PDA

View Full Version : Voter Photo ID?



Whet
2/25/2012, 01:33 PM
Should a voter be required to provide a government issued photo ID to vote?

olevetonahill
2/25/2012, 01:55 PM
Yes

Turd_Ferguson
2/25/2012, 01:56 PM
Genious^^^^

yermom
2/25/2012, 02:10 PM
register to vote, get a free ID

sounds good to me

Whet
2/25/2012, 02:19 PM
Register IN PERSON, prove identity, get a free photo ID.

SanJoaquinSooner
2/25/2012, 03:10 PM
If you move out of a voting district, could you still use this gov't issued ID to fraudulently vote?

Whet
2/25/2012, 03:33 PM
more importantly, dead people, illegal aliens, convicted felons, and fake voters would find it more difficult to illegally vote. (interesting to note the one major political party that opposes photo ID voting, stand to lose the most from the requirement - thus, their adamant opposition to the requirement)

Turd_Ferguson
2/25/2012, 03:38 PM
more importantly, dead people, illegal aliens, convicted felons, and fake voters would find it more difficult to illegally vote. (interesting to note the one major political party that opposes photo ID voting, stand to lose the most from the requirement - thus, their adamant opposition to the requirement)Eggzackly..see the post above yours...

SanJoaquinSooner
2/25/2012, 03:53 PM
more importantly, dead people, illegal aliens, convicted felons, and fake voters would find it more difficult to illegally vote. (interesting to note the one major political party that opposes photo ID voting, stand to lose the most from the requirement - thus, their adamant opposition to the requirement)

Damned Libertarian Party.

Turd_Ferguson
2/25/2012, 04:02 PM
Damned Libertarian Party.Poster child for liberal spin...

StoopTroup
2/25/2012, 04:06 PM
You should get a free ID once you file your tax return.

SanJoaquinSooner
2/25/2012, 04:37 PM
Outside pockets of corruption, like Chicago, dead people don't swing elections and neither do illegal aliens.

Some gov't official will say something like, "80,000 non-citizens voted in the state's last election," and blogger-journalists will run to their keyboards and type, "80,000 illegal aliens voted ..." But the non-citizens were almost all legal, resident aliens, WHO ARE ELIGIBLE FOR GOV'T ISSUED DRIVERS LICENSES."

Photo IDs don't solve the non-citizen problem. The overwhelming majority are not illegal aliens.

On the back of my California Drivers License it states, "This license is issued as a license to drive a motor vehicle. It does not establish eligibility for employment, voter registration, or public benefits."

If you pass a law establishing a Photo ID requirement, you actually, perhaps unwittingly, "sanction" many non-citizens to vote.


I bet "out of voting district" fraud is the much more common fraud.

Whet
2/25/2012, 04:42 PM
You should get a free ID once you file your tax return.

No, because non-citizens, convicted felons, and others not eligible to vote are required to file federal tax returns.

Whet
2/25/2012, 05:03 PM
A small number of illegal voters can have a major influence in elections. Those elections with a small turnout is one example of where election fraud would have a major impact. Typically, voter fraud is a coordinated effort to sway those elections. Local elections, school board elections, primary elections, or even Congressional elections can be impacted by this illegal activity. Local results have an impact on national elections. Whether it is state legislative elections, where the draw Congressional boundaries, or undercard state elections - like sec of state, can have major impacts on those national elections. This is why the convicted felon, George Soros, invested millions in his sec of state program, to get leftists elected to this position. Hs efforts paid off in MN, with the election of Al Frankenstein and the 2008 Ohio Pres election,nowhere the secof state ruled homeless people with no permenant address could register and vote the same day. Election fraud at the local level does have national impacts. The leftists know this and use election fraud to advance their agendas.

StoopTroup
2/25/2012, 09:56 PM
No, because non-citizens, convicted felons, and others not eligible to vote are required to file federal tax returns.

Yes because the rest of us don't like you making the rules.

StoopTroup
2/25/2012, 09:57 PM
No, because non-citizens, convicted felons, and others not eligible to vote are required to file federal tax returns.

Yes because the rest of us don't like you making the rules.

Whet
2/25/2012, 10:23 PM
^ I don't make the rules, just enforce the regulations.

hawaii 5-0
2/25/2012, 10:34 PM
I'll just show 'em my Kenyan birth certificate.

5-0

Whet
2/25/2012, 11:25 PM
That will work!

cleller
2/26/2012, 07:42 PM
Don't you know that in polite, media-influenced society requiring identification to vote is considered racist?

