first?

Christy!

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Well, I have to call it a day early. I’ve got a “leadership” retreat to go to. Perhaps I should invite some of our Democratic congresscritters.

Keep up the good work everyone!

Voter fraud is a well documented and existing problem in the United States. In the next paragraph he writes that investigations in Milwaukee, Wisconsin “found thousands of fraudulent and suspicious votes in that city, in a state where John Kerry won by only 11,384 votes in the 2004 election.” (027886). And who are among the authorities cited by von Spakovsky for these two statements ? His own law journal article that he published under the name Publius! So Hans von Spakovsky has finally found someone who agrees with his take on voter ID laws: himself.

wow, a man modeled right after the administrations own strategy

remember this administration as they were running up to invading Iraq for no reason what so ever?

they first leaked fake information to the new york times and then had the nerve to use the new york times as confirmation of their own fake data?

man, daja vu…all over…again

Hello Christy…

I swear, Whack a mole run amok with these people.

Actually, I have to add my confusion to that already stated. Why is showing a photo to prove that you are who say you are voter oppression?

You need a photo id to get a job, to fly, to drive… what exactly is wrong with showing ID to prove who you are before being handed a ballot? Otherwise, anyone could go in and claim they were me and steal my vote!

I’d have no problem at all with walking in and showing my Driver’s License, or State ID card to prove my identity before being handed my ballot. I have a voter registration card (no photo), but I’ve NEVER been asked to show it.

Why is this an issue?

Sewmouse @ 8

Actually, I have to add my confusion to that already stated. Why is showing a photo to prove that you are who say you are voter oppression?

You need a photo id to get a job, to fly, to drive… what exactly is wrong with showing ID to prove who you are before being handed a ballot? Otherwise, anyone could go in and claim they were me and steal my vote!

I’d have no problem at all with walking in and showing my Driver’s License, or State ID card to prove my identity before being handed my ballot. I have a voter registration card (no photo), but I’ve NEVER been asked to show it.

Why is this an issue?

How about because there are more people than you might think who don’t drive, don’t fly, and don’t have jobs and who might still like to vote.

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Because those folks least likely to have a photo ID are the same folks most likely to be afraid to vote. You know, the poor, the racial minorities, the elderly.

The ones who don’t drive a car, don’t fly an airplane, don’t have checking accounts.

You know, the folks left behind in this “wonderful” economy and “color blind” society we are supposed to be living in.

thanks for the Heads-up Christy. I’ll see if I can get through Ted Stevens’s lawyers to his office and explain Von Spakovsky to a staffer.

dakine01 @ 10

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Because those folks least likely to have a photo ID are the same folks most likely to be afraid to vote. You know, the poor, the racial minorities, the elderly.

The ones who don’t drive a car, don’t fly an airplane, don’t have checking accounts.

You know, the folks left behind in this “wonderful” economy and “color blind” society we are supposed to be living in.

An ID is a requisite to living in a civilized society. Requiring a photo to identify oneself hardly strikes me as burdensome for anyone.

If Rove hadn’t stolen two elections for Shrub, voter integrity wouldn’t even be an issue. Thanks alot fuckwads!

dakine01 @ 10

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Because those folks least likely to have a photo ID are the same folks most likely to be afraid to vote. You know, the poor, the racial minorities, the elderly.

The ones who don’t drive a car, don’t fly an airplane, don’t have checking accounts.

You know, the folks left behind in this “wonderful” economy and “color blind” society we are supposed to be living in.

beautifully said, dakine.

dakine01 @ 9

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Because those folks least likely to have a photo ID are the same folks most likely to be afraid to vote. You know, the poor, the racial minorities, the elderly.

The ones who don’t drive a car, don’t fly an airplane, don’t have checking accounts.

You know, the folks left behind in this “wonderful” economy and “color blind” society we are supposed to be living in.

the real problem is there is no voter fraud, it hasn’t been shown and what little there might be cannot affect the outcome of an election

the only reason to require information the restricts a demographic is if you don’t like how that demographic votes

thus they invent a ‘voter fraud” issue that doesn’
t exist so they can initiate programs the eliminate the voters that would vote against their corporate agenda

LibertyLee @ 12

dakine01 @ 10

Because those folks least likely to have a photo ID are the same folks most likely to be afraid to vote. You know, the poor, the racial minorities, the elderly.

The ones who don’t drive a car, don’t fly an airplane, don’t have checking accounts.

You know, the folks left behind in this “wonderful” economy and “color blind” society we are supposed to be living in.

An ID is a requisite to living in a civilized society. Requiring a photo to identify oneself hardly strikes me as burdensome for anyone.

