Liberals call voter ID programs discriminatory and "voter purging". To what ends are they going trying to stack the polls?
Read on:
QuoteDogs, dead people get election docs from nonprofit
By MIKE BAKER Associated Press
Published: 7/13/2012 6:04 AM
Last Modified: 7/13/2012 6:04 AM
OLYMPIA, Wash. — The voter registration form arrived in the mail last month with some key information already filled in: Rosie Charlston's name was complete, as was her Seattle address.
Problem is, Rosie was a black lab who died in 1998.
A group called the Voter Participation Center has touted the distribution of some 5 million registration forms in recent weeks, targeting Democratic-leaning voting blocs such as unmarried women, blacks, Latinos and young adults.
But residents and election administrators around the country also have reported a series of bizarre and questionable mailings addressed to animals, dead people, noncitizens and people already registered to vote.
Brenda Charlston wasn't the only person to get documents for her pet: A Virginia man said similar documents arrived for his dead dog, Mozart, while a woman in the state got forms for her cat, Scampers.
"On a serious note, I think it's tampering with our voting system," Charlston said. "They're fishing for votes: That's how I view it."
Every presidential election cycle brings with it a variety of registration drives targeting people who typically are underrepresented at the polls, and Republicans have long seized on sloppy or questionable registrations as a sign of potential fraud on the part of Democrats.
It's an issue that is particularly sensitive this year GOP political leaders have used fears of fraud to successfully push laws across the country that could make voting more difficult by requiring voters to show identification. Democrats have fought the laws, arguing that they can disenfranchise citizens, minorities in particular.
The group at the root of the questionable mailings — the Voter Participation Center — acknowledges that the databases it uses to contact possible voters are imperfect because they are developed from commercially collected information. The group also says it expects people who receive misdirected mail to simply throw it away.
Several election officials said they believed the voter registration systems were secure enough to catch people who might improperly submit the misdirected documents.
But administrators in New Mexico, a potential swing state in the 2012 presidential race, warned that ineligible voters who complete the documents could make it onto the rolls.
New Mexico is one of two states in which noncitizens can qualify for a driver's license by simply proving residency — not necessarily legal residency — and state elections officials have no way of verifying the legal status of those who file registration documents.
Ken Ortiz, the chief of staff at the New Mexico secretary of state's office, said some noncitizens have contacted the state asking why they received the forms when they'd previously been told that they could not vote.
"We fear that some of these individuals who receive this mailing may feel that they are being encouraged to vote by our office or county government," Ortiz said.
The mailings appear official, arriving in privacy envelopes with the headline "VOTER REGISTRATION DOCUMENTS ENCLOSED." Some information is already completed on the voter registration papers, and recipients also get an envelope to send completed forms to local elections officials.
The Voter Participation Center works with a vendor that has access to multiple commercial databases that could include people who subscribe to magazines or junk mail using names of their pet, said Page Gardner, the group's president. She said the nonprofit tries its best to target only eligible and unregistered voters but that some other names inevitably get on the final list.
"Is it a perfect process? No," Gardner said. Ultimately, she said they rely on the integrity of people and the security of the system and notes that the same forms are available to anyone at county offices or on the Internet.
The Voter Participation Center says it is trying to increase participation among minorities, unmarried women and people under the age of 30, with Gardner saying that those groups have historically been underrepresented in the election process. (um, gee wonder why that is?)
The group says it has helped register 1 million people since 2004 and some 300,000 people in the current election cycle.
The center conducted one mailing distribution last year and another earlier this year before its biggest mailing, which went out in June. It is planning one more for later this year.
Voter registration drives of all types can create a small subset of problems. An active voter, for example, may sign up again after encountering a registration drive at an event. Some registration workers at the community activist group ACORN were accused in past years of submitting false forms with names like Mickey Mouse — filings the group said were done by workers to increase their pay.
What makes the Voter Participation Center's work challenging is that the group is identifying voters based on data, instead of during in-person interactions. The mailings include pre-filled information that creates further confusion and concern, said Katie Blinn, a co-director of elections in Washington state.
Blinn said it appeared that many of the mailings were going to people who are already registered to vote. They have heard about a "handful" of pet-related forms in the state of the past few weeks and fielded calls from people wondering whether their registration was canceled.
Julie Anderson, the auditor in Pierce County, Wash., estimates that about two dozen residents have contacted the county about registration forms arriving for dead relatives.
Read more from this Tulsa World article at http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=13&articleid=20120713_13_0_OLYMPI140602
Here's a suggestion: Prosecute the jackasses that are registering their pets. God forbid we do that. Instead we have to implement Poll Tax 2.0. ::)
Quote from: Conan71 on July 13, 2012, 04:17:48 PM
Liberals call voter ID programs discriminatory and "voter purging". To what ends are they going trying to stack the polls?
Read on:
Coulda....or coulduh in your case.
You goof... lame example, as usual, and you apply it across the board. Your new nickname shall be catfish baiter because what you're doing is baiting a thread with catfish bait (or is that your underwear I smell?).
Don't you think there's a big difference between those registered who can't vote all of a sudden because they do not, all of a sudden, have a picture ID and this tripe you post?
Honestly Conan, why is this an issue? Do you hate Obama so much your only hope for the Morons is to disenfranchise scads of voters?
What happened to the Fast and Furious? It didn't derail the Justice Department from moving ahead in Florida.
how many cases of voter fraud have been prosecuted in Oklahoma in the past oh say 20 years? Just asking. And what was the results of those thousands of court cases?
Is the right to vote derived from your officially issued government ID, or is it a right of citizenship? The actual number of fraudulent voters is very, very low, yet the right fear mongers over the issue again and again. Pennsylvania will be a swing state again this year, and the Republican leader of the state legislature baldly stated that the new voter ID law will win the state for Romney. About 750,000 eligible voters do not have the required documents, including a 92 year old woman who does not have any state-issued ID. She is challenging the new law in court.
The last time I voted, an elderly couple were ahead of me in line. The husband had his driver's license, but the wife did not. She was not permitted to cast a ballot, not even a provisional ballot, despite the fact that she was personally known by one of the poll workers who could vouch for her identity. This law is truly asinine.
We have a hard enough time getting citizens to take an interest in government without throwing even more obstacles in their way.
There's more, but I gotta walk the dog before the rain gets here!
Quote from: Ed W on July 13, 2012, 05:19:12 PM
Is the right to vote derived from your officially issued government ID, or is it a right of citizenship? The actual number of fraudulent voters is very, very low, yet the right fear mongers over the issue again and again. Pennsylvania will be a swing state again this year, and the Republican leader of the state legislature baldly stated that the new voter ID law will win the state for Romney. About 750,000 eligible voters do not have the required documents, including a 92 year old woman who does not have any state-issued ID. She is challenging the new law in court.
The last time I voted, an elderly couple were ahead of me in line. The husband had his driver's license, but the wife did not. She was not permitted to cast a ballot, not even a provisional ballot, despite the fact that she was personally known by one of the poll workers who could vouch for her identity. This law is truly asinine.
We have a hard enough time getting citizens to take an interest in government without throwing even more obstacles in their way.
There's more, but I gotta walk the dog before the rain gets here!
At the risk of sounding like an donkey, no one was trying to penalize the elderly woman by not allowing her to vote, she didn't follow the rules which have been well-publicized. I do feel for the elderly couple, but she didn't follow the rules. I have a couple of friends who man the polls every election day including my former step-father with whom I'm still on great terms. I'd never dream of asking for special treatment because I left my wallet at home.
