Rooting out that voter fraud

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/opi...e59695406.html

Hell, every bureaucratic system has errors and exceptions. We have to accept a small amount of collateral damage to root out fraud. Hopefully, the state will correct its error and let that lady vote.

Just as long as there are no dangling chads to count.

Hell, every bureaucratic system has errors and exceptions. We have to accept a small amount of collateral damage to root out fraud. Hopefully, the state will correct its error and let that lady vote. Originally Posted by DSK

This seems so backwards to me. You are saying that we should deny this woman her constitutional rights because someone else might commit a crime. On top of that, it is a crime that no one has even been able to even really prove is actually a problem.

This is not to say it never happens, I am sure it does. But if we are going to set up a system that we know denies people their constitutional rights, when they have done nothing wrong, we better have a whole lot of proof that it is actually a problem.

This seems so backwards to me. You are saying that we should deny this woman her constitutional rights because someone else might commit a crime. On top of that, it is a crime that no one has even been able to even really prove is actually a problem.

This is not to say it never happens, I am sure it does. But if we are going to set up a system that we know denies people their constitutional rights, when they have done nothing wrong, we better have a whole lot of proof that it is actually a problem. Originally Posted by eatfibo

The constitution guarantees equal protection - The Equal Protection Clause is part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The clause, which took effect in 1868, provides that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction "the equal protection of the laws".

Yet, as a white man, I'm routinely discriminated against by my own government. Affirmative action, quotas, diversity, etc - all discriminatory. Compared to that, having to have the correct paperwork to vote is a minor thing.

The constitution guarantees equal protection - The Equal Protection Clause is part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The clause, which took effect in 1868, provides that no state shall deny to any person within its jurisdiction "the equal protection of the laws".

Yet, as a white man, I'm routinely discriminated against by my own government. Affirmative action, quotas, diversity, etc - all discriminatory. Compared to that, having to have the correct paperwork to vote is a minor thing. Originally Posted by DSK

This is a red herring. I'm not discussing who has it worse or discrimination against white men. I'm talking about denying people the right to vote without good reason. Whether or not you think you have it worse on something completely unrelated has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

This is a red herring. I'm not discussing who has it worse or discrimination against white men. I'm talking about denying people the right to vote without good reason. Whether or not you think you have it worse on something completely unrelated has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand. Originally Posted by eatfibo

It is a completely good reason to deny someone their vote if they cannot prove their identity per reasonable governmental rules.

It is a completely good reason to deny someone their vote if they cannot prove their identity per reasonable governmental rules. Originally Posted by DSK

To decide whether or not something like this is reasonable, we have to weigh two things: is there a good reason to do it, and does the burden it put on people match the reason.

I would hope you would agree that we wouldn't want to effectively block 1000 legitimate people from voting, in order to stop one fraudulent vote. At some point, the number of people disenfranchised voters has to be taken into account.

So, right now, no one can provide a good reason. If there were evidence of a lot of misrepresentation voter fraud, I would be totally on board. However, the evidence seems to suggest that this isn't happening much at all.

Considering we have a pretty good idea how difficult it would make voting for a large number of people, effectively disenfranchising them, the costs don't see to even remotely outweigh the tiny problem.

That being said, if voter fraud were something we knew was happening a lot, I would absolutely agree with you that an ID would be a reasonable request. However, considering it doesn't even appear to be a problem, it doesn't seem reasonable at all.

She got her voter registration. Anyone else can, too. This is not an issue. If you want to vote, get an ID. If you are worried about citizens not being able to get an ID to vote, quit marching and bitching, and help them get an ID. The state should provide a photo ID for voting purposes for free. If they don't, pay for it yourself. It's more effective than donating to marchers and bitchers.

The ONLY reason this is an issue is because some people want non-citizens to vote, because they think the non-citizens will vote for them. That is the ONLY reason!

To decide whether or not something like this is reasonable, we have to weigh two things: is there a good reason to do it, and does the burden it put on people match the reason.

I would hope you would agree that we wouldn't want to effectively block 1000 legitimate people from voting, in order to stop one fraudulent vote. At some point, the number of people disenfranchised voters has to be taken into account.

So, right now, no one can provide a good reason. If there were evidence of a lot of misrepresentation voter fraud, I would be totally on board. However, the evidence seems to suggest that this isn't happening much at all.

Considering we have a pretty good idea how difficult it would make voting for a large number of people, effectively disenfranchising them, the costs don't see to even remotely outweigh the tiny problem.

That being said, if voter fraud were something we knew was happening a lot, I would absolutely agree with you that an ID would be a reasonable request. However, considering it doesn't even appear to be a problem, it doesn't seem reasonable at all. Originally Posted by eatfibo

Evidence? There is evidence but since voter ID has been blocked in so many states it makes it very difficult to get real evidence. About the only time you get "evidence" is when someone does something really stupid or the powers that be go overboard and have a 110% voter turnout.