ID yes. Photo id, maybe not. I have personal experience with this - no car, so no driver’s license. Self-employed, so no employer-provided photo id. I had to get a passport just so I could get onto a plane. And believe it or not, there are people even in civilized countries that can’t afford a passport.

In response to questions above, I’m not sure how I feel about the ID requirement, but I do have an integrity requirement for those put in charge.

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Because it costs time and money to have an ID created. It dis-enfranchises the poor and less privileged. Duh.

I also want to post this to cheer on firepups.

Platoon, let’s do a little singing this mo’nin’:

Basic Training

perris @ 15

dakine01 @ 9

the real problem is there is no voter fraud, it hasn’t been shown and what little there might be cannot affect the outcome of an election

the only reason to require information the restricts a demographic is if you don’t like how that demographic votes

thus they invent a ‘voter fraud” issue that doesn’
t exist so they can initiate programs the eliminate the voters that would vote against their corporate agenda

Umm, I grew up in de Mare’s City of Chicago. That there was and IS voter fraud is unquestionable. A photo ID is a small price to pay for democracy.

I want US citizens who are purposely undermining National Security wiretapped. Judy Miller, Robert Novak, Micheal Ledeen, John Bolton.

In a 2004 article in the New Yorker, this is what Jeffrey Toobin wrote about this guy:

Von Spakovsky, a longtime activist in the voting-integrity cause, has emerged as the Administration’s chief operative on voting rights. Before going to Washington, he was a lawyer in private practice and a Republican appointee to the Fulton County Registration and Election Board, which runs elections in Atlanta. He belonged to the Federalist Society, a prominent organization of conservative lawyers, and had also joined the board of advisers of a lesser-known group called the Voting Integrity Project.

The V.I.P. was founded by Deborah Phillips, a former county official of the Virginia Republican Party, as an organization devoted principally to fighting voting fraud and promoting voter education. In 1997, von Spakovsky wrote an article for the Georgia Public Policy Foundation, a conservative research group, that called for an aggressive campaign to “purge” the election rolls of felons. Within months of that article’s publication, the V.I.P. helped put von Spakovsky’s idea into action. Phillips met with the company that designed the process for the removal of alleged felons from the voting rolls in Florida, a process that led, notoriously, to the mistaken disenfranchisement of thousands of voters, most of them Democratic, before the 2000 election. (This year, Florida again tried to purge its voting rolls of felons, but the method was found to be so riddled with errors that it had to be abandoned.) During the thirty-six-day recount in Florida, von Spakovsky worked there as a volunteer for the Bush campaign.

I generally don’t like to feed the trolls, but I have to say I can see both sides of this argument. That being said, I’d like to offer a simple solution that I don’t think either side has offered.

You have to register to vote, and that registration requires some proof of ID. Why can’t people who don’t have any sort of photo ID just mail in a Polaroid of themselves with their registration application, which could then be attached to their voter registration card? That way, their voter registration card could function as their photo ID on election day. The state should pay all of the processing charges for this, of course, since the state is the one making the requirement.

As an aside, does anyone know what happened to all of those libertarians who used to rail against ID cards? Didn’t this used to be a big issue among the privacy types?

Didn’t this used to be a big issue among the privacy types?

pre 9-11

Perhaps the Texas Review of Law and Politics ought to require that those who submit articles must show a photo ID.

You know, if photo-ID is going to be mandatory, the doggone states or Federal government ought to provide every voting age citizen with one free of charge.

Not everyone drives (or is able to drive, e.g. the blind), so requiring a driver’s license to vote is right out.

Then there are those who don’t have the money for the photo-ID that some States will issue those who don’t/can’t drive.

Passports? Ah, try at least $100 each. If you can’t afford the State ID, the Federal passport is even more expensive.

Work-ID — not every employer issues such things, and if you’re unemployed, self-employed, or retired* that’s a non-starter as well.

*Most employers who issue work-IDs reclaim them when the employee retires.

Just called Schumer’s office. They are very busy on the telephones but were quite responsive.

Keep up the good work Firepups.This is vintage Rove — and where does it stop?

My nephew was recently asked for two photo IDs in order to complete a transaction (and in his hometown of 15000 people).

LibertyLee @ 20

perris @ 15

Umm, I grew up in de Mare’s City of Chicago. That there was and IS voter fraud is unquestionable. A photo ID is a small price to pay for democracy.

how quaint, “liberty” lee, quaint in a ridiculous way

the voter is a “small price to pay for democracy” when in fact the voter id prevents democracy

this is like ‘fighting terrorism in Iraqis a small price to pay for democracy” when in fact the invasion creates terrorism it doesn’t fight it

you/koolaid/synonymous

me done feeding this troll

CNN

Justices also agreed to decide whether voter identification laws unfairly deter poor and minority Americans from voting, stepping into a contentious partisan issue in advance of the 2008 elections.