In Oklahoma, we are issued a
free voter ID card. You are required to register to vote, prior to voting, and they mail you a FREE voter ID card. If anything, Oklahoma has tried to make it easier for voters that if they misplace that card or simply forget it, you can present multiple forms of government-issued photo ID.
State-issued Photo ID cards for those over 65 years of age have no expiration date to further limit the burden on the elderly. If you are poor, you must provide some form of ID to get on state or federal assistance, and you must provide some sort of ID to cash a federal or state assistance check (at least in respectable establishments). Everyone MUST register with the Social Security Administration. So why aren't
those examples considered discriminatory? Would everyone be a lot happier if the feds would issue a free photo ID Social Security card? That's a serious question and I'd love to hear everyone's thoughts. There's your universal ID and it's no more a hardship to get it than to go to the SSA office which you'd have to do to get or adjust benefits in the first place.
If it's no hardship to get to the polls, it's no hardship to get to somewhere you can get a free photo ID.
I was brought up to believe by very patriotic parents that voting is one of the most if not the most sacred of rights of being an American. Sorry, I can't slough it off when there's obvious mass movements to influence voting amongst people who can't be bothered to register on their own and take an active part in the system. No one is trying to keep legal American citizens from registering to vote nor from voting.
It's not even a matter of assuring we are only keeping illegals and anyone else specifically restricted from voting from doing it. Do you really want someone who has zero interest in the candidates nor the issues voting because they got a free ride to the polls, free lunch, and a little pep talk on how they should vote? Voter intimidation and voter manipulation is just plain wrong, and that's what the example I posted points to.
Quote
Eligibility
A person who is eligible to register to vote must be at least 18 years old, a United States citizen and a resident of the State of Oklahoma.
How to Register
You must fill out a voter registration application form. Voter registration applications are available at your County Election Board, post offices, tag agencies, libraries and many other public locations. You will be offered a voter registration application when you get your driver's license and when you apply for assistance at some government agencies. You also may download an application form.
You must sign and date the oath printed on the form. When you sign the voter registration application form, you swear that you are eligible to register to vote.
Changing Your Registration
If you need to change your name, your address or your political affiliation, you must fill out another voter registration application form. You may change your registration at any time with one exception. You may not change your political affiliation during the period from April 1 through August 31, inclusive, in any even-numbered year. The last day on which you may change your political affiliation before the closed period is March 31; the first day on which you may change your political affiliation after the closed period is September 1.
Submitting Your Application
You may mail your voter registration application to the State Election Board. The card is already addressed, but you must add a first-class postage stamp. If you fill out your voter registration application form at a tag agency when you get your driver's license or when you apply for assistance at a government agency, the agency will mail the form to the State Election Board for you.
Voter Identification Card
You do not become a registered voter until the county election board in the county where you reside has approved your application. When your application is approved, the county election board will mail a voter identification card to you. Your voter identification card lists your name, address, political affiliation and the polling place for your voting precinct. When you receive your voter identification card, look at it carefully and report any errors to the county election board immediately. Keep your voter identification card in a safe place and always take it with you when you go to vote.
If your voter registration application cannot be approved, you will receive a letter from the county election board. The letter will tell you why your application was not approved and explain the steps you need to take to become registered. You may be able to return the letter with some additional information, or you may need to fill out and send in another voter registration application form.
Closed Primary System
Oklahoma has a closed primary system. Only voters who are registered members of a recognized political party may vote for the party's candidates in primary and runoff primary elections. Registered Independent voters may be eligible to vote in party's primaries and runoff primaries if authorized by the party.
However, nonpartisan judicial offices, state questions and county questions often are included in primary elections. All registered voters, including Independents, are entitled to receive those ballots. At general elections, all voters receive the same ballot and may vote for any candidate or question on the ballot.
When to Register
You may submit your voter registration application form at any time. However, voter identification cards cannot be issued during the 24 days prior to an election. If your registration application is received by the county election board during the 24 days before an election, you will not receive your voter identification card until after the election.
If you will become 18 during the 60 days before an election, you may apply for voter registration between 25 and 60 days before the election.
Additional Information
For additional information about voting in Oklahoma, contact your local county election board or the State Election Board.
Oklahoma State Election Board
PO Box 53156
Oklahoma City, OK 73152
(405) 521-2391
info@elections.ok.gov
http://www.ok.gov/elections/Voter_Registration/
QuoteFacts about Proof of Identity for Voting in Oklahoma
The proof of identity law (sometimes called the "voter ID" law) was contained in State Question 746 (Legislative Referendum No. 347). The question appeared on the ballot at the November 2, 2010, General Election, and it was approved by 74% of the votes cast.
The proof of identity law requires every voter who votes in person at the precinct polling place or during early voting at the County Election Board to show proof of identity before receiving a ballot.
A document used for proof of identity for voting must have been issued by the United States government, the State of Oklahoma, or a federally recognized tribal government.
The law requires any document used for proof of identity for voting to contain the following information:
the name of the person to whom it was issued
a photograph of the person to whom it was issued
an expiration date that is after the date of the election
The law also requires the voter's name on the proof of identity document to "substantially conform" to the voter's name in the Precinct Registry. In other words, your name on your proof of identity must match your name in the Precinct Registry.
The following documents may be used for proof of identity for voting:
an Oklahoma driver license
a State Identification Card*
a passport
a military identification
* A State Identification card issued to a person 65 years of age or older does not have an expiration date but is, by law, a valid proof of identity for voting.
In addition, voters may use the voter identification card they received by mail from the County Election Board when they registered to vote. The law allows use of the voter identification card even though it does not include a photograph or an expiration date.
If you do not have or if you refuse to show proof of identity, you may only vote by provisional ballot.
Voters who cast provisional ballots are required to fill out and sign an affidavit that explains why their provisional ballot should be counted. Provisional ballots are sealed inside special envelopes and are not put through the voting device. After election day, County Election Board officials will investigate the information provided by the voter on the affidavit and either will approve the provisional ballot for counting or will reject it based on the outcome of that investigation.
In order for a provisional ballot to be approved for counting, the information on the affidavit must match the information in the voter's registration record.
Is my ID valid for voting in Oklahoma?
FAQs about proof of identity for voting
Quote from: nathanm on July 13, 2012, 04:37:55 PM
Here's a suggestion: Prosecute the jackasses that are registering their pets. God forbid we do that. Instead we have to implement Poll Tax 2.0. ::)
Oklahoma allows your voter registration card which if FREE. Poll Tax?
Quote from: Ed W on July 13, 2012, 05:19:12 PM
The last time I voted, an elderly couple were ahead of me in line. The husband had his driver's license, but the wife did not. She was not permitted to cast a ballot, not even a provisional ballot, despite the fact that she was personally known by one of the poll workers who could vouch for her identity. This law is truly asinine.
Knowing you need an ID and showing up to vote without one is truly asinine. OK allows your FREE voter ID. If you cannot be bothered to get one, well, too bad.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 13, 2012, 09:29:47 PM
Knowing you need an ID and showing up to vote without one is truly asinine. OK allows your FREE voter ID. If you cannot be bothered to get one, well, too bad.
Hard donkey. We shouldn't inconvenience people who can't follow simple rules.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 13, 2012, 09:25:49 PM
Oklahoma allows your voter registration card which if FREE. Poll Tax?
Requiring photo ID? Maybe that's the beef? That always costs money.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 13, 2012, 09:25:49 PM
Oklahoma allows your voter registration card which if FREE. Poll Tax?
