Case against voter id?

[MSNative]

My kids were reading the paper and intrigued by this article which makes the case for voter id. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704816604576333650886790480.html?KEYWORDS=voter+id

 

I try to make my kids learn both sides of issues but frankly I'm stuck on this one. I don't understand the problem with making someone show id to vote. Can someone point me to a source to illuminate the case against voter id - especially if there is one that refutes the facts cited in the posted article?

 

Thanks!

[Ellie]

My kids were reading the paper and intrigued by this article which makes the case for voter id. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704816604576333650886790480.html?KEYWORDS=voter+id

 

I try to make my kids learn both sides of issues but frankly I'm stuck on this one. I don't understand the problem with making someone show id to vote. Can someone point me to a source to illuminate the case against voter id - especially if there is one that refutes the facts cited in the posted article?

 

Thanks!

I can't come up with a *good* case against voter i.d., either. If someone is a legal resident of the country in which he's voting, why wouldn't he have appropriate i.d.?

 

The only problem I see is getting the photo I.D. This can be trickier than one might think. My non-ambulatory, 80+yo mil had to have a Texas i.d. in order to acquire a handicap parking permit. The Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS) wouldn't accept her miliary I.D. as a form of identification for the Texas I.D. (and she had to have *three* forms of I.D., including a birth certificate). A nice DPS employee noodled around and found it in her administrative heart to give her one, anyway. Another elderly friend, who lives part-time here and part-time in Calif, wanted to get a Texas I.D., and she had to send back to Pennsylvania to get a copy of her birth certificate (so she had to have her Calif driver license, a b.c., and an original SS card, which she hasn't had to show in 40 years despite having worked for many years, and she had to apply at the SS office for a replacement). She still hasn't managed the Texas I.D. We might tackle it when she comes out again this week. I don't even know how some people could possibly have three forms of I.D. just to get a picture I.D. in the first place.

Edited May 24, 2011 by Ellie

[Parrothead]

I can't come up with a *good* case against voter i.d., either. If someone is a legal resident of the country in which he's voting, why wouldn't he have appropriate i.d.?

There is no national ID in the US though.

[Julie in Austin]

Well, I don't think you can make a case against "voter ID." I think you can make a case against "IDing some voters unlikely to vote for you so it is harder for them to vote." ;)

 

For example, the legislation in Texas exempts older people (=more likely to vote GOP) . . . even though one of the biggest sources of voter fraud involves nursing homes. This makes some people feel that this legislation (and similar in other states, although I am not familiar with details in other states) isn't about voter ID, but just making it harder on people likely to vote for Democrats.

 

Also, there is a real history in this country of using things like literacy tests and poll taxes for no reason other than to disenfranchise black voters, so I think people are wary of going down that path.

 

Had they not exempted old voters and mail-in voters, and had they made provisions for poor/rural people to get IDs, I wouldn't have a problem with the TX legislation. But as it stands, it seems fishy to me.

[Ellie]

There is no national ID in the US though.

There's no need for a *national* I.D.

[RoughCollie]

she had to send back to Pennsylvania to get a copy of her birth certificate (so she had to have her Calif driver license, a b.c., and an original SS card, which she hasn't had to show in 40 years despite having worked for many years, and she had to apply at the SS office for a replacement). She still hasn't managed the Texas I.D.

 

According to PennDot (PA), these are Homeland Security requirements. It is a real PITA to get a photo ID or a driver's license these days.

[Murmer]

A photo ID should not be required because this is not a papers please country. People should not have to PROVE that they are who they are with a *required* photo ID. The only reason we have Driver's licenses is to show that a person is able to drive..sadly that has been taken as a give in that a person will have a driver's license and therefore a photo id which can be used for other things such as getting liquor or getting on an airplane. It could make it hard for those that do not need a driver's license because they do not drive and may not be able to afford the cost of a driver's license...especially the poor which is largely made up of minorities. That is why requiring a photo ID to vote would be unfairly limiting groups of people from voting just as reading tests and poll taxes did.

[pdalley]

A photo ID should not be required because this is not a papers please country. People should not have to PROVE that they are who they are with a *required* photo ID. The only reason we have Driver's licenses is to show that a person is able to drive..sadly that has been taken as a give in that a person will have a driver's license and therefore a photo id which can be used for other things such as getting liquor or getting on an airplane. It could make it hard for those that do not need a driver's license because they do not drive and may not be able to afford the cost of a driver's license...especially the poor which is largely made up of minorities. That is why requiring a photo ID to vote would be unfairly limiting groups of people from voting just as reading tests and poll taxes did.

 

 

In NC you can get a photo ID card at the DMV very cheaply - ten dollars. I'm always asked to provide photo ID if I'm using a credit card or writing a check or even if I take myself or the boys to the Dr or ER. Or to apply for Food stamps or Medicaid as well.

 

I really don't see why requiring the same thing to vote is such an issue. Why shouldn't I have to prove I am who I say I am there as well?

[Rivka]

Unless photo IDs are distributed for free, it amounts to a poll tax. Not everyone has a photo ID for other purposes. You shouldn't have to pay drivers' license fees (or equivalent state ID fees) to vote.

 

And because access to/possession of ID is not evenly distributed among Americans, photo ID requirements disproportionately affect minorities, legal immigrants, students, urban residents, young voters, and the elderly... all of which, except for the last group, are more likely to be Democrats.

 

Here's an interesting academic paper about the subject:

http://faculty.washington.edu/mbarreto/research/Voter_ID_APSA.pdf

 

In exit polling, they found that minorities and legal immigrants who were registered to vote were less likely than whites and native-born citizens to have the forms of ID specified in many state voter ID laws. Lower-income and lower-educated people were less likely to have those ID types as well.

