Are you for Voter I.D. ?

[kyrider]

I keep hearing people say how asking someone for their I.D. before they can vote is discrimination. I disagree and think if you are against voter I.D. you must be for voter fraud.

Am I wrong on this?

[sombo]

No, you are totally correct. In several of the past few elections there have been more investigations on possible voting fraud than in the rest of the US history. There were many stories of votes being found linked to ss#'s of dead people or newborns. Other stories that claimed people popped up in more than one state, and others where the private company in charge of the software used for the voting in that area would/could allow them to alter votes w/o the voters knowledge. I think many of these are still "under investigation" with no solid proof of them being true or false. So it's still up in the air as to which ones happened and which ones didn't since it hasn't been fully proven either way.

["A"]

Why not just have a finger print or retina scan and be done with.

[FrugalNinja250]

Originally Posted by kyrider

I keep hearing people say how asking someone for their I.D. before they can vote is discrimination. I disagree and think if you are against voter I.D. you must be for voter fraud.

Am I wrong on this?

Yes, you are. You're using a semantic trick to justify a conclusion. I'm against voter ID, yet I'm also against voter fraud. That makes your statement false.

The evidence does not support any conclusion that states that there is widespread vote fraud in this country. It just doesn't. Now, I'm not saying there is not vote fraud, there have been many well-documented cases, but as a percentage of all voting it is very small, miniscule in fact, and other than a very, very few isolated tiny local elections it has no effect whatsoever on the overall scheme of things.

The main reason I'm against the current crop of proposed voter ID laws, aside from the waste of fiscal resources they entail with dubious (at best) benefit, they tend to impose financial hardship on some voters, typically in the form of mandating travel and expenses to get an ID. For instance, having to travel to the county seat, having to produce birth records in cases where there are legitimate reasons why those records may not exist and refusing other forms of proof of citizenship, etc.

For instance, why wouldn't someone have a birth certificate? Many black families in the old south existed in such poverty that they could not afford a birth in any kind of medical facility, at all. Babies born at home and raised on a sharecropper's farm wouldn't have a birth certificate. Should they be excluded from being able to vote? The Constitution says no, but a certain political mindset says yes. Why? Because historically African Americans tend to vote for one party more often than the other, and guess which party is pushing for these so-called "voter ID laws"?

To me, the motives behind these legislative efforts are suspect enough, especially in light of the fact that there's no credible evidence of meaningful or widespread fraud, to justify rejecting these so-called laws.

And by the way, before a certain segment gets all twisted up over my comments, I just wanted to make it clear that I believe, 100% and unequivocally, that the only people who have any right to vote in this country are people who hold valid citizenship of this country. Anyone who states otherwise would be making fraudulent statements.

[Mr.E]

Also, did you know some places dont accept school I.D's as proper ID? I think that is stupid. These same places allow gun ID's to be accepted though, which if you ask me, is even more stupid. They are making it more difficult for people to vote, which is not what we should be doing at all. Sure voting fraud is plausible, but as stated above, and from other thing's I've read, there's not much evidence to support that it's been a significant factor in past elections.

It does make it harder for the lower class to vote, especially when they struggle just to put food on the table for their family. What they do now is good enough. Perhaps just a proof of ID would be fine, but still, Im not for it. Especially if there is no major problem with anything right now. It'll only make voting more difficult, and it really outrages me as a student, to see that some places dont accept student ID's. Just my two cents.

Link to original page on YouTube.

Link to original page on YouTube.

[shiroganeshinobi]

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

Yes, you are. You're using a semantic trick to justify a conclusion. I'm against voter ID, yet I'm also against voter fraud. That makes your statement false.

The evidence does not support any conclusion that states that there is widespread vote fraud in this country. It just doesn't. Now, I'm not saying there is not vote fraud, there have been many well-documented cases, but as a percentage of all voting it is very small, miniscule in fact, and other than a very, very few isolated tiny local elections it has no effect whatsoever on the overall scheme of things.

The main reason I'm against the current crop of proposed voter ID laws, aside from the waste of fiscal resources they entail with dubious (at best) benefit, they tend to impose financial hardship on some voters, typically in the form of mandating travel and expenses to get an ID. For instance, having to travel to the county seat, having to produce birth records in cases where there are legitimate reasons why those records may not exist and refusing other forms of proof of citizenship, etc.