You may not have noticed this, but there are other states beyond our borders which fall within the nation we share. Don't believe for one second that the problems in other states can't find their way here.
Quote from: Hoss on July 13, 2012, 09:33:27 PM
Requiring photo ID? Maybe that's the beef? That always costs money.
May be true in some states but not RED Oklahoma.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 13, 2012, 09:46:26 PM
May be true in some states but not RED Oklahoma.
What? That photoID doesn't cost money? Last time I checked, licenses and IDs that were state issued did. I thought Oklahoma required photo ID at the booth.
Quote from: nathanm on July 13, 2012, 09:44:21 PM
You may not have noticed this, but there are other states beyond our borders which fall within the nation we share. Don't believe for one second that the problems in other states can't find their way here.
I don't see voter ID as a problem.
Quote from: Hoss on July 13, 2012, 09:47:50 PM
What? That photoID doesn't cost money? Last time I checked, licenses and IDs that were state issued did. I thought Oklahoma required photo ID at the booth.
Please see several posts stating that your FREE voter registration card is acceptable ID. Check it out if you don't believe it.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 13, 2012, 09:51:58 PM
I don't see voter ID as a problem.
I know you don't. I do have a problem with requiring ID that costs money or is only available from places difficult to access by public transportation. I still don't understand why you're so concerned with a problem that doesn't actually exist on any meaningful level in this country, but it's certainly your prerogative.
Quote from: nathanm on July 13, 2012, 09:55:11 PM
I know you don't. I do have a problem with requiring ID that costs money or is only available from places difficult to access by public transportation. I still don't understand why you're so concerned with a problem that doesn't actually exist on any meaningful level in this country, but it's certainly your prerogative.
I don't understand why you and other Democratic Party leaning persons are so concerned with obtaining an ID that is required for almost every other aspect of life in the USA.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 13, 2012, 09:53:06 PM
Please see several posts stating that your FREE voter registration card is acceptable ID. Check it out if you don't believe it.
Didn't say I didn't believe it, RA, I was questioning because I wasn't sure. that's why I said I 'thought'.
Simma down now!
Quote from: Hoss on July 13, 2012, 09:57:28 PM
Didn't say I didn't believe it, RA, I was questioning.
If you believe it, why question it? Just trying to keep a Friday evening joust going?
Quote from: Hoss on July 13, 2012, 09:47:50 PM
What? That photoID doesn't cost money? Last time I checked, licenses and IDs that were state issued did. I thought Oklahoma required photo ID at the booth.
Nope. Your free voter card without a photo is a legal ID to vote. I don't even remember if they asked for my DL when I re-registered...or was that de-registered?
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 13, 2012, 09:57:06 PM
I don't understand why you and other Democratic Party leaning persons are so concerned with obtaining an ID that is required for almost every other aspect of life in the USA.
But it's not required for almost every other aspect of life. If I'm self employed, already have an SSN, take public transport or ride a bike, and have a credit card, there's literally nothing in my daily life I require ID for. Personally, the last time I showed anybody my ID was to some TSA nozzle. Yet another worthless use of photo ID, that.
This idea that "we all need" photo ID, absent it being required to vote, is completely false. Many people do. Many others do not, especially those who live in cities and do not drive.
Quote from: nathanm on July 13, 2012, 10:06:03 PM
But it's not required for almost every other aspect of life. If I'm self employed, already have an SSN, take public transport or ride a bike, and have a credit card, there's literally nothing in my daily life I require ID for. Personally, the last time I showed anybody my ID was to some TSA nozzle. Yet another worthless use of photo ID, that.
This idea that "we all need" photo ID, absent it being required to vote, is completely false. Many people do. Many others do not, especially those who live in cities and do not drive.
Using a debit or credit card about 25 5o 50% of the time. Writing or cashing a check 100% of the time. Apply for a loan? Want cash back with that deposit or to withdraw cash without an ATM card. Oh wait, forgot, you can't open a bank account w/o a photo ID. When you apply for Social Security, I guarantee they will ask for photo ID. Get admitted to a hospital? Wanna own a firearm legally?
In general, you put yourself at a huge disadvantage to not have an ID.
Quote from: nathanm on July 13, 2012, 10:06:03 PM
But it's not required for almost every other aspect of life. If I'm self employed, already have an SSN, take public transport or ride a bike, and have a credit card, there's literally nothing in my daily life I require ID for. Personally, the last time I showed anybody my ID was to some TSA nozzle. Yet another worthless use of photo ID, that.
This idea that "we all need" photo ID, absent it being required to vote, is completely false. Many people do. Many others do not, especially those who live in cities and do not drive.
How many people that are too poor to get a photo ID are self employed, have a credit card and can afford a bike? See other posts on requiring ID to qualify for government benefits.
Conan, you're arguing convenience versus need. And they're all personal to you and people like you. There are people in this world who live differently than you. They still get the right to vote, and maybe you should show a little consideration for their preferences when going on a crusade against a boogey man. This country isn't just about you and your inane fears. We all have to live together in it.
You need clear and convincing evidence of significant wrongdoing before you mess with one of our most fundamental freedoms. What you've got now is fear and speculation.
RA, a poll tax isn't right just because you can afford it.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 13, 2012, 09:59:39 PM
If you believe it, why question it? Just trying to keep a Friday evening joust going?
Because I wasn't absolutely sure. And you were the one keeping it going. Wow.
Quote from: nathanm on July 13, 2012, 10:20:12 PM
RA, a poll tax isn't right just because you can afford it.
We disagree on whether it's a poll tax.
Quote from: Hoss on July 13, 2012, 10:20:22 PM
And you were the one keeping it going.
Are you saying you were not contributing to keeping it going? The best way to not keeping it going is to not respond. Like the rest of us, you cannot resist.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 13, 2012, 10:28:29 PM
We disagree on whether it's a poll tax.
Requiring someone to spend money before they can vote is a poll tax, no matter what you call it or how convenient it may make your life in other ways.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 13, 2012, 10:30:13 PM
Are you saying you were not contributing to keeping it going? The best way to not keeping it going is to not respond. Like the rest of us, you cannot resist.
At least you're being inclusive. I'm finished. Now that I know it's not required, I won't add to it. I couldn't find it clear-cut on line without some legalese parsing.
I'm going to have a Marshalls now. How's that for a thread ender?
Quote from: nathanm on July 13, 2012, 10:32:11 PM
Requiring someone to spend money before they can vote is a poll tax, no matter what you call it or how convenient it may make your life in other ways.
I
might be inclined to agree in states where there is no alternative to a fee paid ID. Oklahoma is not one of those states, imagine that. Despite your claims otherwise, I don't believe it is possible for almost anyone in the USA to live without an ID acceptable for voting. Making an issue of having to present it to vote is Grandstanding in my opinion. It's as much or more of a non-issue as you claim voter fraud to be. We will obviously disagree on this. So be it.
Quote from: Hoss on July 13, 2012, 10:32:57 PM
I'm going to have a Marshalls now. How's that for a thread ender?
You need an excuse to have a Marshall's. I thought you are single/divorced.
Quote from: nathanm on July 13, 2012, 10:20:12 PM
Conan, you're arguing convenience versus need. And they're all personal to you and people like you. There are people in this world who live differently than you. They still get the right to vote, and maybe you should show a little consideration for their preferences when going on a crusade against a boogey man. This country isn't just about you and your inane fears. We all have to live together in it.
You need clear and convincing evidence of significant wrongdoing before you mess with one of our most fundamental freedoms. What you've got now is fear and speculation.
RA, a poll tax isn't right just because you can afford it.
