Voter Fraud

P@triot

Diamond Member
Jul 5, 2011
61,031
11,514
2,060
United States
Here are the facts related to voter fraud:

People seemingly voting after they've been dead for years. Drug kingpins buying votes from poor people to sway elections. Non-citizens being bussed to the polls and coached on how to vote. Stories of voting fraud are shocking, and states have been taking action to make sure that elections are secure. But the Justice Department, led by Attorney General Eric Holder, has blocked states at almost every turn.

This is the same Justice Department that*stopped a non-partisan election reform by arguing that if party affiliation were removed from a ballot, African-American voters wouldn't be able to identify and vote for the Democrats. Holder has continued to stoke the racial fires, calling a requirement for voters to produce photo identification a "poll tax." Heritage expert Hans von Spakovsky said this argument is merely political. "Holder continues to perpetuate the incendiary error to the public, knowing that the poll-tax assertion is a racially charged one that should not be used lightly," von Spakovsky said. He explained:
Even the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals—the most liberal appeals court in the country—did not buy the Holder poll tax claim when it reviewed Arizona's voter ID law. In Gonzalez v. Arizona (2012), the Ninth Circuit held that even though "obtaining the free identification required under [Arizona law] may have a cost," such immaterial costs are not a poll tax.

Holder is now "investigating" Pennsylvania's voter ID law, on the left's charge that it disenfranchises minorities.

Former Congressman Artur Davis, an African-American from Alabama who served in Congress as a Democrat from 2003 to 2011, finds this argument incredibly insulting. Speaking at The Heritage Foundation yesterday, Davis held up his driver's license and said, "This is not a billy club. It is not a fire hose. I used to represent Birmingham and Selma, Alabama, and I know something about fire hoses."

In states that have voter ID laws, the real-world results show that minorities have not been disenfranchised by any means. States that require ID to vote have offered free IDs to anyone who does not have one already. In Kansas, which allows any of nine different forms of ID as proof of identity to vote:
Out of a total of 1.713 million registered voters in Kansas, only 32 people had requested a free photo ID as of May 4, 2012. That represents only 0.002 percent of the registered voters in the state. Of those 32 voters, 80 percent were white, 10 percent were black, and the race or ethnicity of 10 percent was unknown. Thus, there is no evidence that minority voters were disproportionately affected.

Georgia, which has had voter ID since 2007, allows six different forms of ID to vote. And there has been no stampede of would-be voters who lack identification: "The number of photo IDs issued by Georgia to individuals who did not already have one of the forms of ID acceptable under state law is remarkably small, averaging less 0.05 percent in most years, and not even reaching three-tenths of 1 percent in a presidential election year."

What happened to minority voting after the law went into effect? In the 2008 presidential election, Hispanic voting in Georgia increased by 140 percent over the 2004 election. African-American voting increased by 42 percent. That is also a higher rate of increase than in other states without voter ID. Von Spakovsky notes:

The increase in turnout of both Hispanics and blacks in the 2008 presidential election after the voter ID law became effective is quite remarkable, particularly given the unproven and totally speculative claims of the Justice Department that the voter ID requirements of Texas and South Carolina will somehow have a discriminatory impact on Hispanic and black voters. In fact, Georgia had the largest turnout of minority voters in its history.

The evidence that producing photo ID is a burden simply isn't there. "How can it be a burden to ask people to do something they do all the time?" asked Congressman Davis, who said he went to a news organization to do an interview on voter ID and had to produce his driver's license to enter the news organization.

The Justice Department requires ID from visitors as well.

..................................... Read more At.............................

Morning Bell: Justice Department Blocks Voter ID at Every Turn
 
I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'

There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.
 
I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'

There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.

Where are your sources to back up your allegation? I posted a link to some concrete numbers.

Furthermore, why is your side of the aisle so afraid of this issue? If it stops even 1 vote that was fraudulent, I would think everyone would support that. Unless, of course, your the side behind the fraud.

The state of Georgia has actually seen a major increase in minority voting since requiring proper identification.