 

The article also makes the point that from 2002 to 2005 there were only 24 documented cases of vote fraud in the entire U.S. There is no evidence that voter fraud is a significant problem. That makes many people suggest that the hype about needing strict voter ID laws has more to do with suppressing the Democratic vote than anything else.

[Impish]

We have to show photo ID to vote here. No 'national' id, but there is provincial.

[Rivka]

Here's a good summary brief of the case against voter ID laws.

 

As many as 10% of eligible voters do not have, and will not get, the documents required by strict voter ID laws. Approximately ten percent of voting-age Americans today do not have driver’s licenses or state-issued non-driver’s photo ID. Based on Americans’ moving patterns, many more do not have photo ID showing their current address. And getting ID costs substantial time and money. A would-be voter must pay substantial fees both for ID cards and the backup documents needed to get them.

 

ID requirements fall hardest on people who have traditionally faced barriers at the polls. The impact of ID requirements is even greater for the elderly, students, people with disabilities, low-income individuals, and people of color. Thirty-six percent of Georgians over 75 do not have a driver’s license. Fewer than 3 percent of Wisconsin students have driver’s licenses listing their current address. The same study found that African Americans have driver’s licenses at half the rate of whites, and the disparity increases among younger voters; only 22% of black men aged 18-24 had a valid driver’s license. Not only are minority voters less likely to possess photo ID, but they are also more likely than white voters to be selectively asked for ID at the polls. For example, in New York City, which has no ID requirement, a study showed that poll workers illegally asked one in six Asian Americans for ID at the polls, while white voters were permitted to vote without showing ID.

[OrganicAnn]

I remember when one state initiated vote ID, there were a couple of 80+ year old nuns that did not have IDs and so were turned away. I can see the Amish or other religious groups that might not live among the main-stream society that do not have drivers licenses. They also might have difficulty getting an id because they might not have all the necessary papers/documentation.

 

So since voter fraud is so rare, is the hassle for people who don't have IDs and the possibility that they are denied the right to vote worth it?

[Hannah C.]

So, what does one have to do to get the voter registration card that one has to show at the polls? :001_huh:

 

I got mine when I changed my name (on that nifty state ID...required if one wants to prove age in order to buy age-restricted products, or to prove who you say you are if you fly, and if I recall correctly it's quite hard to get a job without one) and checked the box saying "update my voter registration."

 

It seems to me that a lot of the people mentioned in this thread as people who would have a hard time getting photo IDs would also have a hard time getting the voter registration card itself, which you *do* have to have to vote, AFAIK. Yet there *has* to be SOME way of at least trying to make sure that each person is only voting once...

 

(Side note: I find it rather annoying that one must present 3 types of ID to get a photo ID, and then one has to present that ID plus one of those other types of ID to do anything in the world. Shouldn't the one ID be enough? I guess this is to get away from fake IDs, but still. The passport is the one exception, and those aren't cheap.)

 

ETA: I looked up voter registration requirements for TX. You have to fill out a voter registration application and mail it to the local county voter registrar. You can request a postage-paid application, but you have to fill out a form for that. I'm looking at this online - I don't know where you can find this info in the "real world." The application asks for ID/license number or the last 4 digits of your SSN, along with name, birthday, and address.

Edited May 24, 2011 by Hannah C.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I believe the state legislation requiring ID usually has a provision for free ID cards for those who don't have them.

 

When I was getting unemployment benefits years ago I was asked for all sorts of paperwork including ID and proof of employment.

I had to prove my ID and residence to get a library card. I don't get why voting should be an area where we just take people's word. It isn't like voter fraud is a new concept.

[Meriwether]

Unless photo IDs are distributed for free, it amounts to a poll tax. Not everyone has a photo ID for other purposes. You shouldn't have to pay drivers' license fees (or equivalent state ID fees) to vote.

 

And because access to/possession of ID is not evenly distributed among Americans, photo ID requirements disproportionately affect minorities, legal immigrants, students, urban residents, young voters, and the elderly... all of which, except for the last group, are more likely to be Democrats.

 

Here's an interesting academic paper about the subject:

http://faculty.washington.edu/mbarreto/research/Voter_ID_APSA.pdf

 

In exit polling, they found that minorities and legal immigrants who were registered to vote were less likely than whites and native-born citizens to have the forms of ID specified in many state voter ID laws. Lower-income and lower-educated people were less likely to have those ID types as well.

 

The article also makes the point that from 2002 to 2005 there were only 24 documented cases of vote fraud in the entire U.S. There is no evidence that voter fraud is a significant problem. That makes many people suggest that the hype about needing strict voter ID laws has more to do with suppressing the Democratic vote than anything else.

 

You don't seriously believe this to be the case, do you?

[Rivka]

You don't seriously believe this to be the case, do you?

 

I am open to evidence otherwise. Do you have any to present, or are you just making an argument by assertion?

[Hannah C.]

To prove your identity in Texas to get a state ID or driver's license, you can either present a TX DL/ID with photo and within two years of expiration date, a valid US passport book or card, a US citizenship certificate or certificate of naturalization with identifiable photo, and valid US ID card. (I left out the more esoteric types of ID, as well as the ones which non-US citizens would have).

 

If you don't have one of those, you can present either 2 secondary documents ("recorded governmental documents (includes full name and date of birth)")or 1 secondary and 2 supporting documents (additional records and documents that aid in establishing identity).