Fear and speculation is precisely what the campaign against Romney is in the first place.
Those people you talk about also need an ID to even cash a money order or get utilities turned on, rent an apartment, or get a $100 loan from Signature Loan Co. My first career after I quit college was as a loan collector for a "B" loan company for two years. I'll gladly swap stories about people who live hand to mouth and an all cash existence. I know far more about the underside of society than you would ever believe and it's all through direct interface and even going through a rough time in my own life for about a year.
Getting an ID isn't a hardship. It costs roughly three packs of Marlboros and probably doesn't mean going any further than going to Warehouse Market for the weekly groceries.
I call complete BS.
Quote from: nathanm on July 13, 2012, 10:32:11 PM
Requiring someone to spend money before they can vote is a poll tax, no matter what you call it or how convenient it may make your life in other ways.
How do you feel about a free ride to the Social Security office for a free photo ID?
No claims of poll tax then. What's the next excuse?
Quote from: Conan71 on July 13, 2012, 10:54:30 PM
I call complete BS.
But disenfranchising voters sounds so nobel. (I'm practicing to be a Democrat again ;D)
Quote from: Conan71 on July 13, 2012, 10:55:51 PM
How do you feel about a free ride to the Social Security office for a free photo ID?
No claims of poll tax then. What's the next excuse?
Can't get out of the house (except to get some Obama money), inconvenient, violation of their rights, it's a Republican effort to keep Democrats from voting.......
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 13, 2012, 10:59:40 PM
Can't get out of the house (except to get some Obama money), inconvenient, violation of their rights, it's a Republican effort to keep Democrats from voting.......
THIS is what the "libs" are looking for:
(http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a319/fladj11/May%202012/183009.jpg)
Screw the effort to put an end to those who hurt the right to vote of those legally entitled.
There's an interesting article in the Washington Post about the deleterious effects of one party rule. DC has a closed primary that magnifies the influence of fringe groups, and Dana Milbank notes that this effectively disenfranchises roughly 117,000 eligible voters.
"We in the District have, in short, seen the future. We have already arrived at where the rest of the country is headed. The voters have checked out. The primaries have been hijacked by a small, unrepresentative group that chooses bad candidates. And these candidates, confident that nobody is paying attention, brazenly ignore the already-flimsy campaign-finance laws."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-dc-shows-what-comes-from-one-party-rule/2012/07/13/gJQASXmQiW_story.html (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-dc-shows-what-comes-from-one-party-rule/2012/07/13/gJQASXmQiW_story.html)
Sounds familiar, doesn't it? Remember this however; he's talking about Democrats. Political success brings with it the seeds of its ultimate failure. The Republican effort to limit the right to vote and enable permanent Republican majorities - if successful - could produce a backlash that would keep them out of power for a generation or more. The party is already deeply divided between the increasingly irrational tea party types and the more pragmatic 'country club' elitists. Remember too, that the excesses of the so-called Gilded Age brought about the reforms of the Progressive Era at the beginning of the twentieth century. It was Theodore Roosevelt, a Republican, who acted to break up the big trusts and their strangle hold on American business.
People at the polling place at Victory require photo ID and would not accept the voter registration card or a photo ID less then 30 days expired. So with the volunteers not knowing the rules its hard to say people who should be able to vote can.
This dead dog received a voter registration?
(http://thegatewaypundit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/dog-voting.jpg)
Quote from: Ed W on July 14, 2012, 09:01:13 PM
The Republican effort to limit the right to vote to those persons legally entitled .....
I helped you there. You just forgot to include that.
Quote from: guido911 on July 14, 2012, 09:52:15 PM
This dead dog received a voter registration?
Yeah, I get credit card applications for people who don't exist. What exactly is the problem here? You act as if this is an election board registering a dead dog, but it's not. If it were I'd like to see the person who signed the application prosecuted. Is there a particular reason you want to make it harder for US citizens to exercise their right to vote? Doesn't enforcing the laws on the books already accomplish that goal? For someone who hates laws and regulations, you sure are for a lot of them.
Quote from: guido911 on July 14, 2012, 09:54:17 PM
" The Republican effort to limit the right to vote to those persons legally entitled ....."
I helped you there. You just forgot to include that.
Thanks for the assist, Guido. It's heartening to see your agreement with the idea that our constitutional rights trump obstructive state laws and obstructive state legislators.
Quote from: Ed W on July 15, 2012, 11:04:43 AM
Thanks for the assist, Guido. It's heartening to see your agreement with the idea that our constitutional rights trump obstructive state laws and obstructive state legislators.
Now all we have to do is agree on what is and isn't obstructive.
I'm not going to hold my breath waiting.
Quote from: nathanm on July 15, 2012, 10:20:48 AM
Is there a particular reason you want to make it harder for US citizens to exercise their right to vote?
I think the election board should make an appointment with me to bring the voting machine and ballot to either my home or place of work. It is just terribly difficult to get to the polling place. Right now it's 0.8 mi. It has been as much as 1.6 miles away. Then on a really big election, I have to wait in line. The only reason I put up with it is to exercise my right to
complain vote.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 15, 2012, 12:36:04 PM
I think the election board should make an appointment with me to bring the voting machine and ballot to either my home or place of work. It is just terribly difficult to get to the polling place. Right now it's 0.8 mi. It has been as much as 1.6 miles away. Then on a really big election, I have to wait in line. The only reason I put up with it is to exercise my right to complain vote.
Nice dodge. (ever heard of an absentee ballot? you're being ridiculous.) How about you answer the question. Why do you want to make it harder for US citizens to vote?
I would have no problem with this (other than the idiotic framing as some kind of victory for Republicans, this shouldn't be a bucking partisan issue!):
http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_21077849/feds-let-florida-access-noncitizen-list-purge-voter
Except that if they do things the way they did in 2000 with the felon "list," they'll almost certainly sweep my SO's (US citizen) dad up in this. He has an incredibly common name. There are something like 46 people identically named on DHS' watch list, to give you an idea of the commonness of the name. There are at about 27 of them in the
ZIP code he lives in. Are they really going to dump every single one of those voter registrations if action isn't taken? What if he's out of the country and not receiving mail when the notice comes?
Or her uncle, for that matter, who is presently living on a small island elsewhere in the world, thanks to our stupidly expensive health care, but is still eligible to vote in federal elections, being a US citizen.
IOW, the idea is sound, but Florida's history on such matters leaves me with no confidence it will be done right. This isn't speculation, just going on their recent history.
Quote from: nathanm on July 15, 2012, 07:43:27 PM
Nice dodge. (ever heard of an absentee ballot? you're being ridiculous.) How about you answer the question. Why do you want to make it harder for US citizens to vote?
You noticed, good for you. I think the uproar over an ID is also ridiculous.
Direct answer... Making someone show an ID is NOT making it harder for US citizens to vote. My opinion, I'm sure you disagree.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 15, 2012, 12:36:04 PM
I think the election board should make an appointment with me to bring the voting machine and ballot to either my home or place of work. It is just terribly difficult to get to the polling place. Right now it's 0.8 mi. It has been as much as 1.6 miles away. Then on a really big election, I have to wait in line. The only reason I put up with it is to exercise my right to complain vote.
Let me put this to you. It doesn't happy to everyone, but just read a moment.
My mother, who is partially disabled, cannot drive. Currently she has several means to get her around, her sister, my aunt, who takes her to and from the doctor and dentist when she needs when I'm at work. Me, who lives with her. My brother in a pinch as well as my sister. That's it.
