Yahoo/AP: Tough ID laws could block thousands of 2012 votes

[Skin'Em84]

But why would a birth certificate not count? Or proof of say, my parents citizenship? Both of those would mean that I have a legal right to vote. And I still need to be listed as a citizen when I show up to the court house to register myself. It's not as if I'm registering myself as a citizen at that point. My problem is more focused on limiting ways to prove citzenship and the right to vote. If it's limiting peoples (who have the right to vote) ability to register, then that's a problem.

The main reason is birth certificate has no photo. According to Census Data there was about 24.7 million registered voters (or about 18%) who did not vote. If we ever end up like Mexico, with cadidates buying votes, just using a birth certificate would not help. I could just by yours, and then go vote as you. A bit harder to do with a photo ID.

And before someone says it, yes I know how easy it can be to get a fake ID. I went to high school once.

[HeluCopter29]

The main reason is birth certificate has no photo. According to Census Data there was about 24.7 million registered voters (or about 18%) who did not vote. If we ever end up like Mexico' date=' with cadidates buying votes, just using a birth certificate would not help. I could just by yours, and then go vote as you. A bit harder to do with a photo ID.

And before someone says it, yes I know how easy it can be to get a fake ID. I went to high school once.[/quote']

Well I would argue that an ID is easier to fake then a birth certificate anyway. Obviously the photo thing does present a problem, but as you just said, obtaining a fake ID is exceptionally easy. You can have those mailed to your house nowadays.

[jpyaks3]

Everyone in this thread needs to realize that just because it is easy for you to get an ID doesn't mean its that easy for everybody.

Voter ID laws further marginalize those on the edges of society and take away their rights. If you are extremely poor, homeless, elderly, or don't have a car you probably don't have a photo ID and guess what laws like these take away your ability to vote.

Voter fraud is incredibly rare and pretty difficult to pull off (and the penalties are extremely harsh for very limited benefit) and I mean real voter fraud that is successful. Voting is one of the most important rights we have in this nation and making it more difficult to vote or preventing others from voting via purges, ID Laws, or through any other means is utter bull**** especially when done in a partisan manner.

---------- Post added July-8th-2012 at 11:03 PM ----------

No I simply meant the Dems will use it to serve their purpose. Florida announces they've purged a couple thousand people from the voting rolls for legit reasons and then AG. Holder tells them they can't do this. I was glad to see the state chose to ignore his directive in this instance.

Except most of the voters purged actually were legitimate and should have stayed on the rolls, but hey who cares if it can help your political cause.

[Hersh]

No I simply meant the Dems will use it to serve their purpose. Florida announces they've purged a couple thousand people from the voting rolls for legit reasons and then AG. Holder tells them they can't do this. I was glad to see the state chose to ignore his directive in this instance.

What were the legit reasons and what are the results? Hope many people were on the purge list that are legal voting citizens? What other laws and directives should states not follow?

[jpyaks3]

No I simply meant the Dems will use it to serve their purpose. Florida announces they've purged a couple thousand people from the voting rolls for legit reasons and then AG. Holder tells them they can't do this. I was glad to see the state chose to ignore his directive in this instance.

Except most of the voters purged actually were legitimate and should have stayed on the rolls, but hey who cares if it can help your political cause.

[Hersh]

Duplicate post

[deejaydana]

Many were deceased people so yes at one point in time they were registered voters. Florida pols aren't haphazardly eliminating people from the voting ranks that were legitimately there.

[chipwhich]

It's funny, I haven't been purged from the polls. Imagine that.

To try and claim ignorance that there is an issue, is well, just playing politics. On both sides

[Larry]

It took me 1 day to get an ID for my 17 year old daughter. It was tough.

I have had the need to get a certified birth certificate to prove my identity. That took a few weeks.

Excellent.

You have now proven that if you already have in your possession, every piece of paper that the government demands, then it's easy.

Guess that's good enough, huh?

[Hersh]

Many were deceased people so yes at one point in time they were registered voters. Florida pols aren't haphazardly eliminating people from the voting ranks that were legitimately there.

Really??

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/28/us/victory-for-floridas-push-against-illegal-voters.html

That master list contained 182,000 names of potential noncitizens. The state forwarded an initial roster of 2,600 of the names to independent county election supervisors, asking them to send letters to those voters requesting proof of citizenship. If no proof was provided, the voters would be dropped from the rolls. The state would then send more names.