For instance, why wouldn't someone have a birth certificate? Many black families in the old south existed in such poverty that they could not afford a birth in any kind of medical facility, at all. Babies born at home and raised on a sharecropper's farm wouldn't have a birth certificate. Should they be excluded from being able to vote? The Constitution says no, but a certain political mindset says yes. Why? Because historically African Americans tend to vote for one party more often than the other, and guess which party is pushing for these so-called "voter ID laws"?

To me, the motives behind these legislative efforts are suspect enough, especially in light of the fact that there's no credible evidence of meaningful or widespread fraud, to justify rejecting these so-called laws.

And by the way, before a certain segment gets all twisted up over my comments, I just wanted to make it clear that I believe, 100% and unequivocally, that the only people who have any right to vote in this country are people who hold valid citizenship of this country. Anyone who states otherwise would be making fraudulent statements.

On the surface, voter id makes sense because we're not really affected by it. If you think about people who are affected, then it doesn't make sense. It affects the poor, minorities, those in rural areas, and senior citizens hence why it discriminates. Voter ID is being seen as a very subtle way of voter suppression. Take it with a grain of salt but it's always interesting to keep in the back of the mind. As FrugalNinja250 pointed out, it really just a fiscal waste of government spending.

I like how one comment in that article totally missed the point because "It's not my fault poor people cant afford to vote".

[FrugalNinja250]

I'm glad that this discussion (so far) doesn't have name calling, insults, innuendos, and all the other elements of discord that tend to contaminate civil discourse lately.

[kyrider]

So, do you all think that a person does not have to show proof of who they are when they vote? Do you believe every absentee ballot should be counted without verifying if that person even exists?

And let me ask this...

Do you think it is o.k. for Church's or community organizations to go out to nursing homes, shelters etc and collect absentee ballots while also encouraging those people how to vote?

[shiroganeshinobi]

Originally Posted by kyrider

So, do you all think that a person does not have to show proof of who they are when they vote? Do you believe every absentee ballot should be counted without verifying if that person even exists?

And let me ask this...

Do you think it is o.k. for Church's or community organizations to go out to nursing homes, shelters etc and collect absentee ballots while also encouraging those people how to vote?

I think of Occam's razor is probably the best answer. Who would go at great lengths to go to visit many different schools at different times to commit voter fraud. There is also mathematical distribution analysis to find inconsistencies. This is actually a big thing with regards to the Russian election right now, which not surprisingly I havent heard much about through regular news.

How would you check a homeless man's id? I don't know but do you refuse his constitutional right to vote because he doesn't have one? I think there are strict guidelines per state that are followed when doing absentee ballot voting.

Organizations can encourage people how to vote but I believe it is illegal to collect their absentee vote (tampering) if I'm not mistaken. It should be deposited directly via USPS. There's also this teacher who was fined for trying to help her students register to vote due to a new state law.

[kyrider]

Originally Posted by shiroganeshinobi

How would you check a homeless man's id? I don't know but do you refuse his constitutional right to vote because he doesn't have one?

The Constitution does not give one the right to vote it only states those who are qualified can vote.

In recent years where we have had very close elections from Florida in 2000 to Minnesota in 2008 voter fraud can make the difference.

I have no problem showing proof of who I am when I vote just as I do when I write a check.

[Mr.E]

Point is what about others who can't though? Who either dont have a valid state ID, or are homeless, or for what ever reason. Statistics show that voter fraud has never been a huge issue, I wish I could find that site again that shows the polls and what not. But there are many people who have issues with presenting an ID, many people with good intentions. By imposing an ID, that could be horrible. And what is an ID going to do? People can make fake ID's. People do it all the time for clubs. It wont fix anything. It'll only make it harder for some to vote, which is not what we as American citizens should want. Just showing an ID wont stop anything.

And why is it, (broken tape recorder), that some places wont accept School ID's? College state ID's? I think thats rather wrong, and again, makes it harder for people to vote.

[kyrider]

Things like instant voter registration without i.d. never get looked into. One can simply register and provide false information and then vote and no one investigates because of the cost.

