Voter ID Compromise

[BillyZane]

"Papers, please?"

No sir, I don't like it.

Better would be to have postcards sent out to the addresses of registered voters, who would then present them at the polling place to obtain a ballot. Don't have a legit local address, no voter registration.

No same-day registration or any other such silliness.

Problem solved.

And those postcards aren't "Papers"?

The postcard is good for one thing only: Obtaining a ballot.

The argument I hear from the voter ID crowd that I find the most lame is the one about needing an ID get get a hotel room or board a commercial airliner.

I say to hell with that. I want to rent a hotel room or get on an airliner, who I am is nobody's concern.

you want to vote? Register early, have a legit local address and bring your registration card to exchange for the ballot. The ID question goes away.

Oh good, so you want are already broke government to mail out postcards to every voter even though statistics say only about 60% of eligible voters vote anyway? What a waste of money

State IDs are easy and cheap to obtain. Most states charge $5 for a non driving ID that is valid for 4 years. There is absolutely no one in this country who could not afford $5 once every 4 years and you know it.

 

[BillyZane]

Why is it that only in America are minorities considered incapable of of obtaining an ID?

Because on average our blacks are dumber and lazier than those in other countries. I'm sorry but it's true. OF COURSE there are exceptions, but as a rule our black population is worthless.

The sad part is, all they do is play victim instead of rising up and meeting the challenges of being successful in today's society.

Now here is a larger picture. Do you WANT people who are such losers that they don't need an ID to get through their lives voting on things that affect YOU? I really don't.

Sorry if that hurts any feelings.

 

[BillyZane]

I agree having some valid ID is sensible, regardless of whether voter fraud is an actual problem. But if state-issued ID do indeed present some with an unfair burden aqquiring them, why not use any legally recognized contract as proof of identity? Like the rental contract even poor people would have signed renting their apartments, or a sworn affidavit under pains and penalties or perjury, or some other legal document? Why wouldn't those qualify as 'valid ID?' Presumedly whoever rents to you was presented with some kind of satisfactory ID before you moved in, so why couldn't whatever proof was presented be used, or the rental contract itself?

Why do some people insist that getting a valid ID is an unfair burden?

It's not under 2 conditions.

You don't have to register.
And it's completely free and available to everyone.

Simple.

I don't believe you should have to register. If you have a state ID that has your address on it, by virtue of your citizenship you are registered to vote. I don't even know why registration started.

As for completely free. NO. Our government can't just keep giving things away. I mean a state ID is $5 and is valid for 4 years. ANYONE can afford that. My small children could afford that.

 

[BillyZane]

In essence what conservatives are saying is that you must have a driver's license or passport to vote.

How about all the people that do not drive and aren't planning on leaving the country anytime soon?

Any state that requires a picture ID must implement a program whereby people can very easily obtain such an ID. Anything else is the denial of people's right to vote.

1. Nope, just a photo ID.

2. How many people don't have or can't obtain a photo ID? Do you know anyone like that?

3. Compare that to the potential for voter fraud, which is in the millions.

4. Why aren't you protesting voter ID laws in other countries?

1. As far as I know the only state issued photo IDs are drivers licenses and passports. I'm sure that there are some others but each would probably have a requirement more stringent than those. What other forms of state issued voter IDs are there? What type of identification do you need to get them? What are the requirements? What do they cost?

2. I went for years, when I was in my twenties, without any form of state issued photo ID. I might have had a library card or school ID but nothing that would qualify. Lot's of people don't have state issued photo IDs.

3. 'Potential for Voter Fraud' - are you joking? There have been almost no cases of voter fraud - and certainly not any evidence of millions of cases. This is nothing but wingnut nonsense. Denying millions of Americans the right to vote because of Conservative paranoid delusions is nonsense.

4. No, I work for a living. Sorry, but I can't just run around the world playing election police. Besides we have enough corruption and either nonsense going on in this country - thanks to people like you.

I question the veracity of your story sir. Colleges will NOT issue a student ID without a state ID to rove your identity. It's been that way for 30 years at least.

 

[jwoodie]

In essence what conservatives are saying is that you must have a driver's license or passport to vote.

How about all the people that do not drive and aren't planning on leaving the country anytime soon?

Any state that requires a picture ID must implement a program whereby people can very easily obtain such an ID. Anything else is the denial of people's right to vote.

1. Nope, just a photo ID.

2. How many people don't have or can't obtain a photo ID? Do you know anyone like that?

3. Compare that to the potential for voter fraud, which is in the millions.

4. Why aren't you protesting voter ID laws in other countries?

Actual voter fraud doesn't even get passed 100. And it generally takes place on ballots that are mailed in.