The justices will hear arguments early next year in a challenge to an Indiana law that requires voters to present photo ID before casting their ballots. The state has defended the law as a way to combat voter fraud.

The state Democratic party and civil rights groups complained that the law unfairly targets poor and minority voters, without any evidence that in-person voter fraud exists in Indiana.

Another problem with requiring government issued photo ID is that local voter suppressors get creative — Donna Brazile wrote during the 2000 “recount” about her sister calling from Florida, having been sent home from the polls on Election Day because she couldn’t produce THREE forms of photo ID.

Voter fraud is another Rovian projection courtesy of the Federalist Society and its Voter Integrity Project. The only real vote fraud is voter suppression, voter purging, voter caging, and voter intimidation. For more on the latter, check out how Sainted William Rehnquist got his start in Arizona politics: racing from one polling place to another challenging non-white voters on election day. And when I say challenging, I mean getting in their face and yelling at them.

Turns out I know the mom of the Ted Stevens staffer to whom I just spoke. Nice kid - I’ll let her know.

I explained that Stevens should be careful because more stuff on Von Spakovsky’s likely to come out after the vote, and that if Stevens gets caught looking on this issue like he did on the bridge and the toobz, his likely GOP primary opponent, Gov. Sarah Palin, will cream him on this issue. I told him to be careful, and let the senator know that a lot of Stevens’s staff might not be fully informing Ted on issues like this because they already consider him a goner, and will keep him uninformed so they can sell his few remaining votes to others in return for future favors or staff positions…

I wish people wouldn’t call Liberty Lee a troll. He has as much right to voice his opinions as I do.

IrishJim @ 18

LibertyLee @ 3

And a photo ID, which is necessary to drive a car, fly an airplane, cash a check, or do a whole bunch of other things is voter suppression exactly, WHY???

Because it costs time and money to have an ID created. It dis-enfranchises the poor and less privileged. Duh.

It takes time and money to get to vote. An ID is scarcely that much more extra particularly since it is only done once every few years. And if you cannot afford it, maybe you shouldn’t be voting. That’s an invitation to stealing from the public trough…

Brisingamen @ 26

You know, if photo-ID is going to be mandatory, the doggone states or Federal government ought to provide every voting age citizen with one free of charge.

Not everyone drives (or is able to drive, e.g. the blind), so requiring a driver’s license to vote is right out.

Then there are those who don’t have the money for the photo-ID that some States will issue those who don’t/can’t drive.

Passports? Ah, try at least $100 each. If you can’t afford the State ID, the Federal passport is even more expensive.

Work-ID — not every employer issues such things, and if you’re unemployed, self-employed, or retired* that’s a non-starter as well.

*Most employers who issue work-IDs reclaim them when the employee retires.

Let’s take it up a notch…

Instead of photo ID’s that can easily be altered, why not retinal scans or electronic fingerprinting. That puts the cost on the gov’t when they register to vote. If they truly want fair elections, it’s a small price to pay. [not holding my breath]

Jane (nyc) @ 27

Just called Schumer’s office. They are very busy on the telephones but were quite responsive.

Keep up the good work Firepups.This is vintage Rove — and where does it stop?

My nephew was recently asked for two photo IDs in order to complete a transaction (and in his hometown of 15000 people).

I can understand one ID in some cases (like cashing a check), but I’ve never understood two. It seems to me that if you’re clever enough to get one high-quality fake ID, it shouldn’t be too much trouble to get two.

Lee — If it were only a photo ID question with him, that would be an easier answer — but it isn’t. He’s also had a hand in voter suppression efforts with targeted mailers, with voter roll purges, and any number of other items, including a law in Georgia which had been declared unconstitutional by federal courts, among other things, for taking Georgia’s voting rights legislation back to the Jim Crow days of poll taxes. (See here for more on some of the larger picture efforts — and that’s just a tiny sliver.) Voter fraud should be taken seriously — but so should every eligible American’s right to vote. That ought to be sacred, regardless of party affiliation — and to have it treated cavalierly as a political maneurvering tactic is appalling and very, very wrong.

Frank Probst @ 22

I generally don’t like to feed the trolls, but I have to say I can see both sides of this argument. That being said, I’d like to offer a simple solution that I don’t think either side has offered.

You have to register to vote, and that registration requires some proof of ID. Why can’t people who don’t have any sort of photo ID just mail in a Polaroid of themselves with their registration application, which could then be attached to their voter registration card? That way, their voter registration card could function as their photo ID on election day. The state should pay all of the processing charges for this, of course, since the state is the one making the requirement.