[Mr.E]

But someone could simply produce a fake ID and still fraudulently vote. If they want to stop frauds, perhaps indeed do something as stated before, fingure print scans, something that doesnt cost Americans and that everyone can do. But even then there is a problem, because not everyone would want to be "in the system." Its not stopping anything, its just making it harder, for both those with good intentions, and barely for those with bad.

[FrugalNinja250]

Originally Posted by kyrider

Things like instant voter registration without i.d. never get looked into. One can simply register and provide false information and then vote and no one investigates because of the cost.

And yet, there doesn't seem to be any problems with this scenario actually happening on any scale that matters at all, anywhere that I can find in this country.

It's always possible to imagine the worst possible scenario, but I think it's very important to understand that there is a vast difference between the words "possible" and "probable". Just because something's possible doesn't mean that it's probable, or happening, or will happen. It's possible that I'll win the lottery tonight, but it's not probable so I don't do any planning around that possibility. I prefer to work with known probabilities because the outcomes are more meaningful and useful.

[rockNroll]

I've been under the impression that most voting fraud is perpetrated by the vote counters, not the vote casters

[revstriker]

Voter fraud is a bigger issue than some published reports would lead you to believe. It is hardly a minor issue, and it certainly can change the result of an election. In recent elections, we have seen how organized some voter fraud really is with groups like Acorn openly encouraging such fraud.

Voter ID is a good idea. Most, if not all laws proposed and passed to enforce Voter ID, also include measures to ensure those few people who are impoverished, or for whatever reason, do not have a government issued ID, are able to obtain one, often times without the need to even leave their home.

Even if Voter Fraud was not a large area of concern, I would still be in favor of Voter ID. It just makes sense that there be some way to prove you are who you are when you go to vote. I disagree with those who make the argument that it discriminates, or disenfranchises any voter. I wonder why these same people are not protesting retail establishments and restaurants who require an ID in order to enter, or buy certain products. Why are they not protesting at the airports for forcing the requirement that travelers have a government issued ID.

[revstriker]

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

And yet, there doesn't seem to be any problems with this scenario actually happening on any scale that matters at all, anywhere that I can find in this country.

It's always possible to imagine the worst possible scenario, but I think it's very important to understand that there is a vast difference between the words "possible" and "probable". Just because something's possible doesn't mean that it's probable, or happening, or will happen. It's possible that I'll win the lottery tonight, but it's not probable so I don't do any planning around that possibility. I prefer to work with known probabilities because the outcomes are more meaningful and useful.

In Colorado, Common Cause of Colorado, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund and SEIU were caught trying to submit 6,000 fraudulent voter registrations. In Daytona Florida, a City Commissioner and his campaign manager were caught with 92 absentee ballots with names of people, some of who no longer even lived in the state.

There are many many other examples of Voter Fraud including people who are deceased, and voter registrations with addresses that don't exist (like hundreds registered to one vacant lot). The scary thing is that a lot of these things were caught by accident as any measure to try and combat voter fraud (like Voter ID) is opposed by certain liberal groups. It doesn't take someone with a masters in statistics to figure out that the examples only represent a small portion of the overall problem.

I wonder what you think would be a scale that matters? -serious question.

[shiroganeshinobi]

Originally Posted by revstriker

In Colorado, Common Cause of Colorado, Mi Familia Vota Education Fund and SEIU were caught trying to submit 6,000 fraudulent voter registrations. In Daytona Florida, a City Commissioner and his campaign manager were caught with 92 absentee ballots with names of people, some of who no longer even lived in the state.

There are many many other examples of Voter Fraud including people who are deceased, and voter registrations with addresses that don't exist (like hundreds registered to one vacant lot). The scary thing is that a lot of these things were caught by accident as any measure to try and combat voter fraud (like Voter ID) is opposed by certain liberal groups. It doesn't take someone with a masters in statistics to figure out that the examples only represent a small portion of the overall problem.

I wonder what you think would be a scale that matters? -serious question.

If I google SEIU voter fraud, I see a pattern. It's all from conservative sources, no objective sources.

I'll leave you with this.

Baseless right-wing accusations of voter fraud? Must mean an election is near

[massacremasses]

slippery slope.

[FrugalNinja250]

Originally Posted by massacremasses

slippery slope.

Yep. At one time paranoia was considered a mental illness. Not any more, it seems. In fact, it apparently has become a badge of honor to some.

[kyrider]

It is pretty simple.