In Re: Chicago: Are there any history buffs that do not agree JFK stole the election from Nixon (via mafia action) in Cook County, IL? Not to mention W. Va.

SanJoaquinSooner
3/12/2012, 05:56 PM
... nearly one-third of the counties in Texas do not have offices where potential voters can obtain a driver's license or state identification card and some residents live more than 100 miles away, the Justice Department said.

They need to set up Photo ID kiosks at every Starbucks and Taqueria to make it more accessible. Like those vending machine booths were you get 4 photos of you and your friend making goofy faces for 3 bucks.


http://news.yahoo.com/obama-administration-objects-texas-voter-id-law-161037385.html

TheHumanAlphabet
3/13/2012, 09:06 AM
Yes!!!

TheHumanAlphabet
3/13/2012, 09:09 AM
I'll just show 'em my Kenyan birth certificate.

5-0
Is that what passes as an official Hawaiian birth certificate today? ;)

badger
3/13/2012, 09:13 AM
Should a voter be required to provide a government issued photo ID to vote?

If it's required to have in order to vote, the government should be required to provide it a nominal fee.

I know that it might be a stretch for some of you to believe, but what is driver's license renewal rate? $26? That's a lot of money to some people, and Oklahoma DL's used to just be a laminated piece of paper. If we could get those cheaply produced and readily available for voting purposes only, then by all means require them in order to vote.

olevetonahill
3/13/2012, 10:39 AM
If it's required to have in order to vote, the government should be required to provide it a nominal fee.

I know that it might be a stretch for some of you to believe, but what is driver's license renewal rate? $26? That's a lot of money to some people, and Oklahoma DL's used to just be a laminated piece of paper. If we could get those cheaply produced and readily available for voting purposes only, then by all means require them in order to vote.

Hon $6.50 a Year aint a LOT of money to anyone .

Whet
3/13/2012, 10:46 AM
Obama's Attorney General throws out Texas voter ID law, sez it will disproportionally affect Mexican voters, because they would most likely not have a photo id. A Democrat state judge threw out Wisconsin's voter id law, too. Sez it puts an undue burden on some people.

Voter fraud is essential for the Democrats to win some elections. One of the methods to fight voter fraud is requiring a government photo ID, that is why the Democrats are so opposed to the laws.

Turd_Ferguson
3/13/2012, 12:55 PM
Obama's Attorney General throws out Texas voter ID law, sez it will disproportionally affect Mexican voters, because they would most likely not have a photo id. A Democrat state judge threw out Wisconsin's voter id law, too. Sez it puts an undue burden on some people.

Voter fraud is essential for the Democrats to win some elections. One of the methods to fight voter fraud is requiring a government photo ID, that is why the Democrats are so opposed to the laws.You know it, I know it...everybody knows it, the Dem's just won't admit it...

badger
3/13/2012, 01:17 PM
Hon $6.50 a Year aint a LOT of money to anyone .

Math schmath, dear. If I had to lump sum pay stuff instead of over time, it'd seem like a big fee, even if it equated to the same amount of money. $26 at once is a lot, while $6.50 per year requires budgeting.

When I was first outta college, my dad surprised me with the fact that in a few weeks, my car insurance bill to the tune of $500 was due and I didn't know what I was going to do, because I didn't know it was due that fast and I didn't have that type of money saved up for anything except necessary day-to-day expenses. Dad was at that stage in parents' life when they like to stop paying for everything they used to, but fortunately, mom was not yet, so it was compromised that they would handle it one last time and that I would then have time to plan for the huge bill in the future.

I think some people would feel about the same way if they learned that they had to pay $26 that they suddenly didn't have to before in order to vote.

okie52
3/13/2012, 01:56 PM
Obama's Attorney General throws out Texas voter ID law, sez it will disproportionally affect Mexican voters, because they would most likely not have a photo id. A Democrat state judge threw out Wisconsin's voter id law, too. Sez it puts an undue burden on some people.

Voter fraud is essential for the Democrats to win some elections. One of the methods to fight voter fraud is requiring a government photo ID, that is why the Democrats are so opposed to the laws.

Holder never met an illegal vote he didn't like.

These poor hispanics have never had to handle things like voter ID cards before:


Mexico's Voter ID Cards Ensure "One Citizen, One Vote"
Digimarc Corporation

Category: Identification Systems | 27/04/2010 - 15:28:55


Mexico's Instituto Federal Electoral (IFE) is an autonomous, non-partisan organisation charged with ensuring free and fair elections.