As an aside, does anyone know what happened to all of those libertarians who used to rail against ID cards? Didn’t this used to be a big issue among the privacy types?

So, instead of requiring poor people to pay for a government-issued ID, we’re going to make them buy a Polaroid camera, or go to Kinko’s and pay fifteen dollars for passport photos? This is still associating a cost with voting, otherwise known as a polltax.

Another objection to the photo ID was that the repubs weren’t even playing that straight. If you signed ‘John Doe’ but your ID said ‘John Q. Doe”, your vote would be voided.
Never do they play it straight.
It was just another ploy to suppress voting.

LibertyLee @ 20

perris @ 15

Umm, I grew up in de Mare’s City of Chicago. That there was and IS voter fraud is unquestionable. A photo ID is a small price to pay for democracy.

Speaking as the minority inspector of elections in my district:

Provisional ballots. If your name doesn’t appear on the official county Election Bureau list of registered voters, your ballot is cast out. If you are on the official list, then your ballot is included. Simple.

No need for ID.

why should any ID be necessary? You already have to be registered to vote, and every time I have voted the nice old ladies at the polling place check my name on their massive list.

What, exactly, is the incentive for “voter fraud” supposed to be? Unless we are talking about some highly motivated and organized squadrons of vote stealers, what does anyone have to gain by casting someone else’s ballot? Seems to me most felons, for example, have other things on their minds than tinkering with the electoral process.

Peterr @ 24

Perhaps the Texas Review of Law and Politics ought to require that those who submit articles must show a photo ID.

oooh, good one Rev.
“Publius.” Feh

LL @ 3
Try this on for size:
minimum-wage job
take bus both ways to work
ID-issuing agency is downtown (or on other side of town) and requires multiple trips to get ID, requiring time off from work, which may result in losing job.
This is not unusual.
Now take out the bus system and put in sharing rides to and from work, and then add having to pay for a cab to get to and from the ID-issuing agency.

Requiring photo IDs to vote is - well, it’s designed to make sure that a lot of potential voters can’t vote. Meanswhile, real problems, like voting machines with no paper trails and no verifiable software, get ignored.

TeddySanFran @ 37

Frank Probst @ 22

I generally don’t like to feed the trolls, but I have to say I can see both sides of this argument. That being said, I’d like to offer a simple solution that I don’t think either side has offered.

You have to register to vote, and that registration requires some proof of ID. Why can’t people who don’t have any sort of photo ID just mail in a Polaroid of themselves with their registration application, which could then be attached to their voter registration card? That way, their voter registration card could function as their photo ID on election day. The state should pay all of the processing charges for this, of course, since the state is the one making the requirement.

As an aside, does anyone know what happened to all of those libertarians who used to rail against ID cards? Didn’t this used to be a big issue among the privacy types?

So, instead of requiring poor people to pay for a government-issued ID, we’re going to make them buy a Polaroid camera, or go to Kinko’s and pay fifteen dollars for passport photos? This is still associating a cost with voting, otherwise known as a polltax.

No, we’re going to tell the government that they have to provide polaroid cameras on request at all voter registration drives. When I said the state should pay, I meant for all of it.

Just made my call to MY Senator Chuck Schumer asking if he had a position on the Hans’ confirmation. His aide said she doesn’t think that the Senator has made a statement on the subject.

She automatically assumed that I opposed it and said they’d been receiving lots of calls. Which I guess is a good thing.

I simply mentioned that it was a travesty that his position is still in doubt.

Damn I’m angry at the Lucy-crats.

oddmommy @ 40

why should any ID be necessary? You already have to be registered to vote, and every time I have voted the nice old ladies at the polling place check my name on their massive list.

What, exactly, is the incentive for “voter fraud” supposed to be? Unless we are talking about some highly motivated and organized squadrons of vote stealers, what does anyone have to gain by casting someone else’s ballot? Seems to me most felons, for example, have other things on their minds than tinkering with the electoral process.

We are talking about highly motivated, organized and financed vote stealers…Turdblossom and his squad of bandits, Van Spakovsky being one of the many.

US passport–costs $97
State ID–costs $17 (in MN)

Also in MN: if you have a voter registration card, then your name is already on the electoral list and you’re not even asked for any ID.

End of story.

I just checked with Elections Canada - they estimate that around 15% of eligible voters do not have driver’s licenses. Can’t be too much different in the US.

One thing that baffles me about US elections is how many of the rules are set by the state.

