Wisconsin court upholds voter ID law

[Sheik Yerbouti]

This right here is the reason the level of politics in this country is so juvenile, so full of ignorance and disgusting things. The politicians know their audience. This right here is the "masses".

with their heads up their asses.

 

[Cozarkian]

Let's assume there has never been a single instance of voter fraud that could have been prevented by an ID law. Could there be in the future? Would it matter?

I think there could be. Let's say 10 people get together, each with a different polling station. They go to a station. The first person walks in gives his real name and looks at the list to find someone registered who hasn't checked in. He goes outside and reports the name. Second person walks in and gives the fake name, looks for another empty, repeat and rinse until all 10 people have voted. Then they go to the second station, rinse and repeat. That's 100 votes, 90 which are illegal. If the real people show up, they have to fill out provisional ballots and have been disenfranchise.

To make it worse, the 10th person could get a name and they could return to the first few stations later and repeat the process. Even if the name is used, they do a provisional ballot and get 9 more votes out of the station.

That's the benefit of a voter ID law, it has a small chance of preventing substantial harm. It also has a very high chance of providing a substantial benefit by encouraging people who don't otherwise have IDs to get them and in those laws that have passed Constitutional muster, by making it possible for people who had difficulty getting an ID to get one.

What's the cost of the law? People who either didn't want an ID or couldn't get one have to fill out some paperwork and make a trip to the DMV to get an ID, for free. Oh wait, more people have IDs at no cost - let's move that to the benefit column.

And there you have it 100% benefit, 0 cost. Every state should have one.

 

[Brainonska511]

Let's assume there has never been a single instance of voter fraud that could have been prevented by an ID law. Could there be in the future? Would it matter?

I think there could be. Let's say 10 people get together, each with a different polling station. They go to a station. The first person walks in gives his real name and looks at the list to find someone registered who hasn't checked in. He goes outside and reports the name. Second person walks in and gives the fake name, looks for another empty, repeat and rinse until all 10 people have voted. Then they go to the second station, rinse and repeat. That's 100 votes, 90 which are illegal. If the real people show up, they have to fill out provisional ballots and have been disenfranchise.

To make it worse, the 10th person could get a name and they could return to the first few stations later and repeat the process. Even if the name is used, they do a provisional ballot and get 9 more votes out of the station.

That's the benefit of a voter ID law, it has a small chance of preventing substantial harm. It also has a very high chance of providing a substantial benefit by encouraging people who don't otherwise have IDs to get them and in those laws that have passed Constitutional muster, by making it possible for people who had difficulty getting an ID to get one.

What's the cost of the law? People who either didn't want an ID or couldn't get one have to fill out some paperwork and make a trip to the DMV to get an ID, for free. Oh wait, more people have IDs at no cost - let's move that to the benefit column.

And there you have it 100% benefit, 0 cost. Every state should have one.

So Lex Luther and Dr. Evil are going to team up to create some overly elaborate, easily foiled plot to cast a few extra votes?

And you have a strange definition of "0 cost." The time it takes to get to a DMV, the time needed to get off from work, and the time/cost associated with assembling documents to get a valid photo ID are not insubstantial burdens for some people.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Let's assume there has never been a single instance of voter fraud that could have been prevented by an ID law. Could there be in the future? Would it matter?

I think there could be. Let's say 10 people get together, each with a different polling station. They go to a station. The first person walks in gives his real name and looks at the list to find someone registered who hasn't checked in. He goes outside and reports the name. Second person walks in and gives the fake name, looks for another empty, repeat and rinse until all 10 people have voted. Then they go to the second station, rinse and repeat. That's 100 votes, 90 which are illegal. If the real people show up, they have to fill out provisional ballots and have been disenfranchise.

To make it worse, the 10th person could get a name and they could return to the first few stations later and repeat the process. Even if the name is used, they do a provisional ballot and get 9 more votes out of the station.

