Common argument on voter ID law: it's not a big problem

I've heard this argument made many times about voter fraud, they say it's not a big problem, and to be fair we only average about a dozen convictions of voter fraud a year. Granted, common sense would tell us that the number of convictions is not the total number, kind of like the number of people convicted of selling marijuana last year isn't the same as the number of times that marijuana was sold.

But before even touching on that problem with the logic, do people actually think that there needs to be a major problem before we enact common sense reforms? I use electronic cigarettes, and the liquids are actually very harmful to small children if ingested - but there haven't been many incidents, so maybe we should just wait until 100kids/year die from it, and leave it be if we don't reach that threshold?

You opponents of voter ID laws don't ACTUALLY believe this en masse, do you? That we shouldn't do a damn thing about a damn thing until it's a rampant or major problem?

 

The argument is about proportionality.

If in order to fix the problem of voting fraud you disenfranchise several orders of magnitude more voters then that doesn't make any sense.

Perhaps before attempting to fix the "problem" of voters voting illegally, it might be advisable to first ascertain the actual scope and scale of the problem. I for one believe it would be far more effective and efficient to first fix things like the voter registration system. there doesn't seem to be a very good process of keeping the information current, which sparks all kinds of claims of apparent fraud when simple neglect of data is the main source.

And by the way your analogy of pot sales vs arrests is not applicable. The last time I looked there isn't any databases of registered pot buyers and sellers, nor anything more than wild arse guesses as to how many transactions take place. the only known number is the number of arrests.

However, there is a voting system in place, with as aforementioned, a database of registered voters right down to a process of voter identification at the polling booth. Auditing those systems and processes to ascertain the level of voting fraud (i.e. a voter voting more than once) would provide a much more accurate assessement of the problem.

And then an informed solution can be enacted. Right now its based on anecdotal evidence with all its associated generalizations that are being offered up as bogus rationale for republican states to push for a rather far reaching "solution: to a problem that if properly quantified in all probability doesn't remotely justify it.

 

Only voters that are 'disenfranchised' are those who allow themselves to be.

 

Not so. In fact the moment that voter ID laws are enacted they become disenfranchised. they have no say in the matter and must then attempt to obtain the necessary acceptable identification before being "re- enfranchised"(?). For many its doesn't seem like abig deal, but for hundreds of thousands if not millions of poor people or the elderly it can be difficult to impossible. Especially if the state won't provide ID services for free (which would be reasonable, since they are the ones demanding it).

 

Ya - sure we buy that, Jonsa. Please provide us this list of disenfranchised non-ID voters, please.

 

We don't need voter ID laws nor do we need restrictions on e-smokes. I'm not sure why someone who labels themselves as libertarian would be arguing for these things and I'm sure humanity has survived to this point without these laws. I don't understand why people feel the need to regulate everything.

 

Yes it's so......you're treating people as if they are stupid,they know how to get ID...If they haven't by now.likely it's been by choice,because there's very little these days you can do without ID

 

Look, if the whole Voter ID thing is too hard, lets just do in America what America setup in Iraq!

Only voting on the day of the election in a public square. When you vote, you dip your finger in semi-perm purple ink.

View attachment 26694



P.S. If you happen to be missing all fingers, all toes, both ears, and your nose, we'll go ahead and let you cheat!
Errr... Well, Unless you're male!

 

where was this concern for proportional response when the aca was being considered? where tweaks to the existing system and its regulations would have been far less destructive and more effective, we've instead been given a massive reorganization of the entire industry complete with a new tax on the people themselves. we've seen the loss of control over a major segment of the american public sector and received little more than an expansion of the welfare state. where is the proportional response as we consider immigration reform? where we need a truly massive revamping of the agencies that control immigration, all we get is the usual tripe about poor folks just trying to make their lives better and another plan for universal amnesty.

now you have the audacity to call for proportional response on a topic that effects not only the present state of our nation, but its future. these mythical masses that would be disenfranchised simply do not exist. unless minorities and the poor really are as stupid and lazy as y'all seem to think they are, access to proper id is well within the reach of nearly every american. those few who really are unable to get id live on the fringes of our society, unable to access most of what our society has to offer, and their plight should be addressed regardless of their voting status.

no, this never has been about the "disenfranchised masses" or stifling the vote of minorities and the poor. it is about the liberal establishment's fear of losing control over access to the fraud that allows them to keep control over an ignorant populace. as their populist, quasi-socialist philosophy proves itself to be the utter failure that history has shown it to be, only fraud will keep these political animals in office. as even the most ignorant voter recognizes that the property stolen from the mythical 1% has never done anything more than enrich the leaders they have been foolish enough to install in seats of power, something must replace their votes and keep the political dynasties in power.

 

We put armed guards around Fort Knox, because there is a great incentive to get into Fort Knox and take what's there, so it needs to be protected.
We don't put armed guards around a manure pile, because nobody is trying to steal manure, not enough to make worth putting armed guards around it anyways.

The incentive to commit voter impersonation fraud is currently far outweighed by the penalties and the current safeguards are sufficient. That's why there is no voter impersonation fraud to speak of, even those 100 odd convictions over an 8 year period weren't voter impersonation fraud.

It's not a problem now, and it won't be a problem in the future, for the same reason that we don't worry about people stealing dog poop from our yard, the incentive is so small compared to the disincentive, that it just doesn't happen.....not enough to worry about it anyways.

Do you really think that voter impersonation fraud is going to be a problem?
Or do you believe what the leadership of the GOP believes, that such laws will reduce minority voting?

