GOP admits voter id laws will "allow" Romney to win

[Darwin333]

And the drones keep parroting the same stupid disinformation.

Absentee Ballots
​

"Dead" people can vote forever using absentee ballots, no photo ID required. The solution to this problem is cleaning up voter registration, NOT voter photo IDs. Why is it so hard for some of you to grasp this very simple concept?

That is a very good point, I assume that the voter ID laws in question do not apply to absentee ballots? Why can't they just amend the law to require ID to get an absentee ballot same as casting a regular vote?

I really don't have a dog in this hunt, just trying to get educated a bit.

 

[Bowfinger]

How are you stopping people from voting?

Nothing is stopping them from getting an ID.

Show your ID to verify who you are and cast your vote.

If no present Gov required issued ID, GET ONE

Sure, that's the easy dodge. Oh no, we're not preventing them from voting. They are still free to vote ... if they get a government photo ID, and if they have the money, and if they can produce a birth certificate, and if they're mobile or can at least find someone to haul them around. The fact of the matter is a significant percentage of them will not do that. They may not be prevented from voting, but they are absolutely discouraged from voting.

Sorry, but in my opinion, the burden of proof lies on those who will disenfranchise a great many voters. They must prove that voter photo ID laws will not only actually reduce fraud -- a tough sell given that they're doing nothing to stop the largely imaginary fraudsters from using absentee ballots -- but will actually reduce fraud more than the number of legitimate voters they disenfranchise. It's called a cost-benefits analysis, and voter photo ID laws are a giant loser ... unless one's real agenda is suppressing votes. Then it becomes a big win.

 

[Darwin333]

Can anyone show that voter fraud produced a statistically relevant effect in any of these states? Not anecdotes about dead people on the rolls, etc., but actual statistics. It seems that if this isn't a thinly veiled attempt to disenfranchise the elderly, the poor, minorities, students, etc. that it is a solution in search of a problem.

I asked earlier in the thread, given our current voting system how exactly would one go about compiling those statistics?

Its a secret ballot and no ID is required, how do you know joe blow was really joe blow and not someone else?

This is a serious question not the normal P&N partisan bullshit.

 

[Paul98]

Just like everything the republicans do, this is just about politics and winning. It has nothing to do with stopping voter fraud, it has everything to do with making it hard for groups who mostly vote democrat to vote. Then they let their stooges parrot the it's all about vote fraud. Their idiotic base eats it up and since they only care about themselves they don't care about the people who end up going to vote and are turned away. Then since these republicans are so stupid, they will say that is was the persons fault that they couldn't vote, even if they have tried to get what they need to vote. The republicans won't take any responsibility for stopping people who should be able to vote.

 

[blankslate]

So you're saying that allowing voter fraud is how democrats win? Preventing voter fraud by asking for ID makes republicans more likely to win? I'm really shocked that anyone would admit their party relies on fraud to win.

\

Actually when you register to vote you provide a signature. Many precincts in different states use that as the main verification of identity of the voter. You sign somewhere to vote. Mail in Ballots require a signature somewhere on either the envelope or the actual ballot. Now maybe that form of ID is insufficient to you, ok that's something that can be debated.

However, it's hard enough to get people to vote. Most of the time the majority of eligible voters won't be bothered except for those odd elections where the voting turnout is high.... even then it's not a vast majority. How is a person going to credibly argue that voter fraud is committed by enough people to be a serious problem when you already have problems getting people to care enough to vote? Especially considering that voter fraud is a felony.




Very few people have been found to have commit voter fraud. However it was a focus of the Bush administration and some federal prosecutors were fired by President Bush, some of those prosecutors had received very favorable appraisals a few years before.

Supposedly, disagreements by those attorneys with the administration over voter fraud was a factor.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dismissal_of_U.S._attorneys_controversy



Election fraud involves shenanigans not committed by the voter. Election officials throwing out or shredding ballots would be a crude example.