That's the benefit of a voter ID law, it has a small chance of preventing substantial harm. It also has a very high chance of providing a substantial benefit by encouraging people who don't otherwise have IDs to get them and in those laws that have passed Constitutional muster, by making it possible for people who had difficulty getting an ID to get one.

What's the cost of the law? People who either didn't want an ID or couldn't get one have to fill out some paperwork and make a trip to the DMV to get an ID, for free. Oh wait, more people have IDs at no cost - let's move that to the benefit column.

And there you have it 100% benefit, 0 cost. Every state should have one.

Holy shit you need to share whatever it is you're smoking.

 

[Atomic Playboy]

Let's assume there has never been a single instance of voter fraud that could have been prevented by an ID law. Could there be in the future? Would it matter?

I think there could be. Let's say 10 people get together, each with a different polling station. They go to a station. The first person walks in gives his real name and looks at the list to find someone registered who hasn't checked in. He goes outside and reports the name. Second person walks in and gives the fake name, looks for another empty, repeat and rinse until all 10 people have voted. Then they go to the second station, rinse and repeat. That's 100 votes, 90 which are illegal. If the real people show up, they have to fill out provisional ballots and have been disenfranchise.

To make it worse, the 10th person could get a name and they could return to the first few stations later and repeat the process. Even if the name is used, they do a provisional ballot and get 9 more votes out of the station.

That's the benefit of a voter ID law, it has a small chance of preventing substantial harm. It also has a very high chance of providing a substantial benefit by encouraging people who don't otherwise have IDs to get them and in those laws that have passed Constitutional muster, by making it possible for people who had difficulty getting an ID to get one.

What's the cost of the law? People who either didn't want an ID or couldn't get one have to fill out some paperwork and make a trip to the DMV to get an ID, for free. Oh wait, more people have IDs at no cost - let's move that to the benefit column.

And there you have it 100% benefit, 0 cost. Every state should have one.

Ah yes, the old "it doesn't happen, but it might through this highly unlikely and easily foiled scheme which could potentially produce dozens of fake votes in a location where elections are decided by differences of thousands, but we can prevent it through this completely free identification card because apparently the DMV can whip up the resources to create cards out of magic and just charges us poor saps for shits and giggles" argument.

 

[ivwshane]

Let's assume there has never been a single instance of voter fraud that could have been prevented by an ID law. Could there be in the future? Would it matter?

I think there could be. Let's say 10 people get together, each with a different polling station. They go to a station. The first person walks in gives his real name and looks at the list to find someone registered who hasn't checked in. He goes outside and reports the name. Second person walks in and gives the fake name, looks for another empty, repeat and rinse until all 10 people have voted. Then they go to the second station, rinse and repeat. That's 100 votes, 90 which are illegal. If the real people show up, they have to fill out provisional ballots and have been disenfranchise.

To make it worse, the 10th person could get a name and they could return to the first few stations later and repeat the process. Even if the name is used, they do a provisional ballot and get 9 more votes out of the station.

That's the benefit of a voter ID law, it has a small chance of preventing substantial harm. It also has a very high chance of providing a substantial benefit by encouraging people who don't otherwise have IDs to get them and in those laws that have passed Constitutional muster, by making it possible for people who had difficulty getting an ID to get one.

What's the cost of the law? People who either didn't want an ID or couldn't get one have to fill out some paperwork and make a trip to the DMV to get an ID, for free. Oh wait, more people have IDs at no cost - let's move that to the benefit column.

And there you have it 100% benefit, 0 cost. Every state should have one.

Congrats! You just stopped at most 100 votes and disenfranchised several thousand legal voters!

Btw, in your scenario you would also have to assume that the names the fraudsters used were names of people who didn't end up voting. That's unlikely to happen and if it did a provisional ballot would have been cast. Not only that but then you'd have the potential to be caught or seen by poll workers and other voters which could result in your arrest and jail time. Hardly worth it for an extra 100 votes.