If you want to vote just provide some sort of i.d.

[tpelle]

I live in Kentucky. We have been required to show ID to vote for as long as I remember - and I'm 59 years old!

The only exception to showing ID is if you are personally known to the poll worker. For years and years a lady from our neighborhood and who also attended the same church volunteered as a poll worker. I never had to show ID when Dorothy was working there. She has now "retired" from volunteering, so now I have to pull out my driver's license. No big deal.

In "minority" precincts, Kentucky sees voter turnouts on par with anywhere else.

Regarding the argument that to obtain an ID is a hardship for certain classes, I bet everyone who says that has a Social Security card.

[kyrider]

Originally Posted by tpelle

I live in Kentucky. We have been required to show ID to vote for as long as I remember - and I'm 59 years old!

The only exception to showing ID is if you are personally known to the poll worker. For years and years a lady from our neighborhood and who also attended the same church volunteered as a poll worker. I never had to show ID when Dorothy was working there. She has now "retired" from volunteering, so now I have to pull out my driver's license. No big deal.

In "minority" precincts, Kentucky sees voter turnouts on par with anywhere else.

Regarding the argument that to obtain an ID is a hardship for certain classes, I bet everyone who says that has a Social Security card.

Yeah,

I don't see where there should be an issue and wonder why one would?

[almost40]

How about this twist. What other services can you aquire and or "stuff" can you do without an ID??

[HKr1]

Originally Posted by Mr.E

Also, did you know some places dont accept school I.D's as proper ID? I think that is stupid. These same places allow gun ID's to be accepted though, which if you ask me, is even more stupid.

Gun ID... you talking CCW license? CCW license is better proof of who you are than some 6 dollar off the internet school ID.
School ID's are crap

[FrugalNinja250]

Originally Posted by kyrider

It is pretty simple.

If you want to vote just provide some sort of i.d.

Then all efforts need to be made by government to provide those IDs free of charge to any who ask, including if necessary transportation costs from the residence of the ID seeker to the location where IDs are applied for. Would you agree with that? That ID seekers should bear no financial burden for obtaining the ID when the ID is mandated by the government?

To deny one single vote because for whatever reason the citizen was unable to afford the costs associated with getting said ID amounts to nothing different than the "poll" taxes that were in place in the old south for many decades with the sole purpose of preventing people living in poverty from voting.

And again, I state, there is no evidence of meaningful or widespread voting fraud in this country. Opinions on conservative websites and blogs are not the same as evidence. Just because someone wrote it doesn't mean it's true. That's one of the biggest problems with the internet, it somehow lowered folks credulity filters to basically zero.

Edit to add: When I vote I show my voter registration card. They check it against their printed log of registered voters in my various districts, then I go to vote. I don't have to drive downtown (gas), park (at least $5, more if I don't want to walk across town), stand in line, burn up time not at my employer getting paid (My employer doesn't pay when I'm not working), etc, just to get some ID that returns my right to vote to me. I do my registration all through mail.

[kyrider]

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

Then all efforts need to be made by government to provide those IDs free of charge to any who ask, including if necessary transportation costs from the residence of the ID seeker to the location where IDs are applied for. Would you agree with that? That ID seekers should bear no financial burden for obtaining the ID when the ID is mandated by the government?

To deny one single vote because for whatever reason the citizen was unable to afford the costs associated with getting said ID amounts to nothing different than the "poll" taxes that were in place in the old south for many decades with the sole purpose of preventing people living in poverty from voting.

And again, I state, there is no evidence of meaningful or widespread voting fraud in this country. Opinions on conservative websites and blogs are not the same as evidence. Just because someone wrote it doesn't mean it's true. That's one of the biggest problems with the internet, it somehow lowered folks credulity filters to basically zero.

Edit to add: When I vote I show my voter registration card. They check it against their printed log of registered voters in my various districts, then I go to vote. I don't have to drive downtown (gas), park (at least $5, more if I don't want to walk across town), stand in line, burn up time not at my employer getting paid (My employer doesn't pay when I'm not working), etc, just to get some ID that returns my right to vote to me. I do my registration all through mail.

Thanks for your opinion but I simply disagree.

[FrugalNinja250]

Originally Posted by kyrider

Thanks for your opinion but I simply disagree.

With which part?

