New Voter ID Laws And The 2012 Elections
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-06-11/new-voter-id-laws-and-2012-elections
Last week county election officials in Florida said they would stop looking for possible ineligible voters because the data base they were using was outdated and inaccurate. The U.S. Department of Justice also had ordered the state to stop the purge on the grounds that it was taking place within 90 days of an election. State leaders in Florida have vowed to find another way to remove ineligible voters from their rolls. The skirmish in the state of Florida is just one of many elsewhere around the country: Last year new voter ID measures were introduced in thirty-four states and they passed in four. Four other states tightened existing ID rules. Please join us to talk about ongoing partisan battles over voter rights.
Guests
Wendy Weiser
director, Democracy Program, Brennan Center for Justice
Hans Von Spakovsky
senior legal fellow, Heritage Foundation and manager of Civil Justice Reform Initiative
Doug Chapin
director, Electionline.org at the University of Minnesota
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
Unless your goal is to allow voter fraud or foment race or class division this is a non issue. The most sickening thing about all of this is how the Holder Justice Department has become nothing more than a political strong arm stiring up racial discontent over voter I.D. laws for the Obama administrations campaign reelection efforts.
Asking for a photo I.D. to insure the integrity of our elections is not too much to ask. Everyone needs a photo I.D. for the most basic needs of modern life, something as important as our elections is at least as important as buying beer and cigarettes or cashing a check or going into federal government facility.
73% Think Photo ID Requirement Before Voting Does Not Discriminate
Monday, April 16, 2012 "new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 64% of Likely U.S. Voters rate voter fraud at least a somewhat serious problem in the United States today, and just 24% disagree. This includes 35% who consider it a Very Serious problem and seven percent (7%) who view it as Not At All Serious. Twelve percent (12%) are undecided'
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_politics...
Someone walks into a polling place in D.C. says he's Eric Holder he is not, no I.D. needed, here's your ballot sir, proof of identity not needed. Must see video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5p70YbRiPw
Thurgood Marshall once said, 'you are not a citizen,until you are allowed to vote'.
We think all people have access to dmv offices. We have rural counties with only 1 office,open part time. Those counties do not have buses or cabs.
We don`t realize a State I.D. costs $8.50 here,along with a $5 bus fare cost,making the outlay $13.50. A staggering sum to many in these horrific financial times.This in a country where some cannot stop whining about the plight of billionaires.
Many States require finger printing,drug and alcohol testing,dna samples,and photo i.d.`s,just to receive government assistance.Now they say they don`t know who the people are?
I would expect strong debate,especially given our differences in what are people? Corporations are People.And humans aren`t allowed to vote.
While opinion polls are cool, what is the real question? Is there election fraud when voters are now prohibited from voting at the Board of Elections offices,the weekend prior to elections? Do people realize voter fraud,registration fraud,and election fraud are different? It`s not who votes that counts,it`s who counts the votes.The sad truth is ,too few people vote in the United States,NOT TOO MANY.
Patsy Nomore wrote:" Many States require finger printing,drug and alcohol testing,dna samples,and photo i.d.`s,just to receive government assistance.Now they say they don`t know who the people are?"
What? if they have the REQUIRED photo I.D. for government assistance, then they already have the I.D. to vote.
What state requires dna samples?
What state requires tests for alcohol?
Most if not all states that seek voter I.D. laws offer free state issued I.D.'s.
Hard to believe we live in a time of such abundant conveniences that asking for an I.D. is too high a price to insure the integrity of our electoral system and to participate in our representative democracy.
"Paul Carroll, a 86-year-old World War II veteran, was denied his right to vote in Ohio's primary contest today after a poll worker refused to accept Carroll's photo ID from the Department of Veterans Affairs.
The poll worker rejected the ID because it did not contain a home address, as required by an Ohio law that was passed by Republicans to combat alleged voter fraud."
_______________________________________________
Legitimate government issued ID`s are routinely rejected because they fail to identify addresses.