A much easier way would to steal absentee voter ballots of which not only happens more often but it's not prevented by voter ID laws.

 

[Cozarkian]

Congrats! You just stopped at most 100 votes and disenfranchised several thousand legal voters!

The voter ID law doesn't disenfranchise a single person. It includes the means for people to get an ID, for free. If the inability to get an ID is a problem, voter ID laws are a solution. If Democrats were truly concerned, they would propose laws designed to help people get IDs and attach voter ID requirements as bribes to get Republicans to pass them.

Btw, in your scenario you would also have to assume that the names the fraudsters used were names of people who didn't end up voting. That's unlikely to happen and if it did a provisional ballot would have been cast.

I actually mentioned that. I'll be honest, I don't know how provisional ballots are handled. How do they decide which vote to accept? If in the end, if both votes are invalidated, then a legitimate voter was still disenfranchised.

A much easier way would to steal absentee voter ballots of which not only happens more often but it's not prevented by voter ID laws.

Wasn't it the article in the OP that mentioned there is a legitimate concern that the injunction was overturned after people already mailed absentee ballots and now those votes won't count because they didn't include a copy of their ID when mailing the ballot? Assuming I recall correctly, that would imply the Wisconsin law does apply to absentee ballots.

 

[fskimospy]

Ah yes, the old "it doesn't happen, but it might through this highly unlikely and easily foiled scheme which could potentially produce dozens of fake votes in a location where elections are decided by differences of thousands, but we can prevent it through this completely free identification card because apparently the DMV can whip up the resources to create cards out of magic and just charges us poor saps for shits and giggles" argument.

It's always funny when you see small government conservatives argue for irrational laws that burden citizens in exercising their rights, creates wasteful government spending, and makes a requirement for all citizens to present government ID.

It's amazing how quickly conservatives embrace everything they claim to hate as soon as they think it might help them win elections.

 

[MomentsofSanity]

It's always funny when you see small government conservatives argue for irrational laws that burden citizens in exercising their rights, creates wasteful government spending, and makes a requirement for all citizens to present government ID.

It's amazing how quickly conservatives embrace everything they claim to hate as soon as they think it might help them win elections.

Ihre papiere, bitte.

 

[Bitek]

Breaking: SCOTUS blocks WI voter id law

 

[MomentsofSanity]

Breaking: SCOTUS blocks WI voter id law

To quote a.... something or other

Score for justice.

 

[ivwshane]

Breaking: SCOTUS blocks WI voter id law

Thanks for the heads up!

Good news for now!

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2014/10/09/supreme-court-wisconsin-voter-id/16985963/

 

[sportage]

So guess which the the justices dissented?
Clue... there were 4 and one is black. I think black? I'm really not sure.
I mean, how can you tell?

Just imagine for one moment, what if the court had 5 or 6 exactly like Scalia?
The rulings that have come down in the last 15-20 years?
Can you imagine the type of country we would live in?

Shit... I'd bet big money they'd find legal reasoning reenact slavery.
And I'm dead serious about that.
It wouldn't take much of an imagination.
I mean, if someone is in debt to you, financially or otherwise, you have the right to enslave them for their debt.

So you lose your job, the bank takes your house, and you find yourself picking cotton for some Wells Fargo's CEO.
And it's all legal....
.
.
So what's worse?
A beheading by ISIS, or a ruling from Scalia?
With either case you lose body parts.
.
.
.

 

[Bitek]

To quote a.... something or other

Score for justice.

Don't hold your breath on an updated thread title

 

[Brainonska511]

Don't hold your breath on an updated thread title

What a travesty of justice! Now this man can put his ridiculous plans into motion in Wisconsin and every other state that doesn't require photo ID to vote:

 

[trenchfoot]

Breaking: SCOTUS blocks WI voter id law

So let's see Scott Walker and his voter disenfranchising chums whip out Dem voter suppression plan B. It should be good for some chuckles.