Now, what if none of us were around by some chance of fate? I'll give you this...my mother does absentee ballots. But guess what? You still require a witness to sign the ballot. What if she was the only person in our family left.
So before you start making jokes about 'bringing the ballot box to you', just think some people may need just that. If my mother were to be on her own, I'm not quite sure how she would vote. At least not right now. Because right now I'm the one that witnesses her absentee ballot.
Quote from: Hoss on July 15, 2012, 08:14:22 PM
Let me put this to you. It doesn't happy to everyone, but just read a moment.
My mother, who is partially disabled, cannot drive. Currently she has several means to get her around, her sister, my aunt, who takes her to and from the doctor and dentist when she needs when I'm at work. Me, who lives with her. My brother in a pinch as well as my sister. That's it.
Now, what if none of us were around by some chance of fate? I'll give you this...my mother does absentee ballots. But guess what? You still require a witness to sign the ballot. What if she was the only person in our family left.
So before you start making jokes about 'bringing the ballot box to you', just think some people may need just that. If my mother were to be on her own, I'm not quite sure how she would vote. At least not right now. Because right now I'm the one that witnesses her absentee ballot.
If she is really so totally dependent, she would probably be living in some kind of assisted living situation if none of you were around. I don't mean to be hard hearted but that's the way I see it.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 15, 2012, 08:26:19 PM
If she is really so totally dependent, she would probably be living in some kind of assisted living situation if none of you were around. I don't mean to be hard hearted but that's the way I see it.
You obviously do not know my Mother then. She is not totally dependent, but when you realize how 'totally dependent' we as a society are on cars for transportation, you would see where I was coming from.
I don't know what the future would hold, but she would fight the assisted living tooth and nail.
But fair assessment from your viewpoint.
Quote from: Hoss on July 15, 2012, 08:30:59 PM
You obviously do not know my Mother then. She is not totally dependent, but when you realize how 'totally dependent' we as a society are on cars for transportation, you would see where I was coming from.
I don't know what the future would hold, but she would fight the assisted living tooth and nail.
But fair assessment from your viewpoint.
My mom is getting up there in years but can still drive. Putting her in assisted living would probably shorten her life significantly so I know what you are talking about. I'm going to help my mom stay out here in suburbia hopefully for quite a few more years yet. If your mom is not totally dependent but cannot drive, an alternative would be an urban life like so many here propose. It's not such a bad alternative, just different and she would still not be in an old folks home. If she is able to stay where she is without her sister and kids, she will obviously have someone to take her to the polls or sign as a witness to an absentee ballot. The point is there are alternatives. I don't have any kids so at some point I will have to make that decision for myself.
Edit:
A few more thoughts, seriously.
Your mom is already living in "assisted living" but fortunately it is family assisting her. Good for her, you, your sister, and aunt. That's what family is about.
I have few friends that have had to put their parents in assisted living (but not nursing homes). It wasn't pretty in one case, reasonably well accepted in another. My grandmother lived for about 7 years after my grandfather died. He had stopped driving about 5 years before that. She was 97 when her time came. She lived in the house she and grandpop built after he retired in 1963. She never had a driver's license and lived in a suburb of Ocala, FL. Walking to the grocery store with a cart was not an option. She had church "family" that looked after her. She also had my Uncle who moved to a town about 20 miles away when he retired. Just close enough to help, no so close as to be in the way. At some point, we will all need someone to help us. Voting is another one of those things.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 15, 2012, 08:12:23 PM
Direct answer... Making someone show an ID is NOT making it harder for US citizens to vote. My opinion, I'm sure you disagree.
So you're saying that adding more paperwork and prerequisites to a process does not make it more difficult to complete that process? Wow. I'll have to remember that next time you're going on about some onerous regulation or something.
If you simply don't think it's a problem to make voting more difficult, OK, but don't try to justify it by claiming that's not what is happening.
Quote from: nathanm on July 15, 2012, 09:35:49 PM
So you're saying that adding more paperwork and prerequisites to a process does not make it more difficult to complete that process? Wow. I'll have to remember that next time you're going on about some onerous regulation or something.
If you simply don't think it's a problem to make voting more difficult, OK, but don't try to justify it by claiming that's not what is happening.
I think it is insignificant. Happy?
Quote from: nathanm on July 15, 2012, 09:35:49 PM
So you're saying that adding more paperwork and prerequisites to a process does not make it more difficult to complete that process? Wow. I'll have to remember that next time you're going on about some onerous regulation or something.
If you simply don't think it's a problem to make voting more difficult, OK, but don't try to justify it by claiming that's not what is happening.
The "hardship" created by this is about the same as opening a checking account. 20 minutes out of your life.
Far less than getting a driver's license, getting on Social Security, welfare, or food stamps.
Should we assume it's a hardship to even register to vote in the first place? Should we just do away with voter registration and let whomever shows up to vote, just vote?
Without evidence of voter fraud, all this does is add unneccessary government bureacracy to a simple right.
I am glad to know you are in favor of unneccessary bureacracy...
Quote from: RecycleMichael on July 16, 2012, 11:30:45 AM
Without evidence of voter fraud, all this does is add unneccessary government bureacracy to a simple sacred right.
I am glad to know you are in favor of unneccessary bureacracy...
Why all the meme's regarding protecting the process and keeping it honest and legit?
I post an article related to a special interest group mailing out some 5 million pieces of mail trying to register people who may not even be eligible to vote and you say there's no evidence? This is hardly an isolated incident. It's hardly creating unnecessary bureaucracy, it's simply enforcing that poll workers check ID's at the polls. As far as Oklahoma goes, there's no hardship nor any difference than in previous years. Show up and use your FREE voter ID card to vote.
I suspect the number of adult Americans without a photo ID is a very, very small fraction of all Americans.
QuoteBack in April, in a story that did not receive the attention it deserved, a Tunica County, Miss., jury found Lessadolla Sowers, who have been identified as a member of the executive committee of the county's NAACP chapter, guilty of 10 counts of fraudulently casting absentee ballots in the name of others.
Sowers, The Daily Caller reported Friday, received a five-year prison term for each of the ten counts—for a total of 50 years– but will be allowed to serve those terms concurrently, meaning at the same time.
The problem of voter fraud, despite what the Democrats say, is very, very real. The question is what to do about it. [Check out our editorial cartoons on the Democratic Party.]
A number of states are considering or have passed reforms that make it tougher to cheat at the polls, most of which center on requiring voters to produce a photo ID before they can cast a ballot, a seemingly simple idea taken from everyday life that most people support. After all, you have to show a government-issued photo ID to board an airplane, rent a car, cash a check, buy liquor, enter office buildings in major metropolitan areas, and even before you can get married so why not have to produce a photo ID before you can vote?
[Check out U.S. News's new iPad app.]
Well to many Democrats, who seem to believe that voter fraud–despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary–is merely a figment of the Republicans' collective imagination, asking people to show a photo ID before voting is akin to the restoration of "separate by equal" schools and segregated lunch counters.
Florida Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz who chairs the Democratic National Committee called photo ID an effort to "literally drag us all the way back to Jim Crow laws and literally—and very transparently—block access to the polls to voters who are more likely to vote for Democratic candidates than Republican candidates."
Once someone explained the meaning of the word "literally" to her, Wasserman Schultz backed off the analogy but not from the sentiment. NAACP President Benjamin Jealous, who apparently didn't get the memo from Wasserman Schultz, called voter ID one "of the last existing legal pillars of Jim Crow."