Florida and Georgia,(maybe more) already require welfare and food stamp recipients be tested for drugs and alcohol.And some States require drug and alcohol testing to get Unemployment Benefits.Already a failure,and adding millions onto taxpayers backs.Ohio has mandatory dna testing on all felons,who are legal voters in Ohio.
____________________________________________
Don`t forget all the women in this country thrown off the voting rolls, simply because their birth certificate doesn`t match the married name.Adding obstacles like producing divorce papers,and even birth certificates can be a challenge in our modern transient society. And GOD forbid someone has to get documents from INS(ICE),the delay and costs are staggering.
Here's what Fox News reported regarding voter fraud. "After a five-year hunt for voter fraud, the Bush administration's Justice Department came up with little widespread fraud, finding mostly cases of people mistakenly filling out voter registration forms or voting when they didn't know they were ineligible, The New York Times reported in 2007. But none of the cases involved a person voting as someone else."
The bottom line? The very few cases of fraud the Bush administration came up with would not have been prevented by requiring a photo id. The people involved were who they said they were.
I find it curious that those who abhor government regulations that make it harder for "job creators" are all for government regulations that make it harder for voters. Job creation is not a constitutional right, but voting is. We don't need obstacles to voting that solve nonexistent problems.
Arkus Duntov wrote: "Everyone needs a photo I.D. for the most basic needs of modern life, something as important as our elections is at least as important as buying beer and cigarettes or cashing a check or going into federal government facility. "
What totalitarian police state do you live in? And, since when are beer or cigarettes "basic needs"? Mitt Romney would probably take issue with that assertion.
I never had to produce a photo i.d. to pay my rent or buy my condo. I just had to show them the money.
I don't have to show an i.d. for direct deposit and don't have to show it to the camera at the bank ATM. Nor does the cashier or self check out ask me for i.d. if I pay with cash, credit or debit.
If I pull out my driver's license once a year it's because I did something stupid with my car while a cop was watching. It's been years since having to do that.
We agree this is a non-issue.
The difference is one of us thinks voter fraud is a rare non-issue and the other thinks systematically preventing blacks from voting is a non-issue.
Patsy Nomore, No states require tests for a alcohol it's a legal product.
Get out the vote efforts can easily assist people in getting their free state i.d.'s, hyper emotionalism and making up the facts as you go does not win any argument.
Since SOME believe that a post made even before the broadcast has great impact, here's a stat from one of the most strict conservative states. Indiana passed a very stringent voter ID law a couple of years ago under the infamous Mitch "The Blade" Daniels and a very slim Republican majority in the Legislature.
A voter must have a secure ID card with photo and special safeguards. To get the card requires an especially long list of identity verifications which are checked arbitrarily by untrained (but even more strict) clerks.......... Original Social Security card, certified birth certificate, utility bills dated within the last 60 days and addressed to the same address as the other documents, a letter or other form of communication on paper from either state or federal government dated within the last 60 days and addressed to the same address. Having a recently used US passport is helpful but not of special note.
So what does one suppose the actual history of voter fraud might be in Indiana??
A grand total of 7 (seven) instances over the entire state history..........over 150 years.
Voter ID laws are a solution desperately searching for a problem.
Rick Evans wrote: "I never had to produce a photo i.d. to pay my rent or buy my condo. I just had to show them the money."
You had to show your photo I.D. and give your S.S. number when you signed the lease. To legally accept title on property you have to show I.D.
Rick Evans wrote:"I don't have to show an i.d. for direct deposit and don't have to show it to the camera at the bank ATM. Nor does the cashier or self check out ask me for i.d. if I pay with cash, credit or debit."
You had to show I.D. when you opened your bank account to accept direct deposit and to allow ATM activity.
Try again!
LibVet wrote: "To get the card requires an especially long list of identity verifications which are checked arbitrarily by untrained (but even more strict) clerks.......... Original "
You do not need everything on that list and you know it. That is a list of what is acceptable to obtain an I.D.
Successful voter fraud by it's very nature would go undetected would it not? The bar for identification is so low so of course most of it would go undetected.
Would the panel please present some data regarding recent and past cases of proven voter fraud in the United States? Are there any types of voter fraud that may still exist even with stricter voter ID rules?
