View Full Version : Good news!
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390444004704578032211743100582.html
Thank goodness this judge blocked this law, at least for this election cycle. This is a win for everyone as, if even one American is prevented from their constitutional right to vote because they can't jump through all the artificial hoops in time, thrown up to block people from voting, then we all lose.
Frankly I think it's telling that the republicans in this state are fighting this tooth and nail as even they have admitted there has never been a single case of in person voter fraud in the state.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/24/pennsylvania-voter-id-trial_n_1697980.html
If after the election they still want to push this phony voter fraud 'protection', then let them have at it. Then people would have time to get what they need, although some still wouldn't be able as more people than you thing don't' have birth certificates.
That's wonderful news! Maybe this Democrat politican (http://www.delmarvanow.com/viewart/20120911/WIC01/309100028/DEM-VOTING-SCANDAL-Candidate-Rosen-out-after-voter-fraud-allegations)can add Pennsylvania to the list of states she votes in.
She was caught in the act by the Democratic party (it's an adjective) and was deservedly canned. Both Mitt Romney and Ann Coulter have lied on voter registrations. It happens, but as has been repeatedly pointed our, only a tiny minority of voters are involved. Some sports guy once said "Winning isn't everything--it's the only thing." Cheaters take this to heart. Another apt quote is "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
For know-nothings (those who wallow in ignorance,) democrat as an adjective is close enough. (In this case I'm certain it was nothing more than a typo.)
She was caught in the act by the Democratic party (it's an adjective) and was deservedly canned. Both Mitt Romney and Ann Coulter have lied on voter registrations. It happens, but as has been repeatedly pointed our, only a tiny minority of voters are involved. Some sports guy once said "Winning isn't everything--it's the only thing." Cheaters take this to heart. Another apt quote is "Power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely."
I understand the revulsion some people have at any word ending in 'rat', but in her case, it seems an apt description. ;)
It's always interesting to look into the reality of simple things. In many states, it's perfectly proper for a part-time resident or property owner to maintan a second voter registration in order to vote in local elections. However, it's never ok, in any jurisdiction, to vote in Federal elections from multiple jurisdictions.
Of course, we know it happens, and the one way to help ensure that it doesn't is to require that a valid ID from the state you're voting in is presented at the polling place during Federal elections. It is very unlikely that a person has valid driver's license or other valid state ID from multiple states, unless that person is a college student from another state with both a home state ID and a college ID. Currently, in many states, those that do have both ID's can easily vote multiple times if they desired.
This is especially true in states like mine, where early voting began today. I mentioned here some years ago (yes we've been discussing this subject on these forums for many years) that at that time my primary residence was in Ohio, I owned another home in Kentucky and I maintained an apartment in Mississippi (due to a temporary work assignment). I realized at the time that it would be very easy to vote in all three states as they all had lax voter registration and polling center ID requirements.
Of course, I didn't do so, but then again, I'm an honest sort in spite of my 'know nothing', 'wallowing in ignorance' appearance.
Gosh us low information voters have so much to learn from ya'll.
Last night Tom Ashbrook on NPR had a program on those Wascally Wepublicans and their efforts to bring order to loose voting rules. I was shocked to learn that not all states have the reasonable expectations for voters that my state has.
For instance, until recent reforms, Florida allowed people to walk into any voting precinct and vote. ANY. It's with a provisional ballot, but "It's not the voter's fault that he's at the wrong precinct" said Ashbrook's guest. UM HELLO! I think that it IS the voter's repsonsibility to show up at the freakin' precint where he is on the rolls. Good god.
Tom's show also pointed to recent shenanigans with those same Wascals, using a 3rd party organization in Florida to register bogus voters. Being the low information voter that I am, I cannot understand WHY this is a problem since it has been proven time and time again that there is NO correlation between registration fraud and voter fraud. None, nada. I can't grok why it's a felony.
It depends. I've heard of paid operatives "registering" voters in Portland (if I'm remembering correctly) and then throwing all the Democratic registrations away. Someone found the forms in a trash can. "Mickey Mouse" type signatures encouraged by employees paid by the name (see ACORN) are a big nuisance, but not otherwise a threat.
When I was still voting at a neighborhood polling place, I had only to sign in at the proper precinct where volunteers would check my signature. No ID required. Originally, I had to show some kind of ID and proof of residency. The system was the same in Oregon and seemed to work fine. I really like vote by mail, personally. It's much more convenient, allows me to catch up on issues and candidates at my leisure and vote all at the same time.
It depends. ...
Of course it does, it depends on whether it's Democratic operatives or Republican operatives fouling the registration process. Got it.