An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who intentionally posts controversial or contrary messages in an online community such as an online discussion forum, especially GameFAQs, or USENET, with the intention of baiting users into an argumentative response.[1]

wiki

I am a party to a lawsuit in NM against voter ID. Our lawyer (from the ACLU) was able to prevail against the law, which was passed at only the local level, as the State Legislature was able to keep the vote suppressors from enacting it statewide. (So far anyway.)

There have been NO documented cases of actual voter fraud of the type that is described by those who try this scheme to keep minority and poor voters from the polls.

This is part of the canard that was put forth by Heather Wilson and Pete Domenici in their “case” against Iglesias.

Feh.

TSF @ 37: Alternative solution: Any polling place that requires photo ID should also be equipped to provide on-the-spot photo ID cards, free of charge.

oddmommy @ 39

why should any ID be necessary? You already have to be registered to vote, and every time I have voted the nice old ladies at the polling place check my name on their massive list.

What, exactly, is the incentive for “voter fraud” supposed to be? Unless we are talking about some highly motivated and organized squadrons of vote stealers, what does anyone have to gain by casting someone else’s ballot? Seems to me most felons, for example, have other things on their minds than tinkering with the electoral process.

Voter fraud exists, certainly, but it has a very minor impact. The Republics just like to use it as a cover for the much more serious issue of electoral fraud, in which they are immersed to their eyeballs.

oddmommy @ 40

Unless we are talking about some highly motivated and organized squadrons of vote stealers, what does anyone have to gain by casting someone else’s ballot? Seems to me most felons, for example, have other things on their minds than tinkering with the electoral process.

I think the Reps fear large hordes of (unwashed, brown?) unregistered folks casting ballots which are then counted toward the total. Can’t happen, of course.

kdh22 @ 44

oddmommy @ 40

why should any ID be necessary? You already have to be registered to vote, and every time I have voted the nice old ladies at the polling place check my name on their massive list.

What, exactly, is the incentive for “voter fraud” supposed to be? Unless we are talking about some highly motivated and organized squadrons of vote stealers, what does anyone have to gain by casting someone else’s ballot? Seems to me most felons, for example, have other things on their minds than tinkering with the electoral process.

We are talking about highly motivated, organized and financed vote stealers…Turdblossom and his squad of bandits, Van Spakovsky being one of the many.

Bingo!

As one who also lived in Da Mare’s city of Chicago, let me say that requiring photo IDs would not have stopped the old Mayor Daley. Wouldn’t even have slowed him down.

It barely slows down HS kids who want to buy beer.

Hit the phones, folks. This is not the kind of person the FEC needs — not in the slightest.

What, nobody else is making the obvious joke here?

That it’s ironic for a “voter fraud” alarmist to engage in “law journal fraud” to *make* his point?

That’s who “they” *really* ought to check for IDs…

kdh22 @ 34

Brisingamen @ 26

You know, if photo-ID is going to be mandatory, the doggone states or Federal government ought to provide every voting age citizen with one free of charge.

Not everyone drives (or is able to drive, e.g. the blind), so requiring a driver’s license to vote is right out.

Then there are those who don’t have the money for the photo-ID that some States will issue those who don’t/can’t drive.

Passports? Ah, try at least $100 each. If you can’t afford the State ID, the Federal passport is even more expensive.

Work-ID — not every employer issues such things, and if you’re unemployed, self-employed, or retired* that’s a non-starter as well.

*Most employers who issue work-IDs reclaim them when the employee retires.

Let’s take it up a notch…

Instead of photo ID’s that can easily be altered, why not retinal scans or electronic fingerprinting. That puts the cost on the gov’t when they register to vote. If they truly want fair elections, it’s a small price to pay. [not holding my breath]

I can see the technology of DNA RFID tracking actually coming online in 20 years. But until then, a photo ID is a small price. Less data storage in currently available chips.

Solai @ 38

Another objection to the photo ID was that the repubs weren’t even playing that straight. If you signed ‘John Doe’ but your ID said ‘John Q. Doe”, your vote would be voided.
Never do they play it straight.
It was just another ploy to suppress voting.

BINGO! This is exactly what happened in NM. It was unreal. This is how Heather Wilson was re-elected in 2004 and how Kerry lost NM.

Chris @ 54

What, nobody else is making the obvious joke here?

That it’s ironic for a “voter fraud” alarmist to engage in “law journal fraud” to *make* his point?

That’s who “they” *really* ought to check for IDs…

Funny, isn’t it? I’ve never known a scholar who felt the need to publish anonymously….

“Photo ID” can be an item of rather nebulous definition. When I recently flew, my VA issued picture ID was just totally unacceptable to the TSA lady, despite being issued by the US Govt. While I searched for something else, I pulled out a Visa card and she was OK with that!

