Election 2012

Dead Men Don't Vote. Well, Not Usually, Anyways. And Only in Important Elections. So Maybe It's a Good Thing.

|

Glenn Instapundit Reynolds has a col in today's NYPOST that reads in part:

In the United States…only 17 states even require identification in order to vote. Holder & Co., claim that requiring photo ID would be racist, because getting a driver's license, etc., costs money. This claim has consistently been rejected by courts, and with good reason: If requiring photo ID to vote is racist, then what about requiring photo ID to exercise other constitutional rights, like buying a gun?

Of course, the real objection to requiring voter ID isn't based in civil rights, but in civil wrongs. With elections often decided by narrow margins, the ability to produce a few thousand more ballots can often swing the results. (In Minnesota's 2008 disputed US Senate election, won by Al Franken — who proceeded to cast the deciding vote in favor of ObamaCare — the margin of victory was 312, but it turned out that 1,099 votes were cast by felons who were ineligible to vote. Many of them have gone to jail, but Franken has remained in the Senate).

Voter ID makes that kind of trickery harder, which is why political manipulators oppose it.

Voters understand this. According to a Washington Post poll taken earlier this month, 74 percent of Americans support laws requiring voters to show photo identification.

Read more.

Related: How many dead voters are on the rolls (and hence open to manipulation and fraud)? Politico reports that one in eight voter registrations "is not valid or has significant inaccuracies." Plus:

There also are more than 1.8 million deceased people who still have active registration on voter rolls, Pew [Center on the States] found. And, [Pew's David] Becker said, the outdated, inefficient systems currently in place are "not designed to keep up with deaths as they occur."

Read more.

I don't think voter fraud is the issue that many right-wingers and left-wingers claim (they call out different issues, but they both seem quick to claim some sort of fakery, from community organizers or Diebold machines or whatever, is at work).

Indeed, the far bigger issue to me is the candidates who are on the ballot and not voters literally have a pulse.

But voter fraud, especially involving clinically dead people—brain dead people, not so much—does seem like a relatively easy issue to address and fix.

NEXT: Iran Denies Plans to Show Nuclear Sites to Diplomats

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Voter ID will make it harder to vote illegally.

    Voter ID will also make it harder to vote legally.

    So no, voter fraud is not a relatively easy issue to address and fix.

    1. Hey, guess what:

      http://weaselzippers.us/2012/0…..onvention/

      1. What a delightfully unresponsive reply!

        1. Your Team, requiring photo IDs to attend their convention, while at the same time bitching about requiring photo IDs to vote in elections.

          How fucking delicious is that?

          1. I guess it’s delicious if you are ignorant of how conventions work.

            You don’t have a right to attend the Democratic convention. Nobody votes there except designated Democratic electors.

            This is not true of a general election.

            1. Hey joe, would you say that you’re retarded, or just incredibly stupid? I know it isn’t much of a difference, but it’s still an interesting differentiation.

            2. We’ve established that not everyone has a right to vote, so we need to have some mechanism to weed out those who don’t from those who do.

              What do you suggest?

              1. we need to have some mechanism to weed out those who don’t from those who do.

                Stay with what we have.

                1. we require ID before a person can cash a check, buy liquor, board a plane, and do a thousand other things, but asking for ID before voting is a problem? Give me a break.

        2. Oh joe, why are you so stupid? Is it because you’re so short? That causes brain damage in men, doesn’t it?

    2. “…the margin of victory was 312, but it turned out that 1,099 votes were cast by felons who were ineligible to vote.”
      _
      requiring photo ID would have no effect since felons can get drivers licenses.

      voter fraud cannot be shown to exist.

      meanwhile, cash strapped state budgets will have to provide FREE photo IDs and birth certificates to those in poverty.

      1. “…the margin of victory was 312, but it turned out that 1,099 votes were cast by felons who were ineligible to vote.”

        “voter fraud cannot be shown to exist.”

        1. His guy won. Ergo, there was no fraud.

          1. I just can’t fathom the stupid it requires to put those two statements in the same comment.

            1. Faith allows you to do many things you never thought possible.

            2. oops – minn allows felons to vote.

              like i wrote, there is no voter fraud

              http://felonvoting.procon.org/…..urceID=286

              1. Vote restored after:
                Term of Incarceration +
                Parole +
                Probation
                ———
                Minnesota

                Do you even bother to read what you link? Or think it through? There’s plenty overlap between “felon” and “ineligible” in MN.

        2. If the person who registered to vote is the person who shows up to vote, it’s not voter fraud. It’s REGISTRATION fraud, but not voter fraud, and ID requirements do nothing to stop bad registrations.