But the list was flawed; many people on it who had been contacted came forward to say they had been born in the United States, or were naturalized citizens. County election supervisors quickly grew critical of the list, saying better information was needed.

[chipwhich]

Excellent.

You have now proven that if you already have in your possession, every piece of paper that the government demands, then it's easy.

Guess that's good enough, huh?

In the case of my birth certificate, I didn't have everything in my possession. So I got it through legal means So no, it wasn't good enough. But it wasn't mission impossible.

[deejaydana]

RUBIO has stood by what the state has done. They've found approximately 100 illegals on the voting rolls to date. My question is this: is this something they SHOULDN'T be doing at all? Even one fradulant vote should be intolerable in my mind. Is it a diabolical plan by the GOP to unfairly target or suppress votes? I don't see Rubio being behind something like that personally. I also don't consider asking for photo ID---something that's required for so many other basic transactions in our American society---as being a very high hurdle to climb. Do you?

[Hersh]

RUBIO has stood by what the state has done. They've found approximately 100 illegals on the voting rolls to date. My question is this: is this something they SHOULDN'T be doing at all? Even one fradulant vote should be intolerable in my mind. Is it a diabolical plan by the GOP to unfairly target or suppress votes? I don't see Rubio being behind something like that personally. I also don't consider asking for photo ID---something that's required for so many other basic transactions in our American society---as being a very high hurdle to climb. Do you?

How many legal voting citizens were on the purge list? What number of legal citizens getting purged would be unacceptable in the name of removing 1 illegal getting purged? Oh, what does Rubio have to do with it?

Yes, the voter ID/purge is a plan by the GOP to suppress the vote in order to try to win the White House back and it's clear in that they haven't pressed for this issue in the past. In an earlier post I already noted that the Majority Leader in PA said as much. Not to mention laws that wouldn't allow college IDs to vote or the fact that Blacks are 20% more likely not to have the required ID. So says South Carolina election officials for the latter stat.

I'm not opposed to voters needing ID, but than every state should spend whatever it takes to ensure that every citizen has the proper ID.

[Larry]

Many were deceased people so yes at one point in time they were registered voters. Florida pols aren't haphazardly eliminating people from the voting ranks that were legitimately there.

Uh, that's funny. Because the facts certainly indicate that they've been trying to do exactly that. For several elections.

I first read about it (of course) during the 2000 fiasco. When the state chairman of the GOP (who also happened to be the state supervisor of elections), decided (completely on her own, without any legislation directing it), to send the state's voter registration lists to a GOP think tank, and told the think tank to prepare "purge lists", for each county (in Florida, the voter registration lists are kept by the counties), listing every registered voter who's name was similar to a convicted felon's. And to then send these lists to the counties, with instructions from the state, telling the county to cancel the registrations from these people, to do it without notifying the people involved, and to then destroy the list of whose registrations had been canceled.

Several of the counties ignored the directive, because the county, not the state, determines voter registrations. Other counties checked the purge list, and determined that roughly a third of the names on the purge list were on there in error. (In one county, the county supervisor of elections was on the purge list. (In error.))

But, several counties did, in fact, cancel the registrations of thousands of people. And then got rid of the records of who they purged.

----------

Florida was rather embarrassed by these revelations, when they came out, during the 2000 elections. So, for 2004, they made some changes.

They sent the voter lists to the exact same GOP think tank, to come up with purge lists for 2004.

They told them to again use methods which the think tank won't reveal ("trade secret"), to identify people whose names are

similar to

convicted felons.

They again used the lists of convicted felons from other states, while not mentioning that many such people listed had had their voting rights restored.

They required the think tank matching up names that were

similar

, to also use race for matching. And race had to match.

This had an interesting side effect. The Florida voter registration database didn't have a racial classification for "Hispanic". Thus, a black voter can have his registration purged if his name is

similar to

a black convicted felon, but a Hispanic voter cannot have his registration cancelled, even if his name is an

exact

match for a convicted felon, because the race won't match.

(In Florida, Hispanics vote 70% Republican.)

They made it

mandatory

for the counties to implement the purge lists.

They stated that, even if the county could

prove

that some of the names on the purge list were errors, they could only challenge the ones that they could prove were errors.

And, they made it illegal for the counties to reveal the lists, to the press or anyone else.