Consider the questionable security of the electronic voting machines however....

Their programming is proprietary. And they are designed by corporations.

I'm sorry but if a machine is going to be used to count votes in addition to a paper printout on durable paper with very durable inks the software of that machine should be open source so that security experts can verify the security of the software.

consider this story.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/240781/argonne_researchers_easily_hack_electronic_voting_machine.html

Researchers at the Argonne National Laboratory this week showed how an electronic voting machine model that's expected to be widely used to tally votes in the 2012 elections can be easily hacked using inexpensive, widely-available electronic components.

Roger Johnston, head of the Vulnerability Assessment Team at the U.S. Department of Energy's science and engineering reseaech lab, said the hack, which requires about $25 and very little technical expertise, would let cybercriminals "flip" votes gathered on Diebold Accuvote TS machines and change election results without raising any suspicion.

Why the hell should we trust a company that designs such flawed machines with our elections? Paper is good enough for countries why not us?

Sure it's easy to make a wisecrack for laughs but the issue is serious.... unless of course, I suppose, the current state of affairs favors the party that you're rooting for.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

I would guess $0. Up here in Canada we require ID for voting and it doesn't seem to cause any problems.

Here's how voting in Canada works.
Voting is based on where you live. If you live at X street and Y avenue, you must vote at polling station Z. This is important because where you vote determines who you can vote for; different ridings have different candidates obviously. The polling stations will already have a giant list of people who are registered to vote in that area. People who live in the area but are not on the list can be added to the list at a moment's notice, and I had to do that last time.

1) Walk into the polling station and give them your government issued ID. You can either use a photo ID like a drivers license or you can use your social insurance card (like a SS card) and a piece of delivered mail that shows where you live.
2) They check the address on your ID or mail and verify that you are at the correct polling station. A couple months ago I was at the wrong one; the correct station was across the street. They put a check mark next to your name to indicate that you have voted, and then they give you a piece of paper.
3) You take the paper over to the cheap folding table that has some cheap cardboard on it that gives some privacy then mark the appropriate candidate with the pencil provided.
4) Take the marked ballot back to the people who gave you the paper.
5) Fold the paper in half and put it in the box; nobody else is allowed to see or touch your ballot.
6) Leave the polling station.


Maybe democrats see this as being some mind bogglingly complex problem. Paper and pencil? $20 folding tables? Senior citizens reading the address on your drivers license? Inconceivable!

Nice post. Based on incorrect info but other than that great. There is no need for government issued photo ID to vote in Canada. I can show a utility bill and a bank statement with my name and address. Or many other documents as long as my name and address appear.

 

[MovingTarget]

That is a very good point, I assume that the voter ID laws in question do not apply to absentee ballots? Why can't they just amend the law to require ID to get an absentee ballot same as casting a regular vote?

I really don't have a dog in this hunt, just trying to get educated a bit.

I have voted before using an absentee ballot when I was a student, but that process requires a lot of information exchange between the voter and the voting precinct prior to actually voting absentee. It is much more of a burden to vote absentee than to actually go to the voting precinct with the exact same information in hand. I once had my ballot tossed by the local commission simply because the postmark was a day late (but still several months prior to the election itself.). It is a pretty strict process. I just don't think that with all that information required that a government-issued ID is necessary.

 

[waggy]

So you're saying that allowing voter fraud is how democrats win? Preventing voter fraud by asking for ID makes republicans more likely to win? I'm really shocked that anyone would admit their party relies on fraud to win.

bwhahahah

 

[Bowfinger]

I have voted before using an absentee ballot when I was a student, but that process requires a lot of information exchange between the voter and the voting precinct prior to actually voting absentee. It is much more of a burden to vote absentee than to actually go to the voting precinct with the exact same information in hand. I once had my ballot tossed by the local commission simply because the postmark was a day late (but still several months prior to the election itself.). It is a pretty strict process. I just don't think that with all that information required that a government-issued ID is necessary.