In January, 2004, IFE entered into a four-year contract with Digimarc Corporation to design and supply secure, reliable voter ID cards to Mexican citizens in order to help ensure the ideal of "One Citizen, One Vote."

Voter Identification Systems

Digimarc's Mexico-based secure ID factory began production of voter ID cards on March 29, 2004. In the three years since then, nearly 25 million credentials have been produced and Mexico's voter ID card is now widely regarded as one of the most secure, reliable voter identification systems in the world. So trusted is the integrity of Mexico's voter ID credential that amid all the controversy surrounding the close presidential election on July 2, 2006, no one questioned the security, reliability, or authenticity of Mexico's voter identification itself. Indeed, Mexico's voter ID has become the country's de facto identification document and is readily accepted as positive proof-of-identity by merchants, banks, government officials, and citizens nationwide.

http://www.security-technologynews.com/article/mexicos-voter-id-cards-ensure-one-citizen-one-vote.html

olevetonahill
3/13/2012, 02:06 PM
Math schmath, dear. If I had to lump sum pay stuff instead of over time, it'd seem like a big fee, even if it equated to the same amount of money. $26 at once is a lot, while $6.50 per year requires budgeting.

When I was first outta college, my dad surprised me with the fact that in a few weeks, my car insurance bill to the tune of $500 was due and I didn't know what I was going to do, because I didn't know it was due that fast and I didn't have that type of money saved up for anything except necessary day-to-day expenses. Dad was at that stage in parents' life when they like to stop paying for everything they used to, but fortunately, mom was not yet, so it was compromised that they would handle it one last time and that I would then have time to plan for the huge bill in the future.

I think some people would feel about the same way if they learned that they had to pay $26 that they suddenly didn't have to before in order to vote.



Just looked its around 10 bucks for an ID card good for 4 years

http://dmvanswers.com/questions/419/How-much-do-state-ID-cards-cost

soonercoop1
3/13/2012, 04:01 PM
Yes as it it makes complete sense since you have to produce one to fly, enter a federal building, buy smokes and beer, etc....

soonercoop1
3/13/2012, 04:04 PM
Obama's Attorney General throws out Texas voter ID law, sez it will disproportionally affect Mexican voters, because they would most likely not have a photo id. A Democrat state judge threw out Wisconsin's voter id law, too. Sez it puts an undue burden on some people.

Voter fraud is essential for the Democrats to win some elections. One of the methods to fight voter fraud is requiring a government photo ID, that is why the Democrats are so opposed to the laws.

Honestly why are liberal progressives so against an ID to vote? The only logical conclusion would be they exist off major voter fraud...

yermom
3/13/2012, 04:10 PM
it's racist.

why can't you see that?

okie52
3/13/2012, 04:13 PM
it's racist.

why can't you see that?

LOL.

Please elaborate.

soonercoop1
3/13/2012, 04:15 PM
LOL.

Please elaborate.

Surely that was in jest?

okie52
3/13/2012, 04:19 PM
Surely that was in jest?

I would hope so but I doubt it. Voter ID's may keep half of San Joaquin's family from voting.

jkjsooner
3/13/2012, 04:23 PM
I am absolutely in favor of a photo identification requirement. Any argument that this would disproportionally affect minorities (even if proven) is greatly outweighed by the public interest served in reducing fraud.

The question for you conservatives, isn't this the mark of the beast you all warn about? ;-)

okie52
3/13/2012, 04:27 PM
I am absolutely in favor of a photo identification requirement. Any argument that this would disproportionally affect minorities (even if proven) is greatly outweighed by the public interest served in reducing fraud.

The question for you conservatives, isn't this the mark of the beast you all warn about? ;-)

Yes, but I am willing to cast aside my religious apprehensions for the good of the country.

jkjsooner
3/13/2012, 04:28 PM
Obama's Attorney General throws out Texas voter ID law, sez it will disproportionally affect Mexican voters, because they would most likely not have a photo id. A Democrat state judge threw out Wisconsin's voter id law, too. Sez it puts an undue burden on some people.

Voter fraud is essential for the Democrats to win some elections. One of the methods to fight voter fraud is requiring a government photo ID, that is why the Democrats are so opposed to the laws.

That's an extremely cynical way to look at it. I don't think democrats are worried about losing fraudulent votes. They're worried about losing the poor and the minorities. I doubt that fraud is high enough that even a unscrupulous politician would worry too much about losing those votes.