The ONLY reason this is an issue is because some people want non-citizens to vote, because they think the non-citizens will vote for them. That is the ONLY reason! Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

This is like the other side saying, "the only reason that they want voter ID laws is because they want poor people to not be able to vote!" If you want to stick your fingers in your ears and ignore the argument of the other side, that is your choice. But instead of making up the argument for them, you would be better served demonstrating why their argument is actually wrong.

Evidence? There is evidence but since voter ID has been blocked in so many states it makes it very difficult to get real evidence. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

If we don't have evidence, that means there is no evidence. Assuming something is happening and then claiming that there would be evidence if we could find it is not the same thing as actually having evidence.

About the only time you get "evidence" is when someone does something really stupid or the powers that be go overboard and have a 110% voter turnout.

Untrue. There are ways to statistically analyze voting and reasonably conclude that there was something fishy going on. Not only that, but we have multiple of different research papers trying to find evidence of fraud, which turned up nothing. This is why the courts, after reviewing the evidence, have repeatedly struck down these laws as "unreasonable." They are trying to solve a problem that appears barely exists by putting undue burden on numerous people who have committed no crime.

This is like the other side saying, "the only reason that they want voter ID laws is because they want poor people to not be able to vote!" If you want to stick your fingers in your ears and ignore the argument of the other side, that is your choice. But instead of making up the argument for them, you would be better served demonstrating why their argument is actually wrong. Originally Posted by eatfibo

I did. They are wrong, eatfido.

If we don't have evidence, that means there is no evidence.... Originally Posted by eatfibo

Not so fast. You want evidence? Read this:

http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...citizen-voting

Some key excerpts:

"In 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that up to 3 percent of the 30,000 individuals called for jury duty from voter registration rolls over a two-year period in just one U.S. district court were not U.S. citizens."

“Those who ignore the implications of non-citizen registration and voting either are willfully blind to the problem or may actually favor this form of illegal voting.”

“The evidence is indisputable that aliens, both legal and illegal, are registering and voting in federal, state, and local elections.”

The author cites one example after another of close elections where the extent of the fraud was only uncovered because a recount was conducted. And you want us to believe in the 99% of elections where there is no recount, it means there was no fraud?

Oh, and did you know that eight of the 9/11 hijackers were registered to vote in either Virginia or Florida?

And here is the scary part – Even if we enact and enforce voter ID laws, they won't fix the problem. Such laws merely require illegal voters to have valid photo IDs matching up with the info they used to register. In other words, it's a voter registration problem, not a voter impersonation problem.

Not so fast. You want evidence? Read this:

http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...citizen-voting

Some key excerpts:

"In 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that up to 3 percent of the 30,000 individuals called for jury duty from voter registration rolls over a two-year period in just one U.S. district court were not U.S. citizens."

“Those who ignore the implications of non-citizen registration and voting either are willfully blind to the problem or may actually favor this form of illegal voting.”

“The evidence is indisputable that aliens, both legal and illegal, are registering and voting in federal, state, and local elections.”

The author cites one example after another of close elections where the extent of the fraud was only uncovered because a recount was conducted. And you want us to believe in the 99% of elections where there is no recount, it means there was no fraud?

Oh, and did you know that eight of the 9/11 hijackers were registered to vote in either Virginia or Florida?

And here is the scary part – Even if we enact and enforce voter ID laws, they won't fix the problem. Such laws merely require illegal voters to have valid photo IDs matching up with the info they used to register. In other words, it's a voter registration problem, not a voter impersonation problem. Originally Posted by lustylad

Very well put. EatFido, please consider this for my reply, also.

I did. They are wrong, eatfido. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

+1

Not so fast. You want evidence? Read this:

http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...citizen-voting

Some key excerpts:

"In 2005, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that up to 3 percent of the 30,000 individuals called for jury duty from voter registration rolls over a two-year period in just one U.S. district court were not U.S. citizens."

“Those who ignore the implications of non-citizen registration and voting either are willfully blind to the problem or may actually favor this form of illegal voting.”

“The evidence is indisputable that aliens, both legal and illegal, are registering and voting in federal, state, and local elections.”

The author cites one example after another of close elections where the extent of the fraud was only uncovered because a recount was conducted. And you want us to believe in the 99% of elections where there is no recount, it means there was no fraud?

Oh, and did you know that eight of the 9/11 hijackers were registered to vote in either Virginia or Florida?

And here is the scary part – Even if we enact and enforce voter ID laws, they won't fix the problem. Such laws merely require illegal voters to have valid photo IDs matching up with the info they used to register. In other words, it's a voter registration problem, not a voter impersonation problem. Originally Posted by lustylad

+1