Voter Photo ID -- Is It Really Terrible?

[RandBlade]

Those are bureaucratic concerns not philosophical ones.

Loki tends to merge multiple issues and then simplify them as a "gotcha". The reason I opposed a National ID card in the UK is not that the government shouldn't know who I am. It already does. I have eg a birth certificate and national insurance number and a passport. All adults have the first two (social security number in the States).

The issue was that the proposed ID card included full biometric information including fingerprints etc that the government only currently has on convicted criminals. THAT was the privacy concern.

[Aimless]

They are philosophical concerns for those whose default position is that the government should basically not do anything besides protecting borders and maintaining a police force, as well as for those who believe that federal governments should not do things that can in theory be done by state or local governments.

[Aimless]

Breaking news: Brown people caught voting

http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politi...ernhard-langer

[RandBlade]

They are philosophical concerns for those whose default position is that the government should basically not do anything besides protecting borders and maintaining a police force, as well as for those who believe that federal governments should not do things that can in theory be done by state or local governments.

The US Federal Government already has Social Security numbers for every adult in America so adding a voting card for Federal Elections (which could then be used for State ones) is not unreasonable. The government would have no extra information with this proposal (unlike the ID cards as an excuse to get biometric info off everyone proposal a decade ago here).

[Lewkowski]

They are philosophical concerns for those whose default position is that the government should basically not do anything besides protecting borders and maintaining a police force, as well as for those who believe that federal governments should not do things that can in theory be done by state or local governments.

If its a federal election... a national ID could be valid.

Here's the deal though - this isn't a compulsory national ID that I'm in favor. This is a free option to be used instead of normal ID at no cost to the user. The vast *vast* majority of Americans wouldn't even bother since they already have a state issued ID. While there would be costs, they are worth it to ensure we have a fair and honest election.

[LittleFuzzy]

Not sure I see the link between terrorism and illegal voting.

National ids aren't just about voting. In fact they have almost nothing to do with voting, unlike requirements for state ids to engage in the state-run electoral processes. The old opposition to a national id was an anti-federal pro-state stance. And that does tend to fall by the wayside after national security events.

[Dreadnaught]

Bringing up national IDs is a distraction at best. Voter integrity advocates would be perfectly happy with any number of state-recognized identification. But apparently this is racist.

[Loki]

People who care about "voter integrity" wouldn't be trying so freaking hard to keep people from voting...or boasting about it afterwards. Pardon me if I don't take seriously those who try to fix a problem they haven't established exists, with remedies that are explicitly intended to benefit them.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/...b0e80b02cbc5b2

[Aimless]

AdChoices
POLITICS
The North Carolina GOP Is Pretty Happy About The State’s Lower Black Voter Turnout
Fewer African-Americans are turning out for early voting compared to 2012.
Nov 07, 2016 | Updated Nov 08, 2016
Emily Tate Politics Intern, The Huffington Post
We Are Sorry,
This video is restricted from playing in your location
Ecode: 18

North Carolina’s Republican Party boasted about the state’s early voting statistics in a press release on Monday, highlighting the decrease in African-American voters and increase in white voters as indicators that the “Obama coalition [is] crumbling.”

“The Republican ground game is showing that motivated statewide volunteers and extensive ground game are better indicators of electoral success than the number of candidate-specific offices one has,” Robin Hayes, the state party chairman, said. “Further, the connected weaknesses of Hillary Clinton, Deborah Ross, and Roy Cooper when combined with the clear Democrat voter apathy, shows the once dynamic Obama Coalition crumbling and tired.”


Early voting numbers among African-Americans are down by 8.5 percent from 2012, while early voting by white voters is up 22.5 percent, the North Carolina GOP says in the statement. The group seems to think this is an opportunity for its party to regain footing in the state.

North Carolina could go either way in the presidential race, and it also faces competitive Senate and gubernatorial races this year.

Early voter turnout among African-Americans nationally has been lower this year than in previous elections, which could ultimately hurt Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton’s chance of securing the presidency.