Condescending Sooner
3/13/2012, 04:31 PM
Nobody has a problem coming up with an ID to buy liquor and cigs. Why is this such a big deal?

jkjsooner
3/13/2012, 04:35 PM
Nobody has a problem coming up with an ID to buy liquor and cigs. Why is this such a big deal?

People who drink or smoke want to drink and/or smoke a lot more than a non-drinker/smoker wants to vote.

Even if it were only 1% of potential voters who are excluded from voting, that is still very significant to a politician in some hotly contested areas.

As I said, I'm for it and I don't think it's too much of a burden but I can see why a self-preserving Democratic politician would be against it. (And, not, the reason isn't about preserving fraudulent votes.)

okie52
3/13/2012, 04:36 PM
That's an extremely cynical way to look at it. I don't think democrats are worried about losing fraudulent votes. They're worried about losing the poor and the minorities. I doubt that fraud is high enough that even a unscrupulous politician would worry too much about losing those votes.

Holder and Obama are the same "heroes" that fought to remove the AZ law that was punishing employers for hiring illegals. The law was upheld by the 9th circuit court and the SC.

The act was signed into law by none other than his own Homeland Security secretary Napolitano.

yermom
3/13/2012, 05:07 PM
I would hope so but I doubt it. Voter ID's may keep half of San Joaquin's family from voting.

i just don't see it. how can you be a functioning citizen without a photo ID?

if you aren't in a position to get a photo ID, you are in pretty sad shape.

though, at the same time. how much of a problem is there really? are they fixing a real problem here?

IMO, i think you should tie the process of getting an ID to registering to vote. how many people don't vote because they haven't bothered to register beforehand?

Whet
3/13/2012, 08:52 PM
That's an extremely cynical way to look at it. I don't think democrats are worried about losing fraudulent votes. They're worried about losing the poor and the minorities. I doubt that fraud is high enough that even a unscrupulous politician would worry too much about losing those votes.

Where were you in November-December 2000? Bush won Florida by 537 votes. Here is a telling article about illegal voting and how close it was that voter fraud decided a Presidential election.

At least 445 Florida felons voted illegally Nov. 7, casting more doubt over the sharply contested presidential election, a newspaper investigation found.A review of nearly 500,000 ballots cast in 12 Florida counties found that hundreds of felons voted despite the state's multimillion-dollar effort to purge dead and illegal voters from lists of registered voters, the Miami Herald reported in its Friday editions.


http://articles.latimes.com/images/pixel.gif
This could mean more than 5,000 felons cast ballots, if the pattern holds up across the state. Nearly 6 million people voted in Florida's 67 counties.
The vast majority of the votes by felons, nearly 75%, were cast by registered Democrats. The felons included 62 robbers, 56 drug dealers, 45 killers, 16 rapists and seven kidnappers.
http://articles.latimes.com/2000/dec/02/news/mn-60123


Another example:
In California, former Republican Rep. Robert K. Dornan was defeated by Democrat Loretta Sanchez by 984 votes in the 1996 election. State officials found that at least 300 votes were cast illegally by non-citizens
http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=16957&security=1601&news_iv_ctrl=1010


NY Democrat: Voter Fraud Is A 'Normal Political Tactic'
As the city of Troy, NY, awaits jury selection in the first trial involving two Democrats and their alleged roles in a “massive” voter fraud scheme, new details have emerged from the investigation. Details involving two other veteran political operatives that have already pleaded guilty.


According to a recent Fox News report, Anthony Renna, a Democrat guilty of second-degree forgery, and Anthony DeFiglio, a Democrat guilty of first-degree falsifying business records, are trying to drag all local politicians, regardless of party affiliation, down with the ship. Thus far, eight people have been charged in connection with the ballot fraud investigation, four of which have pleaded guilty.

http://nation.foxnews.com/voter-fraud/2012/01/19/ny-democrat-voter-fraud-normal-political-tactic


Democrat Voter Fraud is Far More Widespread Than You Think
Last week I wrote an article titled How Obama Used an Army of Thugs to Steal the 2008 Democratic Primary (http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25125) that introduced the conservative community to the movie “We Will Not Be Silenced (http://wewillnotbesilenced2008.com/video/index.htm)”, made by Democrat activist Gigi Gaston two years ago. Her video documented widespread voter fraud committed by Obama supporters during the 2008 Democratic primary election to secure the nomination for Obama over the popular vote winner Hillary Clinton.
The story went viral and 24 hours later Fox News asked Gaston to appear on the Sunday morning program Fox and Friends. For the first time many Americans saw for themselves first hand accounts from Democrats who personally witnessed “the disenfranchising of American citizens by the Democratic Party and the Obama Campaign.”





