coolidge
    lowtech redneck
    @lowtech redneck

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    There are two reasons why I think this might be the case:

    1. A shift has taken place in coalitions. The suburbs have gone to the Dems.

    That’s an interesting development, and we’ll see how that plays out. The “suburbs” are an elastic concept, for starters; inner-ring burbs are different from outer-ring, and exurbs, and have different different compositions as post-war housing stock becomes affordable to new arrivals. It will be more difficult for the Left to excoriate suburbs for all the usual tired reasons when they’re increasingly Hispanic and Asian, particularly if those groups are protective of their own school systems and local rule.

    If the Biden Administration jump-starts AFFR and uses the instruments of the state to alter the economic demographics of every zip code, as they’ve said they will, some of the comfy burbs may balk. Say, we wanted you to help Those People, but we didn’t mean we wanted them to live next door. C’mon, man.

    That could happen, but I also think January 6th changed everything. Hippies poisoned the perception of the left throughout the country during the 60’s and 70’s. I would argue that the terrorists on the 6th will be at least as harmful to the right as the hippies were to the left.

    So far, that doesn’t seem to be the case; Trump’s support has actually risen, according to the Rasmussen poll.  Democrat support for several months of domestic terrorism probably has a lot to do with that-they (and the GOPe) might have overplayed their hand, making the double standard too big to ignore.  There’s also the fact that these ‘terrorists’ consisted mostly of unarmed wanderers staying inside the parameters of velvet ropes, and a small number of retards pretending to make prank calls from congressional offices.  Doesn’t seem remotely as threatening to reasonable people as mobs burning down cities, looting businesses, and toppling statues.

    • #137
  18. RufusRJones Member
    RufusRJones
    @RufusRJones

    dukenaltum (View Comment):
    Like every other democracy and republic in history we’re doomed because people are terrible. The culture is rotten, most people are weak, corrupt, and morally degenerate rent seekers and every four years we are given a binary choice between the candidate of the most morally depraved and corrupt political party in the history of representative democracies and a guy selected by a deceived or deluded majority of our fellow Republicans.

     

     

     

    This is a three part series that nobody is going to listen to.

     

     

     

    • #138
  19. Viruscop Inactive
    Viruscop
    @Viruscop

    lowtech redneck (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    There are two reasons why I think this might be the case:

    1. A shift has taken place in coalitions. The suburbs have gone to the Dems.

    That’s an interesting development, and we’ll see how that plays out. The “suburbs” are an elastic concept, for starters; inner-ring burbs are different from outer-ring, and exurbs, and have different different compositions as post-war housing stock becomes affordable to new arrivals. It will be more difficult for the Left to excoriate suburbs for all the usual tired reasons when they’re increasingly Hispanic and Asian, particularly if those groups are protective of their own school systems and local rule.

    If the Biden Administration jump-starts AFFR and uses the instruments of the state to alter the economic demographics of every zip code, as they’ve said they will, some of the comfy burbs may balk. Say, we wanted you to help Those People, but we didn’t mean we wanted them to live next door. C’mon, man.

    That could happen, but I also think January 6th changed everything. Hippies poisoned the perception of the left throughout the country during the 60’s and 70’s. I would argue that the terrorists on the 6th will be at least as harmful to the right as the hippies were to the left.

    So far, that doesn’t seem to be the case; Trump’s support has actually risen, according to the Rasmussen poll.

    Rasmussen, so the opposite is probably true.

    On top of that, I thought all polls were now bad?

    • #139
  20. Marythefifth Inactive
    Marythefifth
    @Marythefifth

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    GFHandle (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    GFHandle (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):
    FWIW, stronger voter ID laws might hurt the right more than the left, but few people think about this.

    Hmmmnn. Please elucidate.