CHRIS KEANE/REUTERS
Voters cast their ballots during early voting in Charlotte, North Carolina, on Oct. 20, 2016. Turnout is down among African-American voters this year.
African-Americans may have been more enthusiastic to cast a vote for President Barack Obama in 2008 and 2012, but the low turnout in North Carolina stems from more than that: Members of the state’s Republican Party have actively tried to reduce early voting opportunities, particularly those popular among black voters, in an effort to hurt Democrats in the election.

A memo from the state GOP urging “party line changes to early voting” was sent out in August, which led to 23 county election boards reducing early voting hours. Nine boards completely cut out Sunday voting.

And, last week, the North Carolina NAACP sued the state after election officials in Beaufort, Moore and Cumberland counties cancelled voter registrations because campaign mailers sent to voter addresses were returned as undeliverable. The NAACP argues that the purge was an attempt by the North Carolina GOP to suppress the black vote. On Friday, U.S. District Judge Loretta Biggs ordered the county election boards to restore the registrations.

At least 3,500 voters had their registrations removed from the rolls in the past 90 days, according to Penda Hair, an attorney for the NAACP, which is a violation of the National Voter Registration Act.

"dog bites man" as RB would say.

[RandBlade]

"dog bites man" as RB would say.

No I would actually say they were right to be encouraged by those figures. Trump won the state and was one of many swing states he took. Maybe if Hillary had taken the threat of defeat seriously we would have been spared Trump.

[Aimless]

I'm sorry but I can't tell from your post whether or not you read the part I quoted with your brain turned on.

[RandBlade]

Yes I did. I responded to the quote rather than the op ed bit at the bottom.

[Aimless]

I'm sorry but I'm having a hard time believing that since you're essentially blaming Clinton based on a quote about how the GOP, in NC, restricted early voting for partisan reasons and possibly also canceled registrations inappropriately. Either you're misreading it, or I am.

[RandBlade]

You are.

Firstly for the canceled registrations the quote says the judge had ordered their registrations to be restored, so that can't be the cause of Clinton's loss. On Friday, U.S. District Judge Loretta Biggs ordered the county election boards to restore the registrations.

Secondly Clinton lost by a margin of 173,315 while the disputed [and restored] votes came to a tally of "at least 3,500 voters". Last I check 3,500 non-cancelled votes come to a total considerably less than 173,315.

As for voting, while I think there should be uniform voting times etc nationwide or at least statewide there was plenty of time for anyone who wanted to cast a vote to do so.

The key part of the quote is this: Early voting numbers among African-Americans are down by 8.5 percent from 2012, while early voting by white voters is up 22.5 percent, the North Carolina GOP says in the statement - Given that both parties were appealing on racial lines that was a warning sign that Trump was winning.

Oh and finally not mentioned in the quote is that Romney carried North Carolina in 2012 [though Obama did in 2008] - so in order to win the State Clinton would need to get a swing towards her, rather than a swing against her as actually happened.

[Lewkowski]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/02/11...ter-fraud.html

"A Mexican citizen living in Texas was sentenced this week to eight years in prison for voting illegally in elections in 2012 and 2014.

Rosa Maria Ortega, 37, was found guilty Wednesday on two counts of illegal voting after she falsely claimed to be a United States citizen and voted at least five times between 2012 and 2014."

But voter fraud never happens, right Loki?

[Aimless]

No-one has said it never happens. It obviously happens every now and then among immigrants who are registered Republicans.

[Loki]

Nice strawman, Lewk. The argument isn't that this never happens, but that it's rare and people who do it get caught. So good job in supporting the latter argument.

[Lewkowski]

Nice strawman, Lewk. The argument isn't that this never happens, but that it's rare and people who do it get caught. So good job in supporting the latter argument.

Considering most criminals are never caught and she voted in FIVE elections prior to getting arrested...

[Loki]

Considering most criminals are never caught and she voted in FIVE elections prior to getting arrested...

