We must protect ourselves from the voter fraud problem we do not have!

[billc]

Oh, by the way. If Republicans are caught cheating, they should be arrested, and they should be stopped as well. All voter fraud needs to be stopped, all of the techniques and every aspect of it needs to be addressed so all votes count.

In the last post that showed how "stand ins," get a list of names to vote for, my idea of putting ink on the hands of voters would be another way to stop that. You vote, you get ink, you go to vote and you get checked for the ink. I think that, maybe even more than voter i.d. could help to stop this aspect of voter fraud. I would still want voter i.d. though, a layered defense is the best defense against fraud.

Inking hands also is something that doesn't cost a lot, doesn't inconvenience people, and can be done on the day of the election without lead up time.

 

[WC_lun]

Looks like Strategic Allied Consulting, the company hired to get out the vote by the RNC are in trouble in Virginia now as well as the already talked about Florida problems. Seems they threw away some registrations the day before the registration deadline. Interestingly enough, it came up during the investigation that Strategic Allied Consulting shared an address with American Crossroads, the CPAC created by Ed Gillespie and Karl Rove, and Jill Holtzman Vogal, a Virginia State Senator.


It seems like a lot of this voter fraud that is happening is by a company hired by the RNC. Yet another thing that cannot be stopped by voter ID

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Looks like Strategic Allied Consulting, the company hired to get out the vote by the RNC are in trouble in Virginia now as well as the already talked about Florida problems. Seems they threw away some registrations the day before the registration deadline. Interestingly enough, it came up during the investigation that Strategic Allied Consulting shared an address with American Crossroads, the CPAC created by Ed Gillespie and Karl Rove, and Jill Holtzman Vogal, a Virginia State Senator.


It seems like a lot of this voter fraud that is happening is by a company hired by the RNC. Yet another thing that cannot be stopped by voter ID

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_new...stration-worker-charged-with-voter-fraud?lite

GOP registration worker charged with voter fraud
By Michael Isikoff, NBC News
A campaign worker linked to a controversial Republican consulting firm has been arrested in Virginia and charged with throwing voter registration forms into a dumpster.
The suspect, Colin Small, 31, was described by a local law enforcement official as a "supervisor" in a Republican Party financed operation to register voters in Rockingham County in rural Virginia, a key swing state in the Nov. 6 election. He was arrested after a local business owner in the same Harrisonburg, Va., shopping center where the local GOP campaign headquarters is located spotted Small tossing a bag into the trash, according to a statement Thursday by the Rockingham County Sheriff’s office. The bag was later found to contain eight voter registration forms, it said. The arrest was reported Thursday night by WWBT-TV in Richmond.

Agreed on all counts. Voter registration fraud is something that is a continuing problem. This time it's a GOP operative (allegedly), and other times it has been DNC people (allegedly). But in none of these cases will voter photo ID stop this from happening. That's a Red Herring and it is being used to try to keep certain citizens from voting, in an attempt to win the upcoming election. Not only is it unnecessary and unlikely to result in the achieving of the stated objectives (reducing voter fraud at the polls that does not occur or occurs very rarely and is caught), but it's an obscene attempt to win an election through deceit and lies.

 

[WC_lun]

Something I would just like to point out here...

"I'll take voter I.D. as a safeguard because the democrats cheat, and they cheat early and often. Voter I.D. doesn't stop anyone from voting and it is an added protection against close elections being stolen by the wrong people."
-Billcihak

Too many on the right have been closing thier eyes to this voter suppression while at the same time attacking the left's stance on this. It is becoming more and more clear that at this time that it is a concerted effort by some on the right to influence the election. When does the outrage begin that exsisted with Acorn? Or is it okay if elections are stolen by the "right people"? ...and yeah, pun was intended

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Something I would just like to point out here...

"I'll take voter I.D. as a safeguard because the democrats cheat, and they cheat early and often. Voter I.D. doesn't stop anyone from voting and it is an added protection against close elections being stolen by the wrong people."
-Billcihak

Too many on the right have been closing thier eyes to this voter suppression while at the same time attacking the left's stance on this. It is becoming more and more clear that at this time that it is a concerted effort by some on the right to influence the election. When does the outrage begin that exsisted with Acorn? Or is it okay if elections are stolen by the "right people"? ...and yeah, pun was intended

As far as voter suppression goes, the left are no angels either. When it comes to fake registrations, same thing. I don't think either side has a lock on purity and clean living. They both want to win and some of them will stop and nothing to do so.