          1. registration fraud can be prevented, too, by asking for little things, like a utility bill tied to a specific address and a photo ID to connect the person. We pretend this is rocket surgery and while I realize this work would be done by govt drones, it’s not that damn difficult.

            1. The utility bill can be a problem. I had trouble with this once upon a time. With a number of roommates, I didn’t have a utility bill that was in my name.

              I don’t wish to set up any barriers to legitimate voting. I do want to have some checks and balances, though.

              And it doesn’t even matter if fraud is “a big deal” or not. It matters that many people believe there is fraud. Voting needs to be legitimate, but it also needs to be seen as legitimate by the voting public. Not one, not the other, but both.

              Check out the numbers here: http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Vote_fraud

              Over 60% of Americans believe vote fraud and vote theft are “serious” or “common”. 86% Mississippi voters believe voter fraud is an “active problem” there.

              This perception matters.

              1. if not a utility bill, then a lease. Something that shows you live where you claim to live. The system needs to be able to verify certain information and, for the most part, it is information that can be readily provided.

      2. “requiring photo ID would have no effect since felons can get drivers licenses.”

        Do you think this might be why Holder tried to keep states from updating their lists of registered voters?

      3. Photo IDs and birth certificates are such a necessary part of life in 2012, this would seem to me to be a completely legitimate use of tax money.

        Hell, you need a photo ID to get a library card, in order to have access to tax-funded city-owned books and other resources.

        It would be entirely legitimate to provide tax-funded and very convenient services to anyone who needs an ID (almost a prerequisite for existence). Spending cuts can and should be made elsewhere, not there.

    3. There’s nothing particularly difficult about using a photo ID.

      1. Unless you don’t already have a government issued photo ID.

        1. So get one. That isn’t difficult either.

          1. On the contrary, you can’t get a photo ID while sitting on your couch with your thumb up your ass. Therefore, it is difficult to get one.

            1. Yeah, I know. They insist that the right to vote is so “precious” but it’s thoroughly unreasonable to expect anybody make even the smallest effort to exercise it. It’s like arguing with a 5 year old.

              1. Be fair, it is difficult to get an ID. You have to go to the DMV.

                1. And they have to give you one for free if it is required to vote. It is just so hard.

        2. Unless you don’t already have a government issued photo ID.

          NPR was able to find the one Democratic voter who didn’t have a photo id and interview her.

          She said she hadn’t had a chance to get it yet.

          The weight of oppression is weighty.

          Totally legitimate issue.

          1. Well shit, Will McAvoy on Sorkin’s execrable “News Hour” couldn’t even be bothered to ask that question in the S1 finale. Though, to be fair, I did revel in the fact that his hero tried to kill himself like an hysterical women by downing anti-depressants after an article he tried to plant accurately portrayed him as a fool.

    4. So Joe,

      Why does it make it harder to vote legally? Oh I know, because immigrants don’t have IDs. That sounds good except immigrants can’t vote. And the ones who have green cards still can’t vote, but a green card is a valid ID even if they could.

      But of course owning a gun is just as much of a constitutional right as voting. So is having a bank account. Yet, there is no worries about asking for an ID there now is there?

      If I didn’t know from experience you were such a dishonest hack, I would swear you were a racist who assumed that black people and minorities were generally too stupid or too lazy or too far underground to ever get a photo ID. But of course you don’t think that. You know full well obtaining a photo ID is essential to function in society and everyone has one. So you dishonestly claim there are people out there who don’t. It is just disgraceful. Do you honestly think the people on here are that stupid? If you do, you are dumber than we thought. If you don’t, you are just wasting everyone’s time trolling.

      1. joe and his tribe have no substantive answer to your question because even they know none exists. They use it as one more opportunity claim racism, disenfranchisement, and the rest of leftist dogwhistling lexicon.

        Your last paragraph highlights the malicious truth about liberals. Their every action reeks of patronization and condescension but, unfortunately, rare is the minority who calls bullshit.

      2. But of course owning a gun is just as much of a constitutional right as voting.

        Maybe we need a 7-day waiting period on voting.

        1. I’m fine with that.

        2. One vote per month could be good, too.

      3. But of course owning a gun is just as much of a constitutional right as voting. So is having a bank account. Yet, there is no worries about asking for an ID there now is there?

        Silly John. Voting grows the size of government. Therefore it should be easy.

        Having a bank account makes it possible for you to hide income. That shrinks government. So it should be hard.

        Owning a gun, well, we don’t even have to talk about that one.

      4. I think Randian hit the nail on the head downstream: if the Democrats lose the White House or suffer substantial losses in Congress, it will be due to “voter suppression” (along with racism and sexism of course). It won’t have anything to do with voters consciously choosing not to vote Democrat.