 

Secondary documents include state birth certificates (original or certified) or a court order about your name or gender change. So, unless you changed your name in court, you are only going to have one of these documents.

 

Supporting documents include your actual SS card, your W-2 or 1099, the temporary receipt for your TX DL/ID, another state or territory's DL/ID within two years of expiration (Canadian ones work too), TX DL/ID which is over 2 years expired, report cards/photo IDs from school, military records, valid US military dependent card, marriage license (original or certified), voter registration card!, pilot's license..and I'm going to stop there because it's a realllly long list.

[Hannah C.]

I am open to evidence otherwise. Do you have any to present, or are you just making an argument by assertion?

 

There were the suspicious voting registrations in Houston, uncovered by Houston Votes. I don't know whether they were determined to be valid, but the allegations were staggering - something like 20,000 false registrations.

[Slartibartfast]

Unless photo IDs are distributed for free, it amounts to a poll tax. Not everyone has a photo ID for other purposes. You shouldn't have to pay drivers' license fees (or equivalent state ID fees) to vote.

 

And because access to/possession of ID is not evenly distributed among Americans, photo ID requirements disproportionately affect minorities, legal immigrants, students, urban residents, young voters, and the elderly... all of which, except for the last group, are more likely to be Democrats.

 

Here's an interesting academic paper about the subject:

http://faculty.washington.edu/mbarreto/research/Voter_ID_APSA.pdf

 

In exit polling, they found that minorities and legal immigrants who were registered to vote were less likely than whites and native-born citizens to have the forms of ID specified in many state voter ID laws. Lower-income and lower-educated people were less likely to have those ID types as well.

 

The article also makes the point that from 2002 to 2005 there were only 24 documented cases of vote fraud in the entire U.S. There is no evidence that voter fraud is a significant problem. That makes many people suggest that the hype about needing strict voter ID laws has more to do with suppressing the Democratic vote than anything else.

 

I agree

Edited May 24, 2011 by Sis

[twoforjoy]

You don't seriously believe this to be the case, do you?

 

I absolutely believe that voter fraud is extremely rare. The penalties for engaging in it are incredibly stiff, and the payoff is very slight. I don't think you are going to find many people willing to risk jail time to get one or two extra votes. I mean, goodness, look at our voter turnout rates! People don't even take advantage of their one legal vote. I just don't see voter fraud having much if any appeal.

 

Voter registration issues are a different matter altogether. There have certainly been cases of voter registration fraud, where partisan groups that have been collecting registrations have "lost" the registration forms for those voting for the other party. There have also been cases of people being registered multiple times, either because they registered with more than one address (think college students registering both at their campus address and their home address), or because the person entering the form information mis-entered some part of the information and created two registrations, or where somebody unthinkingly registered more than once (maybe they were approached by more than one person doing voter registrations, and forgot they'd filled out a form, or hadn't received their registration yet and figured they should fill out another). But those are more mistakes than actual cases of fraud.

[Rivka]

I am open to evidence otherwise. Do you have any to present, or are you just making an argument by assertion?

 

There were the suspicious voting registrations in Houston, uncovered by Houston Votes. I don't know whether they were determined to be valid, but the allegations were staggering - something like 20,000 false registrations.

 

"I don't know whether they were determined to be valid" is a pretty big stumbling block, don't you think?

 

I've seen an awful lot of things passed off as evidence of "voter registration fraud" when allegations are made. The practice of caging is a good example. A political organization sends registered letters to new voters, and then challenges or otherwise tries to suppress the votes of anyone for whom the letter comes back as undeliverable. I personally wouldn't waste my time going down to the post office to pick up a registered letter from the Republican Party (for example), but that doesn't mean that my voter registration is fraudulent.

 

For another example, activists sometimes count up people registered to vote in more than one precinct, or they count the number of registered voters in a precinct and declare that it is larger than the census count of eligible voters. But that doesn't necessarily mean that any of those registrations are fraudulent. When you move, do you write a letter to your old precinct telling them to remove you from the rolls? Me neither. I assume that it's taken care of, and I only show up to vote in one place.

 

But even true voter registration fraud is not the same as voter fraud. Voter registration fraud tends to happen when people are hired to register voters and are paid for each voter they sign up. That's when you get "registered voters" named Mickey Mouse and so forth. But it doesn't mean that someone shows up at the polls and casts a vote, or attempts to cast a vote, based on those fraudulent registrations. It's almost always a case of the paid registration gatherer defrauding whichever organization is paying him or her to register voters.

 

Vote fraud is when someone actually attempts to cast a vote knowing that they are not eligible to vote. There is very little proven, documented evidence that this is a significant problem in the United States. Anyone asserting otherwise needs to provide evidence, not of challenged registrations or even false registrations, but of false votes.

[pqr]

I am open to evidence otherwise. Do you have any to present, or are you just making an argument by assertion?

 

 

Try taking a look at Acorn and their ahem "registration."Given who they were willing to register it is not much of a leap to think that some of these would eventually have tried to vote.

 

As to only 24 cases, 2 min on the net turned up the following. I am sure a more determined look would find many more.

 

http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1103/110317lakecounty.htm

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/03/08/20110308scottsdale-voter-fraud-charges-brk.html

http://www.santafenewmexican.com/localnews/Secretary-of-state-cites-signs-of-voter-fraud

http://www.wfaa.com/news/investigates/Grand-jury-issues-indictment-in-Dallas-voter-fraud-case-118817389.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/12/felons-voting-illegally-franken-minnesota-study-finds/

http://www.examiner.com/law-enforcement-in-national/voter-fraud-illegal-alien-voters-ignored-by-obama-justice-department

Edited May 24, 2011 by pqr

[pqr]

votes.[/i]

 

 

Come on be serious. False registration, ie getting on the voting list when not entitled to do so IS VOTER FRAUD. It is undermining the electoral system, do you seriously argue otherwise? Honestly?