As explained on the We Will Not Be Silenced website, “‘Change’ from Chicago encouraged and created an army to steal caucus packets, falsify documents, change results, allow unregistered people to vote, scare and intimidate Hillary supporters, stalk them, threaten them, lock them out of their polling places, silence their voices and stop their right to vote.”
Because of the program and other recent events concerning voter intimidation, including the Black Panther incident in Philadelphia and testimony from J. Christian Adams on the Department of Justice’s unwillingness to pursue voter related crimes committed by African Americans, people around the country are finally waking up to the fact that Democrat voter fraud is a far, far bigger problem than anyone had ever realized.
Some conservatives have mistakenly interpreted these events as only affecting Democratic primaries and aren’t concerned about the possibility of vote theft in a general election.
But they would be wrong.
While the voter fraud documented in Gaston’s film primarily involves Democratic caucuses, the bigger story here isn’t a single primary, but the bag of tricks that Democrats use to influence elections of all kinds.
Earlier in the week Fox News ran a story showing how illegal votes by felons in Minnesota were enough for Democrat Al Franken to beat Republican candidate Norm Coleman and claim the Senate seat.
Millions had voted in the Minnesota election, but at the end of the day all it took was 341 criminals to disenfranchise an entire state.
How to Steal an ElectionWhat we are seeing is the transplantation of Chicago politics to communities throughout the nation that are completely unprepared for the level of fraud and intimidation that can be generated by thousands of unethical Democrats, including private citizens, local, state, and federal officials, and politicians, convinced that breaking the law is okay as long as the “right” candidate wins.
On July 6, American Thinker published an article by Lee Cary about an interview with a Chicago political machine insider. It contained the following warning:

“In Chicago, the Precinct Captains watch to see who votes and who doesn’t. Then, at the end of the day, others will cast votes for those who haven’t shown up to vote, all under the direction of the Precinct Captain. If the actual voter shows up later, they’re given someone else’s card. The Republican poll watchers don’t stop this. Hell, most of them are actually Democrats.”
The Democrat Voter Fraud Playbook is as follows:

ACORN registers the names, legitimate or not.
Black Panther, SEIU and other “community organizer” groups intimidate people, especially minorities, from voting Republican.
Voter lists remain unscrubbed of felons, dead people, and illegal immigrants.
On Election Day, precinct workers submit any unused ballots for Democrat candidates.
Democrat officials and politicians pretend like nothing happened.
It’s as easy as that to steal an election.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25349

jkjsooner
3/14/2012, 08:25 AM
Where were you in November-December 2000? Bush won Florida by 537 votes. Here is a telling article about illegal voting and how close it was that voter fraud decided a Presidential election.

http://articles.latimes.com/2000/dec/02/news/mn-60123



Another example:
http://www.fairus.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=16957&security=1601&news_iv_ctrl=1010


http://nation.foxnews.com/voter-fraud/2012/01/19/ny-democrat-voter-fraud-normal-political-tactic


http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/25349


My point is that the number of legitimate voters who do not have a proper ID probably greatly outnumbers the fraudulent voters. A Democrat can be against ID requirements for reasons other than protecting fraudulent voters. To make a blanket statement that those who are against an ID requirement are doing so to protect fraud is cynical and unfair.

There's plenty of room for criticism here without assuming someone wants to protect fraudulent votes. Wanting to protect poor and/or minority votes could still be seen as self-serving.

And, by the way, many of those examples cited have nothing at all to do with identification. In a lot of cases it was felons voting under their own name. They simply weren't removed from the list of eligible voters and did not admit to being a felon. Identification doesn't help that unless the ID has a flag for a convicted felon (which I am not aware of).




ACORN registers the names, legitimate or not.
Black Panther, SEIU and other “community organizer” groups intimidate people, especially minorities, from voting Republican.
Voter lists remain unscrubbed of felons, dead people, and illegal immigrants.
On Election Day, precinct workers submit any unused ballots for Democrat candidates.



Not a single one of these would be stopped by a voter identification requirement.

FtwTxSooner
3/14/2012, 08:40 AM
Its a joke that a voter's registration card was a simple postcard in the first place. Its time to fix that mistake and add a photo to it.

