toldailytopic: Do you favor voter ID laws? Why or why not?

[HisServant]

Can somebody explain this to me? I have been voting for decades in Virginia. I cannot think of one instance where they didn't ask me for some form of ID, which I always gave my drivers license. And then they looked me up in a list and put a check by my name.

Are there some states where I can just walk up and say I am Joe Smo and they will take my word for it and not look up my name in a list?

Yes.


Even voter ID's are fraught with fraud, especially since the Clinton motor voters law. It's extremely easy for convicted felons to vote. It's been found that 1099 felons voted in the Al Franken election and so far 177 have been convicted with another 80 or so awaiting trial. There is a good chance that most felons voted Democrat, so its a safe assumption that Franken did not win the election.

I would like to see you have to register to vote in person, with the required ID (Drivers License Photo ID, Birth Certificate or Naturalization Papers), and they would take your photograph as part of the registration process. Then they would print your photo in the registration book (in PA it only contains your name and signature).. that way you can go to the polls with no ID, you don't have to worry about losing your ID etc. and the people at the polls have a photo to compare against before letting you vote.

Then the state can deal with the registration books to strike out felons and others that are ineligible.

 

[exminister]

Yes.


Even voter ID's are fraught with fraud, especially since the Clinton motor voters law. It's extremely easy for convicted felons to vote. It's been found that 1099 felons voted in the Al Franken election and so far 177 have been convicted with another 80 or so awaiting trial. There is a good chance that most felons voted Democrat, so its a safe assumption that Franken did not win the election.

I would like to see you have to register to vote in person, with the required ID (Drivers License Photo ID, Birth Certificate or Naturalization Papers), and they would take your photograph as part of the registration process. Then they would print your photo in the registration book (in PA it only contains your name and signature).. that way you can go to the polls with no ID, you don't have to worry about losing your ID etc. and the people at the polls have a photo to compare against before letting you vote.

Then the state can deal with the registration books to strike out felons and others that are ineligible.

OK, thanks. I got no problem with requiring some form of government ID and doing it in person only. If you are not there on election day you can go to a local government office (DMV, Post Office, Treasurers Office) and vote beforehand. Not sure about them having to take your picture while you are there due to the cost of managing it.

 

[The Barbarian]

Why don't they give photo IDs [not licenses] out for free if they're going to require them to vote?

Because that would defeat the whole purpose of having such a law. If you did that, it wouldn't keep any qualified voter from voting.

 

[Buzz]

Why should we have voter ID laws?
We apparently don't have any candidate ID laws.

 

[Angel4Truth]

genuine original, you never answered my questions.

I asked if a man who serves in the armed forces (has rented address because of being in the military) should be unable to vote and if a woman whose husband has the land in his name should be blocked from voting (yes Virgina she can have her own opinion outside of her husbands)

 

[Granite]

Three renters and a landowner vote on how much taxes the landowner should pay . . .



The proletariat renters start shouting about how the foul, rotten, arrogant, presumptuous, despicable, pigheaded, and bourgeoisie landowner is opressing them by owning land, so they vote that the landowner should pay 100% of his land in taxes.

The vote passes by 3:1 against the strutting clueless little peacock of a landowner.


Isn't Utopia wonderful?

You're an idiot. And judging by your inability or unwillingness to answer questions, a particularly arrogant and clueless one to boot.:yawn:

 

[Granite]

Am I the only one who reads granite's listed out derisions in "Jesse Jackson" voice?

It would be way better tho' if the adjectives started with the same letter....

That's foul, fickle, facinorious, feeble, fraudulent, and factious........

Yes Im bored and yes I cheated to find those f-words

You realize I'm going to read my next few posts in The Voice, yes?:chuckle:

 

[The Barbarian]

It's a dangerous game, trying to set landowners against renters. As home ownership goes down, there will be more renters than landowners. The renters might just conclude that landowners shouldn't be allowed to vote.

And then go and enforce it.

No, class warfare isn't the way.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Its idiotic to think renters would want to drive taxes way up on landowners anyway, they are who pay for it.

 

[Saved.One.by.Grace]

There have been more and more voting irregularities happen in the US since 1960. That's why I support voter ID laws. Also, we have so many legal and illegal aliens in this country who have no rights to vote in our elections, we have to protect the integrity of our election process. The laws passed since 1960 have increased the number of voters, but fraud has also increased. I'm concerned my three Pomeranians will want to vote and cancel out my wife's and my vote. There liable to vote for the party of handouts and that wouldn't be good.