Trying to make the case that people shouldn't have to prove who they are before casting a vote is as asinine as trying to make a case that murder should be legalized. This is just stupid. I know the left is desperate, but you would think they would come up with a better argument than it should be ok to have voter fraud.
 
Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections
Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections


We conclude that a State violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment whenever it makes the affluence of the voter or payment of any fee an electoral standard.

Regardless of what the 9th may think in this matter, any fee that a voter may pay for the sole purpose of voting is a "poll tax" and violates the 24th amendment as well as the 14th. These Voter ID laws do not combat fraud because the instances of fraud from them to combat is virtually nonexistant, and had it been such an issue as these states may claim, then it would have been so prior to this election. In fact if these laws keep one American from voting simply because they cannot afford the documentation to obatain these ID's then they have taken away that person(s) right to express themselves under several constitutional Amendments.
 
Last edited:
Voter fraud is just another scare tactic and that's it!

====================================================

Policy Brief on the Truth About “Voter Fraud”
Summary

* Fraud by individual voters is both irrational and extremely rare.
* Many vivid anecdotes of purported voter fraud have been proven false or do not demonstrate fraud.
* Voter fraud is often conflated with other forms of election misconduct.
* Raising the unsubstantiated specter of mass voter fraud suits a particular policy agenda.
* Claims of voter fraud should be carefully tested before they become the basis for action.
<snip>
Because voter fraud is essentially irrational, it is not surprising that no credible evidence suggests a voter fraud epidemic. There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often.
<snip>
Voter fraud is most often invoked as a substantial problem in order to justify particular election policies. Chief among these is the proposal that individuals be required to show photo ID in order to vote - a policy that disenfranchises up to 10% of eligible citizens. But the only misconduct that photo ID addresses is the kind of voter fraud that happens as infrequently as death by lightning.
w.brennancenter.org/content/resource/policy_brief_on_the_truth_about_voter_fraud/]Policy Brief on the Truth About &#8220;Voter Fraud&#8221; | Brennan Center for Justice

================================================

So, being as voter fraud is rare, rare, rare, what's the point of disenfranchising 10% of eligible voters and why the scare tactics?
 
Last edited:
Voter fraud is real and if it didn't work people wouldn't attempt it. If anyone thinks it's OK because it helps his or her side of the isle you are wrong. Eventually both sides of the body politic will be infected with fraud and that will hurt all of us. Stand up against voter fraud and support voter ID or pay for it down the road.
 
Because voter fraud is essentially irrational, it is not surprising that no credible evidence suggests a voter fraud epidemic. There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often.

Policy Brief on the Truth About &#8220;Voter Fraud&#8221; | Brennan Center for Justice
 
I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'

There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.

So here's the deal. Unless they can be refuted by a credible source, Rottweiler has posted some substantial numbers backing up his O.P.

So I'm going to have to ask you to support how Voter I.D. disenfranchises huge numbers of legitimate voters.
 
I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'

There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.

So here's the deal. Unless they can be refuted by a credible source, Rottweiler has posted some substantial numbers backing up his O.P.

So I'm going to have to ask you to support how Voter I.D. disenfranchises huge numbers of legitimate voters.

According to Al Sharpton on last night's Block the Vote sermon on MSNBC, PA's new law will impact almost 260K voters who don't have the voter ID required. That's something like 9.1% of the registered voters in that state alone.

I don't agree with Sharpton as a rule, but it seems to me that affecting 260K potential voters to scare off the 9 fraudulent votes per million cast (WA state, 4 votes in 10 million per Ohio's study) can only be considered an effort to keep voters away from polls.

If there's a real problem impacting our election process, where is the data to show it's impact? If we accept that there are 9 frauds per million votes, in a state like Fla we're talking about less than 3 wrongfully cast votes in an election where they get 100% turnout. How many hanging chads were there in the Bush election?
 
I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'

There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.

Correct.

There is no evidence ‘fraud’ altered the outcome of any election.

Allegations of widespread fraud by malevolent voters are easy to make, but often prove to be inflated or inaccurate. Crying “wolf” when the claims are unsubstantiated distracts attention from real problems that need real solutions. Moreover, these claims are frequently used to justify policies – including restrictive photo identification rules – that could not solve the alleged wrongs, but that could well disenfranchise legitimate voters.