Mississippi Sooner
3/14/2012, 08:51 AM
Its a joke that a voter's registration card was a simple postcard in the first place. Its time to fix that mistake and add a photo to it.

Here in Mississippi you don't even get a registration card or register as one party or the other. When you go to the poll, you just give them your name, they put a check beside it in the book and you go vote.

I should also mention, as I think I have many times here before, there there are something like 30% more names in the voting books in my county than there are people counted in the county census. Voter fraud could be child's play here.

cleller
3/14/2012, 08:59 AM
You know, its strange that one side says requiring a voter ID is somehow racist. They then go on to spell out that some less educated, less capable types don't have photo id's.
Isn't that also racist to infer one race is less capable of attaining enough success to get a photo ID?

The only way to stop all this race crap is to quit supposing one thing or another about a race of people, and hold everyone to the same standard.

Whet
3/14/2012, 10:14 AM
My responses to your comments:

My point is that the number of legitimate voters who do not have a proper ID probably greatly outnumbers the fraudulent voters. A Democrat can be against ID requirements for reasons other than protecting fraudulent voters. To make a blanket statement that those who are against an ID requirement are doing so to protect fraud is cynical and unfair. That is the attitude the Democrat organizers like to hear and count on from the unbelieving voters. These organizers go to great lengths to ensure their candidates win, regardless of legalities. It's all about the results, that is why they like to deflect criticism to the other party - oh, look a shiney ball! There are some that do not care about right and wrong, just winning that election. Why? Because they have a specific agenda to implement. This is the progressive movement in the U.S. - "social justice," "fair share," "worker's rights," and other innocent sounding themes to push - all in the attempt to convert us to a more socialist society. I have spent a few years in the political area, including 12 years as an election judge, to see what goes on in these elections. From my experience, I believe they are more concerned about getting as many votes as they can, using any method available. Maybe I am jaded from my experiences and living in the political corruption Capitol, Chicago, but I've seen it and live it every day here (I may not have the SoCali or Sic'Em experiences, but I've seen what I've seen and know what I know from my own experiences). The vast majority of the citizens do not participate in the political process (other than some vote), so they do not see, or care not to see, how it all works. I can understand where those folks may be oblivious to the motives and actions of the progressive organizers in trying to advance their agenda, through taking elections.

There's plenty of room for criticism here without assuming someone wants to protect fraudulent votes. Wanting to protect poor and/or minority votes could still be seen as self-serving. Assuming they are against photo IDs because it could disenfranchise the minority and poor is, in itself, naive and buying into how they want to frame the issue. They could care less about the minorities or poor (other than ensuring they get the overwhelming majority of their votes), it's all about the narrative they spin.

And, by the way, many of those examples cited have nothing at all to do with identification. In a lot of cases it was felons voting under their own name. They simply weren't removed from the list of eligible voters and did not admit to being a felon. Identification doesn't help that unless the ID has a flag for a convicted felon (which I am not aware of). Yes, there were a lot of cases with felons voting and that could be addressed through a program of identifying people not eligible to vote, on the photo ID card. I am sure you have noticed some progressives have pushed for felons right to vote - looking at the percentages, you can see why.


Not a single one of these would be stopped by a voter identification requirement. You are correct, this last portion was to provide substance for the levels these progressive organizers will go, to ensure they get enough votes to win an election. They use multifaceted methods to achieve their goals.

jkjsooner
3/14/2012, 12:53 PM
I should also mention, as I think I have many times here before, there there are something like 30% more names in the voting books in my county than there are people counted in the county census. Voter fraud could be child's play here.

Obviously this indicates that there is a lot of potential for voter fraud but I doubt fraud is the reason there are 30% more names in the books. It sounds like that county has an issue with keeping their data up-to-date. That could be simply an issue of not keeping track of those who have moved away or died.

For example, I recently moved from one county in NC to another. Within 2 or 3 months the original county mailed me asking if I still lived at the original address. (The USPS informed them of a change of address.) I responded to their request and they removed me from their list and my new county sent me a registration form.

It sounds like NC has it down pretty well here as long as you put a change of address in with USPS. However, I've had other moves where I never heard anything from my original county/state. I'm guessing once I registered to vote at the new location that triggered an automatic update but I'd bet in your county they're not thorough in making those updates.

Whet
3/14/2012, 02:08 PM
Obviously this indicates that there is a lot of potential for voter fraud but I doubt fraud is the reason there are 30% more names in the books. It sounds like that county has an issue with keeping their data up-to-date. That could be simply an issue of not keeping track of those who have moved away or died.