Good point. Let's take measures that cut turnout by 2% (4 million votes if adopted by all states) in order to stop a few dozen illegal votes.

http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/665966.pdf

[Lewkowski]

Good point. Let's take measures that cut turnout by 2% (4 million votes if adopted by all states) in order to stop a few dozen illegal votes.

http://www.gao.gov/assets/670/665966.pdf

Voter fraud undermines elections. People not turning out - doesn't. People aren't required to vote, if they choose not to it is on them.

EDIT: are to aren't

[LittleFuzzy]

Voter fraud undermines elections. People not turning out - doesn't. People are required to vote, if they choose not to it is on them.

Actually people not turning out DOES undermine them. Our democracy would be much more robust if we had more than 50-55% of registered voters participating in an election and MASSIVELY more robust if we had most of the people eligible to vote registered and voting. As it is, even in relatively high-turnout elections, the elected representatives are usually the choice of less than 1/4 of the population. If you think that doesn't undermine democratic legitimacy you're nuts. It doesn't matter whether it's their own fault for not participating, it still weakens the final result and the system.

[RandBlade]

Indeed but it is about priorities. If someone is able to vote and chooses not to then that is their own fault.

If someone should be able to vote but is unable to do so out of their control or the system in place is not secure so legitimate votes can be tampered with by the inclusion of illegitimate ones ... then that is not the victims own fault.

[Lewkowski]

Indeed but it is about priorities. If someone is able to vote and chooses not to then that is their own fault.

If someone should be able to vote but is unable to do so out of their control or the system in place is not secure so legitimate votes can be tampered with by the inclusion of illegitimate ones ... then that is not the victims own fault.

Exactly.

[LittleFuzzy]

Indeed but it is about priorities. If someone is able to vote and chooses not to then that is their own fault.

If someone should be able to vote but is unable to do so out of their control or the system in place is not secure so legitimate votes can be tampered with by the inclusion of illegitimate ones ... then that is not the victims own fault.

Ok, it's about priorities. In which case scale necessarily ALWAYS wins out and takes top priority. Source of greatest harm and all that. So tell me, Rand, which problem is of a greater scale, scattered voter fraud. . . or more than 100 million US citizens not voting?

[Lewkowski]

Ok, it's about priorities. In which case scale necessarily ALWAYS wins out and takes top priority. Source of greatest harm and all that. So tell me, Rand, which problem is of a greater scale, scattered voter fraud. . . or more than 100 million US citizens not voting?

If someone doesn't pay attention to politics and has no clue what they are voting on... I'd rather they didn't vote. I'm not going to ban them from voting but I don't see a need for society to try to push them to go vote. If you are the type of person that only votes because someone pushed you to go vote you probably aren't paying attention the political world at large.

[RandBlade]

Ok, it's about priorities. In which case scale necessarily ALWAYS wins out and takes top priority. Source of greatest harm and all that. So tell me, Rand, which problem is of a greater scale, scattered voter fraud. . . or more than 100 million US citizens not voting?

Scattered voter fraud . . . assuming the non-voters are not voting because they don't want to which is their right.

There's nothing wrong with the system because people can't be arsed to vote, give them something to believe in and they can turn out. If the non-voters are not voting as they're being prevented from voting then that is the greater problem of course.

[Dreadnaught]

Ok, it's about priorities. In which case scale necessarily ALWAYS wins out and takes top priority. Source of greatest harm and all that. So tell me, Rand, which problem is of a greater scale, scattered voter fraud. . . or more than 100 million US citizens not voting?

Are you suggesting 100 million US citizens don't vote because they can't be bovvered to get an ID?

[LittleFuzzy]

Are you suggesting 100 million US citizens don't vote because they can't be bovvered to get an ID?

No, I'm saying getting 100 million more US citizens to educate themselves and vote is vastly more important than adding yet another measure to try and reduce voter fraud that is already very low due to the methods currently used to mitigate or stop fraud.

[RandBlade]

And how much will "re-education" of 100 million US citizens cost and how easy will it be? What will you do, send them to "re-education camps" to ensure they vote?

How about parties inspire people with something they think is worth voting for, how about that instead? Turnout goes up or down depending upon how much parties represent what people want to vote for.

[Loki]

Irrelevant. This policy in itself reduces turnout. It's judged on its own merits.