The Brennan Center carefully examines allegations of fraud to get at the truth behind the claims.

The Truth About Fraud

Missouri, 2000

The 2000 election was hotly contested in Missouri, and various irregularities led to inflated claims of widespread fraud. Many of these fraud claims were later used to support the call for restrictive ID requirements. We examined each of the allegations of fraud by individual voters -- the only sort that ID could possibly address -- to uncover the truth behind the assertions.

The allegations yielded only six substantiated cases of Missouri votes cast by ineligible voters, knowingly or unknowingly, except for those votes permitted by court order. The six cases were double votes by four voters -- two across state lines and two within Missouri -- amounting to an overall rate of 0.0003%. None of these problems could have been resolved by requiring photo ID at the polls.

Missouri, 2006

The 2006 election was hotly contested in Missouri, and various irregularities led to inflated claims of widespread fraud. At the same time, Missouri citizens were debating a proposal to require restrictive identification of each voter at the polls, and the fraud claims were used to support the call for ID. We examined each of the allegations of fraud by individual voters -- the only sort that ID could possibly address -- to uncover the truth behind the assertions.

The allegations yielded absolutely no substantiated cases of individuals knowingly casting invalid votes that counted. Accordingly, none of these problems could have been resolved by requiring photo ID at the polls.

The Truth About Fraud: Case Studies by State

With a voter ‘fraud’ rate of only 0.0003%, there is no justification of requiring an ID to vote.
 
Voter fraud is real and if it didn't work people wouldn't attempt it. If anyone thinks it's OK because it helps his or her side of the isle you are wrong. Eventually both sides of the body politic will be infected with fraud and that will hurt all of us. Stand up against voter fraud and support voter ID or pay for it down the road.

Youre saying its real because people do it. Sorry, but thats circular logic.
 
I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'

There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.

Correct.

There is no evidence ‘fraud’ altered the outcome of any election.

Allegations of widespread fraud by malevolent voters are easy to make, but often prove to be inflated or inaccurate. Crying “wolf” when the claims are unsubstantiated distracts attention from real problems that need real solutions. Moreover, these claims are frequently used to justify policies – including restrictive photo identification rules – that could not solve the alleged wrongs, but that could well disenfranchise legitimate voters.

The Brennan Center carefully examines allegations of fraud to get at the truth behind the claims.

The Truth About Fraud

Missouri, 2000

The 2000 election was hotly contested in Missouri, and various irregularities led to inflated claims of widespread fraud. Many of these fraud claims were later used to support the call for restrictive ID requirements. We examined each of the allegations of fraud by individual voters -- the only sort that ID could possibly address -- to uncover the truth behind the assertions.

The allegations yielded only six substantiated cases of Missouri votes cast by ineligible voters, knowingly or unknowingly, except for those votes permitted by court order. The six cases were double votes by four voters -- two across state lines and two within Missouri -- amounting to an overall rate of 0.0003%. None of these problems could have been resolved by requiring photo ID at the polls.

Missouri, 2006

The 2006 election was hotly contested in Missouri, and various irregularities led to inflated claims of widespread fraud. At the same time, Missouri citizens were debating a proposal to require restrictive identification of each voter at the polls, and the fraud claims were used to support the call for ID. We examined each of the allegations of fraud by individual voters -- the only sort that ID could possibly address -- to uncover the truth behind the assertions.

The allegations yielded absolutely no substantiated cases of individuals knowingly casting invalid votes that counted. Accordingly, none of these problems could have been resolved by requiring photo ID at the polls.

The Truth About Fraud: Case Studies by State

With a voter ‘fraud’ rate of only 0.0003%, there is no justification of requiring an ID to vote.


I disagree. Heres why:

Every election cycle we have HUGE get out the vote campaigns. People are on every street corner registering people to vote ( well, not in same day registration states ).

So I propose a compromise. A national law requiring a state issued ID be presented at the polls on the day of the election BUT, mandating same day registration in EVERY state.