 

Why would you not want our system to be as secure as possible?

[twoforjoy]

Come on be serious. False registration, ie getting on the voting list when not entitled to do so IS VOTER FRAUD. It is undermining the electoral system, do you seriously argue otherwise? Honestly?

 

Why would you not want our system to be as secure as possible?

 

What if somebody isn't aware of whether or not they are able to vote?

 

Again, unless there is evidence that these people are actually voting, then I don't think mistakes in voter registration are an issue.

 

In reality, it seems like "voter fraud" is a specter invented by the political right to pass laws that actually end up disenfranchising groups traditionally inclined to vote Democrat. The whole idea of "voter fraud" seems like, IMO, a sneaky way to actually *commit* voter fraud, by passing unconstitutional laws and intimidating people into thinking they don't have the right to vote.

 

Now, if we really want to talk about problems with voting and laws that circumvent democracy, I'd love to talk about the felony disenfranchisement laws that have led to 1/3 of black men in Florida being permanently disenfranchised.

Edited May 24, 2011 by twoforjoy

[Rivka]

Try taking a look at Acorn and their ahem "registration."Given who they were willing to register it is not much of a leap to think that some of these would eventually have tried to vote.

 

ACORN had a problem with paid signature gatherers falsifying registration applications. The law does not permit community voter registration groups to selectively discard applications even when they believe them to be false. ACORN did flag many registration cards as suspicious when they turned them in, and those cards appear to have been dealt with appropriately. After massive investigations at both federal and state levels, the accusations of voter fraud against ACORN melted away with only a couple of cases of proven fraudulent votes cast.

 

As to only 24 cases, 2 min on the net turned up the following. I am sure a more determined look would find many more.

 

http://www.ice.gov/news/releases/1103/110317lakecounty.htm

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/03/08/20110308scottsdale-voter-fraud-charges-brk.html

http://www.santafenewmexican.com/localnews/Secretary-of-state-cites-signs-of-voter-fraud

http://www.wfaa.com/news/investigates/Grand-jury-issues-indictment-in-Dallas-voter-fraud-case-118817389.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/07/12/felons-voting-illegally-franken-minnesota-study-finds/

http://www.examiner.com/law-enforcement-in-national/voter-fraud-illegal-alien-voters-ignored-by-obama-justice-department

 

Only the first two links refer to convictions for vote fraud. The third refers to indictments. The fourth describes an investigation which is apparently ongoing - no charges have been made, and voting rights groups are disputing the methodology. The fifth reports on a study by a conservative watchdog group, the results of which are disputed by state authorities. And the last is just a blog post by some guy who apparently believes that it's illegal for immigrants to vote, and that it's improper for Obama to speak before groups of Latinos without checking each attendee's immigration status at the door.

 

Also, did you miss that the statistic of 24 cases was for a specific two-year period?

[Rivka]

http://www.truthaboutfraud.org/pdf/TruthAboutVoterFraud.pdf

[pdalley]

I agree, although it would be nice to have some option in place for someone who for whatever reason cannot get the ID. I don't know what that would be, but it seems wrong to make one pay for something to vote.

 

 

If income guidelines were met then I don't have a problem with waving a fee. I do wonder if one doesn't have a photo ID how they do much of anything. Mine is checked all the time. Especially with medical care these days. Even when I didn't have insurance and went to the sliding fee clinic.

 

Waving the fee based on income would then eliminate the 'poll tax'. I still think ID should be shown in order to vote. I know of voter fraud in a local election many moons ago when I was in college so I really don't think its isolated and rare.

[Rivka]

If income guidelines were met then I don't have a problem with waving a fee. I do wonder if one doesn't have a photo ID how they do much of anything. Mine is checked all the time. Especially with medical care these days. Even when I didn't have insurance and went to the sliding fee clinic.

 

Waving the fee based on income would then eliminate the 'poll tax'. I still think ID should be shown in order to vote. I know of voter fraud in a local election many moons ago when I was in college so I really don't think its isolated and rare.

 

It doesn't eliminate the poll tax aspect. Now you've added an extra burden of documentation (coming up with proof of income), and people would presumably still have to pay fees to acquire whatever forms of ID are necessary to obtain a state ID - an official copy of a birth certificate, etc. There is also a substantial time and effort burden if you're having to send away for various forms of documentation, wait for them to arrive, then go to a DMV (or whatever) and wait to be seen there, etc. Keep in mind that we are likely to be talking about people who don't have the internet, a credit card, or a checking account, so to send away for a birth certificate they will have to go wait in line for a money order, and then perhaps write to an out-of-state office and wait to hear back. It's a burden.

 

There is seriously no evidence that voter fraud is not isolated and rare, and people have checked and checked. The fact that you knew of a local case back when you were in college doesn't really demonstrate that it's common and widespread, you know. I understand that a lot of people have the vague feeling that people must be voting fraudulently, and the right-wing media and the Republican party do a lot to encourage that feeling. But it should take more than vague feelings and unsubstantiated opinions before we take actions that will disenfranchise people.

[LidiyaDawn]

We have to show photo ID to vote here. No 'national' id, but there is provincial.

 

I was just starting to read this thread and was thinking how strange it was because the idea of showing up to vote without ID seems so strange!

[angela in ohio]

I was just starting to read this thread and was thinking how strange it was because the idea of showing up to vote without ID seems so strange!