No. Cheating is always wrong. Outcomes may vary from minor to major damage, depending on the details and scope of the action.
Romney and Coulter lying about their residence was minor. So was registering Mickey Mouse. Denying qualified voters in order to skew election outcomes is major.
I have no strong opinions on this, but I have to admit that when I go to vote, I'm always surprised that all they want from me is my signature. I live in NJ and it always takes me 3 days to find all the documentation I need to renew my driver's license, but all I have to do to vote is scribble a signature.
Can someone succinctly point out to me the pros and cons of requiring voter ID? I mean, explicit examples of how it would prevent fraud vs. prevent qualified voters from voting.
Catherine, Yahoo just published this, exactly on your topic:
http://news.yahoo.com/3-views-whether-us-states-require-voter-id-151600305--politics.html
Unsure what the warring parties here think of option #3.
I'm a little like you. I might not like How and When these voter ID laws are being passed, and don't think they are really warranted, but if a specific voter ID were easily obtainable by any citizen, free, and there was plenty of time between the change in policy and the next major election, I'd certain consider it fair enough. Would that make everyone happy and put this million-dollar mess to bed once and for all?
Last night Tom Ashbrook on NPR had a program on those Wascally Wepublicans and their efforts to bring order to loose voting rules. I was shocked to learn that not all states have the reasonable expectations for voters that my state has.
For instance, until recent reforms, Florida allowed people to walk into any voting precinct and vote. ANY. It's with a provisional ballot, but "It's not the voter's fault that he's at the wrong precinct" said Ashbrook's guest. UM HELLO! I think that it IS the voter's repsonsibility to show up at the freakin' precint where he is on the rolls. Good god.
Tom's show also pointed to recent shenanigans with those same Wascals, using a 3rd party organization in Florida to register bogus voters. Being the low information voter that I am, I cannot understand WHY this is a problem since it has been proven time and time again that there is NO correlation between registration fraud and voter fraud. None, nada. I can't grok why it's a felony.
Gee, do you think maybe it's a felony cause they DEFRAUDED the folks who hired them? Do ya think? Humm, now that you bring it up, this latest voter registration fraud is kind of like the ACORN thing. I'm sure Fox will now have a 3 month expose on this voter registration fraud and send in hidden cameras to 'catch' someone somewhere saying something somehow that they can then spin into a damnation of the republican party! Then they can beat this dead horse for months on end until the Florida republican election committee, who these EVIL FOLKS were working for, close shop and go away. Yeah, that's what they'll do! And then Alan can bring it up reliably every 6 months or so as evidence of nefarious republican activities. (Ha!, just kidding!)
You know, it seems funny that despite all these 'loose voting laws' (oh horrors!) there hasn't been a SINGLE CASE of in person voting fraud in Penn. So where did the republicans get this notion that our voting was in danger? Huh? Where? Or why? It's a totally invented, made up, whole cloth pulled from their butts 'problem'. Y'all can it all you want, but the facts are the facts. THE FACTS ARE THE FACTS. No voter fraud. None, nada, zero.
Iris, most states, including those who are trying these tricks this time DO have, or had, reasonable voting laws. And most of them are very much like MO. You show your registration card and some ID when you vote. Despite Alan's claims, it isn't 'easy' to just walk in and vote, cause if it were THERE MIGHT BE SOME CASES OF VOTER FRAUD! Certainly enough to warrant this. But there isn't.
What these states are trying to do is make it harder. They are rejecting ID that was accepted in the past (remember, these laws worked, thus no voter fraud) or scrubbing voting lists of 'Hispanic sounding' names, or really scrubbing democratic lists.
One more time, I will provide links of these shenanigans. Please actually look at them and read what is actually happening.
http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/gop-voter-id-laws-working-hard-suppre
And the a--hole who sponsored these laws slammed everyone. The judge for striking this down (for now) and the Governor for trying to create a new state ID that would only be used for voting since people were having trouble getting the other. Pretty clear this guy simply didn't want people to vote and is now pi--ed that others were trying to actually enable people to vote.
http://www.philly.com/philly/blogs/cityhall/Voter-ID-law-sponsor-turns-on-fellow-Republicans-in-ruling.html
In Florida, as one state example, thousands of people were tossed off the voter lists and sent letters saying they had to 'prove' they were eligible to vote. It just so happens most of those had 'Latino' names. Now wouldn't that piss you off? I know it would me. Especially as it turns out only about 5 of those people were not registered properly, and I think all were due to simple mistakes.
