Voter ID laws: Everyone has an ID, right? Nope

[Riot]

[phystech]

Here's a solution for all of those without an ID - if you want to vote, GET ONE!!

[Danzig]

this needed a new thread? whatever.

anyway, can't see what madam wrote, can only see the thread title. i really wish when i pose a question when at work and unable to look for the answer, that someone whose posts i can read would answer...at any rate, i found this:

http://geoff82.wordpress.com/2012/01...ave-photo-ids/

i have no idea who this site is, or if they're 'valid' or not. i just know it was first on the google list. found it interesting to say the least.

[bigrun]

Originally Posted by Danzig

this needed a new thread? whatever.

anyway, can't see what madam wrote, can only see the thread title. i really wish when i pose a question when at work and unable to look for the answer, that someone whose posts i can read would answer...at any rate, i found this:

http://geoff82.wordpress.com/2012/01...ave-photo-ids/

i have no idea who this site is, or if they're 'valid' or not. i just know it was first on the google list. found it interesting to say the least.

This chart was posted..

][/quote]

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by bigrun

This chart was posted..

]

[/quote]

gee, thanks. i'll sleep better tonight not having to wonder any more.

[Riot]

Too bad Danzig won't read this:

Fri Jul 20, 2012
The Fraud of Voter Fraud
by Richard Riis

There is a coordinated, nationwide effort right now to enact voter ID laws that do nothing to impact alleged voter fraud and instead disenfranchise voters and infringe upon the fundamental American right to free and fair elections... which is, of course, precisely what the proposed laws are intended to do.

Photo ID laws have been introduced or passed in at least 15 states. They discriminate against those who don’t have driver’s licenses — disproportionately the poor, elderly and minorities. Nationally they could disenfranchise about five million voters. Several states are also pushing legislation to restrict voter registration and to limit early voting.

A quick check of the facts vis-à-vis voter fraud: The Bush Justice Department conducted a massive, five-year investigation into voter fraud that resulted in a mere 86 convictions nationwide. An independent investigation into voter fraud in Missouri in 2000 determined that the rate of voter fraud in that state was 0.0003%. A similar study in Ohio in 2004 turned up a percentage of 0.0004%, while another study in Wisconsin the same year measured the proportion of fraudulent votes at 0.0002%.

Notably, in virtually every case the “fraudulent” votes involved either in- and out-of-state double voting or votes cast by ineligible voters, chiefly ex-felons, problems that would not be addressed by photo ID. None were cases of actual fraud via voter impersonation.

Based on these studies, and expecting about 125 million votes to be cast nationwide in this year’s general election, we can anticipate the number of ineligible or fraudulent votes to be cast in 2012 at between 250 and 500.

We like to say that every vote counts, but, really, five to ten votes, on average, in each of 50 states are hardly likely to make a difference in this, or any, election’s outcome. Voter fraud is just not a very real threat to American democracy.

However, the costs of implementing these new laws are very real. States must undertake massive public information campaigns, retrain poll workers, account for longer lines on Election Day, and produce and distribute millions of free IDs to citizens. This has the potential to increase electoral costs in some states by as much as 50 percent — tens of millions of dollars.

Most recently, Indiana's strict voter ID law cost taxpayers more than $10 million in the issuing of new IDs. Estimates by other states projected additional implementation costs of up to $25 million in North Carolina over three years, $17 million in Missouri over three years.

Is this really the wisest use of taxpayer money in these tight times?

Of course, the real intent of voter ID laws is not to prevent fraud but to disenfranchise millions of otherwise eligible voters.

Studies have shown that about 21 million Americans, or 11% of eligible voters, currently lack a valid photo ID.

However, those percentages rise to as high as 25% for African-Americans, 15% for low-income voters, 18% for seniors and 20% for voters under 30.

Do you detect a pattern here? These demographic groups are predominantly Democratic base voters.

The other pattern at play: all of the new or proposed voter ID laws and other legal obstacles to voting are being put into place by Republican legislatures.

Though right-wing efforts to suppress low-income and minority voting are nothing new, the current GOP campaign is unprecedented in scope, organization and ambition.