The Reverend Jesse Jackson said photo ID was the equivalent of "a poll tax." Former President Bill Clinton said of the effort to enacted voter ID legislation that there had never been "in my lifetime, since we got rid of the poll tax and Jim Crow burdens on voting, the determined effort to limit the franchise that we see today."
Others have attacked the plan because it would be too expensive to provide government-issued photo IDs to everyone who needs but does not have one, a concern that, frankly, is laughable.
Since when have Democrats ever been dissuaded from doing anything outside of the defense sector because it costs too much?
You get the picture. The rhetoric is over the top, probably because voter ID does get at the problem of voter fraud which—for some Democrats—is not so much a theory as a turn out model, a key to winning close elections. [See a slide show of who's in and out for the GOP in 2012.]
A comprehensive study by the Milwaukee Police Department found a strong possibility existed that there was "an illegal organized attempt to influence the outcome" through voter fraud of the 2004 elections in Wisconsin. The Colorado Secretary of State's office determined that nearly 5,000 people who were not United States citizens—and therefore according to the law, ineligible to vote—voted in the 2010 U.S. Senate race. And there are plenty of other examples in the modern era including one other recent U.S. Senate race and a gubernatorial election whose outcomes were determined as a direct result of voter fraud.
Voter fraud is not imaginary. It's real and it threatens the franchise held by ever legitimate voter in the country and needs to be addressed if the electoral process is gong to continue to mean anything. Requiring voters to show a photo ID before they can vote just makes sense.
http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/peter-roff/2011/07/29/despite-what-democrats-claim-voter-fraud-is-real
Its always something. I applied at a temp service today and they asked me for my "right to work" card. I was confused and asked her what that was. She said they couldn't pay me unless I had that or another form of identification besides my DL. "A Social Security card or birth certificate, you know". I told her I don't carry either one with me as that would be stupid and that SS cards are not to be used as identification. Besides, I don't know if I even want your jobs. We'll deal with that "right to work" stuff later.
Just embed a numeric digital display on my forearm and lets get it over with.
You posted an opinion page about voter fraud. I counter it with this...
http://news.yahoo.com/gops-believe-voter-fraud-epidemic-163000131.html
The Republican war on barely-existent voter fraud threatens to disenfranchise countless American citizens
Out of the blue, Florida recently asked a 91-year-old World War II veteran to provide proof of his U.S. citizenship — or he wouldn't be allowed to register to vote. Bill Internicola, born and raised in America, sent the state the information it requested and military papers to boot, according to NPR.
So why was this "flabbergasted" senior citizen targeted by Florida? Republicans across the country are pushing new state laws to stop "voter fraud" — a crime so demonstrably rare that many critics assume these laws are meant not to stop fraud, but to disenfranchise Democratic voters. And as more and more laws pass — in Pennsylvania, an incredible 9 percent of the electorate may be shut out by a new voter ID law — many innocent citizens like Internicola are becoming victims.
One of the legislators leading the charge is Gov. Rick Scott (R-Fla). Thanks to Scott, if you're an ex-convict, an early-riser, or have moved recently, you're going to have a lot of trouble casting your vote in Florida. Scott's latest tactic is purging noncitizens from the state's voter rolls, with questionable results. According to The Miami Herald, the state-produced list of non-citizens has targeted "hundreds of actual citizens who are lawful voters."
Between 2000 and 2010, there were 47,000 UFO sightings, 441 Americans killed by lightning — and only 13 cases of in-person voter impersonation.
The Department of Justice is suing Florida to stop this particular law in its tracks, on the grounds that it violates the National Voter Registration Act. But winning this battle alone won't win the war. All over the country, courts are struggling to defend our right to vote against legislators who are stomping on that right: some, accidently — others, with reckless enthusiasm.
Eleven states have now passed laws that require voters to show photo ID and 16 additional states have laws pending, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU Law School. Three states have started requiring voters to demonstrate U.S. citizenship, and six states are restricting registration in other ways — all in the name of stopping the crime of voter fraud.
Quote from: AquaMan on July 16, 2012, 12:13:43 PM
Its always something. I applied at a temp service today and they asked me for my "right to work" card. I was confused and asked her what that was. She said they couldn't pay me unless I had that or another form of identification besides my DL. "A Social Security card or birth certificate, you know". I told her I don't carry either one with me as that would be stupid and that SS cards are not to be used as identification. Besides, I don't know if I even want your jobs. We'll deal with that "right to work" stuff later.
Just embed a numeric digital display on my forearm and lets get it over with.
She managed to butcher "employment authorization" into "right to work"?
I've never completed my employment information without an SS card.
http://www.uscis.gov/files/form/i-9.pdf
Scroll to page 5. You need some sort of government-issued photo ID AND your SS card or birth certificate. That's nothing new, it's been a requirement for years.
Quote from: Conan71 on July 16, 2012, 12:02:53 PM
I suspect the number of adult Americans without a photo ID is a very, very small fraction of all Americans.
I don't think it's appropriate to mess with people's right to vote because you think it only inconveniences a few. Here's the thing: Even if only 0.1% of the US population has no photo ID, that's still up to 300,000 people you're disenfranchising. That's the thing about living in a country with lots of people. Even a small fraction of our population is still a lot of people.
Last I checked, there's nothing in the Constitution that conditions the right to vote on one's ability to jump through hoops.
Quote from: nathanm on July 16, 2012, 03:38:41 PM
I don't think it's appropriate to mess with people's right to vote because you think it only inconveniences a few. Here's the thing: Even if only 0.1% of the US population has no photo ID, that's still up to 300,000 people you're disenfranchising. That's the thing about living in a country with lots of people. Even a small fraction of our population is still a lot of people.
Last I checked, there's nothing in the Constitution that conditions the right to vote on one's ability to jump through hoops.
Do you consider registering to vote jumping through hoops?
Quote from: Conan71 on July 16, 2012, 04:00:49 PM
Do you consider registering to vote jumping through hoops?
OK, let's shed a little light on the subject.
Most states do NOT require a photo ID, just the voter reg card. However, there are a handful of states that do require photo ID.
http://www.ncsl.org/legislatures-elections/elections/voter-id.aspx
Quote from: Conan71 on July 16, 2012, 04:00:49 PM
Do you consider registering to vote jumping through hoops?
Given that there's nothing stopping us from same day registration, yeah, as implemented in Oklahoma it's more of a hoop than I think is reasonable. I don't think it's unreasonable to prove your eligibility once, at initial registration. I don't even think it's completely unreasonable to require that a person bring
something to indicate who they are, even if that something is actually a someone. I don't think that restricting that something to photo IDs is reasonable, however. Nor is it reasonable to require further identification when you are personally known to the poll workers. No more so than I'd consider it reasonable if the folks at my bank suddenly started asking for ID even though they manage to greet me by name when I walk in the door.
Quote from: nathanm on July 16, 2012, 04:27:02 PM
No more so than I'd consider it reasonable if the folks at my bank suddenly started asking for ID even though they manage to greet me by name when I walk in the door.
My bank never asks for ID....when I'm putting money in.
They always ask for ID when I keep some back.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 16, 2012, 06:24:36 PM
They always ask for ID when I keep some back.
Mine doesn't, unless I'm withdrawing an amount that requires a CTR, or I'm at a different branch where they don't know me.
Quote from: nathanm on July 16, 2012, 06:46:02 PM
Mine doesn't, unless I'm withdrawing an amount that requires a CTR, or I'm at a different branch where they don't know me.
Mine has a sign at the tellers indicating that ID is required on all cash back transactions. Since I always have an ID (driver's license), I see no need to try to get cash back without ID.