Since 90% of irregular ballots favor Democratic candidates, I can understand why you prefer the status quo. It really is that simple.

 

[geauxtohell]

I agree having some valid ID is sensible, regardless of whether voter fraud is an actual problem. But if state-issued ID do indeed present some with an unfair burden aqquiring them, why not use any legally recognized contract as proof of identity? Like the rental contract even poor people would have signed renting their apartments, or a sworn affidavit under pains and penalties or perjury, or some other legal document? Why wouldn't those qualify as 'valid ID?' Presumedly whoever rents to you was presented with some kind of satisfactory ID before you moved in, so why couldn't whatever proof was presented be used, or the rental contract itself?

Why do some people insist that getting a valid ID is an unfair burden?

Because it is for some people. Having to pay for ID to vote is essentially a poll tax.

As voter fraud hasn't been shown to be a major problem in any recent election, why do we need this?

 

[jwoodie]

I agree having some valid ID is sensible, regardless of whether voter fraud is an actual problem. But if state-issued ID do indeed present some with an unfair burden aqquiring them, why not use any legally recognized contract as proof of identity? Like the rental contract even poor people would have signed renting their apartments, or a sworn affidavit under pains and penalties or perjury, or some other legal document? Why wouldn't those qualify as 'valid ID?' Presumedly whoever rents to you was presented with some kind of satisfactory ID before you moved in, so why couldn't whatever proof was presented be used, or the rental contract itself?

Why do some people insist that getting a valid ID is an unfair burden?

Because it is for some people. Having to pay for ID to vote is essentially a poll tax.

As voter fraud hasn't been shown to be a major problem in any recent election, why do we need this?

How about AL FRANKEN?

 

[DontPanderOnMe]

The integrity of elections is important. The problem arises when some states attempt to use this as a method to suppress the vote of certain legal citizens, which is not an act of integrity. Yes, there are responsible ways to do this.
But regardless of method, no system will be 100% accurate in a country this size, or in states with millions of voters. In most states, any systems margin of error (which is not fraud) will more than likely be way higher than any level of fraud. In very close races, a candidate can win within the margin of error. So even if it were possible to remove 100% of fraud from those elections, it is possible the candidate that “won” really didn’t, or vice versa. The fleas come with the dog.

 

[candycorn]

liberals would never go for that

I don't think they would. But I do think whenever you say the words "Federal law decreeing that all...." conservatives are usually the ones that come out swinging.

I would also strongly suggest that the Federal Government supply 100% of all voting machines so there is no difference in the software, the ballot formats, how to remedy problems, etc...

As you likely know, I'm pretty liberal but I can never quite understand the liberal phobic reaction to wanting as sterile a voting process as we can field? I'm of the firm opinion that most "fraud" is just negligence;

you go to the wrong polling place,

you hear about the election on TV but live in the incorporated suburbs and work in the city where the election is taking place so you are not sure if you are to vote or not (there are sometimes state or county issues on the ballot)

or the poll workers mark you off as having voted because your name is Jane Doe and there are 4 Jane Does on their rolls. I had my AAA membership cancelled the other day because someone sharing my name cancelled theirs.

Anything that will help give us the most sterile process possible is fine by me. I think elections should last for an entire week or so. If there are any problems, they can be addressed while the election is still going on. We have 330,000,000+ people in this nation and we have shameful numbers voting. This would engender greater participation; allow people working multiple jobs or who are traveling a better chance to cast a ballot. People who are sick on the one magic day we cast ballots can wait until they are less infirmed. \

Anyway, just my opinioin.

For what it is worth.

The reason conservatives "come out swinging" is they believe that is not the intent of the Constitution:

Section. 4.
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

The same reasoning for the feds supplying all voting machines and software. Not everyone trusts the government.

In my state the polling address is clearly displayed on my voter registration card and I get a new card every year. I had a neighbor that moved, diidn't look at his registration card and went to the wrong polling place. The poll worker gave him the location of the one where he was registered to vote.

There may be 4 Jane Does listed on the registration rolls, but since they will all probably have a different address, the poll worker can verify which Jane Doe you are by checking to see that the address on your photo ID matches the address of one of the Jane Does.

Is AAA so careless that they didn't check the address of a member? I will have to rethink my membership.

I agree that the participation of so few Americans in the election process is sad. In my state the election process goes on for several weeks, with early voting in various locations, but do not know about the other 56 states. (The devil made me do that) My job takes me out of town or out of the country at times. Since I know my travel schedule in advance, I have had to vote absentee several times.

