The Face of Voter Fraud

[JMHX]

For a while now, Republicans have been using "voter fraud" as a means to pass onerous voter identification and voter suppression laws. One of these recently passed in Virginia, for fear of "illegals" and "urban centers" allowing cascades of (Democratic) votes into the state.

But what's the actual face of voter fraud in Virginia? Young, white, and Republican.

Link Here

[Feoric]

There really isn't such a thing as voter fraud to begin with. The actual number of legit voter fraud prevented is going to be somewhere between none and very little, while the number of people that will be disenfranchised will be far greater (hmmmm...I wonder who this affects more?). I do however think we should try to implement a system where 100% of everyone has a government issued photo ID of some kind like in many other countries. But these vote ID laws are essentially a poll tax under a different name.

[JeffShort]

Whoever thinks voter fraud is not a problem in the modern age should take a look at the briefs for Bush v. Gore or all the dead people that vote every year in our elections. Just because the Federal government hasn't prosecuted every case doesn't make it not a problem, neither does the fact that this recent focus on vote fraud is politically motivated. The sanctity of the vote is one of the hallmarks of democracy. You would think that in America (the foundation of modern democracy) we would be more concerned with every vote being counted.

I can't tell you how many times I have heard nonvoters tell me that they don't vote, because they don't believe their votes are counted. They mean that literally: because of the electoral college, because of voting equipment with limited public oversight, because of intimidation, because of technical issues like "hanging chads". Dealing with these issues in a responsible, public way would do far more to get people voting then not requiring a driver's license. Democrats and Republicans have worked to manipulate voter turnout and numbers for decades. Until that changes this is an issue worth keeping vigilant on.

[TheMason]

There is voter fraud on both sides. So if anyone looks hard enough they'll find Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, etc abusing the system.

I personally think that both sides of the argument overstate their arguments. I think voter ID laws will have a positive impact on reducing it. However, I'm not sure that it is all that much of a problem. Likewise, I highly doubt that requiring an ID would disenfranchise minority voters all that much.

It's just something that's over-sensationalized by both sides.

[JMHX]

At 10/19/12 12:02 PM, TheMason wrote:
I personally think that both sides of the argument overstate their arguments. I think voter ID laws will have a positive impact on reducing it. However, I'm not sure that it is all that much of a problem. Likewise, I highly doubt that requiring an ID would disenfranchise minority voters all that much.

If you've ever worked in political outreach in an urban center, there's a huge impediment to getting photo IDs, especially among the poorest or the elderly in those areas. It disproportionately impacts voters who by tradition lean Democratic, hence why the main proponents of strong voter ID implementation laws have so far all been Republicans.

[Memorize]

At 10/19/12 12:11 PM, JMHX wrote:

If you've ever worked in political outreach in an urban center, there's a huge impediment to getting photo IDs, especially among the poorest or the elderly in those areas. It disproportionately impacts voters who by tradition lean Democratic, hence why the main proponents of strong voter ID implementation laws have so far all been Republicans.

If people are too stupid to hop over to a DMV to receive a free Photo ID on just 1 occasion over a 4 year period, they deserve to be "disproportionately impacted."

It's a lot like how I would never prevent someone from voting, but I'm not going to encourage some idiot who doesn't even know who the vice president is, to vote.

This has more to do with laziness into getting an ID over anything else. Last I checked, I don't see people crying discrimination over needing an ID to board a flight; nor did I see democrats demanding to show ID when attending their convention.

[JMHX]

At 10/19/12 03:44 PM, Memorize wrote:

At 10/19/12 12:11 PM, JMHX wrote:

If you've ever worked in political outreach in an urban center, there's a huge impediment to getting photo IDs, especially among the poorest or the elderly in those areas. It disproportionately impacts voters who by tradition lean Democratic, hence why the main proponents of strong voter ID implementation laws have so far all been Republicans.

If people are too stupid to hop over to a DMV to receive a free Photo ID on just 1 occasion over a 4 year period, they deserve to be "disproportionately impacted."

Having worked in this area, here's the list for Virginia:

- Two proofs of identity
- One proof of Virginia residency
- One proof of legal presence in U.S.
- One proof of your social security number

Now here's the thing we run into most often with the poor in urban areas: most of them are missing one or more of these things, and quickly find themselves in a Catch-22 situation of needing one piece of missing ID to get another form of ID. This is particularly hard with birth certificates, which have recently been restricted by the Virginia Republicans. Birth certificates must be state-issues originals. Birth documents issued by a hospital, notifications of birth registration, and other birth notifications (including application for a Social Security card including facsimile attached birth registration) are no longer allowed.