Here's the form used in Iowa:

http://sos.iowa.gov/elections/pdf/absenteeballotapp.pdf
​

It's pretty simple, name, address, DOB, and phone. It does ask for either a DL# or the SSN-last 4, but that's not marked as a required field. I don't know how that compares to other states, but my impression is it's usually pretty simple. Both parties will help you get one if you need it (mostly for shut-ins and the elderly).

 

[MovingTarget]

I asked earlier in the thread, given our current voting system how exactly would one go about compiling those statistics?

Its a secret ballot and no ID is required, how do you know joe blow was really joe blow and not someone else?

This is a serious question not the normal P&N partisan bullshit.

There are various statistical methods to use here, but I'll keep this in layman's terms as I'm no statistician. With the information required to actually vote, it should be relatively easy for the state to get in touch with you, either by mail, phone, or in person. The only thing that need to be done within a properly chosen sample is to:
a) confirm their identity
b) ask them where they are supposed to vote
c) ask if they voted
d) compare to lists of who voted as compiled by the local polling stations
Those who worked at the polling locations should be able to confirm this data in a-c. That should be sufficient to compare the actual voter rolls to the sample. Any statistical effects can be compiled from there. The fact that a secret ballot is used is irrelevant to determining if the possibility of changing the outcome of an election via fraud.

 

[ShawnD1]

Oh noes, we might limit the number of marxist voters!

Or at least limit the number of voters who are so extremely tin foil paranoid that they refuse to get any form of ID and they live in the woods or "off grid" to avoid alien GPS satellite tracking because the trees provide excellent visual cover.

 

[ShawnD1]

The issue is that Republicans in several states are changing the process to mandate a government-issued photo ID as the only acceptable form of identification.

This would be in contrast to the democrats who think I should be able to use the MS Word template and print my own ID card. How dare you accuse me of not being the prince of Nigeria. It says I am on this card!

 

[Bowfinger]

I asked earlier in the thread, given our current voting system how exactly would one go about compiling those statistics?

Its a secret ballot and no ID is required, how do you know joe blow was really joe blow and not someone else?

This is a serious question not the normal P&N partisan bullshit.

You'd have to do it through statistical sampling. Whenever someone impersonates another voter, there is a chance the victim will also show up to vote, creating some incidence of duplicate ballots. From that, after eliminating dupes due to other causes, one could then project the total scale of in-person fraud that was not detected directly. It would only be an estimate, but it would give an idea of how often it happens.

Once could also do a more rigorous study by selecting a random sample of voters in an election, then contacting them to confirm they actually voters. This would obviously be a lot of work.

 

[Bowfinger]

This would be in contrast to the democrats who think I should be able to use the MS Word template and print my own ID card. How dare you accuse me of not being the prince of Nigeria. It says I am on this card!

Yep, typical. When you don't have an actual argument, lie about your opposition. You fail hard. Go play.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

The Republicans don't care about voter fraud. They care about suppressing those who typically vote Democrat.

The Democrats don't care about voter fraud. They care about not suppressing those who typically vote Democrat, even if it means fraud occurs.

That's the reality.

 

[Bowfinger]

Or at least limit the number of voters who are so extremely tin foil paranoid that they refuse to get any form of ID and they live in the woods or "off grid" to avoid alien GPS satellite tracking because the trees provide excellent visual cover.

If there is such a thing as karma, perhaps you will someday find yourself disabled and house-bound, with no friends or family at hand to cart you around and indulge your whims, and you may look back at yourself today and realize what an ignorant, self-centered ass you were.

 

[MovingTarget]

Here's the form used in Iowa:

http://sos.iowa.gov/elections/pdf/absenteeballotapp.pdf
​

It's pretty simple, name, address, DOB, and phone. It does ask for either a DL# or the SSN-last 4, but that's not marked as a required field. I don't know how that compares to other states, but my impression is it's usually pretty simple. Both parties will help you get one if you need it (mostly for shut-ins and the elderly).