Then the get out the vote campaigns could simply switch focus and get people their proper IDs.

But its not needed you say? I agree its not needed, BUT it completely takes this nonsense issue that rises every election AND gets same day registration to all Americans thus making it EASIER to vote in the long run.
 
I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'

There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.

Correct.

There is no evidence ‘fraud’ altered the outcome of any election.



Missouri, 2000

The 2000 election was hotly contested in Missouri, and various irregularities led to inflated claims of widespread fraud. Many of these fraud claims were later used to support the call for restrictive ID requirements. We examined each of the allegations of fraud by individual voters -- the only sort that ID could possibly address -- to uncover the truth behind the assertions.

The allegations yielded only six substantiated cases of Missouri votes cast by ineligible voters, knowingly or unknowingly, except for those votes permitted by court order. The six cases were double votes by four voters -- two across state lines and two within Missouri -- amounting to an overall rate of 0.0003%. None of these problems could have been resolved by requiring photo ID at the polls.

Missouri, 2006

The 2006 election was hotly contested in Missouri, and various irregularities led to inflated claims of widespread fraud. At the same time, Missouri citizens were debating a proposal to require restrictive identification of each voter at the polls, and the fraud claims were used to support the call for ID. We examined each of the allegations of fraud by individual voters -- the only sort that ID could possibly address -- to uncover the truth behind the assertions.

The allegations yielded absolutely no substantiated cases of individuals knowingly casting invalid votes that counted. Accordingly, none of these problems could have been resolved by requiring photo ID at the polls.

The Truth About Fraud: Case Studies by State

With a voter ‘fraud’ rate of only 0.0003%, there is no justification of requiring an ID to vote.


I disagree. Heres why:

Every election cycle we have HUGE get out the vote campaigns. People are on every street corner registering people to vote ( well, not in same day registration states ).

So I propose a compromise. A national law requiring a state issued ID be presented at the polls on the day of the election BUT, mandating same day registration in EVERY state.

Then the get out the vote campaigns could simply switch focus and get people their proper IDs.

But its not needed you say? I agree its not needed, BUT it completely takes this nonsense issue that rises every election AND gets same day registration to all Americans thus making it EASIER to vote in the long run.

But......
Where is the evidence to support the claim that voter IDs are a necessary thing? If the best evidence of wrongdoing is that 9 votes per million cast are incorrect in some way (and that is the absolute highest number I could find), then there would seem to me to be another issue involved here than potential voter fraud.

Here's another way to see this point - lets assume the worst cast, 9 bogus votes per million. The population of Florida is 19,057,542 as of July 2011 per the US Census. If the entire population of Florida could vote, this would result in 171 bad votes cast. Hardly a deciding factor in any election. More realistically, Florida has some 11 million registered voters. If as many as HALF showed up to cast a vote, statistically there might be as many as 50 bad votes. In the whole state.

The fraud being perpetrated here seems to be the one where our legislators are asking us to believe that making voting harder for hundreds of thousands (which would equate to millions nationally) is better than letting 50 bad votes get by and that whole elections depend on those 50 votes.
 
Correct.

There is no evidence &#8216;fraud&#8217; altered the outcome of any election.





With a voter &#8216;fraud&#8217; rate of only 0.0003%, there is no justification of requiring an ID to vote.


I disagree. Heres why:

Every election cycle we have HUGE get out the vote campaigns. People are on every street corner registering people to vote ( well, not in same day registration states ).

So I propose a compromise. A national law requiring a state issued ID be presented at the polls on the day of the election BUT, mandating same day registration in EVERY state.

Then the get out the vote campaigns could simply switch focus and get people their proper IDs.

But its not needed you say? I agree its not needed, BUT it completely takes this nonsense issue that rises every election AND gets same day registration to all Americans thus making it EASIER to vote in the long run.

But......
Where is the evidence to support the claim that voter IDs are a necessary thing? If the best evidence of wrongdoing is that 9 votes per million cast are incorrect in some way (and that is the absolute highest number I could find), then there would seem to me to be another issue involved here than potential voter fraud.