 

[ivwshane]

So let's see Scott Walker and his voter disenfranchising chums whip out Dem voter suppression plan B. It should be good for some chuckles.

I'm not sure what's worse, the politicians that try such tactics with their obvious intentions or the people that apologize or rationalize these tactics.

 

[trenchfoot]

I'm not sure what's worse, the politicians that try such tactics with their obvious intentions or the people that apologize or rationalize these tactics.

Yeppers, anything for the win and anything else on top of that to keep the losers on a streak it seems.

That right there is desperation, fear and paranoia personified, all brought to us by the folks that want a oligarchic/plutocratic/theocratic form of gov't right here in the good 'ol United States of God Fearing America.

 

[ivwshane]

Yeppers, anything for the win and anything else on top of that to keep the losers on a streak it seems.

That right there is desperation, fear and paranoia personified, all brought to us by the folks that want a oligarchic/plutocratic/theocratic form of gov't right here in the good 'ol United States of God Fearing America.

But is that what they really want? I look at some of the posters here and it certainly seems like that's what they want but I'm sure if you asked them they would say it isn't. Is it just blind allegiance to their party? Why? It's hard for me to think any American or any American poster on this board would support such tactics or have such feelings as you described but their posts make it hard to ignore that urge to brand them as such.

 

[trenchfoot]

But is that what they really want? I look at some of the posters here and it certainly seems like that's what they want but I'm sure if you asked them they would say it isn't. Is it just blind allegiance to their party? Why? It's hard for me to think any American or any American poster on this board would support such tactics or have such feelings as you described but their posts make it hard to ignore that urge to brand them as such.

Well, all I can say within reason to that is what I see from the outside looking in. As you mentioned, party loyalty seems to be the overriding factor, because I wouldn't be able to logically explain otherwise why a person would vote against their own best economic interests, along with that nasty habit of why a person would be more than willing to "cut off their nose to spite their face".

I think single issue voting, ie - same sex marriage, illegal immigration, etc. also has a lot to do with some folks willing to make painful personal sacrifices to pursue their apparent self-defeating agenda. And I think the Repub Party leaders exploit this condition for maximum effect.

 

[michal1980]

woo hoo. democrats rejoice, now they can buy more vote with cigs, load up buses, tell people how to vote, and get then same day registered by vouching for them.

oh and they'll be out in full force slashing tires of their opponents.

 

[Bitek]

woo hoo. democrats rejoice, now they can buy more vote with cigs, load up buses, tell people how to vote, and get then same day registered by vouching for them.

oh and they'll be out in full force slashing tires of their opponents.

I'm glad you got the fraud proportion right. When it gets to votes maybe you will have a case.

Can the GOP put together an honest cost/benefit for voter ID? Show the benefits actually outweigh the actual and real costs to democracy.

I ask because they haven't, and likely can't.

This is the new Gay Marriage for the GOP. They can't articulate a clear position other than veiled bigotry, and consequently get their asses handed to the them by the courts.

 

[michal1980]

I'm glad you got the fraud proportion right. When it gets to votes maybe you will have a case.

Can the GOP put together an honest cost/benefit for voter ID? Show the benefits actually outweigh the actual and real costs to democracy.

I ask because they haven't, and likely can't.

This is the new Gay Marriage for the GOP. They can't articulate a clear position other than veiled bigotry, and consequently get their asses handed to the them by the courts.

the supreme court already said voter id is ok.

once again the libs will lose on this issue.

 

[xBiffx]

Don't hold your breath on an updated thread title

Title is 100% accurate, why would he need to change it?

Someone else already made a new thread with a different title. Post there. :\

 

[Texashiker]

TH can't see that he's a bigot because he bases his mortal superiority on his rationalized opinions.

moonie, when you were growing up did your mommy tell you you could not eat cookies for dinner? That you had to eat something besides sweets? How terrible it must have been to have parents who tried to look after your well being.

That is how the government is with the people.

Voter id laws apply equally to everyone. So therefor it is not bigotry.