Not all these measures will likely survive court challenges. The 14th and 15th amendments to the U. S. Constitution and the 1965 Voting Rights Act bar discrimination and other interference with voting in all elections.

In addition, Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act requires preclearance for nondiscrimination by either the Justice Department or a federal court before states can change any voting procedures.

This is what led the Texas Justice Department to recently put a hold on Texas’ discriminatory new voter ID law and a Wisconsin judge to strike down a similar law in that state.

"Voter fraud is no more poisonous to our democracy than voter suppression”, wrote Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess in his decision; “A government that undermines the very foundation of its existence — the people's inherent, pre-constitutional right to vote — imperils its legitimacy as a government by the people, for the people, and especially of the people."

What we ought to be doing in this country is rethinking our voting laws with regard to how to ensure that every citizen can cast his or her vote with fewer obstacles, not more.

Registration drives, extended voting hours, modern balloting technologies — Americans should be having a national conversation on how to encourage and increase voting, not on how to suppress it.

[bigrun]

gee, thanks. i'll sleep better tonight not having to wonder any more.

You are welcome...she just posted a long story on voter fraud, you want to see it?..

[Crown@club]

Originally Posted by phystech

Here's a solution for all of those without an ID - if you want to vote, GET ONE!!

Yea. I don't get it. Why the controversy?

A photo ID and signature would help eliminate fraud.
I remember 20 years ago, my mother had to get an ID to vote in Indiana. She's never had a Driver's License.

Get it done and move on.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Crown@club

Yea. I don't get it. Why the controversy?

Because it's not easy for many people - a very significant number - to have access to obtaining an ID, both financially and geographically. You can't put a poll tax on voters. You can't put excess requirements on certain parts of the population (see chart) And so far the courts are agreeing completely.

Banking, driving, cashing checks is a privilege. Voting is a right. You don't have to be a "normal citizen participating in society on a daily basis (working, driving, banking)" to have exactly the same, inviolate right to vote as every single other American citizen. And it has been repeatedly documented that there is little to no voter fraud, virtually non-existent, and what exists is rarely preventable by any photo ID.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Crown@club

Yea. I don't get it. Why the controversy?

A photo ID and signature would help eliminate fraud.
I remember 20 years ago, my mother had to get an ID to vote in Indiana. She's never had a Driver's License.

Get it done and move on.

I don't get it either...I have to show my driver's license to get checked off the roles before going into the booth. I consider it an honor to do so, and appreciate the retired folks that volunteer their time to man the polls.

What the hell is the difference? If they questioned my eligibility, I'd comply with the same honor of privilege, thankful that there are enough people that still give enough of a sh1t to insure the election is legitimate.

She is just bent because she knows how many illegitimate inhabitants of this country will purposefully and willingly attempt to sway the election via fraud, toward her particular candidate. And now she's crying because the fraud has been uncovered and disallowed. Boo hoo.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

I don't get it either...I have to show my driver's license to get checked off the roles before going into the booth. I consider it an honor to do so, and appreciate the retired folks that volunteer their time to man the polls.

What the hell is the difference? If they questioned my eligibility, I'd comply with the same honor of privilege, thankful that there are enough people that still enough of a sh1t to insure the election is legitimate.

She is just bent because she knows how many illegitimate inhabitants of this country will purposefully and willingly attempt to sway the election via fraud, toward her particular candidate. And now she's crying because the fraud has been uncovered and disallowed. Boo hoo.

OMG! Brown people! Run in fear! Make up imaginary lies about voter fraud by illegals!

[Riot]

Daily Show hilariously eviscerates the lies about massive voter fraud existence:

Florida's Republican Gov. Rick Scott recently signed a law that requires new voters to submit completed registration forms within 48 hours from the minute they fill them out, causing new voter registration to plummet by twenty percent.

The law is intended to limit rampant voter fraud, as Daily Show correspondent John Oliver explained last night to Jon Stewart: "Sacrificing twenty percent of new voter participation is nothing compared to the horrors of voter fraud, which, according to the Brennan Center for Justice, happens at a terrifying rate of 0.0004 percent."

The Brennan Center's number is minuscule, so voter fraud isn't a real concern, right?