The Right is SO paranoid about this issue, it almost seems like something we could compromise on. Free photo ID with one’s voter registration, perhaps incorporated into the registration itself?

Well, I have a few minutes yet before I need to get going, so I’ll chime in as someone who lives in a state that implemented the voter ID law.

First of all, I think the first question anyone should ask when considering a new law is whether the law is even needed.

There is very little evidence of voter fraud in recent years, so why is this even being brought up now?

The only logical answer is that it is intended to intimidate and disenfranchise certain voters. It just so happens to be proposed by Republicans and the people most likely to be disaffected or intimidated by these laws tend to vote disproportionately Democratic.

It seems pretty clear-cut what the intention of the people who propose these laws is. So to me that should immediately throw up some red flags.

Now there is a LOT of evidence of election fraud in recent years, so I would rather see our legislative efforts go toward fixing that problem. Unfortunately this is a problem that benefits the powerful elites, so we are stuck with legislation to address a problem that doesn’t really exist and nothing to address a real and serious problem.

Sure, presenting a photo I.D. is no problem at all for me, but unlike our conservative friends, I don’t assume that everybody enjoys the exact same circumstances I do.

And I know here in Indiana, the legislation was written with so much specificity that people with photo I.D.’s who were clearly who they claimed to be were denied the right to vote because their I.D. didn’t meet the specific criteria. Again, I have to think that was intentional.

It’s a simple fact that when more people vote Democrats do better. When fewer people vote Republicans do better. So it’s clear who benefits from voter suppression of any kind, let alone something that is so carefully targeted.

nonplussed @ 57

“Photo ID” can be an item of rather nebulous definition. When I recently flew, my VA issued picture ID was just totally unacceptable to the TSA lady, despite being issued by the US Govt. While I searched for something else, I pulled out a Visa card and she was OK with that!

The Right is SO paranoid about this issue, it almost seems like something we could compromise on. Free photo ID with one’s voter registration, perhaps incorporated into the registration itself?

Never compromise with the right wing just because they “feel passionately” about something. That plays right into their hands.

PA_Lady @ 52

oddmommy @ 40

Unless we are talking about some highly motivated and organized squadrons of vote stealers, what does anyone have to gain by casting someone else’s ballot? Seems to me most felons, for example, have other things on their minds than tinkering with the electoral process.

I think the Reps fear large hordes of (unwashed, brown?) unregistered folks casting ballots which are then counted toward the total. Can’t happen, of course.

Not now, of course, because the unwashed brown people have seen the true “colors” of the Repugnants. Pun intended.

nonplussed @ 58

“Photo ID” can be an item of rather nebulous definition. When I recently flew, my VA issued picture ID was just totally unacceptable to the TSA lady, despite being issued by the US Govt. While I searched for something else, I pulled out a Visa card and she was OK with that!

The Right is SO paranoid about this issue, it almost seems like something we could compromise on. Free photo ID with one’s voter registration, perhaps incorporated into the registration itself?

This strikes me as a very practical solution. How are people required to identify themselves when registering to vote?

Hi, Christy. Your earlier post inspired me to call, and the fact that you so helpfully provide the phone numbers makes all the difference. (But try saying Hans von Spakovsky three times, fast. I wanted to laugh out loud every time I had to repeat his pompous-sounding name.)

I got to the Dems, will try the Repubs later. Only Durbin’s office doesn’t appear to have enough phone operators and asks you to “call back.” What’s up with that??

Anyway, this is one of those calls I only made because of your efforts. Kudos for dogging this and for making it so easy for us to follow up.

One problem with the Georgia photo ID law is that it requires a photo ID for voting in person, but removed any ID requirement for voting by absentee ballot. In GA, most absentee voters vote Republican and people without photo ID are most likely to vote Dem. This was by design.

I agree with Oddmommy @ 40, there is generally no motivation for voter fraud. Voter suppression on the other hand…

CityGirl @ 64

Hi, Christy. Your earlier post inspired me to call, and the fact that you so helpfully provide the phone numbers makes all the difference. (But try saying Hans von Spakovsky three times, fast. I wanted to laugh out loud every time I had to repeat his pompous-sounding name.)

I got to the Dems, will try the Repubs later. Only Durbin’s office doesn’t appear to have enough phone operators and asks you to “call back.” What’s up with that??

Anyway, this is one of those calls I only made because of your efforts. Kudos for dogging this and for making it so easy for us to follow up.

It is a lot easier to say “Publius, Publius, Publius.”