  2. The left is all for arguing to make “consent of the governed” the trump card for using force to implement their policies, but doesn’t care if that consent is legitimate if it might cost them some votes.

  3. It’s not my fault the government can’t keep track of who died and who became a felon, or how many times someone has voted in an election, especially in the age of computers, this should be simple. Why should I have to make an extra effort to exercise my basic rights because their system is inefficient at dealing with fraud? I have to register to vote when I move to a new place, isn’t that good enough?

    1. Depends on how you feel elections should be decided?

        1. Elaborate?

          it’s not your fault govt can’t do a lot of things, but the system is what it is. Showing an ID when you show at the precinct is hardly putting you out since anyone with an ID carries it all the time anyway. Most places want to see a picture when folks use credit cards in order to prevent fraud.

          Elections workers also do not keep track of who moves in and out of a given precinct. They don’t know everyone on sight and it is unreasonable to expect them to. There is no “extra effort” involved in showing an ID.

          1. Ooops, I missed this before.

            What I was thinking was that:

            If you want elections decided by the number of eligible voters who vote for the candidate of their choosing, then you should not be against voter ID.

            If you want elections decided in some other manner, then you should be against it.

            NB – this is not saying that voter ID will lead to non-fraudulent elections, only that the only reason for being against it is nefarious.

          2. Ooops, I missed this before.

            What I was thinking was that:

            If you want elections decided by the number of eligible voters who vote for the candidate of their choosing, then you should not be against voter ID.

            If you want elections decided in some other manner, then you should be against it.

            NB – this is not saying that voter ID will lead to non-fraudulent elections, only that the only reason for being against it is nefarious.

    2. The system is inefficient partly because it is more complex than it needs to be. Making felons ineligible to vote means additional resources must be used to make sure they do not vote.

      1. That’s a fair statement, I don’t think the right to vote should be taken away from Felons, especially given how easy it is to commit a “felony” these days.

    3. Why should I have to make an extra effort to exercise my basic rights because their system is inefficient at dealing with fraud? I have to register to vote when I move to a new place, isn’t that good enough?

      I agree with this. Voter ID laws are not about suppression and really don’t get my goat all that much, but the registration system is just fine, thanks very much.

    4. The bizarre thing is that the federal firearm background check system is very good at flagging felons and illegal aliens, along with several other categories of people prohibited from owning firearms. Why can’t they just use that system for voter registration too?

      1. Because that would run counter to the self-interest of many politicians?

      2. Or, better yet, let any adult citizen vote whether they are felons or not.

  4. I have yet to see documented (or even undocumented) cases of voter fraud. Solving a non-problem doesn’t constitute a benefit.

    Felons voting for Franken is a red herring – are you suggesting that the felons didn’t have drivers licenses or other forms of ID, and that’s why they slipped through the cracks?

    On the other hand, requiring ID is a legitimate impediment to voting. It may be small, but it is almost certainly disproportionate on low income voters.

    Bottom line, there is a cost, and it is disproportionate. There is no clear evidence of a benefit… thus voter ID fails the reasonableness test.

    It may benefit me as a conservative republican, but it offends my sense of right and wrong.

    1. I have a family member who can’t drive, so he gets a state-issued ID every six years.

      It costs eleven dollars to renew it.

      Anyone who can’t budget two bucks a year to renew their ID, is too fucking poor to vote.

      1. I don’t know where the idea crept in that expending some minimal amount of effort in order to vote was a civil rights violation.

        I have to go to a grade school over a mile away and stand in a line to vote, between [gasp] 6am and 6pm–and this is every time I vote, mind you! What horrors!

        1. It’s not like that in the rest of the world. Sounds like a scam to me. Question is, cui bono?

        2. Spoken like a white man born with a silver driver’s license in his wallet’s mouth.

          1. P. fuckin S. The real tragedy is not having elections on the weekend. What the eff?

            1. If we did that, then people who don’t show up but mysteriously vote anyway might show up.

            2. But then more people with non-government jobs might vote.

              And we’ve heard enough of their lip already.

            3. You can’t shut the bars down on weekends.

      2. Anyone who can’t budget two bucks a year to renew their ID, is too fucking poor to vote.

        Seems to me that there is something wrong with that statement. The only requirement to vote should be being an adult citizen.

    2. “I have yet to see documented (or even undocumented) cases of voter fraud. Solving a non-problem doesn’t constitute a benefit.”

      You can suck my cock now.

      [A]n NAACP executive sits in prison, sentenced for carrying out a massive voter fraud scheme.

      In ? April a Tunica County, Miss., jury convicted NAACP official Lessadolla Sowers on 10 counts of fraudulently casting absentee ballots. Sowers is identified on an NAACP website as a member of the Tunica County NAACP Executive Committee.