 

We moved a few years ago, and I was relieved to have to start showing my ID to vote. Before that, I just gave my name and signed the book (next to a copy of my own signature, just in case I needed to copy it ;).) There were numerous complaints in that state last election of people showing up to vote and having had someone already make their vote. :001_huh: Considering the low voter turnout, I can't imagine how many just didn't know it, either.

 

That said, until there are free acceptable forms of ID available (and there should be,) I don't think you can require it. You can't make someone pay to vote, imho.

 

Honestly, I don't think that's the biggest form of fraud in elections, anyway, so I think it's a small time issue.

[LidiyaDawn]

For anyone interested, here's the requirements from Elections Canada for voter identification: Voter Identification at the Polls

 

there are MANY options besides a driving licence ~ as you can see by the charts. :)

[MSNative]

We moved a few years ago, and I was relieved to have to start showing my ID to vote. Before that, I just gave my name and signed the book (next to a copy of my own signature, just in case I needed to copy it ;).) There were numerous complaints in that state last election of people showing up to vote and having had someone already make their vote. :001_huh: Considering the low voter turnout, I can't imagine how many just didn't know it, either.

 

That said, until there are free acceptable forms of ID available (and there should be,) I don't think you can require it. You can't make someone pay to vote, imho.

 

Honestly, I don't think that's the biggest form of fraud in elections, anyway, so I think it's a small time issue.

 

I think I understand the argument against id if the id costs money. If id was free (as the article stated it was in KS and others have said it is in other states) would those of you who are against voter id still be against it and if so, why? Are you philosophically opposed to someone showing id to vote or is it that you find the current system to get the id onerous?

 

I'd be interested in seeing more research into voter fraud. Seems like if 62% of Americans think it is a big issue, it is worth a serious, non-partisan investigation to prove or disprove. Especially if we have a percentage of people who don't think it a problem and think that measures to prevent it are a tactic to stop certain groups from voting. Yikes. Either one of those can't be good for the country. I know voter fraud occurs in my home state. My cousin showed up to vote in 2010 and found out someone had already voted for her. Such service. ;) My aunt volunteered and saw on her books (from an earlier shift) two people who were dead had voted also.

 

I agree with you, Angela in Ohio, that there are bigger issues. I'm very concerned with the votes that election officials "find" in their cars and with electronic voting that defaults to a certain party with no paper back up. This has now happened in at least 4 elections that I can think of off the top of my head. Not good for electoral confidence.

[twoforjoy]

I'd be interested in seeing more research into voter fraud. Seems like if 62% of Americans think it is a big issue, it is worth a serious, non-partisan investigation to prove or disprove.

 

I'm pretty sure these investigations have happened, and widespread voter fraud has not been found.

 

I think we need to think about this practically. People seem so convinced that illegal immigrants, for example, are illegally voting in large numbers. Let's consider that. What is going to happen if they are caught? They'll be charged with a crime and deported. What is going to happen if they get away with the fraud? They'll get one stinking vote in an election. Do we really think that the chance to cast one vote in an election--in a political system where both parties treat undocumented workers pretty badly--is worth risking arrest and deportation to people? I can't imagine it would be, and all evidence indicates that it isn't, and that illegal immigrants are not casting illegal votes in even small numbers, much less numbers significant enough to make a difference in an election.

 

From an article about voter fraud, describing two efforts to crack down on/study it:

 

http://www.slate.com/id/2272405/

 

In 2002, the Bush administration made cracking down on voter fraud a top priority. Five years later, the effort had yielded 86 convictions. About 30 convictions were linked to vote-buying schemes in races for small offices like sheriff or judge. Only 26 were attributable to individual voters, and most of those were misunderstandings about voter eligibility, such as felons who voted without knowing it was illegal. The prosecutions provided little evidence of organized fraud.

 

A 2007 study by the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University reached a similar conclusion. The vast majority of "fraud" cases, it found, were due to typographical errors in poll books and registration records, bad matches between voter databases (for example, you could be listed as John Smith in one database and John T. Smith in another), and voters registering at new addresses without deleting old registrations. Much of the alleged "voter fraud," it turns out, is just poorly filled out registration cards. And even if someone purposely files a fraudulent form by writing the name "Mickey Mouse," it doesn't affect the election. "Mickey Mouse doesn't vote," says Wendy Weiser of the Brennan Institute. Actual voter fraud—a voter pretending to be someone he's not—is, according to the study, less common than getting struck by lightning.

[ChrissySC]

I will toss in my opinion.

 

I see nothing wrong with asking for ID. I have been asked for my ID for more than 20 years. I show my card, sign my name, and go vote.

 

As for the cost factor, as I watch people with layers of gold around their neck, high-dollar cell phones, and nicer cars than mine buy steaks with food stamps, I think they can find five to ten dollars for a state ID. The cost is not unreasonable. You can find that many quarters and pennies in my sofa. We all manage our households despite the income level. We plan for those things we need and desire.

 

SC will never support the national ID either. We have fought against this twice already. I suppose we are quite the rebel state, but there are some very valid points against the national ID - which boils down to state rights and governing power.

 

So ....

[twoforjoy]

I will toss in my opinion.

 

I see nothing wrong with asking for ID.

 

But what is the purpose? Anything we do that puts up any sort of barrier to people voting needs to have a really, really strong rationale. If it's been shown again and again that voter fraud is neither widespread nor happening at the individual level in most of the isolated cases in which it does happen, what purpose does requiring ID serve? And what would be the effect?