LibVet wrote:
"Voter ID laws are a solution desperately searching for a problem."
Ask Norm Coleman how he feels about that.
I hear a lot of complaints from the left about how a simple ID available for free discriminates against the poor, but I never hear a single suggestion of a solution to allay fears of voter fraud. Perhaps that is because the poor overwhelmingly vote Democratic and there is very little interest on the left in preventing fraud when it is needed.
LibVet, "Since SOME believe that a post made even before the broadcast has great impact", I agree 100%. Longtime fan of the DR show here, and for fans who are interested in expanding their knowledge base and willing to listen to intelligent discussion this is the place to do so. Which is why we are fans. But, over the last few months we are seeing an extreme amount of the right wing trolls, who are enamored of their loyalty and rather than try to coerce others to their way of thinking by making their points in a respectful manner many use the usual vituperative attacks. In their way of thinking may be effective but the method is off putting and makes little impact. It's like listening to those awful political ads that pronounce doomsday if the opponent wins.
LibVet, "Since SOME believe that a post made even before the broadcast has great impact", I agree 100%. Longtime fan of the DR show here, and for fans who are interested in expanding their knowledge base and willing to listen to intelligent discussion this is the place to do so. Which is why we are fans. But, over the last few months we are seeing an extreme amount of the right wing trolls, who are enamored of their loyalty and rather than try to coerce others to their way of thinking by making their points in a respectful manner many use the usual vituperative attacks. In their way of thinking may be effective but the method is off putting and makes little impact. It's like listening to those awful political ads that pronounce doomsday if the opponent wins.
Whoops! Double post, sorry.
I don't know where people think "Rasmussen is a legitimate polling outfit", but it ain't here. Voter fraud fraud is the concern, not real voter fraud.
And if half of this hour isn't about tearing down the absolute crimes, lies, edits and fabrications of James O'Keefe and Andrew Breitbart, it's a waste of public radio's time.
Dawn Castle wrote:
Whoops! Double post, sorry.
Triple post but who's counting. Whats with you people anyway. I put plenty of facts up there and all I get in return is made up garbage and hyperbole. Face it you can't handle the truth and you offer nothing except insults.
It's just too obvious, clamoring for new voter ID laws and purging voter rolls before a major election where one candidate is an African-American. I for one am sickened by Gov. Rick Scott's blatant attempt to rig yet another Florida election and the gullibility of those who support him.
I am most curious about how the major newspapers in Florida are covering this.
"But, over the last few months we are seeing an extreme amount of the right wing trolls, who are enamored of their loyalty and rather than try to coerce others to their way of thinking by making their points in a respectful manner many use the usual vituperative attacks."
"And if half of this hour isn't about tearing down the absolute crimes, lies, edits and fabrications of James O'Keefe and Andrew Breitbart, it's a waste of public radio's time."
Read: You are entitled to my opinion. And if you don't think the way I do, shut up.
Lovely.
http://www.ourwhitehouse.org/whogetsvote.html
• In 1776 only white men who own property have the right to vote, except for Catholics, Jews, and Quakers. Women, and people of color could not vote.
Lets just cut to the chase, a form of the above is what conservatives in the US would like to see brought back. Only allow the wealthy, and preferably only the white ones to vote. They will continuously fight until they can get as close as possible to that goal, all the while denying that that is they are trying to do.
After all, isn't that what a true Constitutional Originalist would do?
ecgberht says, "I never hear a single suggestion of a solution to allay fears of voter fraud."
I suspect most people don't believe we should be passing laws based on alleged fears. We have more than enough laws already dealing with proven problems. However, if an alleged fear is sufficient to require new laws, how about those who fear voter id laws will lead to the disenfranchisement of qualified voters. Should we pass a law to allay that fear?
In and of itself, there is nothing wrong with voter ID's. But does anyone really think supporters of "reforming" the voting process has the best interests of all voters at heart? How often do we hear about actual cases of voter fraud or people (outside of 1 or 2 anecdotal instances that people blow out or proportion as being "representative" of fraud)?