      Sowers received a five-year prison term for each of the 10 counts, but Circuit Court Judge Charles Webster permitted Sowers to serve those terms concurrently, according to the Tunica Times, the only media outlet to cover the sentencing.

      http://hotair.com/greenroom/ar…..ter-fraud/

  5. On the other hand, requiring ID registration, with proof of residence and identity is a legitimate impediment to voting. It may be small, but it is almost certainly disproportionate on low income voters.

    Bottom line, there is a cost, and it is disproportionate. There is no clear evidence of a benefit… thus voter ID registration fails the reasonableness test.

    So, really, why do we require voter registration? Especially if we aren’t going to require some confirmation that the person claiming to be the registered voter is, in fact, the registered voter?

    If nobody is really trying to defraud the system, and even if they were, couldn’t cheat enough to change the outcome, why do we bother with registration at all? Why not just let people go to the polls and vote? Anything that “impedes” that, like voter registration or ID, after all, doesn’t have enough of a benefit to justify the impediment, right?

    1. Why not eliminate the registration process and just require an ID?

      1. Fascist!

      2. Why require an ID or registration, under the reasoning of those opposed to ID?

        1. If the cost is the issue, then make IDs free. Or subsidize them for poor people. Of course, cost isn’t the issue.

          1. Tell people that they have to pay a tax if they don’t vote. It would not be a poll-tax (which is illegal, but rather, an anti-poll-tax.

            Oh, BTW, that vote of yours? You didn’t cast that. Someone else made that happen.

          2. Every state I’ve seen, mine included, has a provision for issuing free state IDs to people for the purposes of voting.

      3. In theory, the registration process provides a way to keep people from voting in multiple jurisdictions. If you just require photo ID I can vote at my weapons permit address, my driver license address, etc.

    2. Of course it’s about protecting the ability to commit election fraud. Otherwise, there would be outcries about requiring IDs in other settings, like credit card presentation (sometimes), gun purchases, etc.

      1. No, significant numbers of people would be denied the right to vote if voter ID laws were implemented right now. This study estimates 5 million people would be affected.

        http://www.brennancenter.org/c….._2012#summ

        It’s about protecting their right to vote.

        1. How would they be denied? As far as I can tell, if you have the ID you can vote. How is that a denial?

          I see that this is going to the story come November 7th, isn’t it?

          1. From the abstract:

            Some states require voters to show government-issued photo identification, often of a type that as many as one in ten voters do not have.

            1. Some states require voters to register.

              So if you fail to register, you don’t get to vote either. Or at least your vote isn’t counted.

              So what is the difference?

              1. Apparently requiring state issued ID is more onerous than voter registration, because people that are currently registered to vote would be restricted from voting due to their lack of state issued ID.

                1. OF course you can’t require an ID to vote unless the state gives free IDs.

                  The U.S. Supreme Court has made it clear that states that require their voters to present
                  government-issued photo IDs for voting must make such IDs available to voters free of charge.24 And
                  indeed, each of the seven state laws provides a mechanism for free IDs for persons who need them for
                  voting.

                  So much for people being too poor to get an ID.

                  Try reading the article Joe rather than lying about the summary.

                2. people that are currently registered to vote would be restricted from voting due to their lack of state issued ID

                  Funny, here where they’re blocking implementation of Voter ID the law specifically says you can walk in and get an ID for free if you tell them you’re broke and need it to vote. But I guess that’s too much of an imposition.

                3. Apparently requiring state issued ID is more onerous than voter registration, because people that are currently registered to vote would be restricted from voting due to their lack of state issued ID.

                  Please realize that you are making a moral claim, to wit: Anything that may prevent someone from exercising their right to vote is an active “denial” thereof.

                  My point is that if registration fits these criteria, why do you not have a problem with registration? If you are saying registration is OK but ID is not, then you have abdicated the moral claim.

                  1. Unless someone comes to your house with a ballot, at your leisure, for free, you don’t have to get up to answer the door, and filling that ballot out takes zero microseconds, voting COSTS something.

                    Therefore, simply holding an election at all is an impediment to voting!

                    Left-wing thinking at its finest.

            2. if you are too stupid to get a state-issued ID, like a driver’s license or non-driving ID if you physically cannot drive, then you are truly too stupid to vote. This is not an issue; it’s a DNC talking point to allow fraud.

              1. What if you just don’t want to have an ID? I could see someone reasonably not wanting to put their name on a piece of paper for the government, or to have their photo taken. But I suppose those people aren’t voting either for the same reasons.

        2. Are you one of those people who are too retarded to understand that both sides want to protect the specific types of voter fraud that benefit only them?