    There are two reasons why I think this might be the case:

    1. A shift has taken place in coalitions. The suburbs have gone to the Dems. Suburban voters turn out and restrictions upon voting do not generally hurt them. They costs that they have to bear of voting restrictions are light upon them. Poor white voters are harmed for the same reasons that poor black voters are harmed by voting ID laws. In particular, there is a greater cost for them to procure an ID. Even if the ID were free, there is still a transportation cost associated with obtaining an ID, and many rural voters might find it hard to procure transportation to obtain the ID. Furthermore, you would need document that you may have to pay for to secure a voter ID.
    2. I think this reason is less important but worth mentioning. Stronger voter ID laws might require simply learning more compliance. Poor voters may have occupations that are paid on an hourly basis. They do not have the time to learn the compliance laws, and are more careless about voting. If, for example, a voter ID law were enacted which required three different forms of identification, they might become careless and not bring three forms or bring the correct three forms.

    In the past, these voters facing high compliance costs voted more with Dems. That is not the case now.

    Thank you. Couldn’t we just let them take a selfie and send it to a gummint office who would then send the thing back? There must be some way to make it a lot easier. Don’t the poor folk you describe have the ID already, to buy beer or drive a car? How many don’t have a driver’s license? A credit or debit card? A bank account? (Not being sarcastic, I don’t know that world very well.)

    I don’t know the answer to these questions. All I can say is that voter ID laws are felt to harm the poor. If the GOP voters are poor, as many of the Trump voters are, and the GOP has lost the suburbs and those with bachelors degrees and above, then I would think that the costs of voter ID laws, no matter how low, will fall most heavily upon the GOP base.

    Those same poor very often have to jump through a lot of paperwork hoops to receive any type of welfare. More hoops than you might want to bother with. I suspect photo ID is far easier.

    • #140
  21. Viruscop Inactive
    Viruscop
    @Viruscop

    Marythefifth (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    GFHandle (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    GFHandle (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):
    FWIW, stronger voter ID laws might hurt the right more than the left, but few people think about this.

    Hmmmnn. Please elucidate.

    There are two reasons why I think this might be the case:

    1. A shift has taken place in coalitions. The suburbs have gone to the Dems. Suburban voters turn out and restrictions upon voting do not generally hurt them. They costs that they have to bear of voting restrictions are light upon them. Poor white voters are harmed for the same reasons that poor black voters are harmed by voting ID laws. In particular, there is a greater cost for them to procure an ID. Even if the ID were free, there is still a transportation cost associated with obtaining an ID, and many rural voters might find it hard to procure transportation to obtain the ID. Furthermore, you would need document that you may have to pay for to secure a voter ID.
    2. I think this reason is less important but worth mentioning. Stronger voter ID laws might require simply learning more compliance. Poor voters may have occupations that are paid on an hourly basis. They do not have the time to learn the compliance laws, and are more careless about voting. If, for example, a voter ID law were enacted which required three different forms of identification, they might become careless and not bring three forms or bring the correct three forms.

    In the past, these voters facing high compliance costs voted more with Dems. That is not the case now.

    Thank you. Couldn’t we just let them take a selfie and send it to a gummint office who would then send the thing back? There must be some way to make it a lot easier. Don’t the poor folk you describe have the ID already, to buy beer or drive a car? How many don’t have a driver’s license? A credit or debit card? A bank account? (Not being sarcastic, I don’t know that world very well.)

    I don’t know the answer to these questions. All I can say is that voter ID laws are felt to harm the poor. If the GOP voters are poor, as many of the Trump voters are, and the GOP has lost the suburbs and those with bachelors degrees and above, then I would think that the costs of voter ID laws, no matter how low, will fall most heavily upon the GOP base.

    Those same poor very often have to jump through a lot of paperwork hoops to receive any type of welfare. More hoops than you might want to bother with. I suspect photo ID is far easier.

    As I said, I am ok with the proposal of Shawn Buell in comment #18, but not anything more burdensome than that.

    • #141
  22. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    Aaron Miller (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    Do you know one person age 18 or above that doesn’t have an ID? Seriously.

    No, but that doesn’t mean much. I don’t know very many extremely poor people.

    Our government has been spending trillions of dollars in giant pork-laden bills. It can afford to spend money where it most matters, on ensuring valid elections by providing identification to every citizen.

    But it already does that in the form of Social Security cards. SS cards are insufficient not by nature but by willful practice. Officials refuse to responsibly purge deceased citizens, duplicates, and other illegal voters from their voter rolls before elections. Officials refuse to grant ballots as much security as the thousands of ATM and bank transfers made every single day in America.