It takes time and money to get to vote. An ID is scarcely that much more extra particularly since it is only done once every few years. And if you cannot afford it, maybe you shouldn’t be voting. That’s an invitation to stealing from the public trough…

Oh, cr*p. That’s BS, all the way through. Nonvoters pay for elections through taxes too. Are you going to refund that money to them? Elections are required by our laws and our Constitution, and there’s nothing in the Constitution anymore that says that the poor and minorities shouldn’t have a vote. In some states, you have to produce both a birth certificate (or passport) and proof of insurance for a license; I’m assuming the photo ID you’re so fond of saying isn’t a burden would also require the birth cert or passport. I’m sure someone who’s poor can afford to pay for one of those in addition to the ID, and that’s another agency involved and more of BushCheney’s ’security’ requirements. Or hadn’t you noticed that it’s become much more difficult to get those, too?

Fern @ 63

nonplussed @ 58

“Photo ID” can be an item of rather nebulous definition. When I recently flew, my VA issued picture ID was just totally unacceptable to the TSA lady, despite being issued by the US Govt. While I searched for something else, I pulled out a Visa card and she was OK with that!

The Right is SO paranoid about this issue, it almost seems like something we could compromise on. Free photo ID with one’s voter registration, perhaps incorporated into the registration itself?

This strikes me as a very practical solution. How are people required to identify themselves when registering to vote?

In GA, you used to be able to show a utility bill with your name and address.

added to the burden of obtaining an ID, keep in mind that many folks do not feel motivated to vote in the first place and have to be encouraged, cajoled, pleaded with to do so.

Fer gawd’s sake, the freakin’ weather impacts voter turnout.

We need to make voting EASIER, not harder.

This is a bullshit debate, and it absolutely is about squelching the votes of those who might use them against the interests of the scheming, lying bastards that have trashed this country.

Fern @ 9

Sewmouse @ 8

Actually, I have to add my confusion to that already stated. Why is showing a photo to prove that you are who say you are voter oppression?

You need a photo id to get a job, to fly, to drive… what exactly is wrong with showing ID to prove who you are before being handed a ballot? Otherwise, anyone could go in and claim they were me and steal my vote!

I’d have no problem at all with walking in and showing my Driver’s License, or State ID card to prove my identity before being handed my ballot. I have a voter registration card (no photo), but I’ve NEVER been asked to show it.

Why is this an issue?

How about because there are more people than you might think who don’t drive, don’t fly, and don’t have jobs and who might still like to vote.

Exactly. Lots of poor people DO NOT HAVE a drivers license or a non-drivers photo ID. If you are poor and get robbed or lose your non-drivers ID, sometimes you do not have $$$ to get a new one. However if you are just released from jail/prison here, you get one for free. Not all Americans use banks, either, or write checks, or drive, or alot of other things that middle class Americans take for granted.

As for photo ID…

Walks like a poll-tax, talks like a poll-tax. It’s a poll tax.
The key elements are these, I think. If there are people without ID, they are likely to be poor…and, in Georgia, largely black. That’s a great demo to cause trouble with if you are Rove. At the level of an individual, it might not even be discernible, but in the aggregate is where the damage is done.

I am personally acquainted with one voting age person that I know does not have valid photoID (I’m sure there are others of whom I am not aware): anyone (say Liberty Lee??) care to guess his demo?

P J Evans @ 66

It takes time and money to get to vote. An ID is scarcely that much more extra particularly since it is only done once every few years. And if you cannot afford it, maybe you shouldn’t be voting. That’s an invitation to stealing from the public trough…

Oh, cr*p. That’s BS, all the way through. Nonvoters pay for elections through taxes too. Are you going to refund that money to them? Elections are required by our laws and our Constitution, and there’s nothing in the Constitution anymore that says that the poor and minorities shouldn’t have a vote. In some states, you have to produce both a birth certificate (or passport) and proof of insurance for a license; I’m assuming the photo ID you’re so fond of saying isn’t a burden would also require the birth cert or passport. I’m sure someone who’s poor can afford to pay for one of those in addition to the ID, and that’s another agency involved and more of BushCheney’s ’security’ requirements. Or hadn’t you noticed that it’s become much more difficult to get those, too?

Nice that the wingnuts can be up front about their motives, though, isn’t it? Keep the poor (especially poor minorities) away from the polls. Like the hokey pokey, that’s what it’s all about.

Fern @ 47

One thing that baffles me about US elections is how many of the rules are set by the state.

The rules are set by the States because the State (or County) pays for the voting machines. Each State has a Board of Elections, and the members of that board are State employees, whose salaries come from State funds.

The polls are staffed by volunteers, but each State trains those volunteers, and the trainers are State employees.

At no point in these procedings does the Federal Government pay any of the costs associated with general elections or primaries.