        3. Read your own fucking article, retard. The study estimates 5 million people will be affected by a whole group of legal changes, including shortening early voting times, preventing felons from voting, or making registration harder in some unspecified way. The executive summary (and I’m not wasting my time on fully studying Democrat pro-fraud propaganda) doesn’t make any effort to say how many voters will be affected by any particular legal change.

          1. Joe didn’t read the article. He just read the executive summary and then lied about it.

    3. Registering is a total pain in the ass. Of course Joe would endorse getting rid of that too if he thought it would elect more Dems and he could get away with it.

      The whole argument is insane. Somehow requiring ID and proof of residency to “register” is just fine. But requiring you actually show you are who you say you are when you vote is not. You can’t register to vote without an ID. But Joe wants us to believe that requiring you to show the same ID when you vote makes it harder to vote legally.

      1. In NY, you just fill out a card and mail it in. No ID required.

        1. Same in OK, which is why some sort of positive identification is necessary.

        2. I registered in Mass this year and VT several years ago. No ID was required for the VT registration. I’m not sure if one was for my MA registration (I did it while getting my license, so they had my passport anyway).

      2. Registering is a total pain in the ass.

        Not really. When I move one of the first things I do is update the address on my license, and update my voter registration at the same time.
        Might take a quarter of an hour.

        Big, fat, hairy deal.

        1. Fair enough. But in Joe’s world where showing an ID to vote is some unconscionable burden, registering is a pain in the ass.

          1. But in Joe’s world where showing an ID to vote is some unconscionable burden, registering is a pain in the ass.

            So is pulling out the EBT card to use our tax dollars to buy his groceries.

            I’m sure the most effective way to hide a hundred dollar bill from any of our liberal trolls would be to slip it under their work boots.

            Assuming they have work boots.

      3. registering requires government jobs and entails funding for ACORN, who God bless them, are out there doing God’s work in some of the toughest neighborhoods in America.

    4. EVERY suck thing in the world falls disproportionately on the poor. That’s the main reason so many people do so much to try to avoid poverty. Poverty sucks.

      When it gets hot, when it gets cold, when it’s too wet, or too dry, when the bus breaks down, whatever it is, it hurts more when you’re really poor.

      That renders the whole argument moot IMO. When you say that something “falls disproportionately on the poor” well, no shit. Everything does.

      If you want to argue that something is unconstitutional, or immoral, well, go for it. But every cost imaginable matters more to someone who is poor than someone who is rich. That’s the definition of “rich” and “poor.”

  6. It costs what, about $800 in paperwork to legally own a gun in D.C.? How does that compare to a state id that would only cost $30 or so…

    1. A state ID that costs $0 since the state is required to give it to them for free.

  7. There is no reason we shouldn’t require photo ID. All the inefficient government agencies, handouts, entitlements, etc., can be traced to stupid voters and the fraud that the ones that the ones on the receiving end perpetuate. Hell, even in third world countries there are steps to prevent voter fraud, i.e finger dye. Every fraudulent vote is a vote that cancels out a legitimate vote, and that is very unacceptable. Anything to make fraud harder to achieve is a step in the right direction. And dont even try to say that getting a photo ID is hard. As of right now, it is just as easy to get to a place that distributes photo IDs as it is to find a voting site.

  8. We allow people in a vegetative state to vote. We allow retards to vote. So what’s the difference if the dead vote.

    The only people who are wrong are the ones NOT commiting widescale voter fraud. There’s no penalty for it, and if enough people on all sides do it, the results cancel out anyway.

    1. They’re not going to stop until we have 120% voter turnout.

    2. There is absolutely zero evidence of widespread voter fraud.

      1. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

        You’re the dumbest sockpuppet ever, joe.

        1. If evidence of widespread voter fraud exists, post it.

          If it does not, just keep threadshitting.

          1. Hey joe, you don’t like it? FUCK OFF THEN, you fucking pathetic loser scumbag. And get some platform shoes.

            1. Take a midol.

              1. As soon as you clear 5’6″, joe.

            2. I took a shit in Lowell once.

          2. Prove that it doesn’t.

          3. “If evidence of widespread voter fraud exists”

            It doesn’t have to be “widespread” to exist and make a difference in an election. If evidence exists that someone needing an ID can’t get one, post it.

          4. Isaac Bartrum did below Joe. We breathlessly await your response.

          5. How about the young, white kid who asked for, and was offered, the old, black Eric Holder’s ballot in Georgetown?

      2. Voter fraud doesn’t leave evidence. Tell me, O Derider, what evidence could convince you that voter fraud exists?

        1. Tell me, O Derider, what evidence could convince you that voter fraud exists?

          Don’t bother, I can already tell you his answer. He denied there was an ACORN registration and voter fraud. When confronted with conviction for registration fraud against ACORN, he argued that the problem was already being solved.