Same thing happening in Colorado, Peggy. Plus, the (republican) secretary of state decided in late August that if a person voted in 2008, but did not vote in the 2010 election, they are now officially "inactive" and can't receive ballots by mail or other election correspondence, and may be turned away at their precinct. This is specifically -- blatantly -- targeting those who voted in the 2008 election but perhaps didn't care enough about who was on the school board in 2010. In late August. As in, ten weeks before a presidential election. The city of Denver has filed suit, thankfully, but seriously: Who can justify this?
Have your IDs, that's fine. I always show my ID and as long as they were easily, freely obtainable and it wasn't a huge cluster like in Pennsylvania (where people were turned away trying to obtain them) or in Texas (where people have to somehow get a couple of hundred miles to the nearest source) then whatever, make them mandatory. But these half-baked schemes are so transparent; we'll require the proper ID, for but people who don't have it, well, you're on your own and in fact, we're going to put roadblocks in the way of obtaining them. And bringing this down in a presidential election year, seriously? I'm supposed to take the Republican party seriously, or place any amount of trust in their candidates?
Of all the sickening stuff coming out of BOTH parties this election season, this really takes the cake.
Catherine, Yahoo just published this:
http://news.yahoo.com/3-views-whether-us-states-require-voter-id-151600305--politics.html
Unsure what the warring parties here think of option #3.
I'm a little like you. I might not like How and When these voter ID laws are being passed, and don't think they are really warranted, but if a specific voter ID were easily obtainable by any citizen, free, and there was plenty of time between the change in policy and the next major election, I'd certain consider it fair enough. Would that make everyone happy and put this million-dollar mess to bed once and for all?
I certainly have no problem with showing ID when I vote. And if the government wants to pursue some form of national ID, that is also OK with me. But like most everything else, follow the 'money'. These laws, proposed by republicans in contested states, so close to elections, are clearly designed for one purpose only. To keep people from the polls. There is no 'problem' with voter fraud, as study after study shows, and the only problem is republicans want a victory when they can't sell their message.
After this election, with several years before the next national election, let them do this, even though there still isn't reason for it. If, given several years to obtain the proper 'approved' ID, people still don't get it, well, then tough.
As it stands, there are thousands and thousands of people in these states (really low information voters) who have no idea the rules have changed, or what exactly the new rules are, and will show up on voting day, perfectly ready, and legal to vote, and won't be able to cause they don't have the proper papers and/or ID's, pictures, blood samples....whatever..
...
Can someone succinctly point out to me the pros and cons of requiring voter ID? I mean, explicit examples of how it would prevent fraud vs. prevent qualified voters from voting.
It would have disenfranchised my mother, who never had a driver's license and who was home bound by illness in her later years. She had a keen interest in politics all her life, but I can't imagine how she could have obtained a photo ID unless there was some kind of in-home outreach program for people in her situation. Voter fraud just isn't a problem--a few convictions per state per year. Not worth the cost in dollars and personal inconvenience that a whole new ID system would entail.
Not worth the cost in dollars and personal inconvenience that a whole new ID system would entail.
If this were an actual problem worth solving, since voters have to register to vote, it would seem simple enough to issue them a voter ID card, perhaps with a signature that could be compared at the polls, for those old-fashioned states that still let you vote in person. Or a PIN, and the all-too-honest electronic voting machine could verify the PIN. I'm not sure why you need a picture ID, it's easy enough to hoax those as well if you care to.
Luckily, my state is all vote-and-fraud-by-mail now :-(
It all sounds like a good argument for mandatory national id. We could tie voter registration status, immigration status, citizenship, SS, just about everything else to it as well. Pick a party to affiliate to if you want and it's good until you die.
I believe President Clinton floated the idea of national ID. It didn't go over well, conjuring up memories of totalitarian states, "Papers, please!" and Big Brother run amok.
Not to mention that today, your national ID chip would have room for your credit rating, your Facebook friends, all the groceries (including booze) you ever bought with a loyalty card, and your cell records. And probably your vaccination schedule. Where's that "I'm so old..." thread? I'm so old I remember privacy.
ApatheticNoMore
10-2-12, 6:54pm
Your national ID card can be your face, all poll places just need facial identification software and there we go. It will look up your face, identify you, and find out if you are registered to vote within that precint.
Oh soon enough we will have the all purpose national card. Driving, voting, paying taxes, toll road fees, rail passes, gun purchases (ok, probably not), TSA screening, social security payments, surgery, unemployment benefits, police checkpoints...heck, we can do it all with one simple to use card. Swipe it and go.
The vet microchips my critters for next to nothing, that may be the way to go.
The vet microchips my critters for next to nothing, that may be the way to go.