But photo ID doesn't stop the problems we do have; it's another trick to keep presumed left-wingers from voting.

 

[WC_lun]

I absolutely agree there are no angels in the voter registration fraud. That is why I mentioned acorn. At this moment it isn't left wing shenanigans though. It is right wing and all those who have been saying that we need IDs to keep fraud from happening and those that were all over the acorn issue now seem to be silent. Here is fraud. Where is the outrage now? Where is the push for laws to keep such things from happening?

When taken as a whole, I believe the lack of concern over fraud being committed in the name of the right just highlights that the ID laws are not being put in place for the reasons being given.

 

[Cryozombie]

First of, we are niether France, Great Britian, Germany, or the Netherlands. Accepting that statement as true, it makes anything you have to say about what they do in thier elections moot.

LOL, Not to sidetrack this thread, but am I allowed to quote this the next time some "progressive" on the board uses them as the comparison for Single Payer/Socialized healthcare?

 

[billc]

Hmmm...I believe I said...

Oh, by the way. If Republicans are caught cheating, they should be arrested, and they should be stopped as well. All voter fraud needs to be stopped, all of the techniques and every aspect of it needs to be addressed so all votes count.

 

[billc]

Again, these democrats in Rhode Island must be trying to stop...well...someone from voting too...

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/kevin-m...oter-id-racist


In response to multiple voter fraud complaints from his own constituents in Providence, Sen. Harold Metts, a black Democrat, led the charge in favor of a new photo voter identification law that is now operative in the Ocean State. Metts is far from alone, however. In fact, despite what the media would have you believe, minorities are more likely to support identification laws than white Americans.



Rhode Island’s new law was tested for the first time during April’s presidential primary, when voters were asked to show drivers’ licenses, passports, birth certificates, or health club IDs. Voters who did not have the necessary identification were permitted to cast provisional ballots. Beginning in 2014, only a photo ID will be accepted, but the state will provide free IDs to anyone who needs them, and provisional ballots will remain in effect for anyone who lacks an ID on Election Day.

 

[billc]

Is there actually any effect on turn out...there apparently is no way to tell...

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/20/whats-the-real-effect-of-voter-id-on-turnout/

One of the most common complaints we hear from opponents of voter ID laws is that such rules would suppress voter turnout and make it more difficult for people to get to the polls. But for states who have already enacted such legislation, has the predicted effect proven true? Are there really less people making it out to cast their ballots on Tuesday? The Wall Street Journal takes a look at the question this weekend and finds that it’s not exactly an easy calculation to make.

This left one analyst throwing up her hands.

Lorraine C. Minnite, a Rutgers University political scientist and a senior fellow at Demos, a liberal think tank, looked for a turnout effect in a 2009 paper she co-authored with Columbia University political scientist Robert S. Erikson. They didn’t turn up definitive evidence, concluding, “our data and tools are not up to the task of making a compelling statistical argument for an effect.”
Whether the inability to find an effect means there is no effect is contentious. To Prof. Minnite, it means the tools aren’t sharp enough, not that ID laws don’t curb voting.
​

Another item which can’t be quantified into hard numbers but which is acknowledged by these studies is the question of how likely the people most affected were to vote anyway. The majority of those without any form of photo ID were people who were apparently not all that big into participating in the public forum in the first place. This doesn’t mean that we should actively seek to stop them from voting – quite the opposite – but it does make it all the harder to figure out what the final effect of these laws are on turnout.
I still maintain that any such law should be enacted in a way that doesn’t put a direct fee in the way of someone being able to register or vote. That flies in the face of the constitution. But we also can’t allow ourselves to fall into the trap of eliminating any proposal which requires even the slightest additional effort to vote. Participating in virtually every aspect of our society requires some measure of effort. And if your state requires you to have a free photo ID – assuming you don’t have one of the most common ones already – then that’s an effort you’ll need to make. It takes an effort to get up off your couch and go to the polls anyway.

To those who b**** and moan that there isn't any evidence that there is actually any voter fraud that can be stopped by voter i.d.....well...there isn't any evidence that voter i.d. prevents people who want to vote from voting either...so according to you guys that means that no one is being stopped from voting because of voter i.d. laws....Right?