 

What proof do you have that minorities will be adversely effected by a photo ID? A couple of cherry picked street interviews or maybe an "expert" on a news program claiming minorities can't get photo ID(but can buy alcohol and collect welfare and food stamps)? Why are Democrat minorities less capable then Republican minorities or !!Gasp!!...poor white people? I really don't understand what makes one group more or less capable than another, unless you're implying one group is less intelligent than another? Are you saying one group isn't as capable of doing something that is essentially EXTREMELY easy for another?

Also, hard to prove massive voter fraud when there isn't a system in place to prove anyone voting is who they say they are.

 

I guess you aren't quite up on what republicans are actually attempting to do. Nor what some of them more foolishily admit to in public.

I can't decide whether you are simply ignoring the obvious or you just aren't up on actual events or you are kneejerking a reaction and demanding evidence for something that has been widely reported for the past couple of years. Or maybe its just a partisan attempt at obfuscation.

Anyway, here's but a few of the dozens of reports and articles pertaining to this issue.

http://www.nationalmemo.com/study-voter-suppression-laws-aim-to-disenfranchise-black-people/

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/03/how-voter-id-laws-are-being-used-to-disenfranchise-minorities-and-the-poor/254572/

https://www.aclu.org/fighting-voter-suppression"]https://www.aclu.org/fighting-voter-suppression"]https://www.aclu.org/fighting-voter-suppression

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/08/28/republicans-admit-voter-id-laws-are-aimed-at-democratic-voters.html#url=/articles/2013/08/28/republicans-admit-voter-id-laws-are-aimed-at-democratic-voters.html

https://www.americanprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/issues/2012/04/pdf/voter_supression.pdf

 

Voter Id will reduce minority voting, that's what GOP leadership believes, it's what their consultants tell them, it's why they push for these laws.

There is a system in place that checks for voter fraud, and it doesn't find very much at all, because there isn't any.

And the question isn't about the magnitude of the effects of voter ID laws, it's about the purpose.
Why do something about a problem that doesn't exist, and is not likely to ever exist?

Shouldn't there be a problem before there is a search for a solution?
Voter impersonation is not a problem now, and will never be a problem.

Unless like the GOP leadership, the problem you are addressing is the "negro voter problem".......

 

Well many of them are stupid, in case you havent noticed. They are also poor. Many are rural. Many are old. If one doesn't have an acceptable form of ID and doesn't drive or carry a concealed weapon it can take quite some time to get it.

One can live quite easily without ID or a credit card or a bank account.

 

so does the government disenfranchises people to accept government assistance because you are required to show an ID to receive that assistants and requires an ID to cash the check they send you?
there isn't not one logical argument against voter ID. there isn't an argument that can be given that the same argument cant be applied to other situations in society that blows your argument completely out of the water
your just making your self a parroting fool arguing against voter ID
over 70% of the population agrees with voter ID that makes you an extremist on the wrong side of the argument

 

how in the hell they cash their government checks and don't say they don't get a check because that means they are working and an ID is required to get a Job

 

In a closely divided electorate like we have in the US today, voter fraud need not be a big problem before it becomes decisive. Viz: The corrupt election of Al Franken in 2008.

 

Exactly what " system" is it to which you refer? How does this "system" work? Do you suppose we could apply this "system" to purchasing alcohol or cashing a check?

 

Wow, you are seriously attempting to equate the ACA with voter ID legislation. do you always engage in such disengenous analogy and logical fallacy?

I suggest you actually do some research about the effects of these laws before accusing anyone of audacity.

Again, you simply regurgitate unsubstantiated accusations of massive voter fraud despite the fact that not a single instance of large scale fraud being found.

Its a "solution" to an entirely different problem than the one it professes to actually address.

I do admire your ability to throw in the kitchen sink in response to a very specific issue. Nothing like accusations, bumpersticker memes, and outright falsehoods to cloud the specific issue at hand. Bravo.

 

By going to those cheque cashing services that exist to rip off the poor.

And ID isn't required to get a lot of itinerent jobs or those that pay cash.

You don't know much about the environment in which the impoverished operate and the challenges they face, do you?

 

used those check cashing places they require an ID

working with out an ID is working under the table and that is illegal to work legally you are required to fill out a W4 forum and that requires an ID

 

Really?...are you sure of that?,saying it's because they are 'poor',or old or live in the sticks is just another way of saying they're stupid,and can't be trusted with their own affairs....for years there have been voter registration drives,how would doing the same for ID be any different?

And how many government services can you obtain without ID?
How many paychecks can you cash?

 

Voters must register with their name and address.
When you enter the voting area, you have to state your address, and your name, it's compared to the rolls, and if there were a dozen people registered to the address of a one bedroom apartment, it gets investigated.

In this state, the names and addresses are compared to the annual census.
This is enough to deter voter impersonation.
That's why there isn't any, if there was, you would be finding names of people who did not live at the address on their registration, or if they were impersonating real voters, people would be showing up at the polls, and being told they already voted, which does happen, and when it does the police make a thorough investigation and what they find in nearly every single case is the incident is the result of a clerical error.

How do you imagine that this massive voter fraud is taking place?




Obviously the incentive to purchase alcohol while under aged or to cash a bogus check is far greater than netting out one extra vote for your candidate.
So those aren't really good examples. How about we compare it with what you'd be willing to spend to prevent people from picking up dog poop off your lawn.
That's something that happens about as often as voter impersonation.

 

Most minorities do not receive government services, and people cash paychecks without ID all the time.

 

what a bunch of balony. It will not be hard, or impossible. You need an ID for virtually everything else form using a credit card, opening a bank account, renting an apartment, owning a house, driving a car, buying a car, buying cigarettes, getting a welfare check, getting SS