 

If the effect would be discouraging voting among certain populations who one political party has a vested interest in keeping from the polls--young people, poor people, racial minorities, legal immigrants--then I do think we need to stop and consider whether requiring ID is really an attempt at voter intimidation and manipulation.

 

Plus, how would requiring ID actually stop fraud if it were as significant as people think? Anybody with enough money to afford a fake ID, who really wanted to commit voter fraud, could do so. If we believe that illegal immigrants are going to risk deportation in order to vote illegally, because voting illegally is so important to people, why wouldn't we believe that people wouldn't obtain a fake ID to commit voter fraud?

 

The problem I have is that the rationale for requiring ID seems to be "Well, what's the big deal? People should have an ID anyway." I just don't think we can create laws putting up barriers to voting based on the idea that some of the population has that such barriers aren't really such a big deal. They should be created because there is a demonstrated need for such laws, and there is simply no demonstrated need for requiring voters to show ID.

Edited May 24, 2011 by twoforjoy

[KristinaBreece]

Unless photo IDs are distributed for free, it amounts to a poll tax. Not everyone has a photo ID for other purposes. You shouldn't have to pay drivers' license fees (or equivalent state ID fees) to vote.

 

And because access to/possession of ID is not evenly distributed among Americans, photo ID requirements disproportionately affect minorities, legal immigrants, students, urban residents, young voters, and the elderly... all of which, except for the last group, are more likely to be Democrats.

 

Here's an interesting academic paper about the subject:

http://faculty.washington.edu/mbarreto/research/Voter_ID_APSA.pdf

 

In exit polling, they found that minorities and legal immigrants who were registered to vote were less likely than whites and native-born citizens to have the forms of ID specified in many state voter ID laws. Lower-income and lower-educated people were less likely to have those ID types as well.

 

The article also makes the point that from 2002 to 2005 there were only 24 documented cases of vote fraud in the entire U.S. There is no evidence that voter fraud is a significant problem. That makes many people suggest that the hype about needing strict voter ID laws has more to do with suppressing the Democratic vote than anything else.

 

I'm going to come down firmly on Rivka's side here. A poll tax is illegal and requiring a photo ID which costs money and loss of income for the time to get the thing constitutes a poll tax.

 

Now, asking to see a local utility bill or other acceptable piece of mail may seem to be a valid way to get around that. But homeless people are entitled to vote just as much as anyone else, and wouldn't have such documentation. Neither would I, if it came to that. All of our bills are in my husband's name.

 

Come on be serious. False registration, ie getting on the voting list when not entitled to do so IS VOTER FRAUD. It is undermining the electoral system, do you seriously argue otherwise? Honestly?

 

Why would you not want our system to be as secure as possible?

 

Our right to a free vote trumps the minimal "security risk" here.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I am open to evidence otherwise. Do you have any to present, or are you just making an argument by assertion?

 

When we lived in Germany, one of the other families observed a US absentee voter registration table set up at a movie theatre in downtown Berlin (about 6 hours drive from the nearest US military base, btw). They were registering people even though the entire conversation was occuring in German. At one point one of the volunteers got off her cell phone and told the others that "we need more voters for [state name]" loudly enough that both of our friends could hear it.

 

I do not think this was just a courtesy table set up to catch US expats who happened to have forgotten that there was a presidential election to request an absentee ballot for.

 

I cannot say with certainty that the intention was to fraudulently register non-Americans to vote in a US presidential election. I can say with certainty that there was nothing going on that would have prevented it.

[twoforjoy]

When we lived in Germany, one of the other families observed a US absentee voter registration table set up at a movie theatre in downtown Berlin (about 6 hours drive from the nearest US military base, btw). They were registering people even though the entire conversation was occuring in German. At one point one of the volunteers got off her cell phone and told the others that "we need more voters for [state name]" loudly enough that both of our friends could hear it.

 

I do not think this was just a courtesy table set up to catch US expats who happened to have forgotten that there was a presidential election to request an absentee ballot for.

 

I cannot say with certainty that the intention was to fraudulently register non-Americans to vote in a US presidential election. I can say with certainty that there was nothing going on that would have prevented it.

 

I wouldn't consider that evidence, no. I've seen absolutely no evidence or even accusations of European citizens using absentee ballots to vote in U.S. Presidential elections.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I absolutely believe that voter fraud is extremely rare. The penalties for engaging in it are incredibly stiff, and the payoff is very slight. I don't think you are going to find many people willing to risk jail time to get one or two extra votes. I mean, goodness, look at our voter turnout rates! People don't even take advantage of their one legal vote. I just don't see voter fraud having much if any appeal.

 

 

Before dh's grandfather died he was living in a nursing home. He was lucid enough to enjoy an occasional outing, but was struggling a lot physically and mentally.

 

He was a life long Republican voter. His daughter's husband "Ted" came to town to work on get out the vote programs for the Democratic party. From several states away. "Ted" took dh's grandfather to vote and was quite willing to help him cast his ballot. Later dh's grandfather told my mil that he'd voted, and that he was pretty sure he'd voted Republican, but he wasn't really sure because "Ted" had been helping.

 

So I guess that it was appealling enough for "Ted" to go to the effort of taking a 70 year old who had voted Republican since Eisenhower to the polls as part of his Democrat voter efforts.

 

DH's grandfather didn't live to vote in another presidential election. And what were those who suspected supposed to do? Request that charges be filed against a family member?

[Meriwether]

I am open to evidence otherwise. Do you have any to present, or are you just making an argument by assertion?