    The fundamental problem is not the letter of the law. It is rule of law. A majority of Democrat and Republican officials throughout the United States evidently prefer unsecure elections.

    As I said, I’m fine with using updated SS cards as voter ID, but I’m not ok going beyond this with respect to voter ID laws.

    The country will have to implement voter ID laws whether you agree or not. Otherwise, every election will be met with the same questions and unrest.

    • #142
  23. EHerring Coolidge
    EHerring
    @EHerring

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    James Lileks (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    There are two reasons why I think this might be the case:

    1. A shift has taken place in coalitions. The suburbs have gone to the Dems.

    That’s an interesting development, and we’ll see how that plays out. The “suburbs” are an elastic concept, for starters; inner-ring burbs are different from outer-ring, and exurbs, and have different different compositions as post-war housing stock becomes affordable to new arrivals. It will be more difficult for the Left to excoriate suburbs for all the usual tired reasons when they’re increasingly Hispanic and Asian, particularly if those groups are protective of their own school systems and local rule.

    If the Biden Administration jump-starts AFFR and uses the instruments of the state to alter the economic demographics of every zip code, as they’ve said they will, some of the comfy burbs may balk. Say, we wanted you to help Those People, but we didn’t mean we wanted them to live next door. C’mon, man.

    That could happen, but I also think January 6th changed everything. Hippies poisoned the perception of the left throughout the country during the 60’s and 70’s. I would argue that the terrorists on the 6th will be at least as harmful to the right as the hippies were to the left.

    The left has been poisoning its image since Bismarck.

    • #143
  24. GFHandle Member
    GFHandle
    @GFHandle

    Flicker (View Comment):
    Do you need two photo IDs to open a bank account these days?

    Can’t speak universally, but I need one to cash a check.

    • #144
  25. The Reticulator Member
    The Reticulator
    @TheReticulator

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    Marythefifth (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    GFHandle (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):

    GFHandle (View Comment):

    Viruscop (View Comment):
    FWIW, stronger voter ID laws might hurt the right more than the left, but few people think about this.

    Hmmmnn. Please elucidate.

    There are two reasons why I think this might be the case:

    1. A shift has taken place in coalitions. The suburbs have gone to the Dems. Suburban voters turn out and restrictions upon voting do not generally hurt them. They costs that they have to bear of voting restrictions are light upon them. Poor white voters are harmed for the same reasons that poor black voters are harmed by voting ID laws. In particular, there is a greater cost for them to procure an ID. Even if the ID were free, there is still a transportation cost associated with obtaining an ID, and many rural voters might find it hard to procure transportation to obtain the ID. Furthermore, you would need document that you may have to pay for to secure a voter ID.
    2. I think this reason is less important but worth mentioning. Stronger voter ID laws might require simply learning more compliance. Poor voters may have occupations that are paid on an hourly basis. They do not have the time to learn the compliance laws, and are more careless about voting. If, for example, a voter ID law were enacted which required three different forms of identification, they might become careless and not bring three forms or bring the correct three forms.

    In the past, these voters facing high compliance costs voted more with Dems. That is not the case now.

    Thank you. Couldn’t we just let them take a selfie and send it to a gummint office who would then send the thing back? There must be some way to make it a lot easier. Don’t the poor folk you describe have the ID already, to buy beer or drive a car? How many don’t have a driver’s license? A credit or debit card? A bank account? (Not being sarcastic, I don’t know that world very well.)

    I don’t know the answer to these questions. All I can say is that voter ID laws are felt to harm the poor. If the GOP voters are poor, as many of the Trump voters are, and the GOP has lost the suburbs and those with bachelors degrees and above, then I would think that the costs of voter ID laws, no matter how low, will fall most heavily upon the GOP base.

    Those same poor very often have to jump through a lot of paperwork hoops to receive any type of welfare. More hoops than you might want to bother with. I suspect photo ID is far easier.

    As I said, I am ok with the proposal of Shawn Buell in comment #18, but not anything more burdensome than that.

    I’m not OK with what’s OK with you. And you may be part of the ruling class, but that doesn’t mean you rule on this issue.

