Voter ID laws

Discussion in 'Politics' started by NaasPreacher (C4K), Aug 16, 2012.

  1. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    I try to look at both sides of issues. I try to at least understand where the logic comes from in those whose views differ from me. I may not agree, but I can often see where they are coming from.

    I have read quite a bit and listened quite a bit to the controversy over voter ID laws such as the new law in Pennsylvania. For the life of me I cannot see how that can be opposed - especially since Pennsylvania offers free ID cards.

    Apart from pragmatism how can anyone oppose such a law? What possible logic is there to say that a person should not have to prove who they are in order to vote?

    I hear the arguments, that it isn't that big a deal and that some people might not be able to vote under these laws, but they seem very shallow.

    There are two contrasting views. On one side we have the potential for fraud, on the other we have the potential for someone not being able to vote. It just appears to me that the potential for fraud is much more likely. The excuses about why someone cannot get a free photo ID seem ludicrous.

    No matter how hard I try to see the other side it seems to me that the only reason to oppose these laws is to perpetuate fraud.

    I know we have some posters here who are more left minded than I am (despite what some members here think :) ) so I would love to get some input to help me understand why this is even an issue.
     
    #1 NaasPreacher (C4K), Aug 16, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 16, 2012
  2. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,083
    Likes Received:
    218
    C (since we are good friends, can I just call you C? :laugh: )

    Actually, I think it boils down to this. By the Dems saying that no ID should be required, then the masses will say the the Dems really care about the common man - and will keep voting the Democrat ticket.

    Salty
     
  3. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    Hmm, good thought. Thanks Sal.
     
  4. saturneptune

    saturneptune
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    13,977
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have no problem with the ID card. In fact, in the state of Illinois, they ought to have two, with DNA samples, voice recognition software, and soul detectors so people do not bring their pet cats to the polls.
     
  5. Revmitchell

    Revmitchell
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2006
    Messages:
    38,287
    Likes Received:
    780
    It doesn't make sense first because opposing it is done with liberal logic and that never makes sense. Second because liberals want illegals to be able to vote since they assume they would vote for them. It is all about winning the election no matter what the cost.
     
  6. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    Still up to form I see S/N!:thumbs:
     
  7. carpro

    carpro
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 14, 2004
    Messages:
    20,894
    Likes Received:
    294
    In a nutshell.
     
  8. OldRegular

    OldRegular
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 21, 2004
    Messages:
    22,678
    Likes Received:
    53
    They can also steal an election on occasion: the Minnesota Senate seat in 2008, the presidency in 1960, and assorted in between.

    I have no confidence that the Republican politicians will do what is best for the country but the democrat politicians are thieves. They will steal elections and they will steal your money through taxes. The bacchanal by GSA employees at a recent "retreat", recorded on video adequately portrays the attitude of some democrat politicians toward the voter/taxpayer.
     
  9. Magnetic Poles

    Magnetic Poles
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2005
    Messages:
    10,407
    Likes Received:
    0
    Philosophically, I think it is a good idea to validate that a voter is, in fact, who they say they are. In practice, there are issues. That said, I don't think the issues are insurmountable. It does mean that some people will need help to get their identification who may not have one (older people, invalids, etc), but a voter registration card with a photo would probably be a good idea. If someone attempts to vote without it, let them cast a provisional ballot. There are still questions about mail-in ballots, etc., but you cannot make any system that is perfect.
     
  10. Zaac

    Zaac
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    13,757
    Likes Received:
    220
    It is a fruitless argument. I get so tired of Al Sharpton and the COngressional Black Caucus and every Civil Rights organization talking about how showing an ID is just another way to suppress votes.

    HOW? How does showing an ID that you can get for free suppress the votes?

    The arguments against voter ID are all about getting illegal and dead people to vote in elections unchecked. If all you've got to do is give a name, every district has a roll of names that can be assumed. It takes time to purge those voting rolls of dead folks and folks who have moved. No picture ID is the perfect way to count votes that shouldn't be counted.
     
  11. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,186
    Likes Received:
    611
    Here we go again. I'm a conservative but I oppose voter photo ID laws because:


    1. The number of cases of actual voter fraud, that is, someone actually casting a vote that should not be voting is so small that it statistically does not meaningfully exist. There might be a couple hundred votes over the past 50 years where this has occurred and it has primarily been errors in the system, not deliberate fraud. Has there been dead people left on voter rolls? Yes. Has there been people using other people's identities to register to vote? Yes. Is it easy to register names to vote that might not be your name? Yes. But actual votes being fraudulently cast? No, the system finds them at the polls on election day and stops them.