For example, I recently moved from one county in NC to another. Within 2 or 3 months the original county mailed me asking if I still lived at the original address. (The USPS informed them of a change of address.) I responded to their request and they removed me from their list and my new county sent me a registration form.

It sounds like NC has it down pretty well here as long as you put a change of address in with USPS. However, I've had other moves where I never heard anything from my original county/state. I'm guessing once I registered to vote at the new location that triggered an automatic update but I'd bet in your county they're not thorough in making those updates.


Yes, even voter rolls are political, see the following WSJ article:


According to Mr. Adams, Justice lawyers were told by Ms. Fernandes: "We're not interested in those kind of cases. What do they have to do with helping increase minority access and turnout? We want to increase access to the ballot, not limit it."If true, Ms. Fernandes was endorsing a policy of ignoring federal law and encouraging potential voter fraud. Ms. Fernandes was unavailable for comment yesterday, but the Justice Department has issued a statement accusing Mr. Adams of "distorting facts" in general and having a political agenda.But there is some evidence backing up Mr. Adams. Last year, Justice abandoned a case it had pursued for three years against Missouri for failing to clean up its rolls. When filed in 2005, one-third of Missouri counties had more registered voters than voting-age residents. What's more, Missouri Secretary of State Robin Carnahan, a Democrat who this year is her party's candidate for a vacant U.S. Senate seat, contended that her office had no obligation to ensure individual counties were complying with the federal law mandating a cleanup of their voter rolls.The case made slow but steady progress through the courts for more than three years, amid little or no evidence of progress in cleaning up Missouri's voter rolls. Despite this, Obama Justice saw fit to dismiss the case in March 2009. Curiously, only a month earlier, Ms. Carnahan had announced her Senate candidacy. Missouri has a long and documented history of voter fraud in Democratic-leaning cities such as St. Louis and Kansas City. Ms. Carnahan may now stand to benefit from voter fraud facilitated by the improperly kept voter rolls that she herself allowed to continue.Mr. Adams' allegations would seem to call for the senior management of Justice to be compelled to testify under oath to U.S. Commission on Civil Rights. But Justice is making none of its officials available and is refusing to enforce subpoenas issued by the commission. The more this story develops, the more it appears Justice is engaged in a massive coverup of its politicization of voting rights cases.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703636404575353052562578046.html

TitoMorelli
3/15/2012, 03:41 PM
This oughta clear the whole matter up....



Leaders of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People were in Geneva this week appealing to the United Nations Human Rights Council for help in fighting voter identification laws in the United States.

NAACP President Benjamin Jealous was part of the delegation to Geneva arguing that laws requiring voters to show ID violate civil and human rights by suppressing election participation, particularly from minorities, USA Today reported. Currently, 30 states have voter ID laws, seven of which were enacted last year.


more--

http://news.yahoo.com/shame-them-naacp-asks-u-n-human-rights-160516740.html

TUSooner
3/15/2012, 04:00 PM
This oughta clear the whole matter up....



Leaders of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People were in Geneva this week appealing to the United Nations Human Rights Council for help in fighting voter identification laws in the United States.

NAACP President Benjamin Jealous was part of the delegation to Geneva arguing that laws requiring voters to show ID violate civil and human rights by suppressing election participation, particularly from minorities, USA Today reported. Currently, 30 states have voter ID laws, seven of which were enacted last year.


more--

http://news.yahoo.com/shame-them-naacp-asks-u-n-human-rights-160516740.html
Seems like the money and effort would be better spent at home educating voters on the simple taks of getting some ID. But I hear springtime in Geneva is awesome. Some voter ID proponents - maybe lots of 'em -- may well be motivated by bias, but the basic concept of showing you're a properly registered voter seems facially neutral and certainly does not seem onerous. I have a hard time getting indignant about this issue.

SanJoaquinSooner
3/15/2012, 11:57 PM
In California, former Republican Rep. Robert K. Dornan was defeated by Democrat Loretta Sanchez by 984 votes in the 1996 election. State officials found that at least 300 votes were cast illegally by non-citizens


Looks like B-52 Bob needed about 685 more German refugees to defeat Sanchez. 300 wasn't enough.

LiveLaughLove
3/16/2012, 12:07 AM
Or it could be like fleas on a dog, you only see 10%.

Anyone wanting to not provide ID for voting has one thing and only one thing in mind. Allowing illegal votes. We all know it.

There is NO other logical reason for wanting to allow people to vote without providing proper identification.