 

[The Barbarian]

There have been more and more voting irregularities happen in the US since 1960.

True, but the miscreants are now under court supervision, which limits their ability to do more of it:
You can read the unanimous opinion of the three-judge-court of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at this link. Speaking very roughly, back in 1982 the Republican National Committee settled a case (through a court-enforced consent decree) brought by the Democratic National Committee claiming that Republican “ballot security” programs meant to combat supposed voter fraud constituted intimidation of minority voters in violation of the Constitution and the Voting Rights Act. Among other things, the consent decree requires the RNC to get permission from the court before implementing certain poll watching activities.
http://electionlawblog.org/?p=31235

And of course, there are groups keeping a close eye on them. They have managed to pass a few laws to keep legal voters from the polls, but the courts have been invalidating them, also. One could simply issue all legal voters free ID cards, but that would do the opposite of what the republicans want.

That's why I support voter ID laws. Also, we have so many legal and illegal aliens in this country who have no rights to vote in our elections, we have to protect the integrity of our election process.

Have you seen the stats on the number of them who vote? Might be a revelation for you. Issuing free ID cards to legal voters would fix that, but of course, that might also mean more minorities would vote, and so it's unlikely the republicans would go for it.

I'm concerned my three Pomeranians will want to vote and cancel out my wife's and my vote.

If they were male, I would think they'd vote republican like the rest of their peers.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

The concern with voter ID laws is that it addresses a problem which virtually doesn't exist. In-person voter fraud accounts for like 00.01% of cast votes, so it's not going to swing an election one way or the other, however the number of legitimate voters lacking ID who would be prevented from voting (which may number in the hundreds if not thousands) very well could determine the results of an election. The poor and elderly are less likely to have valid state-issued ID, and the associated costs with attaining one although not bank breaking may be enough to dissuade legitimate voters from casting their votes.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

I think this was proposed early in American history but it was rejected.

It wasn't just "proposed" that was the law of the time. Non-land owners couldn't vote until 1850.

 

[Vaquero45]

You realize I'm going to read my next few posts in The Voice, yes?:chuckle:

Youre welcome

 

[Nick M]

Why do you want to prevent most people from voting?

People are, by and large, ugly, stupid sheep. That said, I do think this problem is getting worse. We're a nation of poorly educated corn-fed rubes.

lain:

 

[Granite]

lain:

...proving that, once again, words fail Nick, and he's about at the same level as the five-year-old he claims to have.

Nice to know a child's running amok on TOL.

 

[Nick M]

...proving that, once again, words fail

I accept your surrender and non answer.

 

[sky.]

It wasn't just "proposed" that was the law of the time. Non-land owners couldn't vote until 1850.

I see. There were amendments to the constitution but I believe that it has never been part of the US constitution that Non-citizens could vote but maybe that's not the whole problem. The problem I see is that voter registration has been compromised.

What happens when voter registration isn't done in a reputable way is it makes the votes of those who have registered legally mean less.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

I see. There were amendments to the constitution but I believe that it has never been part of the US constitution that Non-citizens could vote but maybe that's not the whole problem. The problem I see is that voter registration has been compromised.

What happens when voter registration isn't done in a reputable way is it makes the votes of those who have registered legally mean less.

In person voter fraud, the kind that would be prevented from voter ID laws, almost never happens because you would not only have to know the name of a registered voter in that district, but you would have to hope that this person doesn't show up on election day. If you were to swing an election in-person voter fraud is the least efficient way to do it. The real problem, if there is one, is with mailed-in ballots which are harder to verify. Voter ID does nothing to address this problem, while disenfranchising the elderly who may not have valid state ID.

 

[sky.]

In person voter fraud, the kind that would be prevented from voter ID laws, almost never happens because you would not only have to know the name of a registered voter in that district, but you would have to hope that this person doesn't show up on election day. If you were to swing an election in-person voter fraud is the least efficient way to do it. The real problem, if there is one, is with mailed-in ballots which are harder to verify. Voter ID does nothing to address this problem, while disenfranchising the elderly who may not have valid state ID.

hmmm...I don't know then. There needs to be a solution to mailed-in ballots. That does affect the elderly.