The question should not be: is it too hard to vote, is asking for an Id too restrictive? The question should be: is voter fraud so widespread that states should spend 10's of millions of dollars instituting more regulations that limit access to the voting booth?
The answer is a resounding NO. There is no wide spread voter fraud. The polls reflect a propaganda campaign that has people whipped into a near frenzy over a non issue (brought to you by the same people that brought us Iraqi wmds) . Wisconsin had a "voter fraud" rate of about .0002% of votes cast in 2008. The Bush administration found virtually no fraud when it made it a major issue.
We only need look at Paul Weyrichs comment to know what this is about ""I don't want everybody to vote, as a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down."
Voter registration and petition fraud are COMPLETELY separate from "voter fraud" issues and should not be conflated. We already have laws in place to punish such activities, and fines of up to $10,000 for voting illegally.
This myth of "voter fraud" is being used to attempt to limit votes cast for democrat candidates, period. For self described "conservatives" to favor MORE government regulation, MORE government spending to limit a problem that barely exists is hypocrisy at it's highest level.
A social security card is not a photo ID and no I did not have to produce my driver's license to sign my lease or close on my mortgage.
Guess, what illegal immigrants buy houses. If they are using fake photo IDs to buy houses, as you assert, how would a photo ID prevent voter fraud?
"You had to show I.D. when you opened your bank account to accept direct deposit and to allow ATM activity. "
WRONG. There's no need to show a photo ID to open an online brokerage or bank account. SS# yes, photo ID, NO.
And, again. How does a photo ID prove citizenship, other in the totalitarian police state you seem so in love with.
This is nothing more than an attempt to chill voting by voters Florida assumes will vote against Republicans. Why in god's name would an undocumented alien or anyone else fraudulently register to vote? It provides no concrete benefit (as opposed to, eg, Medicaid fraud or some other fraud). Voting is not a benefit someone would commit fraud for.
There's no doubt voter rolls across the country have a lot of mistakes, given how poorly kept they have been over time, but cleaning them should not be motivated by driving away poorer voters.
"Lets just cut to the chase, a form of the above is what conservatives in the US would like to see brought back. Only allow wealthy white people to vote. They will continuously fight until they can get as close as possible to that goal, all the while denying that that is they are trying to do."
Cut to the chase? Yeah, lets, NC_TOm.
One shred of evidence that that is the objective.
I will say though, that there was logic to the original plan that only property owners could vote. Property owners have a vested interest in well-run efficient government and a successful society that maintains property values, etc. We have something less than that today. What is the vested interest of someone who has no home and no job and whom the government supports? Answer: only himself.
Would I recommend a return to 1776? Not at this point, but I see the logic in it. Study history, NC_TOm. It will improve your ability to think and reason.
What is "caging" and how is it different from these new laws?
@ecgbehrt
How many times does the felon James O'Keefe have to be caught lying and fabricating before public radio treats his crap as stuff to be scraped off the botto m of its shoe?
The answer, in a universe of "public radio polite", always seems to bed "one more time at least". There's always "two sides" on public radio, no matter how much propaganda the right's side is filled with. They are piss-pants scared of being called a liberal, and at the same time think that the people who want to kill them will be placated by letting some Heritage hack spout his crap.
Read: This isn't Fox Nation. Don't pretend the crap that flies in those pep rallies passes even on a message board for even Nice Polite Republican radio. THis isn't Meet the Press. Don't pretend that the mainstream media's "both sides do it" false equivalence means anything to truth.
Jim978 wrote:
"I suspect most people don't believe we should be passing laws based on alleged fears. We have more than enough laws already dealing with proven problems. However, if an alleged fear is sufficient to require new laws, how about those who fear voter id laws will lead to the disenfranchisement of qualified voters. Should we pass a law to allay that fear?"
Thanks for the non answer. How are qualified voters disenfranchised? If you have a government provided and paid for ID, you can vote. That's not difficult. Fraud does occur. It's not rampant, I agree. But in close elections it matters.
Does anyone else find it interesting that "conservatives" are more concerned with allowing the wrong person to vote than with putting the wrong person to death?