Voter ID laws are not a new concept. If you have no problem with voter ID laws, then why throw a fit about voter ID laws?
Those with common sense want the rules back to some semblance or order as they had been for decades. Remember it was the Democrats that push for easing voting REGULATIONS especially registering. And the GOP won in 2000, 2002, 2004, 2010 and a host of other years and all along have been supporting the integrity of our election process as opposed to the Democrats who want it wide open for fraud and abuse. - - - Updated - - - No one has been "suppressed" please prove there has been wide-spread "suppression" and wide-spread people unable to vote and the polling place.
My phone number is not listed on my voter registration and how do you ask a dead person if that was really them who voted? Or someone who has moved away? I have posted over and over a list of elections where the margin was less than .01% some where it was only 2-5 votes. That is all it would take to sway those elections. Voter ID when you register and then when you vote is a simple common sense protection of the integrity of our election system, why do you oppose such a common sense measure and don't give me the canard about people unable to obtain a valid ID.
A number of cases have been listed OVER AND OVER along with the list of close elections where it would take minimal number of fraudulent votes to sway the election. And you engage in the logical fallacy, argumentum ad ignorantiam, that absence of evidence is evidence absence. Voter ID at registration and at the polling place is a common sense perfectly reasonable protection of the integrity of our system of voting and there is NO rational reason to oppose it except to allow voter fraud to take place.
Why? I never claimed the attempted suppression is "wide-spread." If you believe that the suppression is not directed at a relatively small number, those most vulnerable to such a calculated device, you'll need to prove your notion to me. I'm fairly certain that the scheme to impose such additional government bureaucracy and red tape would serve to discourage only Americans already largely disenfrancised in other respects.
It is your side of this debate that claims that for something to affect an election it has to be widespread. So if suppression is not widespread then it doesn't effect an election? What additional red tape and bureaucracy? There is no such thing with voter ID states are all setup to issue ID's as it is. In fact you could get rid of some because culling voter rolls would not be so critical as people who moved or died could not have their vote cast by someone else, you simply remove the names after so many election cycles without a vote being cast in that name, send a card to the last address saying they must confirm back to stay on the list.
Depriving any American of her right to vote when the unjustified pretext is voter impersonation does not demand that many folks are its victims. None should be thusly victimized. Where is your evidence for sufficient numbers of dastards risking fine and imprisonment to each cast a single bogus ballot to pervert any election in any state where the additional bureaucracy has not been inflicted on the electorate? Name just one. Establishing guidelines for the ID cards, the burden and expense upon voters in obtaining them, training for those checking IDs to determine whether they are genuine or counterfeit, establishing proper procedures if they are questionable, temporary disposition of the ballots of those whose legitimacy is pending proper review to insure their votes are properly assigned and not tampered with whilst on hold, instituting guidelines for such reviews, etc. Presumably, you are not pretending that merely flashing a card at a poll nanny is all that is needed to address the non-existent problem of vast conspiracies of coordinated bogus voters perverting elections - and that, if such organised cabals actually existed, could easily be circumvented by high-quality fake cards? What do you hope to accomplish by imposing such ineffectual additional bureaucracy and red tape when no problem has been shown to exist, and there are far more effective methods of altering election outcomes for anyone serious about doing such a thing?
agreed, as should be trying to deny a valid voter from voting... Permanent revocation of voting rights, and it should be a felony.
That's not what Kurmudgeon says. According to him, it's happening at "silly levels". Personally, I've never seen it, and I don't see how this conspiracy of millions of vote fraudsters could possibly be occuring.
How is protecting the country against something that doesn't happen and is not likely to happen "common sense"?
Certainly, the fines and imprisonment penalties on the books, given the extent of the "problem" that the voter-suppression advocates have been able to demonstrate, are more than adequate disincentives. If they feel such rare infractions merit crucifixion, that may be less of an imposition than making every voter flash a pic at a poll nanny. .
Crucify Ann Coulter, I like it....despite their fantasies, most voter fraud is Republicans with multiple homes registering in multiple states....
No it is very rare. The right fails to relize when they lose elections it for a couple of reason. Their candidatewas a whack job and their policies suck. Generally speaking there is a 99.9999999999999% chance that voterfruad had nothing to do with it. However, we will let you cry and moan about voter fruad because it works out better for Dems.
Not enough to require everyone to flash a pic at a poll nanny, maybe, but receiving a lurid facial tattoo when voting would be a better safeguard against Republicans attempting to advantage their multiple residences.