Here's another way to see this point - lets assume the worst cast, 9 bogus votes per million. The population of Florida is 19,057,542 as of July 2011 per the US Census. If the entire population of Florida could vote, this would result in 171 bad votes cast. Hardly a deciding factor in any election. More realistically, Florida has some 11 million registered voters. If as many as HALF showed up to cast a vote, statistically there might be as many as 50 bad votes. In the whole state.

The fraud being perpetrated here seems to be the one where our legislators are asking us to believe that making voting harder for hundreds of thousands (which would equate to millions nationally) is better than letting 50 bad votes get by and that whole elections depend on those 50 votes.


There is no evidence. Rampant voter fraud is a myth. But its used as a political club every election cycle.

I say remove the weapon, make a "compromise" to get it and come out politically ahead on the other side.

Look if we allow for voter ID but provide IDs for all voters, then we lose nothing. If we also demand the compromise of same day voter registration in all states that have voter ID, we gain larger voter turnouts, which invariably favor the progessives. If it DIDNT, then the far right radicals wouldnt be working so diligently to try to disenfranchise voters with voter ID laws, would they? They see the political gain in keeping people from voting.

Turn it on them. Give them what they want by demanding something in return. If they say no, they lose. If they say yes, they lose.

And all we have to do to end the fight is offer up the compromise.
 
Last edited:
I disagree. Heres why:

Every election cycle we have HUGE get out the vote campaigns. People are on every street corner registering people to vote ( well, not in same day registration states ).

So I propose a compromise. A national law requiring a state issued ID be presented at the polls on the day of the election BUT, mandating same day registration in EVERY state.

Then the get out the vote campaigns could simply switch focus and get people their proper IDs.

But its not needed you say? I agree its not needed, BUT it completely takes this nonsense issue that rises every election AND gets same day registration to all Americans thus making it EASIER to vote in the long run.

But......
Where is the evidence to support the claim that voter IDs are a necessary thing? If the best evidence of wrongdoing is that 9 votes per million cast are incorrect in some way (and that is the absolute highest number I could find), then there would seem to me to be another issue involved here than potential voter fraud.

Here's another way to see this point - lets assume the worst cast, 9 bogus votes per million. The population of Florida is 19,057,542 as of July 2011 per the US Census. If the entire population of Florida could vote, this would result in 171 bad votes cast. Hardly a deciding factor in any election. More realistically, Florida has some 11 million registered voters. If as many as HALF showed up to cast a vote, statistically there might be as many as 50 bad votes. In the whole state.

The fraud being perpetrated here seems to be the one where our legislators are asking us to believe that making voting harder for hundreds of thousands (which would equate to millions nationally) is better than letting 50 bad votes get by and that whole elections depend on those 50 votes.


There is no evidence. Rampant voter fraud is a myth. But its used as a political club every election cycle.

I say remove the weapon, make a "compromise" to get it and come out politically ahead on the other side.

Look if we allow for voter ID but provide IDs for all voters, then we lose nothing. If we also demand the compromise of same day voter registration in all states that have voter ID, we gain larger voter turnouts, which invariably favor the progessives. If it DIDNT, then the far right radicals wouldnt be working so diligently to try to disenfranchise voters with voter ID laws, would they? They see the political gain in keeping people from voting.

Turn it on them. Give them what they want by demanding something in return. If they say no, they lose. If they say yes, they lose.

And all we have to do to end the fight is offer up the compromise.

Ummm... there's so many ways that blows up I'm having a hard time listing them all...

New voters would need new cards for every election...

Do voters who misplace their cards lose their right to cast a vote?

The idea itself would need 100% turnout on this one election in order to ensure that every voter had an ID. When was the last time you saw 100% turnout?

Any way you look at it, the "compromise" would fail to provide 100% of the registered voters an ID that was guaranteed to be accurate at the time of the election.

There is a built-in way to deter voter fraud - and it's been working pretty well. When a person registers to vote, they must provide either a driver's license (or state issued ID) number, or their social security number. You might not have an ID, but a valid citizen in this country has to have a SSN. It's an optional field on the registration form - you aren't required to provide the info.