When they did this, several Florida newspapers went to court, demanding access to the purge lists. Governor Jeb! fought to keep the lists secret, appealing his losses all the way to the USSC. (Citing his deep respect for the privacy of convicted felons.) When the case made it to the USSC, after losing at every lower court, Jeb! decided that he would rather cancel the purge lists than reveal the list of all the people he was planning to disenfranchise.

----------

Now, I'll agree that "aren't haphazardly eliminating people from the voting ranks". They're systematically striving to do so, while carefully constructing their rules to give the GOP the maximum possible advantage from the effort.

But yes, there certainly is at least historical evidence that the GOP has certainly tried to disenfranchise thousands of legitimate voters. (And almost certainly has succeeded in a few hundred. Remember, in 2000, at least some counties did implement purge lists which at least other counties found to have huge numbers of errors in them.)

----------

(Now, I haven't heard about any such efforts in the more recent elections. Somehow, I don't think it's because the GOP has suddenly become ethical. My suspicion is that they've simply become better at hiding it.)

---------- Post added July-9th-2012 at 12:04 AM ----------

In the case of my birth certificate, I didn't have everything in my possession. So I got it through legal means So no, it wasn't good enough. But it wasn't mission impossible.

And I got my Mom's too.

And it only took me a bit over a year.

(Because apparently my grandparents, some time between the 30s and the 50s, changed an E to an I in their last name.)

[mistertim]

RUBIO has stood by what the state has done. They've found approximately 100 illegals on the voting rolls to date. My question is this: is this something they SHOULDN'T be doing at all? Even one fradulant vote should be intolerable in my mind. Is it a diabolical plan by the GOP to unfairly target or suppress votes? I don't see Rubio being behind something like that personally.

What does Rubio have to do with this? Are you saying that because he is latino that means there is no way he could ever give lip service to something that could disenfranchise minority voters? Rubio is, first and foremost, a politician. And what politicians spend most of their time doing is getting into or making sure they stay in office and keeping their party in power or getting their party into power.

Now I certainly don't think Rubio, or (hopefully) any, Republican lawmakers go home at night and start thinking about how much they hate minorities and want to make sure they have their freedoms taken away purely out of spite. However, if you think for a second that a politician won't hold his or her nose and support something they personally disagree with (or just delude themselves into thinking it is actually something different...both methods are probably used) if it will help them and/or their party get into or stay in power then you're incredibly naive.

The Republicans know exactly who these laws will affect and exactly who those groups tend to vote for. I don't think it is a coincidence that their outcry and fear mongering about "voter fraud" has risen over the past few decades at seemingly the same rate as the populations of those same groups and the increasingly large numbers of voters who are part of said groups.

And seriously? 100 people? Out of how many? Aren't they doing this for a ton of people? To me that sounds like they essentially validated the other side's argument...that "voter fraud" by illegals is essentially nonexistent statistically. Nice self ownage, Florida

I also don't consider asking for photo ID---something that's required for so many other basic transactions in our American society---as being a very high hurdle to climb. Do you?

As Larry pointed out, yes, it CAN be a very high hurdle for some people on the fringes of society or very poor, elderly, disabled, etc. Just because it is relatively easy for many people to get a photo ID doesn't mean it is easy for everyone.

[The Sisko]

Yeah, we have the right to vote, but only if we jump through twenty million hoops. I hope this bites the Republicans in the ass as much as it does the Democrats. The Republicans may regret the dumbing down of the electorate. We can only hope.

Voter suppression...

The idea is to disenfranchise the http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/national-affairs/florida-gop-takes-voter-supression-to-a-brazen-new-extreme-20120530'>other guy's voters. Sheesh!

I've asked this before but....there's been an awful lot less voter fraud than there have been cases of voter suppression.

http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/voter_suppression_incidents/

New Mexico. Two families reported visits by a private investigator inquiring about relatives that the state Republican Party alleges voted fraudulently in the June primary. The private investigator requested identification for relatives in question as proof of their eligibility, potentially in violation of federal law. The Bernalillo County Clerk confirmed both individuals' legitimate registrations. On October 27, 2008, the Mexican American Legal Defense and Education Fund filed a lawsuit seeking an injunction to stop further intimidation.

Virginia. A phony State Board of Elections flier was posted around the Hampton Roads area, stating that Republicans vote on Tuesday, November 4th, and Democrats vote on Wednesday, November 5th. The Virginia State Police determined that flier was an "office joke" and not intended to deceive voters.

Philadelphia fliers. Deceptive fliers about the consequences of voting were distributed in a predominantly African American neighborhood in Philadelphia.