There are numerous forms of election and voter fraud some of which actually could affect an election but much of which doesn't. For example the voter registration of a fictitious person such as Mickey Mouse is fraud but it doesn't affect an election because Mickey Mouse never shows up to vote at the polls. It is the responsibility of the "elections office" of the State to identify these case but, as noted, they don't affect election outcomes. This has nothing to do with the Voter ID laws. The voter registration of a person prohibited from voting such as an ex-felon that has had their voting rights suspended or an alien immigrant is fraud but it is already a crime as a person must commit perjury in signing the voter registration card as they must declare they are entitled to vote and are not a US citizen that's had their voting rights suspended or an alien resident. It is the responsibility of the "elections office" of the state to identify these individuals and remove them from the voting list. It is a criminal offense and it's the responsibility of the State to establish the evidence necessary to address this issue just like any other criminal offense. This has nothing to do with the Voter ID laws. There are cases of duplicate voting where a registered voter maybe registered in more than one district and vote in both or where they submit an absentee ballot and also vote at a poll. These cases do exist but they are rare and haven't affected any election. They were more of a problem historically than they are today. This has nothing to do with Voter ID laws. Then there are possible cases where a person shows up at the polls and misreprents who they are by claiming to be a "registered" voter and they impersonate that voter. That is voter impersonation fraud that would be addressed by the Voter ID law but the problem is that this is extremely rare. For example in Pennsylvania, North Carolina, and Wisconsin all passed Voter ID laws but none of these states could show any evidence of voter impersonation fraud ever occurring. The Pennsylvania law has since been struck down by a federal court. If we really wanted to address the problem of "rigging elections" then the greatest concern is where it's being done "legally" by the gerrymandering of Congressional districts. Both Democrats and Republican have engaged in the gerrymandering of Congressional districts historically. Today the Republicans are better at gerrymandering than the Democrats as evidenced by the fact that more Americans vote for Democratic House candidates but the Republicans control the House of Representatives. Gerrymandering of Congressional districts is the greatest problem in the United States that adversely affects the outcomes of elections. If the State want to address corrupted elections then this is really where their efforts need to be focused.
Disfranchising a legal vote because of illegal votes is even worse especially when common sense measures such as voter ID can be used to further prevent illegal votes. And no one is deprived of voting due to voter ID, no one. As I have posted several times there have been many elections where the difference was single digits, just a couple of dead people casting a vote would sway the election. Now where are is your evidence for sufficient numbers of people who are prevented from voting because they cannot get a proper ID? What additional bureaucracy? Are you ignorant of the fact that the majority of states already have voter ID, that EVERY state already has a system of state ID in place? Your entire argument is a silly canard. It is a commons sense measure easily put in place to further protect the integrity of our elections, something you care not a twit about it seems. What do you hope to accomplish but allowing anyone to walk up to a polling place and claim to be someone else and then allowing them to vote?
I asked My phone number is not listed on my voter registration and how do you ask a dead person if that was really them who voted? Or someone who has moved away? Care to answer this time? How do you know that has not occurred and how would you prevent it? The incidences of such fraud have been linked several times, how do you prevent someone from voting in someone else's name and swaying an election when the margin is just 1 or 2 votes? You use your common sense and have voters show their ID's. Tell me do you agree that you should show your ID when you register and prove who you are and that you live in the voting precinct for which you are registering? - - - Updated - - - Which voter ID is since no one is deprived of their vote with this common sense measure.
Oklahoma state elections, 2006 Margin 0.020846% Vote difference 2 Total votes 9,594 After a recount Republican Todd Thomsen beat Democrat Darrel Nemecek by two votes for the Oklahoma House of Representatives seat in its 25th district.[29][30][31] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_close_election_results So how many fraudulent votes would it have taken to sway that election?
Are you just taxing your imagination or can you cite actual examples where the existing fine and/or imprisonment penalties were not applied? Did they? Cite where and when. Again, you're making up my "point," and pretending that the additional bureaucratic hurdle you would impose does not discourage some voters. What's silly is your insisting all states must do what some states do to address a non-existent problem. You're making up nonsense again. I do not support "allowing anyone to walk up to a polling place and claim to be someone else and then allowing them to vote." In those rare instances where such a fraud is attempted, there should be criminal penalties, fines and/or imprisonment - as is the case. Why do you pretend that having to flash a fake ID at an untrained poll nanny is an effective method of addressing your non-existent problem?
Why not a barcode tattoo on the forehead to identify lawful US voters? Sort of like the Nazi tattoo of Jews only in reverse but it still reflects the same tyranny by government. .
The votes of dead people are counted and recorded all of the time but it has nothing to do with voter impersonation at the polls and it is completely legal and acceptable. This often happens because of absentee ballots where the person votes, mails in their ballot, and happens to die before the actual date of the election. Yes there are cases where a small double digit difference exists in the vote that affects the election but overwhelmingly this relates to small town voting for local offices in communities where literally everyone knows everyone else. The voters don't need to "identify" themselves because everyone knows who they are. When we look at major elections the closest one I'm aware of was the gubenatorial race in Washington in 2004 between Christine Gregoire and Dino Rossi. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christine_Gregoire#2004_gubernatorial_election While there were claims of voter fraud including votes by felons, deceased voters, and double voters there wasn't a single claim of voter impersonation fraud that a Voter ID Law would address in an election where over 2.7 million votes were cast. With over 2.7 million votes and not a single case of voter impersonation being identified what are the odds against voter impersonation fraud? The closest major election for governor with millions of voters casting ballots and absolutely no need for a voter to show ID when voting. There is no evidence of voter impersonation fraud ever affecting any electorial process ever in the history of the United States.