 

[Bill Mattocks]

To those who b**** and moan that there isn't any evidence that there is actually any voter fraud that can be stopped by voter i.d.....well...there isn't any evidence that voter i.d. prevents people who want to vote from voting either...so according to you guys that means that no one is being stopped from voting because of voter i.d. laws....Right?

Let's say that's true. So no voter fraud is prevented and no one is stopped from voting.

So why do we need the law again? Why put another layer of restrictions on a constitutional right?

Right. No reason.

So the reason must be something OTHER than preventing fraud.

 

[billc]

I'm glad you asked, this article takes up the case rather nicely...

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/20/the-non-problem-of-voter-fraud/

It never fails to spur some heated discussions on both sides of the aisle when we bring up the subjects of voter ID laws and potential voter fraud. Some of the unusual suspects seem to be interested in talking about it this week, but only because a Republican supporter was involved. Such was the case earlier today when I wrote aboutefforts to measure the effect on turnout where such laws make it on to the books. The response from the left was both rapid and typical, summed up rather nicely (if impolitely) by one person who chimed in on a Twitter discussion I was having about national ID. (Image of one Tweet has been edited to block out an expletive, but text not edited in any other way.)

Okay, let’s talk about that for a minute, since we hear it on pretty much a daily basis. (Thanks, Reverend Al!) We’re supposed to start from the assumption that there is no need to take any action because of the paucity of recorded convictions or reported and prosecuted instances of voter fraud crimes. It’s a compelling argument if you don’t think about it for too long. But to explain it to those who choose to engage in this argument in a way that’s easier to digest, let’s look for a moment at another crime – murder. We’ve touched on this before, but it’s worth a closer look.

And in the example above, we’re talking about MURDER. This isn’t some obscure code violation like building a garage too close to your property line. It’s the one case which attracts more immediate and vigorous police and media attention than anything else when an innocent person turns up missing. It is, getting back to the original point of this, a crime that we’re actively looking out for and trying to identify and solve whenever it crops up. And yet there are probably more cases of it that are never reported than are solved. And – again – we’re really looking for it.
Now what is the key difference between murder and voter fraud? (I hope by now you’re getting the idea.) Nobody is looking for it. It’s not obvious like a person not showing up at work for weeks on end or a bloody body in the park. Somebody walks into a precinct who isn’t immediately recognized by the blue haired ladies volunteering at the desk and what happens? Nothing. You can’t know everyone who lives in the entire area. And there is no trail of evidence to follow after the fact. There are no families of the stolen vote beating down the doors of the cops. It may be true that you haven’t found many instances of in person voter fraud. But it’s also true that you haven’t been looking. Not even in passing.

It’s clearly possible to commit voter fraud. It’s also reasonable to see that there will be some number of unscrupulous individuals (and no party gets a pass here) who may have the motive to do so. So with all things being equal, why would you not want to take reasonable steps to prevent or at least hinder efforts of criminals to do it? If your town had no robberies for one entire year, would you push to repeal all laws against theft?

You say to us, “there is no proof of widespread, in person voter fraud so why are you trying to stop it?” And I say to you, there is no proof that it’s not happening either, so why would you fight so hard against preventing it?

So there is no proof that voter i.d. laws prevent anyone from voting.

So there is no reason to not use voter i.d. laws to add a layer to protecting the vote, much in the same way you have layers of protection protecting your home, even if you have never had your home robbed...ever...

So the reason to stop voter i.d. laws must be something other than trying to help people vote.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

I'm glad you asked, this article takes up the case rather nicely...

Not really, it's just rehashing of the same arguments we've already had, including a rather sad strawman.

The basis of the argument is that the crime of voter fraud MAY WELL BE HAPPENING, but we just can't prove it. Voter photo ID would stop it, so why not put it in place?

Well, I already answered that sufficiently, but to recap:

1) Voting is a constitutional right.
2) Before placing restrictions on constitutional rights, specific hurdles have to be cleared.
3) The most important of those is WHAT is the SPECIFIC public good that is more important that the right itself?

"We may have a problem we're not even looking for" is not sufficient reason. "Show cause, or do not infringe the right," is the basis for most of the court arguments rejecting voter photo ID laws to date.

And to just add to that, may I say that the notion that we have a massive voter fraud problem that we're not aware of because we're not looking for it is absurd.

