Featured But I thought voter fraud was a myth fabricated by racist conservatives

1. The US Constitution requires neither voter ID nor flush toilets but does not prohibit common sense.

2. There is massive voter fraud, some of it among the rich with many homes. In the black neighborhoods of Indianapolis, the Democrats admitted voting Grannies in several different precincts under variations of the same name.

3. The elderly actually have no problem complying because people need ID everywhere and senior programs make sure that seniors are able to easily get ID. Seniors move a great deal in big cities.

4. People who have recently moved need to re-register. In the past, the registration had to be 30 days before the election. I once lost my vote in Chicago because I moved too late to re-register. Nowadays with motor voter, you can vote in your old precinct as long as it is in the same Congressional district. This skews local races such as township races.

5. College students don't have to vote in person. They can vote absentee.

In the Indiana case, not one person could show inconvenience to a federal judge. People actually want to have ID and people actually support one-man-one-vote and voter ID. You have to show ID to buy beer but this does not seem to have affected the consumption of beer.

 

"Massive voter fraud"?

A comprehensive investigation of voter impersonation finds 31 credible incidents out of one billion ballots cast

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...le-incidents-out-of-one-billion-ballots-cast/

I love how you talk about millions of elderly as if you know them all.

States will not allow any photo ID. It must be an approved form of ID.

Many states have election day registration, not requiring 30 days. Your motor voter example assumes you only moved within the same congressional district.

So no need for a photo ID then.

 

I realize that we are talking about state picture ID--the kind that is required to buy beer--and it is very easily obtainable. The Supreme Court has already upheld the Indiana law as constitutional so I don't know how you think that you can overturn that case. The Democrats in Indiana could not provide one single case of how a person was inconvenienced--not one!

 

So having an elderly person find their Social Security card and their Birth Certificate and proof of residency is not a bother. Then taking that elderly person (with perhaps arthritis or some other malady) out of their home and hauling them down to a Bureau of Motor Vehicle location, having them sit and wait in line, maybe with a wheelchair or walker, get their photo taken, pay their fee, and get them back home is not an inconvenience. Compared to going to the polling place like they've done all their lives and voting. That's not an inconvenience. All-righty then...

And BTW, I never stated I was in favor of overturning Photo ID laws, I've only said they are unnecessary.

 

Well, I am on borrowed time and a member of my county senior center and I have not heard anyone say that getting ID has been a problem to them. You have to have ID to buy a gun....

 

Well, they do need to gather up their documents and physically go to an Indiana BMV office. For many seniors that is not easily accomplished.

 

I don't know. This county has transportation for seniors. So do nursing homes. I think that people have had state ID for a long time. I should think that with the wealth of Minnesota that it would be very easy for seniors to comply in Minnesota. Most people have state ID nowadays.

 

May 2014: Ben Hodzic allegedly voted at the polls in the name of his brother in the Catskill School District Board of Education election in Catskill, NY.[1]
Nov. 2013: Mark Atlas allegedly voted at the polls in the name of someone else in the municipal election in Worcester, MA.[2]

Sep. 2013: At least four, and possibly 20-24, Hasidic voters in the South Williamsburg neighborhood of Brooklyn, NY, allegedly attempted to vote at the polls under others’ names in the municipal primary elections for New York City.[3]

Mar. 2013: Kristina Bentrim went to vote at the polls in the Cedar Rapids, IA, special election on a gambling referendum, and was allegedly told that someone had voted in her name.[4] It is not clear whether poll book records were investigated to determine whether the record of voting represented an impersonated signature or a clerical error.

Nov. 2012: A vote was apparently cast at the polls in the name of Angela Cooney in the general election in San Diego, CA; there is an Angela Cooney listed as dying 4 years earlier.[5] It is not clear whether the two are the same person, or whether the death reports are accurate, and poll book records do not appear to have been investigated to determine whether the record of voting represented an impersonated signature or a clerical error.There would be no question if photo ID had been checked.