You'd be surprised how much time it takes someone with limited mobility and documentation to get the required information from the state just to begin the process of receiving a state-issued birth certificate. And since, unsurprisingly, most of these individuals lack passports and drivers' licenses (which also require original state-issued birth certificates in Virginia), you end up working with local community advocates and pro bono legal teams to build up a petition to the state.

I'm happy to go more into depth on some of the other areas where we face a lot of problems getting people registered, to say nothing of getting registered and then having your registration form thrown in the trash by a voter registration official, which is probably the lowest form of voter suppression I've seen in seven years working with Virginia politics.

[Warforger]

At 10/19/12 03:44 PM, Memorize wrote: This has more to do with laziness into getting an ID over anything else. Last I checked, I don't see people crying discrimination over needing an ID to board a flight; nor did I see democrats demanding to show ID when attending their convention.

The problem is that it makes voting more complicated, when that happens people are less likely to vote. When you make voting easier it increases voter turnout. The main problem with these voter id laws is that they don't effect voter fraud. Like at all. Most of the voter fraud is voting for people who are already registered and using absentee ballots. What it is, is dead people voting, it's going to nursing homes and voting for Alzheimer's patients etc. Voter ID laws do not address this, in fact their only purpose is to keep people from voting. Where they usually are is in Swing states with Republican state legislatures. KIND OF A COINCIDENCE RIGHT?

[TheMason]

At 10/19/12 04:11 PM, JMHX wrote: Having worked in this area, here's the list for Virginia:

- Two proofs of identity
- One proof of Virginia residency
- One proof of legal presence in U.S.
- One proof of your social security number

I think that you should have to produce one form of government issued ID in order to vote when you register, register to vote absentee, and when you vote in person. I do not think producing a photo-ID in order to do any of those three things is complicated nor does it unreasonably suppress voting.

Now, I do think you make a valid point that obtaining this ID may be difficult. People may have mobility issues, or be impoverished. However, there are people like you who are out there helping them (and I respect you for it). They also have family to help. If they really wanted to vote...and were really involved in the political process don't you think they are capable of figuring this out on their own?

How much of it is respondant bias? People saying they really want to vote...because there is someone talking to them about it? How many of these individuals are really earnest in wanting their voice heard...or just shamed into saying they want to vote to cover up their apathy so you don't think less of them? (NOTE: I'm shooting in the dark a little here since I am unfamiliar with the operation you are involved in...do you go to them or they come to you?)

In the end I think there are two legitimate concerns coming into conflict here: the need to preserve the integrity of our voting system and the need to allow everyone who wants to vote vote.

I think you have some valid criticisms of the Virginia system...but I don't think Voter ID laws need to be scrapped. Maybe simplified.

[TheMason]

At 10/19/12 08:34 PM, Warforger wrote: The problem is that it makes voting more complicated, when that happens people are less likely to vote. ... Most of the voter fraud is voting for people who are already registered and using absentee ballots.

Two things:

1) I don't think that requiring a single photo-ID issued by a state that includes an address (that matches the registration roll) makes things unreasonably complicated. While JMHX makes some valid points about the Va system above, I still think that the system can be simplified. Furthermore, if a person is deterred from voting because getting an ID (which is required for so much of adult life today) is too tough...how informed will their vote be? How much are letting our government be turned over to emotional mob rule? Again like I believe Camarohusky said in another topic...read your Federalist Papers.

2) I think Voter ID laws open the door to reforming absentee voting. In order to vote absentee I think you should have to go to the county clerk's office and register in person. The only exception should be military stationed overseas and out of state. As for nursing homes, volunteers from both major political parties could oversea mobile voting registration and absentee polling stations that go to hospitals and nursing homes to allow people to vote from their beds.

Where they usually are is in Swing states with Republican state legislatures. KIND OF A COINCIDENCE RIGHT?

I wish I could find the original articles, but I believe Voter ID laws started with black, Democratic state legislators who worried about Hispanics voting illegally. In fact the first I heard of it was from a female Democrat who introduced legislation because she witness a 'hot' Latino guy vote then watched him change clothes in his car and brush his hair...and go vote again.