[SephiaSputnik]

Originally Posted by shiroganeshinobi

I think of Occam's razor is probably the best answer. Who would go at great lengths to go to visit many different schools at different times to commit voter fraud.

What is Occam's razor?

[massacremasses]

Someone posted something the other day that said "how is it ok that people on govt. aid get to vote, because isn't that a conflict of interest?"

And you know what? That is a compelling argument in my opinion... However a little OT I suppose.

[massacremasses]

Originally Posted by SephiaSputnik

What is Occam's razor?

"a principle that generally recommends from among competing hypotheses selecting the one that makes the fewest new assumptions." - Wikipedia

[SephiaSputnik]

Originally Posted by massacremasses

"a principle that generally recommends from among competing hypotheses selecting the one that makes the fewest new assumptions." - Wikipedia

hmm... I get it but I'd probably understand better if it were put in an example...

[Mr.E]

Originally Posted by HKr1

Gun ID... you talking CCW license? CCW license is better proof of who you are than some 6 dollar off the internet school ID.
School ID's are crap

Yeah thats what I'm talking about. Then again, I can make a fake ID like nothing and it will be accepted, so really, whats the point and how will these things stop voter fraud?

[Alex]

Originally Posted by SephiaSputnik

hmm... I get it but I'd probably understand better if it were put in an example...

It's often simplified to mean, the most simple assumption of what might have happened, is probably what happened. Rather than the more complex one.

For example, if you are looking for your car in the mall parking garage after shopping for a few hours, and you find it in a row three rows over from where you thought you parked it, do you believe:

- you were mistaken about where you parked it

or

- someone broke into your car, managed to start it, found a spot 3 rows over, and parked it there during the time you were shopping.

Occam's razor would say that you were mistaken about where you parked it.

[kyrider]

What happens where you all live if a policeman asks for some sort of identification?

[FrugalNinja250]

Originally Posted by kyrider

What happens where you all live if a policeman asks for some sort of identification?

Plonk...

[massacremasses]

Originally Posted by kyrider

What happens where you all live if a policeman asks for some sort of identification?

unless youve done something wrong I dont think they have the right to ask you for an ID.

[shiroganeshinobi]

Originally Posted by FrugalNinja250

With which part?

He disagrees because he still doesn't understand how it discriminates. Rather than have a civil discussion to why you could be wrong(which you are not) he changes the subject because he cannot produce evidence which proves contrary. All sources are baseless and come from one particular side, it's not hard to guess which.

It's funny because we already have voter registration cards, which is sent to our homes which we present alongside state id to vote.

rockNroll also nailed a valid issue. Sometimes is where the votes are counted where fraud can occur. So all that money for a voter id is wasted. Voter ID is wasteful spending to suppress voting rights.

The Constitution said originally property owners should vote which was later amended/expanded by the Bill of Rights. Check out amendment 14. I think it's pretty straightforward. If I'm wrong, point it out please.

[massacremasses]

Originally Posted by shiroganeshinobi

He disagrees because he still doesn't understand how it discriminates. Rather than have a civil discussion to why you could be wrong(which you are not) he changes the subject because he cannot produce evidence which proves contrary. All sources are baseless and come from one particular side, it's not hard to guess which.

It's funny because we already have voter registration cards, which is sent to our homes which we present alongside state id to vote.

rockNroll also nailed a valid issue. Sometimes is where the votes are counted where fraud can occur. So all that money for a voter id is wasted. Voter ID is wasteful spending to suppress voting rights.

The Constitution said originally property owners should vote which was later amended/expanded by the Bill of Rights. Check out amendment 14. I think it's pretty straightforward. If I'm wrong, point it out please.

I enjoy reading what you say. I was wondering how you would respond to this argument.

"how is it ok that people on govt. aid get to vote, because isn't that a conflict of interest?"

I thought it was a valid point...

[shiroganeshinobi]

Originally Posted by massacremasses

I enjoy reading what you say. I was wondering how you would respond to this argument.

"how is it ok that people on govt. aid get to vote, because isn't that a conflict of interest?"

I thought it was a valid point...

So you're trying to say people who get "handouts" shouldn't be allowed to vote because it's in their benefit. This has no bearing on the actual right to vote. You're trying to argue voting preference vs the ability to vote. It's apples and oranges.