Photo ID = National Identity Card = “Show us your papers” = “We don’t have to tell you where we got the “evidence” against you.” = Enemy of the State = … well, you get the picture.

Brisingamen @ 74

Fern @ 47

One thing that baffles me about US elections is how many of the rules are set by the state.

The rules are set by the States because the State (or County) pays for the voting machines. Each State has a Board of Elections, and the members of that board are State employees, whose salaries come from State funds.

The polls are staffed by volunteers, but each State trains those volunteers, and the trainers are State employees.

At no point in these procedings does the Federal Government pay any of the costs associated with general elections or primaries.

The federal gov’t pays the cost of stealing elections however.

Thanks Christy,

I sent both Senators Lincoln and Pryor a letter urging them to vote NO on S.A. 3017 Kyle Liebernam Amendment (war with Iran).

Also Sent a letter to Pryor about Von Spakovsky and followed up with a phone call just to make sure…

I love an FDL call to action!

when i registered to vote…an its been awhile - i had to show proper id….after that when voting no one has asked me or my kids for proof b/c we are registered….now one must show all types of id to vote in some places?? is this a recent thing or what?

dalloway @ 75

Photo ID = National Identity Card = “Show us your papers” = “We don’t have to tell you where we got the “evidence” against you.” = Enemy of the State = … well, you get the picture.

Freedom, meet Slippery Slope.

Only voter fraud I know about it is rich people who have homes in different states voting twice.

As I see it , the point of this post is to shed some sunlight on a known vote suppression operative of the GOP slated to be in the FEC.

P J Evans @ 67

It takes time and money to get to vote. An ID is scarcely that much more extra particularly since it is only done once every few years. And if you cannot afford it, maybe you shouldn’t be voting. That’s an invitation to stealing from the public trough…

Oh, cr*p. That’s BS, all the way through. Nonvoters pay for elections through taxes too. Are you going to refund that money to them? Elections are required by our laws and our Constitution, and there’s nothing in the Constitution anymore that says that the poor and minorities shouldn’t have a vote. In some states, you have to produce both a birth certificate (or passport) and proof of insurance for a license; I’m assuming the photo ID you’re so fond of saying isn’t a burden would also require the birth cert or passport. I’m sure someone who’s poor can afford to pay for one of those in addition to the ID, and that’s another agency involved and more of BushCheney’s ’security’ requirements. Or hadn’t you noticed that it’s become much more difficult to get those, too?

I am simply saying that I work with computers. There’s input and output. I hear the complaints on this side about Diebold and the “output” side–even though a young man in Ohio recently proved that with a clever use of FOIA voter logs and the so-called “paper trail” everyone wants you can actually defeat the secret ballot; I am concerned about the input side of the equation–that the voters who are voting are not voting twice or three times (or more) and that they are who they say are: citizens of the place in which they live as required by the voting laws. The only way I know you accomplish the latter successfully is a voter ID. If you are going to require states to spend the money to “fix” the voting apparatuses, it is not too much to require the voter to prove who he/she is…

Pentimenti @ 78

Only voter fraud I know about it is rich people who have homes in different states voting twice.

Or Ann Coulter, who wants us to believe she doesn’t know what district she lives in. And guess who SHE votes for….

Brisingamen @ 74

Fern @ 47

One thing that baffles me about US elections is how many of the rules are set by the state.

The rules are set by the States because the State (or County) pays for the voting machines. Each State has a Board of Elections, and the members of that board are State employees, whose salaries come from State funds.

The polls are staffed by volunteers, but each State trains those volunteers, and the trainers are State employees.

At no point in these procedings does the Federal Government pay any of the costs associated with general elections or primaries.

Hmm. This does strike me as truly weird. I am used to a system where election rules and standards for federal elections are set, administered, funded and enforced on a national level. Makes for some consistency, ensures that all practices are constitutional, etc. And makes situations like this electoral college scam being set up in California completely impossible.

EvilDrPuma @58 — nice point. (well, John Lott aside)

Of course, it’s not like *we*’re necessarily using our real names here, but this ain’t exactly publishing…

Though I do like the idea of watching a senator ask, “So, Evil Doctor Puma, it’s your view of the law that…”

Bustednuckles @ 79

As I see it , the point of this post is to shed some sunlight on a known vote suppression operative of the GOP slated to be in the FEC.

Yup.

kdh22 @ 76

Brisingamen @ 74

The rules are set by the States because the State (or County) pays for the voting machines. Each State has a Board of Elections, and the members of that board are State employees, whose salaries come from State funds.

The polls are staffed by volunteers, but each State trains those volunteers, and the trainers are State employees.

At no point in these procedings does the Federal Government pay any o