Let me prove that. Let's say someone goes to the polls and identifies himself as me. Since I am a registered voter, my name appears on the voter registration rolls. Of course, he'll have to have a voter ID (non photo as they are issued in Michigan) with my name on it, and he'll have to know to go to the right polling place, since that's the only place my name appears, but never mind all that, let's say he is very determine to steal my vote, so he does it.

Presuming that he got to the polls BEFORE I did, then when I go to the polls, I'll be told I cannot vote, because their records indicate that I already voted. Yes, that's right, using the high-tech device of a pencil and a ruler, they crossed my name off the voter printout when that vote fraud guy voted as me.

So I just say "Oh well," and I go back home and I tell no one, and the vote fraud guy wins.

Yeah. Let's think about that one for a minute.

The FIRST thing that would happen is that I'd be raising a stink about it. I'd demand my right to vote and I'd be given a provisional ballot. An investigation would ensue when I lodged a complaint with the local Election Commission, too.

And that's ONE guy.

Sure, a voter fraud guy would get away with voting for some folks, since most don't show up to the polls anyway.

On the other hand, he has to go stand in line for each of them; he can't show up to the polls and pretend to be five guys all at once, let alone 50 or 500 guys. If he's going to go back to the same polls over and over again, he has to hope no one recognizes him each time he comes through; pretty daring for the sake of waiting an hour in line each time to cast one vote, then back to the end of the line again.

Oh, but maybe he has 500 cohorts! Yeah, that's it, they do voter fraud en masse. Of course, I hope they'll be able to muster those 500 guys all in the same district, since no doubt they'll want to vote THEMSELVES and gosh, can there be 500 voter fraud guys for every precinct who dare to vote once as themselves and once as someone else? Seems like a lot of people willing to risk going to prison over a vote. How much are they being paid for this work? If it were me, they'd have to pay me an awful lot to get me to risk it.

And of course, it only takes a few guys like me who discover that someone else has voted in our names before the election folks are going to realize that they have a massive problem on their hands.

So, to be clear, for this kind of fraud to work:

1) One guy has to pretend to be many; or many guys have to pretend to be a few guys each.
2) They have to stand in line for up to an hour each vote.
3) They have to hope they're not recognized.\
4) They have to be local, since clearly they will want to cast at least their own lawful vote (not much point in casting one fraudulent vote if you don't also vote yourself, eh)?
5) They have to know where each voter they intend to defraud needs to go to vote.
6) They have to hope that the voters they intend to defraud WERE registered to vote but do NOT plan on voting, of there are going to be LOTS of complaints of voter fraud raised all at once.

Hmmm.

I'm going to say no, we do not have an undetected voter fraud problem at the polls.

If you can't show me the fraud, you can't restrict my right to vote by placing burdens on it.

No breaky, no fixy.

Especially when we're talking about constitutional rights.

And frankly, if someone suggested that what really need is more gun laws because maybe there is a lot of gun crime that we're just not detecting, your head would shoot off your shoulders and fly around the room. Think about it.

 

[billc]

And to rehash from Democrat controlled Rhode Island with their new voter i.d. laws...


http://oceanstatecurrent.com/analysi...onent-alleges/

U.S. Rep. David Cicilline’s political campaigns benefitted from a highly organized voter-fraud effort dating back to 2002, his Democratic primary opponent alleged in a press conference today. That was the year of Cicilline’s landslide victory to claim the office of mayor in Providence, Rhode Island.
Anthony Gemma, who is running against Cicilline in the September 11 primary, told reporters in Providence that a private investigation agency he retained uncovered evidence that demonstrates how fraudulent activity conducted in Cicilline’s name “compromises the very core of the electoral process.”
Gemma says he has presented federal and state officials with sworn statements from people associated with Cicilline who say they saw and sometimes participated in multiple instances of voter fraud.
TRP, the private investigation group Gemma hired, includes retired state police officers.





Train Illegal Voters, Break the Machines, Use Paper Ballots
Gemma’s documents allege that voter fraud has been fine-tuned to the point that willing participants can be trained to carry it out. One witness claimed that at least 10 people received instructions from a woman identified as “CA4.”
“After the election, I reviewed a list of the individuals who voted at the Elmwood Community Center,” the witness said. “I noted the presence of numerous Chinese names. I visited the residences of these individuals, all of whom told me they did not vote.”
Nevertheless, votes were recorded in their names. The voter fraud trainees included an underage male who called himself “John Smith,” the witness said. Mr. Smith voted multiple times, according to the witness statement.