Good info. Our process is similar and I've linked to both the information and application below. With our process, you also have to provide two witnessed signatures and/or have the document notarized. You also have to state why you need to vote absentee.

I am unaware of the two parties' efforts to assist in voting absentee, but with one party largely defunct in my state, any effort is pretty one-sided. Most just deal directly with the secretary of state in Montgomery.

http://www.sos.state.al.us/elections/absenteevotinginfo.aspx
http://www.sos.state.al.us/download...eballotapp.pdf&trgtfile=absenteeballotapp.pdf

 

[ShawnD1]

That is a very good point, I assume that the voter ID laws in question do not apply to absentee ballots? Why can't they just amend the law to require ID to get an absentee ballot same as casting a regular vote?

I really don't have a dog in this hunt, just trying to get educated a bit.

You would probably verify it the same way the tax man verifies tax filings without photo ID. Up in Canada the automated system will ask for a line from your tax return. What was the number on line 306 of your 2010 tax return? You enter the number, and it gives a validation code that allows online tax filing.
Voting is supposed to be anonymous so it would need to have some kind of security feature. Maybe it would register that you have voted but it would not associate your vote with your name. You can't vote twice, but it also can't be traced back to figure out who you voted for.

 

[Bowfinger]

The Republicans don't care about voter fraud. They care about suppressing those who typically vote Democrat.

The Democrats don't care about voter fraud. They care about not suppressing those who typically vote Democrat, even if it means fraud occurs.

That's the reality.

I guess that's why I'm an independent. I care very much about reducing fraudulent voting. I am focused on wholesale fraud that actually steals elections, however, and not the imaginary individual fraud that has no material impact whatsoever. To prove this, one need only look at my many posts decrying corruptible electronic voting systems, laughably easy to hack from afar, and completely lacking in any audit trail to preserve election integrity. That is real election fraud waiting to happen, unlike this in-person fraud BS.

 

[ShawnD1]

Yep, typical. When you don't have an actual argument, lie about your opposition. You fail hard. Go play.

How is that a lie? Republicans (and sane democrats) said they should only accept government issued ID. You're saying you disagree with this position - you think people should vote with absoloutely no proof of who they are. I could vote for the communist party using a vote under your name and you would be perfectly ok with that.

Give me your name and address. Next election, I'll take a special trip to the US and vote using your name. It'll be good for your economy because I'll buy lots of illegal drugs while I'm down there.

 

[boomerang]

 

[Greenman]

So you're saying that allowing voter fraud is how democrats win? Preventing voter fraud by asking for ID makes republicans more likely to win? I'm really shocked that anyone would admit their party relies on fraud to win.

This is right on point. The only reason not to require ID from voters is to allow fraud. If someone isn't bright enough to have identification, they aren't bright enough to vote.

 

[ShawnD1]

Yeah but republicans are racist to assume that black people have photo ID. Every democrat knows that:
-black people only go to the bank when they plan to rob it
-black people steal movies instead of rent them
-black people prefer crack cocaine over alcohol
-black people don't fly

Why can't you just accept that black peole are different? Racists like you are scum.

 

[ElMonoDelMar]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/15/texans-gun-permits-student-ids-voting_n_1095530.html

It's an old article. Sort of funny that gun cards are accepted as photo ID, but student ID's are not.

 

[Bowfinger]

This is right on point. The only reason not to require ID from voters is to allow fraud. If someone isn't bright enough to have identification, they aren't bright enough to vote.

Whereas I think that if someone isn't bright enough to read this thread, isn't bright enough to recognize he's slurping up a load of RNC propaganda, isn't bright enough to recognize there are many reasons one might not have government ID that have nothing to do with intelligence, that person is not bright enough to vote. YMMV.