You can say they are scared, they are intimidated, yadda yadda. Bull!

It's about voter fraud, plain and simple.

SanJoaquinSooner
3/16/2012, 08:29 AM
Or it could be like fleas on a dog, you only see 10%.

Anyone wanting to not provide ID for voting has one thing and only one thing in mind. Allowing illegal votes. We all know it.

There is NO other logical reason for wanting to allow people to vote without providing proper identification.

You can say they are scared, they are intimidated, yadda yadda. Bull!

It's about voter fraud, plain and simple.



Is it inconceivable that a poor person may be discouraged from voting if he has to travel over 100 miles and pay money for the ID?





... nearly one-third of the counties in Texas do not have offices where potential voters can obtain a driver's license or state identification card and some residents live more than 100 miles away, the Justice Department said.

olevetonahill
3/16/2012, 08:56 AM
Is it inconceivable that a poor person may be discouraged from voting if he has to travel over 100 miles and pay money for the ID?

jaun, Come on , Hell if a person cant go to the trouble to attain an ID then what makes you think they would bother to study the issues or even go Vote in the 1st place?

EnragedOUfan
3/16/2012, 09:11 AM
"Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

Copied and pasted, the 24th Amendment.

1. No where in this amendment does it specify nor state that people must show ID to vote.

2. If people want to use the argument and case that its to prevent voter fraud, no problem, but then the Constitution needs to be changed, and then this will totally undermine the idea of living in accordance with the Founding Fathers. But it's not like we do that any way, because they owned Black people back in those days, so clearly the Constitution was designed to be changed, making it now impossible to live in 2012 in accordance with the Founding Fathers from the 1700's..........

okie52
3/16/2012, 09:20 AM
Looks like B-52 Bob needed about 685 more German refugees to defeat Sanchez. 300 wasn't enough.

Your family voted for Dornan, didn't they San Joaquin?

jkjsooner
3/16/2012, 10:26 AM
jaun, Come on , Hell if a person cant go to the trouble to attain an ID then what makes you think they would bother to study the issues or even go Vote in the 1st place?

I agree with you but I think you're taking SanJoaquinSooner's post out of context.

The post was in response to a claim that the only reason to fight a voter ID is to protect fraudulent votes.

If a group of people are inconvenienced and if that demographic is mostly Democratic voters, I could see a self-serving politician protecting his votes.

I'm for a voter ID and I think it's ridiculous to not have one but I think LLL's claim is absurd.

olevetonahill
3/16/2012, 10:33 AM
Is it inconceivable that a poor person may be discouraged from voting if he has to travel over 100 miles and pay money for the ID?


jaun, Come on , Hell if a person cant go to the trouble to attain an ID then what makes you think they would bother to study the issues or even go Vote in the 1st place?


Juan's post was in response to a claim that Democrats are only protecting fraudulent votes.

The claim was that the only reason to fight voter ID is to protect fraudulent votes and I and SanJoaquinSooner have both argued that it is ridiculous to assume that there are no other reasons to fight a voter ID requirement. I don't have the statistics but I believe the argument is that the poor (and quite possibly young voters in urban areas) do not have identification. I think it's pretty clear that these demographics match Democrats more than Republicans.

It might be self-serving on the Democrat's side but to make the leap that it's only to protect fraudulent votes is quite a stretch.

I'm for a voter ID requirement. I think it's ridiculous we don't have one and if someone can't be bothered to get an ID they probably shouldn't vote.

Just goes to show how 2 people can see the same thing and interpret
it differently

jkjsooner
3/16/2012, 10:41 AM
Just goes to show how 2 people can see the same thing and interpret
it differently

I changed my post to be a little more clear but didn't do it in time. I think Juan is right. Some people will be discouraged.

I personally agree with both Juan's statement and your statement and don't find that to be a contradictory stance.


jaun, Come on , Hell if a person cant go to the trouble to attain an ID then what makes you think they would bother to study the issues or even go Vote in the 1st place?

FtwTxSooner
3/16/2012, 12:13 PM
"Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation."

Copied and pasted, the 24th Amendment.

1. No where in this amendment does it specify nor state that people must show ID to vote.



If its not specified in the Constitution, than its up to the states to do as they see fit. As long as an individual has the ability to obtain an ID for free without too much trouble, then I don't see how anyone can consider voter ID a poll tax.

MamaMia
3/16/2012, 12:20 PM
If you have to PAY taxes, you should get to vote twice. He he he