Decline to answer unconstitutional voter id questions at the polls

When you arrive to vote this year, someone at the polling place may ask you a question about voter IDs.

You are not required to answer a question about voter id this year.

From the unconstitutional voting law changes passed by the General Assembly last year (emphasis mine):

At each primary and election between May 1, 2014, and January 1, 2016, each voter presenting in person shall be notified that photo identification will be needed to vote beginning in 2016 and be asked if that voter has one of the forms of photo identification appropriate for voting. If that voter indicates he or she does not have one or more of the types of photo identification appropriate for voting, that voter shall be asked to sign an acknowledgment of the photo identification requirement and be given a list of types of photo identification appropriate for voting and information on how to obtain those types of photo identification. The list of names of those voters who signed an acknowledgment is a public record.

This part of the unconstitutional law is on page 13 in this link.

Just because a statute directs someone to ask a question, that does not mean you are required to answer the question.

My hope would be a "Decline to Answer" movement would occur during the period mentioned in the above unconstitutional law.

I'll decline to answer. I hope you'll join me in not answering.

Comments

I will be declining too

The entire voter suppression movement is an insult and an infringement on our most sacred right as citizens. We have no responsibility to answer questions designed to cover Republican asses when this thing blows up.

I went in prepared

I went in prepared to decline to answer. I know the state gov & BOE is going to under-resource the effort to help people learn about and deal with these new ID requirements. And a part of me is concerned that declining would lead their numbers to reflect even fewer people saying they need IDs so they under-resource it even more.

But a bigger part of me was ready to stick it to the man, tell them I wasn't going to show an ID, and that this voter suppression effort should not stand! In the end they just showed me a piece of paper that talked about the new rules but didn't ask me to show an ID so I didn't really get to take a principled stand.

Still, I got to vote on the first day of early voting, which frees me up to do more get out the vote work to help make sure that voter turnout is strong in opposition to these voter suppression efforts.

Declining also

"I will answer that in 2016" is perfectly legitimate.

And although they may ask if you have one of the acceptable forms of identification, you do NOT need to show it and, as noted here, do not even need to answer the question.

-------------------------------------------------------
"I will have a priority on building relationships with the minority caucus. I want to put substance behind those campaign speeches." -- Thom Tillis, Nov. 5, 2014

Please remember that the

Please remember that the people working the polls are volunteers and had nothing to do with the voter id law. They are doing a thankless job so please don't take displeasure about this awful law out on them.

I'm a moderate Democrat.

Very good point

These people, more often than not, are the true public servants. They're just following the rules.

Declining to answer remains legal and in many cases, preferred. It should be done courteously.

-------------------------------------------------------
"I will have a priority on building relationships with the minority caucus. I want to put substance behind those campaign speeches." -- Thom Tillis, Nov. 5, 2014

I think you all may be missing the point

The reason they're asking the question and getting people to sign an acknowledgment if they don't have an acceptable form of ID is so that someone can contact those folks later and help them get an ID. It's actually a good question to ask.

That is indeed the stated reason

and it could end up helping people.

It also could end up scaring people away from voting, which is the underlying purpose of the Voter Suppression law.

-------------------------------------------------------
"I will have a priority on building relationships with the minority caucus. I want to put substance behind those campaign speeches." -- Thom Tillis, Nov. 5, 2014