Even better. At birth or upon passing through customs, whichever comes first.
The new chipped driver's licenses we can get for travel to Canada are a the first step.
The vet microchips my critters for next to nothing, that may be the way to go.
Maybe - microchip thefts, though, could get pretty nasty.
I believe President Clinton floated the idea of national ID. It didn't go over well, conjuring up memories of totalitarian states, "Papers, please!" and Big Brother run amok.
Not to mention that today, your national ID chip would have room for your credit rating, your Facebook friends, all the groceries (including booze) you ever bought with a loyalty card, and your cell records. And probably your vaccination schedule. Where's that "I'm so old..." thread? I'm so old I remember privacy.
But people who are looking for voter id are really looking for this level of identification. Be careful what you ask for.
But people who are looking for voter id are really looking for this level of identification. Be careful what you ask for.
Don't look at me. I'm not in favor of full disclosure at any level. If I could be invisible, I would be...
But people who are looking for voter id are really looking for this level of identification. Be careful what you ask for.Really? I must have missed a couple of evil Republican strategy meetings.
Really? I must have missed a couple of evil Republican strategy meetings.
But that is exactly what they are asking for, state by state...or maybe just from democrats. So which is it? Are you for these draconian ID requirements for voting or not? You can't have it both ways. You can't demand these requirements for voting (even though there is no measurable voter fraud to warrant it) and say 'but not for me!' If you demand these extensive requirements of ID to vote, then you must demand these to do just about anything else that might impact your fellow citizens. Drive, buy insurance, purchase agricultural soil enhancements, buy a GUN, anything that might impact the Union at large. (and we have determined that a single gun can kill far more than a single vote) Hindsight is 20/20. Forethought takes a little more sight.
Sometimes when you design to dig a hole for someone else, you are in real danger of falling in yourself.
In NYC I used to have to just sign the voting roll at the polling place. They had a remarkable technology, in that they had a copy of the signature I'd given at the time I registered, printed right next to where I had to sign. The poll worker then just had to compare the two signatures to confirm that I was me. It was back in 1992 when I registered so I honestly don't remember what I had to do to prove myself at that time, but I'm sure there was some sort of validation process.
Gee, do you think maybe it's a felony cause they DEFRAUDED the folks who hired them? ..
I think it's a felony to tamper with voter registration, though ya'll tell me that fraudulent voting as a result is a non-issue. So why bother to prosecute anyone for tampering? I just don't know what to think, I'm so helpless in my pit of ignorance where I'm wallowing.:D
But that is exactly what they are asking for, state by state...or maybe just from democrats.
They're asking for a national ID card, state by state? Wow!
Are you for these draconian ID requirements for voting or not?
Draconian? I don't think that word means what you think it means.
If you demand these extensive requirements of ID to vote, then you must demand these to do just about anything else that might impact your fellow citizens. Drive, buy insurance, purchase agricultural soil enhancements, buy a GUN, anything that might impact the Union at large. (and we have determined that a single gun can kill far more than a single vote) Hindsight is 20/20. Forethought takes a little more sight.
You know, I'm not sure about purchasing agricultural soil enhancements, but I'm pretty sure you have to show an approved ID for the rest of that stuff (with the possible exception of buying the neighbor's old .410 shotgun). Why, I even have to show my drivers license to buy certain over-the-counter cold remedies at my local pharmacy, just as a means of discouraging those who may use it's ingredients in an un-approved manner.
Let me ask you a question, are you in favor of not being required to prove you are who you say you are when you engage in any of those activities?
Also, getting back to voting, are you in favor of making it easy for other voters to dilute the power of your single vote by claiming multiple votes for themselves?
They're asking for a national ID card, state by state? Wow!
Draconian? I don't think that word means what you think it means.
You know, I'm not sure about purchasing agricultural soil enhancements, but I'm pretty sure you have to show an approved ID for the rest of that stuff (with the possible exception of buying the neighbor's old .410 shotgun). Why, I even have to show my drivers license to buy certain over-the-counter cold remedies at my local pharmacy, just as a means of discouraging those who may use it's ingredients in an un-approved manner.
Let me ask you a question, are you in favor of not being required to prove you are who you say you are when you engage in any of those activities?
Also, getting back to voting, are you in favor of making it easy for other voters to dilute the power of your single vote by claiming multiple votes for themselves?
But they don't Alan, and that's the point! There is no measurable voter fraud! It's just not happening! And yes, you should need to show ID when doing all of those things, including buying a gun, from anyone! And there should be a process to tract gun purchases for all gun purchases! I'm glad you agree on that. There is something wrong when you can buy a gun easier than you can vote.