          No evidence? There isn’t a problem.

          Evidence? The problem has already been taken care of.

          Head you lose, tails he wins… It’s the joe way, and why it’s not worth arguing with him.

          1. No, I argued that voter ID laws would not have stopped that incidence of fraud from occurring.

            1. No, you spewed bullshit. Nice to see that you’re no longer denying being joe, joe. Why don’t you stop being the massive coward you are and just use your old handle, pussy?

              1. Wait, he ins’t Lrrr from Omicron Persei 8?

              2. The Derider| 8.28.12 @ 12:54PM |#

                No, I argued that voter ID laws would not have stopped that incidence of fraud from occurring.

                Remember this the next time he denies that he is Joe. So pathetic.

  9. I’d be happy if the voting rolls from New York were bounced against the voting rolls in Florida. I more than suspect that you’d find quite a bit of double registrations, especially in Palm Beach, Broward and Miami-Dade Counties.

    At least when I lived in Florida, there was a significant “Homestead Exemption” on the real estate taxes, so there is a large incentive to claim Florida residency even if ones Florida home is only part-time. Might as well register to vote at the same time that you fraudulently claiming residency for the Homestead Exemption.

    1. Is it voter fraud when people maintain registration in both NY and FL and request absentee ballots?

      According to the New York Daily News :

      Some 46,000 New Yorkers are registered to vote in both the city and Florida, a shocking finding that exposes both states to potential abuses that could alter the outcome of elections, a New York Daily News investigation shows.

      …..

      The News’ investigation also found:

      Of the 46,000 registered in both states, 68 percent are Democrats, 12 percent are Republicans and 16 percent didn’t claim a party.

      Nearly 1,700 of those registered in both states requested that absentee ballots be mailed to their home in the other state, where they are also registered. But that doesn’t raise red flags with officials in either place.

      I realize that the Daily News isn’t the most disinterested observer in these matters, but the story does suggest some shenanigans.

      Although, I don’t see how ID requirements would help here.

      I’m in favor of more rigorous registration procedures that make sure people who are eligible to vote can register in convenient locations and be assured that accurate records are kept so that a person’s eligibility is easily established. But that would require efficient administration, something government departments are not especially noted for.

      1. Maybe we should make voters dip their fingers in purple dye.

  10. “Former Troy Democratic City Clerk William McInerney, Democratic Councilman John Brown, and Democratic political operatives Anthony Renna and Anthony DeFiglio have entered guilty pleas in the case, in which numerous signatures were allegedly forged on absentee ballots in the 2009 Working Families Party primary, the political party that was associated with the now-defunct community group, ACORN.”

    http://www.foxnews.com/politic…..z24rGhrUEh

    1. Paging Beowulf, Beowulf to the white courtesy phone.

    2. Voter ID would have done absolutely nothing to stop that incidence of fraud. This was corrupt officials, not fraud at the polling site.

      1. So now you are moving the goal posts from “no evidence of voter fraud” to “there is fraud but this law will not address it”?

        1. We’ve got to prove that there are people voting under false names, even though we can’t currently check their IDs to confirm their names. Therefore we can only show evidence if the crook is stupid enough to vote for someone who is going to vote in that jurisdiction anyway.

  11. joe | October 17, 2008, 2:47pm | #

    God bless ACORN, out there registering 13 million new voters. They’re doing God’s work in some of the toughest neighborhoods in America.

    Hi, joe! Glad to see that you still can’t stay away from us.

    1. Top HnR quote evar.

  12. Voter ID will stop some minor frauds but not the major stuff (like felons voting). The way vote fraud works in Philadelphia (and probably in all areas where one party has overwhelming sway) is for
    committeemen and their hench-election officials to vote the dead and those they know to be out of town or sick. If the minority party even has a “watcher” present, then a cash gift encourages him or her to take a potty break at the necessary time. This kind of fraud can result in several hundred extra votes per precinct and is particularly effective in primaries where the establishment types want to defeat the reformist candidate.

  13. I don’t think voter fraud is the issue that many right-wingers and left-wingers claim

    This is like saying that we have no idea how much of the loose cash left laying around in the street is stolen because we haven’t actually paid any attention. Politicians and their operatives will sell their souls to Bael to stay in office but draw the line at voter fraud?

    The question isn’t if there is voter fraud, it is simply how much.

    1. Agreed. I even think we have less of it than most countries. But how much is okay or not worth worrying about? Is the fraud enough to decide elections?

      1. Only the close elections are worth committing fraud for.

      2. It got Franken elected, so apparently so.

        1. Prove it.

          1. Disprove it. 1009 felons. Explain those away.

    2. Correct, and there is absolutely no evidence that there is any significant amount of voter fraud in the US.

      1. joe, do you gain some savage satisfaction from being this fucking stupid? It must stimulate some primitive part of your baboon brain. Does that make up for being a midget? You’ll never be Peter Dinklage, joe. Sorry to break that to you.