The last time I did anything even approaching $10,000 to require a CTR was 9 years ago when I bought a (new to me) used car. I think it was $11,500 but I'm not sure.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 16, 2012, 07:18:37 PM
Mine has a sign at the tellers indicating that ID is required on all cash back transactions. Since I always have an ID (driver's license), I see no need to try to get cash back without ID.
The last time I did anything even approaching $10,000 to require a CTR was 9 years ago when I bought a (new to me) used car. I think it was $11,500 but I'm not sure.
It's always been that way for me as well.
This whole thing could be resolved if Voter Reg cards were required to have photos on them. I understand the cost implications, but looking at some of the states on that page I referenced that require photo id, one *could* argue that requiring someone to pay for a photo id would be considered a poll tax. I'm not saying I would be in agreement, but I could see how it could be construed as such.
Quote from: Hoss on July 16, 2012, 07:48:38 PM
This whole thing could be resolved if Voter Reg cards were required to have photos on them. I understand the cost implications, but looking at some of the states on that page I referenced that require photo id, one *could* argue that requiring someone to pay for a photo id would be considered a poll tax. I'm not saying I would be in agreement, but I could see how it could be construed as such.
That could be solved by having the states requiring a photo voter ID to provide a FREE photo ID if requested by the voter. Anyone have actual $ numbers to make a photo ID
in addition to the other processing already being required? Your $25 driver's license is mostly tax.
Quote from: Red Arrow on July 16, 2012, 08:12:31 PM
That could be solved by having the states requiring a photo voter ID to provide a FREE photo ID if requested by the voter. Anyone have actual $ numbers to make a photo ID in addition to the other processing already being required? Your $25 driver's license is mostly tax.
Is it $25 now? Sheesh. My last one was $21.50. Hell, I can remember when they were $7.50 when I first got my license in 1982.
Quote from: Hoss on July 16, 2012, 08:50:44 PM
Is it $25 now? Sheesh. My last one was $21.50. Hell, I can remember when they were $7.50 when I first got my license in 1982.
I remembered it was about that much. I just checked and my last one (last fall) was $21.50.
Quote from: Hoss on July 16, 2012, 08:50:44 PM
Is it $25 now? Sheesh. My last one was $21.50. Hell, I can remember when they were $7.50 when I first got my license in 1982.
Only $25?? Geez...mine is 3 times that. Plus fees, plus an alien abduction probing by the TSA.
Gotta love it!
Quote from: heironymouspasparagus on July 16, 2012, 10:51:38 PM
Only $25?? Geez...mine is 3 times that. Plus fees, plus an alien abduction probing by the TSA.
Gotta love it!
CDL holder I gather? You have the great yellow card!
Quote from: Hoss on July 16, 2012, 11:04:10 PM
CDL holder I gather? You have the great yellow card!
Yeah...complete with doubles, tankers, haz-mat, and M (motorcycle) endorsements. That ought to scare some people - knowing I am out there, possibly driving 150,000 lbs of toxic chemicals, or highly volatile chemical compounds...
Let not your heart be troubled.... Yellow is mellow!!
Pa. Voter ID Law Leads to DMV Trips from 'Hell'http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/voter-id-vote/story?id=17206253#.UE-eU41lTYg (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/voter-id-vote/story?id=17206253#.UE-eU41lTYg)
QuoteTwo government offices, three hour-long lines, two 78-mile trips, two week-long waiting periods, four forms of identity and two signed affidavits later, Pennsylvanians will be allowed to vote.
Under the state's new voter ID laws,, which require every voter to show a government-issued photo ID at the polls, that is the epic process thousands of native Pennsylvanians have to go through to get the ID required to cast their ballots in November. And they now have just 56 days to complete it before the election.
"It was hell all told," said Jan Klincewicz, who helped his 87-year-old mother, Jisele, through the process. "To have to go through that kind of rigmarole to exercise her right to vote I think is excessive."
Pennsylvania is one of five states that will have a strict photo ID law in effect for the 2012 election. Kansas and Tennessee approved similar laws last year. Georgia and Indiana have required voters to present government-issued photo IDs at the polls since 2005 and 2007, respectively.
Proponents of the law argue that the IDs prevent voter fraud. Opponents claim it presents a burden so large that the ID requirement will effectively disenfranchise thousands of voters. How many thousands of voters is hotly disputed.
In Pennsylvania, where 20 electoral votes are up for grabs on Nov. 6, the State Department estimated about 90,000 eligible voters may not have the required form of ID to vote. The American Civil Liberties Union, which is challenging the law in the Pennsylvania Supreme Court this week, claims as many as 759,000 voters lack a valid ID for voting.
Since Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett signed the law in March, the state has issued about 7,200 non-driver ID cards solely for the purpose of voting, according to the state's Department of Transportation, which issues the IDs. But for the tens of thousands of voters who, according to conservative estimates, still lack the ID, the transportation, verification and mobilization barriers that stand between them and that voting requirement are significant.
Many of those ID-less voters are very old or in nursing homes, and have limited mobility and few ways to get to a driver's license issuing center, said Nicole Berner, associate general counsel at the Service Employees International Union. Many others, whether they are homeless, living with their parents or simply not named on a lease or utility account, do not have the required documents to prove their address, she added.
"Most of these people are on the margins of society," Berner said, "but they still clearly have the right to vote."
Eligible voters who don't have an original copy of their birth certificate have to make two trips to the DMV, which for residents in rural northern Pennsylvania may be up to 30 miles away; once there, wait times average 59 minutes.
Voters lacking an Social Security card have to truck over the Social Security office, where wait times vary from 15 minutes to an hour, and apply for a replacement card, which takes two to three days to receive in the mail, before making that first trip to the DMV.
"It's long lines and it's multiple trips," Berner said, adding that many people she has encountered "are just becoming demoralized and saying 'I'm just not going to vote.'"
But the state argues that after a $5 million ad campaign - funded entirely from federal voter education grants –a toll-free information hotline and ample documents posted online, voters should be informed and aware of the requirements.
"It's a shared responsibility," said Jan McKnight, a spokeswoman for the Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, or PennDot. "We are encouraging everybody to use the information available."
But hundreds of eligible Pennsylvania voters do not meet those requirements to apply for a secure state ID card.
Two weeks ago, on August 27, the state launched a new type "safety net" ID card, which will allow voters who have none of the documentation to prove their identity and residence necessary for the state ID get a photo ID in order to vote. So far nearly 500 of these Department of State voter ID cards have been issued.
"It's a maze to get the IDs," said Vic Walczak, the legal director at the ACLU in Pennsylvania. "If you go through all of the trouble of navigating the maze, which may include several trips to PennDOT, and then at the end of the day you're still stuck in the maze, then they let you get this 'safety net' Department of State ID."
That safety-net ID is only valid for voting and requires a Social Security number, proof of residence and an affidavit pledging that the voter cannot obtain or afford any other form of ID. Because Pennsylvania offers free birth certificate verification for state natives, few people born in the state will be able to qualify for the "safety net" ID. So far the state has spent about $100,000 issuing free IDs to low-income voters, according to the Pennsylvania State Department.
"The entire system is designed to appear reasonable, but in practice is going to prevent hundreds of thousands of people from voting," Walczak said.
Voters who have the six types of documents necessary to apply for the state ID card have limited time to apply. For residents of 13 counties, there is only one day per week that the DMV is open to apply for an ID. And in 10 more counties it's only open two days per week.
For Klincewicz and his 87-year-old mother that limited schedule meant two days of trying in order to get her the ID required to vote, after she mistakenly surrendered her state ID because of a Department of Transportation error.