Not so, Oliver said. Because who knows how many cases of undetected voter fraud there might be? "Voter fraud statistics are limited only as much as your imagination."

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tu...gistration-law

[joeydb]

Originally Posted by Riot

Not to bait you at all, but just a question:

Why would the racial background or age matter when analyzing those who did not obtain official ID for themselves?

It's insane that the Justice Department would seek to not enforce laws for ID's - though your graph likely points to their motivation.

Would we do the same for other action/inaction within our society, and then shape the laws accordingly?

For instance, statistics have shown that most drunk drivers are young people in their late teens. But if you are hit by a vehicle driven by a drunk driver, the demographic of the driver is unimportant. So they passed laws where a measurable quantity (blood alcohol level) can be the key evidence of whether a driver is intoxicated. They pull over ANYBODY driving erratically. The stats are irrelevant. As these people grow up, they may still drunk drive, changing the stats, especially if the new young people do not abuse alcohol to the same degree.

It is a shame that in the past, literacy tests have been used as a mechanism for disenfranchisement. That should never have happened. It's absurd, and those people warping that policy should have been prosecuted.

However, there is a legitimate role for tests IF the ability to read and understand the language of the ballot is in question. I don't know Russian for example. I don't even know the whole Cyrillic alphabet, so where the letters differ from our Roman alphabet, I can't read the word, let alone know what it means in Russian. Giving me a ballot in Russian is pointless. If I lived in Russia and it was time to vote I would not be shocked to have to pass a test to see if I can read the ballot (or so they can tell me how to spell Putin in Cyrillic letters)

Giving someone a ballot they cannot read and interpreting the selection as meaningful is an intellectual absurdity. Obviously, places where Spanish is universal and they have the ballot in Spanish this is not an issue. But ballots are printed and therefore need to be read in order to convey the necessary information.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by joeydb

Not to bait you at all, but just a question:

Why would the racial background or age matter when analyzing those who did not obtain official ID for themselves?

It is against United States law to discriminate against any segment of our population when it comes to voting rights.

[Rudeboyelvis]

Originally Posted by Riot

It is against United States law to discriminate against any segment of our population when it comes to voting rights.

Who is telling them they can't vote? Or is this your way of twisting the facts again to support your senseless, baseless, opinion?

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Who is telling them they can't vote? Or is this your way of twisting the facts again to support your senseless, baseless, opinion?

LOL - you're funny.

Who is telling people they can't vote? Restrictive ALEC-GOP Voter ID laws that discriminate unfairly against certain segments of the population.

My "senseless, baseless" opinion isn't opinion, it is merely repeating what our judges and courts have found about these voter ID laws to date, as they have thrown them out.

It appears you should be directing your ire towards judges and our judicial system for standing up for the rights of your fellow American citizens.

[Danzig]

Originally Posted by Rudeboyelvis

Who is telling them they can't vote? Or is this your way of twisting the facts again to support your senseless, baseless, opinion?

i did a search, as i thought others besides felons were disenfranchised, and found this:

Several states deny voting rights for life to anyone convicted of a felony. Children of American families living abroad often cannot vote when they come of voting age. American citizens living in Puerto Rico, Guam and the Virgin Islands can be drafted into the military but are unable to vote for their commander in chief. Congress has sweeping power to govern the District of Columbia, yet more than a half million citizens living in the District have no voting representation in Congress.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Riot

It is against United States law to discriminate against any segment of our population when it comes to voting rights.

this statement is false. Felons cannot vote. in 12 states, even felons who have completed their sentence and their probation and are "free" men.. they cannot vote.

[Riot]

Originally Posted by Antitrust32

this statement is false. Felons cannot vote. in 12 states, even felons who have completed their sentence and their probation and are "free" men.. they cannot vote.

Yes, we all know felons cannot vote, a thinking person following the discussion would not assume I meant differently without having to spell it out in every single post.

[Antitrust32]

Originally Posted by Riot

Yes, we all know felons cannot vote, a thinking person following the discussion would not assume I meant differently without having to spell it out in every single post.

yeah well it made your post 100% incorrect.