    2. The right to vote is constitutionally guaranteed. The right to drive a car, board a plane, buy liquor--all common reasons given as to why you should also need a photo ID to vote--are not constitutional rights. I always ask conservatives what they think about the 2nd amendment being tampered with by the passing of regulatory laws. Of course they are adamantly opposed to regulating the 2nd amendment. Not applying this same standard to voting laws is hypocrisy.

    3. Conservatives say they are staunch defenders of the literal interpretation of the constitution meant to be interpreted in the context it was written, yet are going out of their way to add strings to a fundamental right of citizenry.

    4. Conservatives are all about less regulation and less government intrusion into your life. They also claim to be for less government and fewer government programs. Yet here they want to create a gigantic new bureaucracy requiring compliance with something that is already a guaranteed constitutional right.

    5. Photo voter ID laws would not stop the method of voting with the most potential for fraud--absentee balloting. Also, photo voter ID laws would probably make it more difficult for soldiers overseas to vote. OK, the solution is to revamp absentee ballot laws. Do you see that being discussed in relation to photo ID laws? I haven't.

    6. Photo voter ID laws would cause some people to not be able to exercise their constitutional right to vote. The elderly that don't have a driver's license anymore might simply decide the hassle of getting a photo ID to vote isn't worth it. Or if they have a drivers license but have recently moved into a nursing home they wouldn't be able to vote. People that have recently moved out of their voting precinct and don't have an updated driver's license and/or haven't gotten a photo voter ID would not be able to vote (or would need provisional ballots.) College students living in a dorm in another state might not even try to vote, or ironically, could vote twice using photo IDs for their college in one state, and their driver's license to vote in their home state. Or college students from New York City attending college in Rochester NY, would have to drive to New York City to exercise their right to vote. Are they going to do that? No.

    7. Most of these photo ID voter laws are unfunded mandates. That is, the law passes several legislative committees and then once it looks like it might pass the funding mechanism is tacked on. Typically this becomes a local government problem which means higher property taxes. All to solve a problem that does not exist.
     
    #11 InTheLight, Aug 16, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 16, 2012
  12. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,186
    Likes Received:
    611
    Source for this allegation?
     
  13. targus

    targus
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2008
    Messages:
    8,459
    Likes Received:
    0
    This seems false on it's face.

    What is your source for this belief?

    Also every fraudulent vote negates a valid vote -meaning that someone's vote is denied as a practical result.
     
  14. Zaac

    Zaac
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 12, 2012
    Messages:
    13,757
    Likes Received:
    220
    Where in the Constitution are you guaranteed the right to vote? We don't have a Constitutionally protected right to vote.
     
  15. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,186
    Likes Received:
    611
    So you've never read the 15th amendment?

    Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.
     
  16. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,186
    Likes Received:
    611
    I've been looking into this issue for a long time. I don't have sources at the ready to post.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/12/washington/12fraud.html?pagewanted=all

    http://www.kansas.com/2011/03/02/1742704/waiting-for-evidence.html

    Besides, the burden of proof is not on the person that claims something does not exist. The burden is on those that say it does exist.

    Where is the proof that fraudulent votes have been cast?
     
    #16 InTheLight, Aug 16, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 16, 2012
  17. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    Good rationale all. That does help me to see the other side.

    But the key issue, IMNSHO, it that my franchise is cheapened when it can so easily falsified. Also, it may be rare, but there are documented cases (I have not looked for them yet, but have heard several cited from what I consider reputable sources) where people have lost their franchise because when they got to the poll someone had voted in their place.
     
  18. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,186
    Likes Received:
    611
    I'd be extremely interested in learning more about this.
     
  19. NaasPreacher (C4K)

    NaasPreacher (C4K)
    Expand Collapse
    Administrator
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2003
    Messages:
    26,806
    Likes Received:
    78
    As I admitted above I not researched this, hence my disclaimer above.

    I do not like the concept of anyone who wants to being able to look over a voter registration list, going to the polls as soon as the open, and saying 'I am so and so.' If that happens even once it is once to much. If people can't be bothered to go get a photo ID that is their choice, and they willingly give up their franchise.

    Yes, US citizens have the right to vote, but I have no problem requiring the to prove they are who they say they are.

    I do, I must say, appreciate your perspective - at least it gives me pause to consider what I had previously seen as black and white. You have presented your viewpoint in a clear and succinct manner.
     
    #19 NaasPreacher (C4K), Aug 16, 2012
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 16, 2012
  20. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,186
    Likes Received:
    611
    In my state, Minnesota, you are asked by the election judges at the polling place, "what is your name?", "what is your address?" then you are required to sign your name on the voting record rolls next to your name and address.

    You are correct that someone impersonating a voter is a possibility. I believe this would be a felony crime. Your solution is to disenfranchise hundreds (thousands?) of people from voting in order to stop something from potentially happening against which we already have laws.
     

Share This Page

Loading...