Just my humble opinion.

Anyone can make a mistake and it's something that some of them do every other year for a week or so; we don't exactly have political science majors staffing the polling places.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I agree having some valid ID is sensible, regardless of whether voter fraud is an actual problem. But if state-issued ID do indeed present some with an unfair burden aqquiring them, why not use any legally recognized contract as proof of identity?

How does my apartment rental contract prove that I am the person I claim to be?

 

[BobPlumb]

It's 2014! What is the statue of limitations on this concept that having a picture ID is too big of a hurdle and will disenfranchise voters? Will this still be an argument 10 years from now? Give me a break?

 

[BillyZane]

I agree having some valid ID is sensible, regardless of whether voter fraud is an actual problem. But if state-issued ID do indeed present some with an unfair burden aqquiring them, why not use any legally recognized contract as proof of identity?

How does my apartment rental contract prove that I am the person I claim to be?

Well, to be fair. NO ONE will rent an apartment to you unless you show them some ID to prove you are who you say you are . Reason being if you move in, destroy their apartment and move out without paying your rent, they have no way to collect if they don't know who yo are. They do this of course by verifying with State ID. Which once again makes the argument that some people don't have ID a stupid argument. If you have an apartment you have state ID, or rather had it at one time.

 

[M14 Shooter]

I agree having some valid ID is sensible, regardless of whether voter fraud is an actual problem. But if state-issued ID do indeed present some with an unfair burden aqquiring them, why not use any legally recognized contract as proof of identity?

How does my apartment rental contract prove that I am the person I claim to be?

Well, to be fair. NO ONE will rent an apartment to you unless you show them some ID to prove you are who you say you are .

So... you then have n ID to use at the polling place.
So, what's the problem with having to produce such an ID when you vote?
Answer:
There is none.

 

[TooTall]

I don't think they would. But I do think whenever you say the words "Federal law decreeing that all...." conservatives are usually the ones that come out swinging.

I would also strongly suggest that the Federal Government supply 100% of all voting machines so there is no difference in the software, the ballot formats, how to remedy problems, etc...

As you likely know, I'm pretty liberal but I can never quite understand the liberal phobic reaction to wanting as sterile a voting process as we can field? I'm of the firm opinion that most "fraud" is just negligence;

you go to the wrong polling place,

you hear about the election on TV but live in the incorporated suburbs and work in the city where the election is taking place so you are not sure if you are to vote or not (there are sometimes state or county issues on the ballot)

or the poll workers mark you off as having voted because your name is Jane Doe and there are 4 Jane Does on their rolls. I had my AAA membership cancelled the other day because someone sharing my name cancelled theirs.

Anything that will help give us the most sterile process possible is fine by me. I think elections should last for an entire week or so. If there are any problems, they can be addressed while the election is still going on. We have 330,000,000+ people in this nation and we have shameful numbers voting. This would engender greater participation; allow people working multiple jobs or who are traveling a better chance to cast a ballot. People who are sick on the one magic day we cast ballots can wait until they are less infirmed. \

Anyway, just my opinioin.

For what it is worth.

The reason conservatives "come out swinging" is they believe that is not the intent of the Constitution:

Section. 4.
The Times, Places and Manner of holding Elections for Senators and Representatives, shall be prescribed in each State by the Legislature thereof; but the Congress may at any time by Law make or alter such Regulations, except as to the Places of chusing Senators.

The same reasoning for the feds supplying all voting machines and software. Not everyone trusts the government.

In my state the polling address is clearly displayed on my voter registration card and I get a new card every year. I had a neighbor that moved, diidn't look at his registration card and went to the wrong polling place. The poll worker gave him the location of the one where he was registered to vote.

There may be 4 Jane Does listed on the registration rolls, but since they will all probably have a different address, the poll worker can verify which Jane Doe you are by checking to see that the address on your photo ID matches the address of one of the Jane Does.

Is AAA so careless that they didn't check the address of a member? I will have to rethink my membership.

I agree that the participation of so few Americans in the election process is sad. In my state the election process goes on for several weeks, with early voting in various locations, but do not know about the other 56 states. (The devil made me do that) My job takes me out of town or out of the country at times. Since I know my travel schedule in advance, I have had to vote absentee several times.

Just my humble opinion.

Anyone can make a mistake and it's something that some of them do every other year for a week or so; we don't exactly have political science majors staffing the polling places.

You are correct. A political science degree is not a requirement for a poll worker. Anyone that can read and write can compare a name and address on a photo ID to the name and address on the registration list. And the picture on the ID should resemble the person wanting to vote.
Are you suggesting that poll workers are stupid?