It's not the fact that you show who you are, it's that they have changed the rules of what they will accept. Or who they will accept. The process in place has worked so far, cause there is NO MEASURABLE VOTER FRAUD, so it was all good!
Let me ask you this. If there is no voter fraud, then why go through all this expense and bother to 'fix' a 'problem' that does not exist? People aren't stupid Alan. They understand exactly what the republican party is up to. The republicans can't sell their message, so they try other tricks to win.
You know, I used to respect the republican party. I may not have agreed with it on all points, but I did respect it. I don't any more. Not even a little bit. And I am increasingly losing respect for anyone who votes for this republican party. Any half way intelligent person who votes for THESE republicans in these particular states is as guilty as they are of trying to block voters and disenfranchise a large number of the people in order to win.
But I think it will come back to bite them in the butt. As I said, people aren't all stupid. Plenty of the disenfranchised are republicans too. Plenty of them will show up unable to vote.
I think it's a felony to tamper with voter registration, though ya'll tell me that fraudulent voting as a result is a non-issue. So why bother to prosecute anyone for tampering? I just don't know what to think, I'm so helpless in my pit of ignorance where I'm wallowing.:D
For the same reason we prosecute DUI even though someone isn't killed every time someone drives drunk.
Climb out of your pit. You can do it!;)
You know, I used to respect the republican party.
I used to have respect for both parties, such as they were. Now...not so much. I think both operate strictly to push their agenda. If that happens to benefit some citizens in its wake so much the better, but its optional. The current Democratic leadership has done nothing to reverse the long slide of diminishing privacy issues or increase personal responsibility of citizens. Neither did the administration before that. Or the one before that... In my mind that is a government problem, not a party platform problem. Both platforms will get us to the same point eventually, its only a matter of the pieces fitting together differently. I've never been a member of either party, but at this point I certainly can't find a comfortable fit. I'm wondering why we need parties and their broad brush stroke platforms at all?
It's our government ("we the people"), but we've let it get away from us. "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty."--Wendell Phillips, abolitionist, 1852
The Atlantic, on voter suppression attempts in Massachussetts:
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/07/republican-virtue-and-the-fraud-of-voter-fraud/260306/
"Pennsylvania officials have the luxury of having confessed that there has no proof of voter fraud:
The state signed a stipulation agreement with lawyers for the plaintiffs which acknowledges there "have been no investigations or prosecutions of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania; and the parties do not have direct personal knowledge of any such investigations or prosecutions in other states."
... and having confessed to the laws true purpose:
Pennsylvania House Majority Leader Mike Turzai (R) said that the voter ID law passed by the legislature would help deliver the state for Mitt Romney in November. "Pro-Second Amendment? The Castle Doctrine, it's done. First pro-life legislation -- abortion facility regulations -- in 22 years, done. Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done," Turzai said at this weekend's Republican State Committee meeting ...."
I don't know how it can get any clearer than that. No problem to be solved, just political dirty tricks.
Courts have blocked or blunted these tricks in most states where they've been tried.
iris lily
10-3-12, 10:03am
For the same reason we prosecute DUI even though someone isn't killed every time someone drives drunk.
Climb out of your pit. You can do it!;)
The RESULT of driving drunk has dastardly outcomes. So, we prosecute driving drunk.
The RESULT of voter registration tampering has no dastardly outcomes (sez peggy.) So, we prosecute tampering.
Do I have the above right according to your world view?
The current group of Republicans in politics are George Wallace Type not Ford, Reagan, or Bush 1. I could have and have voted for these type of republicans.
The current group of Republicans in politics are George Wallace Type not Ford, Reagan, or Bush 1. I could have and have voted for these type of republicans.
Exactly!
The RESULT of driving drunk has dastardly outcomes. So, we prosecute driving drunk.
The RESULT of voter registration tampering has no dastardly outcomes (sez peggy.) So, we prosecute tampering.
Do I have the above right according to your world view?
Noo...Iris, you have me confused. I said we prosecute voter registration fraud because it's FRAUD. Most drunk drivers don't kill someone, but it's still illegal to drive drunk, so we prosecute.
You know, for someone who went on and on about ACORN you seemed to have changed your tune when it was republicans who were 'doing the deed'. Pretty transparent...like these voter ID laws!:~)
ApatheticNoMore
10-3-12, 3:37pm
And if someone does get disenfranchised, that's a voter who will never vote Republican ever, not even for dogcatcher, if someone's grandmother does get disenfranchised, that's a grandmother who will spread on the word of what happens to her children etc. and they might not either. It's a short term game they play.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.