Nov. 2012: A vote was apparently cast at the polls in the name of Evan Dixon in the general election in San Diego, CA; there is an Evan Dixon listed as dying 11 years earlier.[6] It is not clear whether the two are the same person, or whether the death reports are accurate, and poll book records do not appear to have been investigated to determine whether the record of voting represented an impersonated signature or a clerical error. There would be no question if photo ID had been checked.

 

Photo ID with current address should also be required for voter registration.

 

After voter ID becoming law in 2011 and then running the gauntlet in the courts, we should finally see it implemented in Wisconsin... in time for the gubernatorial election in November. :thumbs:

 

Ironic timing. Just saw on the local news that it has been appealed to the Supreme Court.

Registered voters in Wisconsin want this by a margin of 2-1. It is the leftist element that is opposed to it.

 

Then there are over 3 million people lying when they say it's a burden to get a photo ID.

By all estimates, those least likely to have a government-issued photo ID fall into one of four categories: the elderly, minorities, the poor and young adults aged 18 to 24. The Brennan Center estimates that 18 percent of all seniors and 25 percent of African-Americans don't have picture IDs.

[Voter photo ID] typically means driver's licenses. But many seniors and many poor people don't drive. In big cities, many minorities rely on public transit. And many young adults, especially those in college, don't yet have licenses.

[Getting a driver's license] can create a host of problems for some. Rural residents can live great distances from state motor vehicle offices. And some state motor vehicle agencies have chronically long wait times for customers. In Tennessee, which has a new voter ID law, the governor has raised concerns about whether offices are prepared to handle an increased volume of ID seekers.

In most states with voter ID laws, citizens must present birth certificates to obtain new photo IDs. Seniors and those born in rural areas, in particular, face a difficult time meeting the requirement because birth certificates weren't regularly generated in the 1930s and earlier. And many of these people were delivered by midwives, who often improperly spelled babies' and parents' names on birth documents.

If a state does have a person's birth certificate, they often must present a photo ID to obtain a copy. That can put an individual back at square one.

"People are caught in a Catch-22: You need a birth certificate to get this ID, but to get a birth certificate you have to have an ID," says Elisabeth MacNamara, who heads the League of Women Voters.

MacNamara also notes that a birth certificate may not be sufficient documentation for women who changed their names after marrying. States require them to present their marriage licenses or divorce decrees.

(Article then presents the story of three people that needed to get photo ID's)

http://www.npr.org/2012/01/28/146006217/why-new-photo-id-laws-mean-some-wont-vote

 

I am a low taxes, small government, strong defense, 2nd amendment rights, pro-life, school choice, anti-government regulations conservative and I don't support voter photo ID laws.

Since there is no widespread voter fraud and since photo ID can only prevent certain narrow cases of actual voter fraud (as can be seen by reading this thread) the real reason why Republicans want it is to deny the poor, minorities, the elderly, and college students from easily voting on election day. They want to prevent Democrat get-out-the-vote efforts from loading up a van or bus in the inner city and driving poor people to the polls.

 

If I am not mistaken, I believe that the Brennan Center is partially funded by George Soros.

 

So guilt by association? The numbers are inaccurate? OK, supposing instead of 18% of seniors and 25% of minorities, it's really 12% and 20%. That's still a problem for people to get ID's.

I'm sure Wisconsin had to debate these issues and have their own numbers. How many voting age Wisconsinites don't have valid photo ID's for voting. Why don't you find the numbers and post them?

 

Or... It may be that people simply want to know that only eligible citizens are voting, and casting only one vote per person.

Two out of three people want it in Wisconsin. Recent history indicates that the voting population is nearly evenly split between Republican and Democrat. It is not just a Rep. thing.

 

Here ya go.

https://www4.uwm.edu/eti/barriers/DriversLicense.pdf

 

OK, if people want it, and it's voted on and passes, that's a good enough reason for me. What I can't abide is all the other reasons given for why it is needed don't stand up to scrutiny. Also, I would not go out of my way to oppose photo ID laws if there were another attempt to have them in Minnesota. I would vote against them if given the chance again (as I did in 2012.) Had it passed in Minnesota in 2012 I would have willingly complied and not made a stink about it in the least.