 

 

Anecdotal. My cousin was standing behind a young man waiting to vote. As the young man was given voting instructions he said, "That isn't how I voted in Philadelphia this morning." I doubt my cousin was standing behind one of the 24 documented cases. Maybe if we had photo ID's we would be able to document more cases of (hopefully only attempted) fraud.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

What if somebody isn't aware of whether or not they are able to vote?

 

Again, unless there is evidence that these people are actually voting, then I don't think mistakes in voter registration are an issue.

 

In reality, it seems like "voter fraud" is a specter invented by the political right to pass laws that actually end up disenfranchising groups traditionally inclined to vote Democrat. The whole idea of "voter fraud" seems like, IMO, a sneaky way to actually *commit* voter fraud, by passing unconstitutional laws and intimidating people into thinking they don't have the right to vote.

 

Now, if we really want to talk about problems with voting and laws that circumvent democracy, I'd love to talk about the felony disenfranchisement laws that have led to 1/3 of black men in Florida being permanently disenfranchised.

 

How would someone be aware if they are able to vote if we have already declared that asking someone to demonstrate citizenship (not just check a box) upon registration is somehow itself evidence of an effort to disenfranchise?

 

As for your last point, the loss of franchise is based on committing a felony, not on race. And it applied just as much to the white members of my extended family who were convicted of felonies as to anyone else.

[ktgrok]

In NC you can get a photo ID card at the DMV very cheaply - ten dollars. I'm always asked to provide photo ID if I'm using a credit card or writing a check or even if I take myself or the boys to the Dr or ER. Or to apply for Food stamps or Medicaid as well.

 

I really don't see why requiring the same thing to vote is such an issue. Why shouldn't I have to prove I am who I say I am there as well?

 

Ok, but that makes voting cost 10 dollars, which is NOT what we believe in in the USA. Voting is supposed to be free, not cheap.

 

Also, add in the cost of cab or bus fare to get to the dmv, and that goes up again. Add in bus or cab fare to the library to use the free internet to research how to find your birth certificate. Add in long distance phone charges to call to get your birth certificate, plus whatever fees might be associated with mailing it, IF you can get it mailed to you at all. Or the cab/bus fare to go pick it up somewhere. Not to mention maybe you can't find it at all.

 

My dh's grandma was a US citizen, but born in the UK. At some point in her 50s the birth certificate was lost, and short of flying to the UK we couldn't get ahold of it for her. She almost didn't get medicaid because of this, and wouldn't be able to get a up to date ID. She didn't have a driver's licencse because she didn't drive anymore.

 

It doesn't sound like a hardship until you are in that situation.

 

And honestly, it's pointless. There has not been a rash of voter fraud, it just isn't an actual problem in this country. This is creating a real problem to fix an imaginary one.

 

This will effect the poor, rural, and elderly making them less likely to vote. That is the real purpose.

[HSmom25andRN]

Every 17 year old I know has a driver's license so I can't see how it is that difficult. My BIL got out of jail (traffic offense) moved to Maryland from Florida and got a photo ID very quickly with only his birth ceritficate, social security card, and one piece of mail to prove Maryland residence (he used a personal letter). A married woman (using her married name) would need to bring her marriage licence. How is that unreasonable?

 

According to PennDot (PA), these are Homeland Security requirements. It is a real PITA to get a photo ID or a driver's license these days.

[ktgrok]

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

Unless photo IDs are distributed for free, it amounts to a poll tax. Not everyone has a photo ID for other purposes. You shouldn't have to pay drivers' license fees (or equivalent state ID fees) to vote.

 

And because access to/possession of ID is not evenly distributed among Americans, photo ID requirements disproportionately affect minorities, legal immigrants, students, urban residents, young voters, and the elderly... all of which, except for the last group, are more likely to be Democrats.

 

Here's an interesting academic paper about the subject:

http://faculty.washington.edu/mbarreto/research/Voter_ID_APSA.pdf

 

In exit polling, they found that minorities and legal immigrants who were registered to vote were less likely than whites and native-born citizens to have the forms of ID specified in many state voter ID laws. Lower-income and lower-educated people were less likely to have those ID types as well.

 

The article also makes the point that from 2002 to 2005 there were only 24 documented cases of vote fraud in the entire U.S. There is no evidence that voter fraud is a significant problem. That makes many people suggest that the hype about needing strict voter ID laws has more to do with suppressing the Democratic vote than anything else.

[ktgrok]

So, what does one have to do to get the voter registration card that one has to show at the polls? :001_huh:

 

I got mine when I changed my name (on that nifty state ID...required if one wants to prove age in order to buy age-restricted products, or to prove who you say you are if you fly, and if I recall correctly it's quite hard to get a job without one) and checked the box saying "update my voter registration."

 

It seems to me that a lot of the people mentioned in this thread as people who would have a hard time getting photo IDs would also have a hard time getting the voter registration card itself, which you *do* have to have to vote, AFAIK. Yet there *has* to be SOME way of at least trying to make sure that each person is only voting once...

 

(Side note: I find it rather annoying that one must present 3 types of ID to get a photo ID, and then one has to present that ID plus one of those other types of ID to do anything in the world. Shouldn't the one ID be enough? I guess this is to get away from fake IDs, but still. The passport is the one exception, and those aren't cheap.)

 

ETA: I looked up voter registration requirements for TX. You have to fill out a voter registration application and mail it to the local county voter registrar. You can request a postage-paid application, but you have to fill out a form for that. I'm looking at this online - I don't know where you can find this info in the "real world." The application asks for ID/license number or the last 4 digits of your SSN, along with name, birthday, and address.

 

The local libraries have the forms, and you can turn them in right there. They will also help you fill them out if you have questions. The libraries are traditionally the place the poor go for these kind of services. They provide internet access, tax forms, and voter forms.