Greene County, Ohio. A law enforcement officer in Greene County, Ohio sought the names of 300 voters who registered and voted at the beginning of Ohio's early voting period in a town made up largely of students. The effort, which was later withdrawn, was criticized as an effort to intimidate student voters and deter others from voting.

California. Dozens of voters reported that a firm hired by the California Republican Party tricked them into registering with the GOP when signing a petition they believed to toughen penalties against child molesters. The Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder is reviewing 9,000 registration affidavits submitted by the firm to determine if any of the party affiliation changes were involuntary.

Travis County, Texas. County officials are looking for a man who may be providing misleading information regarding the state's straight-party voting option, telling voters that in addition to a straight-party vote, they must also select the name of the candidate they would like vote for president. In actuality, doing this would de-select the mark automatically made by the straight-party vote.

Madison County, North Carolina. Residents have complained of misleading calls that provide inaccurate information regarding absentee ballot deadlines. The State Board of Elections is investigating.

Kern County, California. A radio host announced that Republicans are being urged to vote on November 4 and Democrats on November 5. Although the host has said he meant it as a joke, the county elections chief has asked the radio station to stop providing misleading information.

Texas. In early October, an email widely circulated falsely warned voters that a straight-party vote would not register a vote for president. In fact, if a voter using Texas ballots separately records a vote for president after voting straight-party, the vote for president will be deselected and will not count.

Florida. The St. Petersburg Times reported that the Republican National Committee sent non-forwardable mailings to older Democratic voters, falsely stating that recipients are registered as Republicans and suggested that undeliverable mailings could be used to compile challenge lists. The RNC claimed that the controversial mailing was just a fundraising piece.

Minnesota. The non-profit group Minnesota Majority, pretending to be from the Secretary of State's office, made calls to voters questioning their registrations in a supposed attempt to uncover voting irregularities.

Where's the outrage, investigation and preventive legislation from the GOP on that? Nah, that stuff's not important.

[Larry]

How many legal voting citizens were on the purge list? What number of legal citizens getting purged would be unacceptable in the name of removing 1 illegal getting purged? Oh, what does Rubio have to do with it?

Yes, the voter ID/purge is a plan by the GOP to suppress the vote in order to try to win the White House back and it's clear in that they haven't pressed for this issue in the past. In an earlier post I already noted that the Majority Leader in PA said as much. Not to mention laws that wouldn't allow college IDs to vote or the fact that Blacks are 20% more likely not to have the required ID. So says South Carolina election officials for the latter stat.

That's a big part of my problem with the push. The way it's so obviously politically motivated.

Military ID is good enough, but student ID isn't. (Guess which party the military tends to vote for, and which party students tend to vote for.)

Seriously, you want to convince me that the GOP isn;t doing this purely as a tactic to disenfranchise demographics that don;t vote Republican?

Publish the lists. Let the public see the lists of the people who you intend to disenfranchise. Give the public, and the media, time to look at tle lists, and see how accurate they are.

If somebody's on the list legitimately, then IMO, he doesn't have a right to privacy. He's a convicted felon or a non citizen or some such, who registered to vote illegally.

If somebody's on the list who has the legal right to vote? Then that's a problem, and the public has a right to know about it.

I'm not opposed to voters needing ID, but than every state should spend whatever it takes to ensure that every citizen has the proper ID.

That's my position, too. I don;t have a problem with demanding ID, If said ID can be easily obtained.

But after personal experience of what it took to get it, for my Mom, and reflecting that there are whole bunches of people out there who don't have the kinds of assets that I had, when trying to get Mom's ID, I have to conclude that yeah, I do think that there are going to be a whole lot of people for whom getting ID isn't such an easy task.

And those people, demographically, are going to be predominately concentrated in the underprivileged demographics of this country. They will not be uniformly distributed among demographics, nor among political parties.

Which is, of course, why it's being done.

[chipwhich]

And it only took me a bit over a year.

(Because apparently my grandparents, some time between the 30s and the 50s, changed an E to an I in their last name.)

Yeah because that's what the voter ID is about.

Meanwhile I have read all about your parent's issues.

My grandparent's have the same issues, it didn't take me over a year. My family dealt with them. But keep on fighting the fight.

[Larry]

Yeah because that's what the voter ID is about.

Meanwhile I have read all about your parent's issues.

Or you can drop the attempt to claim that because it was easy for most people, therefore anybody else just deserves to not be allowed to vote.