But this was back in the 1990s and early 2000s.

This is why I try to stay away from pointing the fingers at the other side...because it's like Bill Clinton said: when you point your finger at someone, three are pointing back at you.

[Camarohusky]

At 10/20/12 10:53 AM, TheMason wrote: This is why I try to stay away from pointing the fingers at the other side...because it's like Bill Clinton said: when you point your finger at someone, three are pointing back at you.

This is why I prefer the international friendly pointing of the hand. That way all fingers are facing the target.

[Insanctuary]

At 10/19/12 04:19 AM, JeffShort wrote: Whoever thinks voter fraud is not a problem in the modern age should take a look at the briefs ...

Why do you have my picture? This is supposed to be MY thing!

On topic, this entire system is controlled by immature brats. Fuck the system - if people stopped voting, the idiots running would have absolutely no power.

[Warforger]

At 10/20/12 10:53 AM, TheMason wrote: Two things:

1) I don't think that requiring a single photo-ID issued by a state that includes an address (that matches the registration roll) makes things unreasonably complicated. While JMHX makes some valid points about the Va system above, I still think that the system can be simplified. Furthermore, if a person is deterred from voting because getting an ID (which is required for so much of adult life today) is too tough...how informed will their vote be? How much are letting our government be turned over to emotional mob rule? Again like I believe Camarohusky said in another topic...read your Federalist Papers.

The problem is not the idea itself but the way they're implemented. I think in Texas you can't get a voter ID if you say provide proof of residence but you can if you have a hunting license. So in these states they're making it so that you have to have a driver's license in order to vote, it just so happens that minorities which vote Democratic tend to live in Inner cities and tend not to have a driver's license. This kind of selective process is exactly whats wrong with the voter ID laws and again they're not tackling the issue of voter fraud they're just being passed to make the process more complicated.

2) I think Voter ID laws open the door to reforming absentee voting. In order to vote absentee I think you should have to go to the county clerk's office and register in person.

Um doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of absentee ballots?

The only exception should be military stationed overseas and out of state. As for nursing homes, volunteers from both major political parties could oversea mobile voting registration and absentee polling stations that go to hospitals and nursing homes to allow people to vote from their beds.

The problem is that these people are probably not able to comprehend the issues or have much ability to care, many of them are still registered so some party officials go to them and vote for them.

I wish I could find the original articles, but I believe Voter ID laws started with black, Democratic state legislators who worried about Hispanics voting illegally. In fact the first I heard of it was from a female Democrat who introduced legislation because she witness a 'hot' Latino guy vote then watched him change clothes in his car and brush his hair...and go vote again.

The issue was current Voter ID laws, which are being passed to suppress voting. Like I said there's nothing inherently wrong with Voter ID laws, it's just the way they're being implemented is.

[Camarohusky]

At 10/20/12 12:59 PM, Warforger wrote: The problem is not the idea itself but the way they're implemented. I think in Texas you can't get a voter ID if you say provide proof of residence but you can if you have a hunting license. So in these states they're making it so that you have to have a driver's license in order to vote, it just so happens that minorities which vote Democratic tend to live in Inner cities and tend not to have a driver's license. This kind of selective process is exactly whats wrong with the voter ID laws and again they're not tackling the issue of voter fraud they're just being passed to make the process more complicated.

There's a big difference between valid voter ID laws, and voter ID laws like Texas' which are completely intended to disenfranchise. A proper voter ID law would have a the same info required to get the registration be required to get the ID. Better yet, issue the ID with the registration. Have the registration expires every 2 years to force a check in by the voter (with certain exceptions for various reasons where a person will be unavailable).

Any piecemeal "this ID works, this does not" is bad and raises a very strong presumption of intent to scare off voters.

Um doesn't that kind of defeat the purpose of absentee ballots?

Not necessarily. If you require the personal presence at time of registration, not voting, it does not invalidate the point of an absentee ballot: somone being absent at the time of voting. Frankly, if someone is unable to register in early enough a time before the election due to a very extended absence, perhaps they shouldnt be registered there (again, with exceptions).

The issue was current Voter ID laws, which are being passed to suppress voting. Like I said there's nothing inherently wrong with Voter ID laws, it's just the way they're being implemented is.

Exactly. The laws that are not uniform and strangely seem to favor the activities of one party of the other (hunting) are the problem.