        1. He’s not joe, dude. He’s said so. Why would he lie?

          1. It’s true; joe was as dedicated to the truth as he was dedicated to being non-partisan.

        2. Wait, so Joe came out as a shorty? Things make a lot more sense now.

        3. Dinklage is the best short guy ever. I could watch him slap that kid from Batman Begins all day long.

          I thought the left thought the 2000 election was a huge moment of fraud? Is that no longer their preferred electoral meme?

          1. Holy crap. I didn’t realize Joffrey was a young Batman. Now Bruce Waynes intense fortune makes sense. But when does he turn his back on violence?

            1. Joffery was the kid that Batman gives the nightvison periscope doohickey in The Narrows, right before Crane sets him on fire.

              1. Ah, that makes more sense. I misread it.

                1. So perhaps Westeros is just the imaginary land the kid goes to so he can deal with witnessing a man being lit on fire.

                  1. The Imp is better than Batman, because Batman failed to slap the kid.

                    My respect for Jack Gleeson grew immensely when I realized that he was in the “first” Batman film. I mean, he was a likeable kid in that. I had figured he was just a crazy brat from watching Game of Thrones. Apparently, he was just acting–who knew?

    3. and yet…no documented cases

      Interesting how denizens of a libertarian message board are willing to impose costs on voters with no measurable benefit to society

      1. Do you not read the other comments? CYP posted a link to convictions for voter fraud and you insist that it never happened?!

        1. Voter ID laws would not stop that sort of fraud.

          1. Move those goalposts, Shorty! Move them!

          2. He said there was no documented case of voter fraud.

            The convictions were for voter fraud.

            The statement he made is not true.

      2. How the hell are you supposed to catch voter fraud, exactly? Outline the particular steps.

      3. Do you not read the other comments? CYP posted a link to convictions for voter fraud and you insist that it never happened?!

      4. Finally, someone else who realizes that voting has no measurable benefit to society.

      5. “and yet…no documented cases”

        Of anyone needing an ID and not being able to get one.

  14. Issue one difficult to counterfeit proof of citizenship certificate to every eligible voting age person who requests one in advance of each voting day that can only be turned in or marked off in the precinct the person lives in. Everyone already has a birth certificate or citizenship thing on record somewhere.

    1. That would work for federal elections but not for state and local ones. You have to live there to vote there, which is fair.

      1. It would work anywhere. Birth certificates are issued by states, and that information can be forwarded to wherever you decide to live.

        1. But how do you show you live there now?

          1. How do they do it now? Pieces of mail, legal documents, titles or leases, certified affidavits. Make it so a person’s proof of citizenship can only be assigned to one voting precinct at a time via electronic record keeping, at least within the statewide voting system.

    2. I will need to bring my birth certificate when I renew my drivers license.

      But I’m not asked to show said license when I vote.

      Figure that one out.

  15. Vote Early, and Vote Often. It’s the Chicago way.

    1. We had some precincts come back over 100% until the Daley folks could scurry out and “make adjustments” that later came out as “erronious reporting”.. barf.

  16. “(In Minnesota’s 2008 disputed US Senate election, won by Al Franken ? who proceeded to cast the deciding vote in favor of ObamaCare ? the margin of victory was 312, but it turned out that 1,099 votes were cast by felons who were ineligible to vote. Many of them have gone to jail, but Franken has remained in the Senate).”

    Why. I. Stopped. Voting.

  17. Mea Culpa. I should have said “voter fraud that is relevant to Voter ID… or to this thread… or to commenters with triple digit IQs”

    If felons are permitted to vote, that would be fraud, but nobody would suggest that requiring a drivers license would impact the problem.

    If somebody screws with absentee ballots, that would be fraud, but Voter ID would be irrelevant.

    What’s interesting about these types of voter frauds is that….wait for it… there is actually evidence that they have happened!

    If poll workers screw with the process, by stuffing the ballot box or permitting folks to vote early and often, that would also be fraud. Now there may not be much evidence that it has happened, but okay, it’s plausible and part of folklore. Again, though – voter ID would be irrelevant to preventing this type of fraud.

    If there were cases where voters were actually walking into the polls pretending to be dead people, then voter ID would a logical response… except that this is the kind of voter fraud where people just can’t seem to come up with documented examples.

    Absent documented examples, are we supposed to take the supposed benefits of voter ID on faith?