[deejaydana]

I guess I'm old fashioned or just a purist: if I showed up at the voting both w/o my photo ID I'd expect to be turned away no questions asked until I produced it. Again Florida's removed people who shouldn't have been on the voter rolls. We'ree all the better for it. I hope they remove as many people as they can that shouldn't legally be there.

[Hersh]

I guess I'm old fashioned or just a purist: if I showed up at the voting both w/o my photo ID I'd expect to be turned away no questions asked until I produced it. Again Florida's removed people who shouldn't have been on the voter rolls. We'ree all the better for it. I hope they remove as many people as they can that shouldn't legally be there.

How about the people removed that are legal voting citizens? How about the limitations on IDs that can be used? I guess based on your non-answer that you are ok with their rights being violated as long as the .0000001% that appear to be voting illegal are purged from the voter rolls.

[Larry]

Again Florida's removed people who shouldn't have been on the voter rolls.

And people who should.

[elkabong82]

Yeah, we have the right to vote, but only if we jump through twenty million hoops. I hope this bites the Republicans in the ass as much as it does the Democrats. The Republicans may regret the dumbing down of the electorate. We can only hope.

There are probably as many illegal immigrants trying to vote Democrat as there are conspiracy, anti-fed. loons without IDs, off the grid, trying to vote Republican.

Voter fraud is such a statistically small occurrence that it's almost irrelevant.

The laws are put forth by paranoid people afraid that "their guy" will be out voted. Voter ID laws are horse **** IMO.

However, the only ones really getting bitten in the ass by this are poor people and elderly people who pre-date the current ID system. The poor are the ones without IDs since most don't really have home addresses they can claim, nor utility bills or rent leases or whatever else is required for ID. If you are homeless, good luck getting an ID. Then again, I don't think a lot of poor people, at least ones so poor they can't get an ID, vote anyways, or at least not in a significant portion.

In the end I believe the laws are simply a waste of time, money, and effort, and will have little to no impact on fraud, which itself has little to no impact. Where the impact will be felt is, as the story shows, will likely be specifically with elderly people pre-dating a lot of the current ID system, who have legitimate votes tossed due to a stupid check put in place over paranoia. Considering Southern states have the toughest laws, Republicans likely will feel the bite in the ass more than the Dems, so they are screwing themselves over paranoia, rhetoric, and satiating party extremists. But what else is new?

[HeluCopter29]

There are probably as many illegal immigrants trying to vote Democrat as there are conspiracy, anti-fed. loons without IDs, off the grid, trying to vote Republican.

Voter fraud is such a statistically small occurrence that it's almost irrelevant.

The laws are put forth by paranoid people afraid that "their guy" will be out voted. Voter ID laws are horse **** IMO.

However, the only ones really getting bitten in the ass by this are poor people and elderly people who pre-date the current ID system. The poor are the ones without IDs since most don't really have home addresses they can claim, nor utility bills or rent leases or whatever else is required for ID. If you are homeless, good luck getting an ID. Then again, I don't think a lot of poor people, at least ones so poor they can't get an ID, vote anyways, or at least not in a significant portion.

In the end I believe the laws are simply a waste of time, money, and effort, and will have little to no impact on fraud, which itself has little to no impact. Where the impact will be felt is, as the story shows, will likely be specifically with elderly people pre-dating a lot of the current ID system, who have legitimate votes tossed due to a stupid check put in place over paranoia. Considering Southern states have the toughest laws, Republicans likely will feel the bite in the ass more than the Dems, so they are screwing themselves over paranoia, rhetoric, and satiating party extremists. But what else is new?

Well I'd disagree with your first point. The demographics that are being targeted and struggling because of these laws are largely democratic voters.

That said, you're right. Voter fraud is essentially a non-issue if you look at polls and election results. And the idea that requiring a photo ID is going to somehow put an end to voter fraud is an idiotic notion as far as I'm concerned. And to limit the ability for poor, elderly, and legal immigrants to vote is absolutely absurd in my opinion. And as you said, these laws have little to no value.

[Burgold]

I wonder how many of the people proclaimng that an ID will fix fraud never used or saw a fake ID when they were underaged and tried to get into a bar? That said, I don't think there's anything wrong with making you prove you are you and presenting an ID is fine with me. I have more problem with the purging lists where they have been caught stripping people of the right to vote because someone has a name similar to someone who was a felon or because they have a foreign sounding name.