 

[candycorn]

For what it is worth.

The reason conservatives "come out swinging" is they believe that is not the intent of the Constitution:


The same reasoning for the feds supplying all voting machines and software. Not everyone trusts the government.

In my state the polling address is clearly displayed on my voter registration card and I get a new card every year. I had a neighbor that moved, diidn't look at his registration card and went to the wrong polling place. The poll worker gave him the location of the one where he was registered to vote.

There may be 4 Jane Does listed on the registration rolls, but since they will all probably have a different address, the poll worker can verify which Jane Doe you are by checking to see that the address on your photo ID matches the address of one of the Jane Does.

Is AAA so careless that they didn't check the address of a member? I will have to rethink my membership.

I agree that the participation of so few Americans in the election process is sad. In my state the election process goes on for several weeks, with early voting in various locations, but do not know about the other 56 states. (The devil made me do that) My job takes me out of town or out of the country at times. Since I know my travel schedule in advance, I have had to vote absentee several times.

Just my humble opinion.

Anyone can make a mistake and it's something that some of them do every other year for a week or so; we don't exactly have political science majors staffing the polling places.

You are correct. A political science degree is not a requirement for a poll worker. Anyone that can read and write can compare a name and address on a photo ID to the name and address on the registration list. And the picture on the ID should resemble the person wanting to vote.
Are you suggesting that poll workers are stupid?

No.
Are you suggesting they are infallible? If so they'll be the first humans ever that are.

 

[TooTall]

Anyone can make a mistake and it's something that some of them do every other year for a week or so; we don't exactly have political science majors staffing the polling places.

You are correct. A political science degree is not a requirement for a poll worker. Anyone that can read and write can compare a name and address on a photo ID to the name and address on the registration list. And the picture on the ID should resemble the person wanting to vote.
Are you suggesting that poll workers are stupid?

No.
Are you suggesting they are infallible? If so they'll be the first humans ever that are.

Since the ONLY thing they have to do is COMPARE the name, address and appearance of a person, one at a time, I maintain that the odds of them making a mistake is 1 in a billion.

 

[BillyZane]

How does my apartment rental contract prove that I am the person I claim to be?

Well, to be fair. NO ONE will rent an apartment to you unless you show them some ID to prove you are who you say you are .

So... you then have n ID to use at the polling place.
So, what's the problem with having to produce such an ID when you vote?
Answer:
There is none.

I have not a clue. I find their claims ludicrous to say the least.

Simple and easy comparison.

I have a constitutionally protected right to buy a gun. I have a constitutionally protected right to vote. Meaning both are enumerated not just assumed rights. Why on Earth are these people defending requiring ID to exercise one right, but not another? It's just odd and dishonest.

 

[jwoodie]

To many on the Left, the end (keeping power) justifies the means (fraudulent elections).

 

[Bill Angel]

I agree having some valid ID is sensible, regardless of whether voter fraud is an actual problem. But if state-issued ID do indeed present some with an unfair burden aqquiring them, why not use any legally recognized contract as proof of identity? Like the rental contract even poor people would have signed renting their apartments, or a sworn affidavit under pains and penalties or perjury, or some other legal document? Why wouldn't those qualify as 'valid ID?' Presumedly whoever rents to you was presented with some kind of satisfactory ID before you moved in, so why couldn't whatever proof was presented be used, or the rental contract itself?

Why do some people insist that getting a valid ID is an unfair burden?

"Papers, please?"

No sir, I don't like it.

Better would be to have postcards sent out to the addresses of registered voters, who would then present them at the polling place to obtain a ballot. Don't have a legit local address, no voter registration.

No same-day registration or any other such silliness.

Problem solved.

The postcard procedure you mentioned was the one that was followed in Maryland during the last Presidential election.

 

[whitehall]

I agree having some valid ID is sensible, regardless of whether voter fraud is an actual problem. But if state-issued ID do indeed present some with an unfair burden aqquiring them, why not use any legally recognized contract as proof of identity? Like the rental contract even poor people would have signed renting their apartments, or a sworn affidavit under pains and penalties or perjury, or some other legal document? Why wouldn't those qualify as 'valid ID?' Presumedly whoever rents to you was presented with some kind of satisfactory ID before you moved in, so why couldn't whatever proof was presented be used, or the rental contract itself?

The dirty little secret is that poor people need a valid photo I.D. for just about anything including renting an apartment, cashing a check or even entering a federal building to complain about needing a voter I.D.