And how the cheat in Rhode Island...

http://oceanstatecurrent.com/analysi...democrat-says/


New Voter Fraud Allegations Bolster the Case for Voter ID Law, Senate Democrat Says



And here is how they cheat in Rhode Island...and why voter i.d. laws are needed...


One witness described how campaign operatives would build a “Not Coming” list by calling actual registered voters to determine who was unlikely to show up at the polls. The “Not Coming” list was then given to willingly accomplices, who were paid to stand in and impersonate voters, the witness said.
“I was told to call the voters on the legitimate rolls and ask if they were going to vote,” the witness explained. “If they answered ‘no,’ I was to put a ‘NC’ next to their name and then make a list of the ‘NC’ list and give it to another member of the campaign. I found out later that they used this list to give the names to people who were paid to take their place and vote.”
With the voter ID law in effect, it will become more difficult for this kind of activity to take place, Metts observed, but he did offer an important caveat.

The "Metts" referred to in the above article is again...

In response to multiple voter fraud complaints from his own constituents in Providence, Sen. Harold Metts, a black Democrat, led the charge in favor of a new photo voter identification law that is now operative in the Ocean State. Metts is far from alone, however. In fact, despite what the media would have you believe, minorities are more likely to support identification laws than white Americans.

 

[billc]

Well...you almost got that past me...

You typed...

And frankly, if someone suggested that what really need is more gun laws because maybe there is a lot of gun crime that we're just not detecting, your head would shoot off your shoulders and fly around the room. Think about it.​

I don't know about you but in this state (Illinois) in order to use your constitutionally protected right to "Keep and Bear Arms,"....I have to show a photo i.d. called a "Firearm Owners Identification Card" in order to purchase a firearm or buy ammunition or use a commercial shooting range. Hmmmm...you were saying about constitutional rights and gun laws...:angel:

Would showing an i.d. to vote be any more of a violation of a right than an F.O.I.D. card?

I believe in the past you have said you are from Michigan...and their gun laws are...

http://crime.about.com/od/gunlawsbystate/a/gunlaws_mi.htm

Handguns

• Permit to purchase a handgun? Yes (*License to purchase - see below)
• Registration of handguns? Yes
• Licensing of owners of handguns? No
• Permit to carry handguns? Yes. Carrying concealed or openly in a motor vehicle requires a license.

​

 

[billc]

Specifically, in Michigan, the right to "...Bear arms...," requires what?...wait for it...

http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,4643,7-123-1591_3503_4654-10926--,00.html

[h=2]Concealed Pistol License Requirements[/h] A. State RequirementsApplicants for a Michigan Concealed Pistol License must: 1. Be at least 21 years of age 2. Be a citizen of the United States or an immigrant alien lawfully admitted into the United States 3. Be a resident of the State of Michigan for at least 6 months prior to application. An applicant is a state resident if one of the following applies: The applicant possesses a valid, lawfully obtained Michigan driver's license or state identification card

 

[WC_lun]

There has been shown a need for ID when purchsing a gun. No such thing has been proved when voting. It is a ploy to restrict voting rights and has been admitted as such by a few Republicans.

 

[CanuckMA]

To expand on BillM's scenario, do waht we do in Canada. When you show up tp vote, your name is crossed off a list and you are given a ballot. Ballots are numbered. The number is recorded next to your name.

If someone showed up and pretended to be me, I'd raise a stink, then I'd prove who I am. They would put the fisrt ballot's number on a list of ballots that are not to be counted. Done. I need ID only if there is a dispute.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Specifically, in Michigan, the right to "...Bear arms...," requires what?...wait for it...

http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,4643,7-123-1591_3503_4654-10926--,00.html

Different rights, different threats to the public, different restrictions. None of us need to show photo ID to pray or to speak publicly.

The state has not shown a compelling threat to the public by allowing people to vote with just a non-photo voter ID card.

 

[billc]

A great, short, commercial about the silliness of objecting to voter i.d. laws. It is kind of funny...What if Banks were run like Minnesota's elections?

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/10/what-if-they-ran-banks-like-minnesota-elections.php