    And yet despite this faith-based approach to actual benefits, folks on a libertarian message board are willing to impose real tangible costs on voters…

    very strange

    1. Absent documented examples, are we supposed to take the supposed benefits of voter ID on faith?

      If you don’t require ID, how do you know that there isn’t fraud? The nature of fraud is that it is fraud and thus not caught.

      You are just restating the dishonesty Episiarch pointed out above. If you don’t look, well there is no problem. If you do look and find a problem, well the problem is solved isn’t it?

      1. so lack of voter ID has effectively hidden this type of voter fraud for hundreds of years… gosh, I wonder what other ephemeral problems are lurking out there that we should impose onerous requirements to solve.

        I forgot the “Just because we couldn’t find any WMDs doesn’t mean they weren’t there” line of thinking…

        1. so lack of voter ID has effectively hidden this type of voter fraud for hundreds of years

          Sure it has. People have been voting twice and voting in other people’s names forever. They don’t say you vote early and often in Chicago for nothing.

          Sorry but “we have always had fraudulent elections” isn’t much of a defense.

        2. And see papayasf’s examples above. This type of fraud exists and seems to be fairly common.

    2. The last time this discussion came up someone posted that they went to the polls to vote and noticed that their son had voted a little earlier. Thing was, his son was in Iraq. If you know a soldier is stationed overseas, just go vote in their place.

  18. One of the biggest bitches Joe’s paper he cites is that some states are requiring proof of citizenship to register. This is somehow an impossible burden for millions of people. Yet, you have to have proof of citizenship to get a job legally in this country. Holding a job is certainly a constitutional right. The state couldn’t get away with unduly burdening the employment process.

    So in Joe world one in ten voters is incapable of so much as holding a legal job in this country. Yeah whatever.

    1. “The state couldn’t get away with unduly burdening the employment process.”

      They do every day.

      1. Yes they do. But there are limits. And requiring an ID isn’t one of them.

    2. Well, you shouldn’t have to provide proof of citizenship to get a job. I think that that requirement is an undue burden.

  19. I don’t see all the hubbub.

    Just let people pull the lever as many times as they can, and vote under as many aliases as they can. The people willing to put in the most effort win the election.

    It’s the ultimate merit system.

  20. Funny how libertarians are willing to ditch the rights of individuals when an opportunity to screw the poor and the non-white presents itself.

    1. Your wholly fake concern is duly noted.

    2. We’ve been waiting…patiently. Now, our master plan has finally been launched and the world is ours.

      1. It’s such openly obvious bullshit. Poor people can’t swing a photo ID? Really?

        1. Taking the bus to the DMV the exact same thing as a poll taxes and literacy tests. EXACTLY.

    3. STEVE SMITH NO TOLERATE RAPE FRAUD!

    4. If the poor want to purchase a firearm, also a Constitutional right, they have to have the same level of documentation as they would to vote.

    5. What’s it like in your ivory tower Steve? Is it lonely with just your fellow racist cocksuckers to pass the time?

      Cause that’s what you are if you automatically think it’s extra hard on non-white people.

      Asshole.

  21. San Bernardino County has been sending out my ded grandfather’s sample ballot for the 10 years he’s been dead. It would be the easiest thing in the world to vote twice or sell the vote, whatever.

    The County wants too much proof–the burden is on us–that he’s dead. We changed his official address so the bills for his house we rent out come here and so does that. Why bother if I’ve got to go gather stuff and pay money to prove he’s dead. I can just vote early and often instead.

  22. I’m pretty ambivalent on this subject, so I will take the opposing view, just for fun.

    If it is easy to commit voter fraud and easy to get the voter ID, what is to stop people from getting the ID with someone else’s name on it and voting in their name? If there is something in the ID getting process that prevents that from happening, why not just do that when you vote and skip the whole going to the DMV to get a photo ID part?

    It seems to me that the photo ID requirement is unnecessary. Just require that the poll officials are satisfied as to the identity of the voter. Where I vote the people at the polls know who I am. A requirement to show ID would be unnecessary. And if the poll officials are in on the voter fraud, they could say that the voter showed valid ID even if they didn’t. So I don’t see how the ID requirement really solves the problem much.

    But I also am not too worried about it either way. It really isn’t a huge burden. But I tend to be of the view that if a law treats just one person in one case unjustly, then it is an unjust law. And I can think of cases where requiring photo ID to vote treats someone unjustly. Suppose I lose my wallet on the way to the poll. Then what do I do? Have I not been disenfranchised.

    1. Someone could still steal your car when it’s locked, so why not leave it unlocked? Someone could still break into a house that’s locked, so why lock the doors? If fraudsters had to get an ID for every fraudulent vote, it not only makes it much more difficult for them, it leaves quite a paper trail to catch them.

      1. I do leave my car unlocked. And my house. So you’re asking the wrong guy.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.