Klincewicz's wife had to make two trips to the DMV where she and her mother-in-law, Jisele, waited upwards of four hours to get the ID. All told, he and his wife spent more than 20 hours making phone calls, writing emails, driving to the DMV and waiting in lines to get his mother's ID reinstated so she could vote in November, Klincewicz said.
"My mom has not been very politically active, but in this particular election she's on Medicaid and she does have enough lucidity to know that voting for a president that would be taking away some of her benefits is harmful," he said. "She did register to vote, which I had not seen her do in years."
Jisele Klincewicz is deaf and hasn't driven in more than 70 years. Without her son's help, Pennsylvania's new voter ID law would prevent her from voting in the 2012 election, he said.
"It appears to me a solution for which there was no problem to begin with," Klincewicz said. "It does not make me a proud Pennsylvanian, that's for sure."
Quote from: Townsend on September 11, 2012, 03:29:46 PM
Pa. Voter ID Law Leads to DMV Trips from 'Hell'
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/voter-id-vote/story?id=17206253#.UE-eU41lTYg (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/voter-id-vote/story?id=17206253#.UE-eU41lTYg)
This is what I thought I was going to see.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/maryland-politics/post/maryland-democrat-quits-congressional-race-amid-vote-fraud-allegations/2012/09/10/d0ff9b1e-fb73-11e1-b2af-1f7d12fe907a_blog.html#pagebreak
But in regards to votor id laws. Jim Cramer (Mad Money) tweeted today that his father in PA was not going to be able to vote because he is elderly and didn't have DL and couldn't prove his citizenship. Seriously? Am I one of the few that has a birth certificate. Even if I didn't have a copy with me, I can write and get one through the mail. I know there are probably some issues with some of these laws but really, this seems like a bit of a stretch.
Quote from: erfalf on September 11, 2012, 09:14:42 PM
This is what I thought I was going to see.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/maryland-politics/post/maryland-democrat-quits-congressional-race-amid-vote-fraud-allegations/2012/09/10/d0ff9b1e-fb73-11e1-b2af-1f7d12fe907a_blog.html#pagebreak
But in regards to votor id laws. Jim Cramer (Mad Money) tweeted today that his father in PA was not going to be able to vote because he is elderly and didn't have DL and couldn't prove his citizenship. Seriously? Am I one of the few that has a birth certificate. Even if I didn't have a copy with me, I can write and get one through the mail. I know there are probably some issues with some of these laws but really, this seems like a bit of a stretch.
You do realize that PA requires a PHOTO ID...right? Most birth certificates don't have those...
Quote from: Hoss on September 11, 2012, 09:16:46 PM
You do realize that PA requires a PHOTO ID...right? Most birth certificates don't have those...
But to get an ID he would need proof of citizenship, then he gets the photo id. That was the point Cramer was making.
It's not just proof of ID/citizenship that is required. You also must have proof of your address.
Quote from: erfalf on September 11, 2012, 09:20:08 PM
But to get an ID he would need proof of citizenship, then he gets the photo id. That was the point Cramer was making.
If I read correctly he also said his father didn't have a DL. Once again, these things cost money to obtain (state issued ID/DL). In essence, it can be considered (loosely) as a poll tax. Why is it so hard for people to understand what the Republicans are trying to do? They've even admitted as much.
QuoteHouse Majority Leader Mike Turzai (R-Allegheny) suggested that the House's end game in passing the Voter ID law was to benefit the GOP politically.
"We are focused on making sure that we meet our obligations that we've talked about for years," said Turzai in a speech to [Republican State Committee] members Saturday. He mentioned the law among a laundry list of accomplishments made by the GOP-run legislature.
"Pro-Second Amendment? The Castle Doctrine, it's done. First pro-life legislation – abortion facility regulations – in 22 years, done. Voter ID, which is gonna allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania, done."
Quote from: erfalf on September 11, 2012, 09:20:08 PM
But to get an ID he would need proof of citizenship, then he gets the photo id. That was the point Cramer was making.
It is often difficult for the elderly to travel if they are home bound and a wait at a DMV or tag agency is out of the question. It was for my mother the last few years she was alive.
Quote from: swake on September 12, 2012, 06:51:01 AM
It is often difficult for the elderly to travel if they are home bound and a wait at a DMV or tag agency is out of the question. It was for my mother the last few years she was alive.
Generally speaking though, there are ways to write these laws that would achieve the same ends without effecting the elderly. I know in Georgia or Indiana (can't remember, they were one of the first to have this type of law) you can still vote absentee without an ID. A guy works in my office (WW II POW, one of the most amazing people I have ever met) that can barely get around without a walker, and I know without a doubt that it would take significantly more than any of this gobbly goo to keep him from voting. I understand some have more issues than him, but still, effort has to be made regardless of your situation. People just can't vote for other people (well they probably do sometimes but... ;))
I even saw in the paper yesterday (Wall Street Journal) a graph that showed the percentage of early votes cast, and I was blown away. I had no idea the proportion was so high. Nearly 80% of Colorado's votes were early in 2008. That's crazy.
Let's just remember, voting is not required by law, so therefore it is always an inconvenience in that it requires action if you want to do it. There is no penalty for not voting. I understand that we want as many people to vote as possible, but I also don't think that the idea of id is a terrible one (although some are admittedly devised poorly).
Quote from: erfalf on September 12, 2012, 08:11:15 AM
I even saw in the paper yesterday (Wall Street Journal) a graph that showed the percentage of early votes cast, and I was blown away. I had no idea the proportion was so high. Nearly 80% of Colorado's votes were early in 2008. That's crazy.
I'll ignore the other things wrong with your statement. I'll just ask, Why? Why is that crazy?
Quote from: Townsend on September 12, 2012, 09:20:10 AM
I'll ignore the other things wrong with your statement. I'll just ask, Why? Why is that crazy?
It's a disturbing trend if the "early" votes are also absentee. Without enough safeguards, it can lead to ballot box stuffing.
Quote from: Townsend on September 12, 2012, 09:20:10 AM
I'll ignore the other things wrong with your statement. I'll just ask, Why? Why is that crazy?
I always assumed the vast majority of votes were cast in person on election day. Nothing political, just changed my assumptions.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 12, 2012, 09:45:00 AM
It's a disturbing trend if the "early" votes are also absentee. Without enough safeguards, it can lead to ballot box stuffing.
Where's all the worry when it comes to issues at the polling stations? Hell, just locally we've had two recent stories where ballots have disappeared only to show back up when it's questioned. "Oh, here they are. Fell under this polling machine."
"without enough safeguards"...What safeguards are there now? I mark a paper with my vote, I place it in a machine. Someone empties the machine and can "oops, I lost some" at any time.
Quote from: Conan71 on September 12, 2012, 09:45:00 AM
It's a disturbing trend if the "early" votes are also absentee. Without enough safeguards, it can lead to ballot box stuffing.
Absentee or "absentee?" (Early voting in Oklahoma is considered absentee voting)
The stats I've seen for other states break down absentee and in person early voting. Absentee is about where it's always been, but early voting is up dramatically in the states that have the most early voting hours. Makes sense, since even here in Oklahoma there are as many early voting hours as there are regular voting hours.
I love voting early. It allows me to completely ignore the last days of ads.
I am opposed to ID laws, but personally don't mind showing my driver's license. It is a good picture.
This is a 3 minute video that a friend of mine helped produce for a voter ID law in Minnesota.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sOGjZoI55UE&feature=youtu.be