As it turns out, when votes are challenged, this is the field that's checked. No entry means there's no way to validate the ballot, and it's chucked. If there's still a need to challenge, the numbers provided can be verified so that a valid voter can be traced to the district. It works. We don't have to change anything.

Look, it's just plain illogical to think that there could ever be an unbeatable system that would ensure no voter fraud whatsoever. The data presented - .00009% worst case - ought to be seen as a testament as to how well our current system does it's job and minimizes government intrusion at the same time (something I thought Republicans wanted).
 
Voter fraud is a myth, as the DOJ in Florida has decided.

However, there is nothing wrong with requiring ID.
 
Voter fraud is a myth, as the DOJ in Florida has decided.

However, there is nothing wrong with requiring ID.

Except, by filling in the field on my voter reg form with my license number (or SSN), I have sufficiently identified myself as a valid voter by giving voting authorities a way to find me and verify for themselves my right to vote if they need to.

Requiring ID shifts the burden of proof back to me every time I vote. Why register in that case?
 
Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections
Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections


We conclude that a State violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment whenever it makes the affluence of the voter or payment of any fee an electoral standard.

Regardless of what the 9th may think in this matter, any fee that a voter may pay for the sole purpose of voting is a "poll tax" and violates the 24th amendment as well as the 14th. These Voter ID laws do not combat fraud because the instances of fraud from them to combat is virtually nonexistant, and had it been such an issue as these states may claim, then it would have been so prior to this election. In fact if these laws keep one American from voting simply because they cannot afford the documentation to obatain these ID's then they have taken away that person(s) right to express themselves under several constitutional Amendments.

Except that, there is NO fee in any capacity. The ID's are given free if someone doesn't already have one (and who on God's green earth does not already have an ID of some kind?!?!?). So this is a false accusation by the left. The question is, why does the left insist on making these false accusations and encouraging voter fraud?
 
Voter fraud is just another scare tactic and that's it!

So, being as voter fraud is rare, rare, rare, what's the point of disenfranchising 10% of eligible voters and why the scare tactics?

That's why Madison, WI had a turn out of 110% participation for the Scott Walker re-call election, right? Sorry chief, but if every single eligible voter turned out, the most you could possibly have is 100% voter turn out. The fact that Madison, WI had a 110% PROVES beyond a shadow of a doubt that the left is actively and heavily engaged in voter fraud.

By the way, what is "scary" about having to show id at the polls? Unless of course, you either A.) involved in voter fraud, or B.) wanted by the authorities

Why is the left so afraid to have accurate, secure voting in America? I can only conclude that they know they will lose just about every election without cheating. If I'm wrong, please, someone give me a rational explanation. Georgia statistics prove that voting actually INCREASED significantly for minorities after they required identification to ensure there was no voter fraud.
 
I think you meant to say 'here are the facts on voter fraud as presented by my side of the aisle.'

There is not, and has not been, enough voter fraud to legitimize disenfranchising huge numbers of legitimate voters.

So here's the deal. Unless they can be refuted by a credible source, Rottweiler has posted some substantial numbers backing up his O.P.

So I'm going to have to ask you to support how Voter I.D. disenfranchises huge numbers of legitimate voters.

According to Al Sharpton on last night's Block the Vote sermon on MSNBC, PA's new law will impact almost 260K voters who don't have the voter ID required. That's something like 9.1% of the registered voters in that state alone.

I don't agree with Sharpton as a rule, but it seems to me that affecting 260K potential voters to scare off the 9 fraudulent votes per million cast (WA state, 4 votes in 10 million per Ohio's study) can only be considered an effort to keep voters away from polls.

If there's a real problem impacting our election process, where is the data to show it's impact? If we accept that there are 9 frauds per million votes, in a state like Fla we're talking about less than 3 wrongfully cast votes in an election where they get 100% turnout. How many hanging chads were there in the Bush election?

Al Sharpton could pull numbers out of a hat. Where did he get this information and how well documented is it?
 

Forum List

Back
Top