    • #145
  26. Charlotte Member
    Charlotte
    @Charlotte

    @viruscop: hypothetically, let’s assume that this apparently insurmountable burden on the poor (or whoever) to obtain a valid government-issued photo ID was, somehow, surmounted. (Some sort of subsidy; people going out and finding un-ID’d citizens and providing on-the-spot ID services; setting up ID centers at Wal-Marts and Dollar Generals, whatever.)

    Again, hypothetically, if income/time was no longer an issue, would you then support an ID requirement to vote? If not, why not? I sincerely want to know as I am baffled by the left’s opposition to this. What, specifically, is the downside?

    • #146
  27. Instugator Thatcher
    Instugator
    @Instugator

    Viruscop (View Comment):
    Would you be ok with the Democrats passing a new Voting Rights Act that simply guarantees the protections of the old act with the same or more levels of enforcement before it was gutted by the Supreme Court?

    How was it “gutted”?

    • #147
  28. I Walton Member
    I Walton
    @IWalton

    While there is truth in everything here, there also is misplaced focus.  The fact is Washington can’t run a country as large and diverse as the US.  Of course foreign and defense policy have to be national, but the original notion was decentralization for everything else, yet  we’ve given everything governmental to Washington and built up state and local government at the same time.  Government is an occasionally necessary feature of a Republic, it isn’t the driving force, people are. And if we can’t get back to that notion rooted in reality, the end will be the way every civilization that ever existed ended and for the same reasons.   If it were not for the Chinese I’d know what to do, break the place up and start over among those states who understand why we’re so screwed up.  If the Democrats let the Chinese have at us, we’ll have to do that anyway but I can’t get my mind around what that might look like.

    • #148
  29. Duane Oyen Member
    Duane Oyen
    @DuaneOyen

    Jager (View Comment):

    SkipSul: We blame the Republican congress of 2017-2018 for not having a Repeal and Replace plan from Day 1 (nevermind that Trump promised he had his own too – and we never saw any of it).

    I like most of what you have written. I take exception to this part. Not from a Pro-Trump place as you are right Trump did not have a plan and yes we kind of blame 2017-2018 Republican’s for not having a plan and McCain for not approving the watered down plan they came up with.

    My issue is your formulation that we blame the 2017-18 congress. I blame every Republican congressperson since 2010. They promised, ran on and fund raised on the idea that they did have answers. They have never had an answer.

    Your are right about the difficulties of this issue, that said a bunch of smart people given a decade to work on the problem should have something to say, a rough outline at least. Today a decade latter there is no hint of a real plan.

    I blame every Republican Congress since 1990 for ignoring the elephant in the room (the Harris Wofford special Senate election in Pennsylvania)- the health care system was a disaster, it was largely a mess because the government made it that way, and the government made it a mess because Republicans ignored the cries of the voters that something be done- the same cry as was evident in every single other developed country in the world.  Instead of saying “NONONONONO!” our side should have embraced the concept and created a program to satisfy the need in a free market fashion instead of sitting by and leaving the field to the Baptist collectivists and the Bootlegger providers.  What does our side do?  It still enables the AHA, AMA, and PhRMA to suck money off the public teat while complaining that GWB’s Medicare Part D was a betrayal of conservative “principles”.  Until our side stops the demagoguery against entitlements and rather requires that goodies need to be paid for when the public obstreperously insists on those goodies, plus embraces truly free markets (that includes drastic FDA and drastic license reform) we will still lose.

    • #149
  30. Viruscop Inactive
    Viruscop
    @Viruscop

    Charlotte (View Comment):

    @viruscop: hypothetically, let’s assume that this apparently insurmountable burden on the poor (or whoever) to obtain a valid government-issued photo ID was, somehow, surmounted. (Some sort of subsidy; people going out and finding un-ID’d citizens and providing on-the-spot ID services; setting up ID centers at Wal-Marts and Dollar Generals, whatever.)

    Again, hypothetically, if income/time was no longer an issue, would you then support an ID requirement to vote? If not, why not? I sincerely want to know as I am baffled by the left’s opposition to this. What, specifically, is the downside?

    If there was no cost to getting it, yes. As I say, Shawn Buell’s suggestion in comment #18 is something that I would support, because all the costs would fall on the federal government.

    • #150
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.