[pdalley]

Ok, but that makes voting cost 10 dollars, which is NOT what we believe in in the USA. Voting is supposed to be free, not cheap.

 

Also, add in the cost of cab or bus fare to get to the dmv, and that goes up again. Add in bus or cab fare to the library to use the free internet to research how to find your birth certificate. Add in long distance phone charges to call to get your birth certificate, plus whatever fees might be associated with mailing it, IF you can get it mailed to you at all. Or the cab/bus fare to go pick it up somewhere. Not to mention maybe you can't find it at all.

 

My dh's grandma was a US citizen, but born in the UK. At some point in her 50s the birth certificate was lost, and short of flying to the UK we couldn't get ahold of it for her. She almost didn't get medicaid because of this, and wouldn't be able to get a up to date ID. She didn't have a driver's licencse because she didn't drive anymore.

 

It doesn't sound like a hardship until you are in that situation.

 

And honestly, it's pointless. There has not been a rash of voter fraud, it just isn't an actual problem in this country. This is creating a real problem to fix an imaginary one.

 

This will effect the poor, rural, and elderly making them less likely to vote. That is the real purpose.

 

So how do these people get public assistance?

 

I've been on public assistance. I've had to get transportation to apply, to deliver necessary paperwork, etc. I also had to produce a photo id. Imagine that.

 

Waive the ID fee based on income. Provide ID's for free at voter registration. There are many ways around the situation. And I'm just laughing at the idea that voter fraud is not a problem in the US.

 

Try living in the deep rural south and get back to me. It happens here all.the.time.

 

The good ole boy system is alive and well here. Truly.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Ok, but that makes voting cost 10 dollars, which is NOT what we believe in in the USA. Voting is supposed to be free, not cheap.

 

Also, add in the cost of cab or bus fare to get to the dmv, and that goes up again. Add in bus or cab fare to the library to use the free internet to research how to find your birth certificate. Add in long distance phone charges to call to get your birth certificate, plus whatever fees might be associated with mailing it, IF you can get it mailed to you at all. Or the cab/bus fare to go pick it up somewhere. Not to mention maybe you can't find it at all.

 

My dh's grandma was a US citizen, but born in the UK. At some point in her 50s the birth certificate was lost, and short of flying to the UK we couldn't get ahold of it for her. She almost didn't get medicaid because of this, and wouldn't be able to get a up to date ID. She didn't have a driver's licencse because she didn't drive anymore.

 

It doesn't sound like a hardship until you are in that situation.

 

And honestly, it's pointless. There has not been a rash of voter fraud, it just isn't an actual problem in this country. This is creating a real problem to fix an imaginary one.

 

This will effect the poor, rural, and elderly making them less likely to vote. That is the real purpose.

 

There has not been much voter fraud that was pursued through the courts. That isn't the same as saying there has not been voter fraud.

 

If we are willing to drop cases like the voter intimidation case in Philadelphia, then we aren't really interested in looking for voter fraud.

 

Leave aside cases like the one in my family (which was someone manipulating an elderly voter in order to get an additional Democrat vote). If someone makes strange statements in front of a poll worker (like indicating they've already voted), do they have any option to do anything at all? How blatant would it have to be for them to step in? (Serious question. I think that polling place volunteers probably have very limited ability to protest suspected irregularities.)

[HSmom25andRN]

I work in a rehab and therefore see lots of elderly. There are many people in their 20's I know that couldn't tell you which party the candidates are affiliated with unless there is a D or an R next to the name. So in the same sense, we have to give these nursing home residence the benefit of the doubt. And trust me, most family members don't even bother to visit, much less take their elderly demented relative to the voting booth. After 15 years working with this population, I really can say this is a non-issue.

 

Before dh's grandfather died he was living in a nursing home. He was lucid enough to enjoy an occasional outing, but was struggling a lot physically and mentally.

 

He was a life long Republican voter. His daughter's husband "Ted" came to town to work on get out the vote programs for the Democratic party. From several states away. "Ted" took dh's grandfather to vote and was quite willing to help him cast his ballot. Later dh's grandfather told my mil that he'd voted, and that he was pretty sure he'd voted Republican, but he wasn't really sure because "Ted" had been helping.

 

So I guess that it was appealling enough for "Ted" to go to the effort of taking a 70 year old who had voted Republican since Eisenhower to the polls as part of his Democrat voter efforts.

 

DH's grandfather didn't live to vote in another presidential election. And what were those who suspected supposed to do? Request that charges be filed against a family member?

[unsinkable]

There has not been much voter fraud that was pursued through the courts. That isn't the same as saying there has not been voter fraud.

 

If we are willing to drop cases like the voter intimidation case in Philadelphia, then we aren't really interested in looking for voter fraud.

 

Leave aside cases like the one in my family (which was someone manipulating an elderly voter in order to get an additional Democrat vote). If someone makes strange statements in front of a poll worker (like indicating they've already voted), do they have any option to do anything at all? How blatant would it have to be for them to step in? (Serious question. I think that polling place volunteers probably have very limited ability to protest suspected irregularities.)

 

The polling workers are not volunteers here. They are paid positions.

[twoforjoy]

Every 17 year old I know has a driver's license so I can't see how it is that difficult.

 

You obviously don't live in a poor, inner city area where many people don't have cars.

 

Again, the issue isn't whether it's difficult, but whether it's absolutely necessary. And, despite people's anecdotal experiences, actual investigations have yielded no evidence of anything approaching significant voter fraud, particularly at the individual level.