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

[Kilmer17]

Kilmer, why would Homeland Security refuse to provide names of known non-citizens on the voting rolls?

I can't think of a reason why, genuinely curious.

Is it a Privacy Act thing?

~Bang

They wont say.

http://rolandmartinreports.com/blog/2012/06/florida-sues-department-of-homeland-security-for-immigrant-citizens-database-to-help-with-purge-list/

DHS has refused to comment or explain why it won’t give Florida access to the database.

There is probably a legit reason. But Im sure that it makes the Obama administration smirk and giggle just denying the request from Rick Scott.

---------- Post added July-9th-2012 at 02:07 PM ----------

That's exactly what the GOP (Grand Oligarch's Party) is banking on. Let's assume that the 178 cases of voter fraud you cited are all valid and all occurred during the most recent election cycle. That overstates the case but doing so helps to make my point. Now contrast those 178 cases with the disenfranchisement of probably several thousand Blacks, Latinos, etc. the great majority of whom would almost certainly vote against Mr. Etch a Sketch.

I'm no lawyer but I'd imagine that in such cases where there's harm on two sides the law should go with the least harmful of the two options. The GOP's voter suppression laws flip that and harms more people than it helps. But hey it's OK as long as it's the other side's voters that get disenfranchised. The ends do justify the means after all.

It's very easy to claim people will get disenfranchised. It's alot harder to show where it actually happens.

Can you show us some proof that a person who IS legal to vote, has had that right denied?

[elkabong82]

It's very easy to claim people will get disenfranchised. It's alot harder to show where it actually happens.

Can you show us some proof that a person who IS legal to vote, has had that right denied?

The article in the OP states that an elderly couple had their votes not count in the Republican primary because they didn't have state ID cards, even though they were registered voters and had their voter cards.Their vote didn't count, hence their right to vote was essentially denied.

24th Amendment clearly states no type of tax can be used as a voting requirement, and the cost of ID, while seemingly not much to us, is a lot to other people. Any charge as a requirement to vote goes against the 24th amendment and the Constitution, so there's no justification for the ID requirement, unless IDs become free.and can be reasonably obtained.

[Kilmer17]

The article in the OP states that an elderly couple had their votes not count in the Republican primary because they didn't have state ID cards, even though they were registered voters and had their voter cards.Their vote didn't count, hence their right to vote was essentially denied.

24th Amendment clearly states no type of tax can be used as a voting requirement, and the cost of ID, while seemingly not much to us, is a lot to other people. Any charge as a requirement to vote goes against the 24th amendment and the Constitution, so there's no justification for the ID requirement, unless IDs become free.and can be reasonably obtained.

They were provided with and used the temporary ballot, and they had a mechanism to have their vote counted. They didnt do so. They wwrent denied the right to vote, they chose not to, or didnt realize they had to verify their eligibility. If they had followed the procedure, their votes would have counted.

The 24th says a tax cannot be used as a voting requirement. An ID is not a tax. I have to drive to my polling precinct, that costs gas money. Is that now a tax too?

[Larry]

Really? My wife wasn't even born in this country, but she showed the proper paperwork when she wasn't a US citizen, applied for a drivers license, passed the test and has been able to renew her license once when she became a citizen and the next time when we moved to a different address. I mean, unless you are illegal, you should be able to get a proper ID card with the required paperwork.

See if you can spot the really big problem in your statement.

Here, let me mention some of the specific fun things about me efforts to get ID for my Mom:

1. In order to get a Florida ID, she had to get her birth certificate. (From Oklahoma.)
   
2. In order to get her birth certificate from Oklahoma, she had to have photo ID.

(Fortunately, I had her power of attorney, and I was able to send then the power of attorney paperwork, and a copy of my photo ID.)

1. When I started this process, in order to get Florida ID, you had to have your Social Security card. (The actual card, not just the number.)
   
2. In order to get a Social Security card, you have to have current photo ID, and a birth certificate. You had to either bring both documents to a SS office, in person, and sit there, or you had to mail the original documents (no copies, not even certified copies) to DC. (They promise they'll send them back, when they're through.)

Fortunately, it took so long to get the birth certificate that Florida changed their requirements, so that now, all you have to have is "proof of your social security number". I was able to bring in one of Mom's 1099s.

----------

Still, though. If I needed to get this paperwork for Dad? I couldn't do it. To get Dad out of the nursing home, I have to hire a medical transport company. I'd have to do this to get his photo ID. (He has to be at the DMV to get his picture taken.) And even before that, I'd have to take him to the SS office, so he could get an SS card. And that's before you start to deal with the fact that every one of these government agencies demands that some other government agency give you something, before they will give you anything.

And the federal agencies won't recognize a Power of Attorney. ("That's a state document. We're superior to that.")

(Frankly, I'm often forced to simply pretend to be my Dad, so that I can do things for him.)

----------

Now, look at those document requirements, above.

Now, pretend that you're homeless. You don;t even have an address where people can mail things to you.

Then, tell me again about how easy it is to get ID.

---------- Post added July-9th-2012 at 02:45 PM ----------

Why should the state be responsible for providing IDs for everyone? That's on you to obtain one. It's not like they cost a fortune. About $15-$20 dollars.

I spent over a hundred dollars getting Mom's. (And that doesn't include the Power of Attorney, which cost more than another hundred, because I did that five years ago.)

---------- Post added July-9th-2012 at 02:46 PM ----------

My marriage license cost me money.

As you may have heard, a lot of conservatives claim that marriage isn't a right.

---------- Post added July-9th-2012 at 02:51 PM ----------

It's not a big deal. The left is making it a big deal because it lets them scare seniors and minorities into think the GOP is out to harm them. It's a political tactic. Nothing more.

Right. The Left is trying to terrify people on this issue.

ACORN!!!!!

[mistertim]

The 24th says a tax cannot be used as a voting requirement. An ID is not a tax. I have to drive to my polling precinct, that costs gas money. Is that now a tax too?

You don't have to drive. And does the state of Florida own and/or administer the gas you get?

As for the tax part, you're basically reading the wording in the amendment and taking it 100% literally and purely as the bottom line. The courts don't do that very often; there is a reason judges are generally said to be there to interpret the law. If you read the 24th literally and refused to interpret it any other way then that would open up a whole new can of worms and essentially make it moot as that means any state could make people pay to vote as long as they weren't doing it by means of a formal tax. Might as well just repeal it at that point.

I haven't seen any of our resident lawyers comment on it in here yet but, as I said before, I think there could be a very convincing case made that this is equal to a tax.

[Kilmer17]

You don't have to drive. And does the state of Florida own and/or administer the gas you get?

As for the tax part, you're basically reading the wording in the amendment and taking it 100% literally and purely as the bottom line. The courts don't do that very often; there is a reason judges are generally said to be there to interpret the law. If you read the 24th literally and refused to interpret it any other way then that would open up a whole new can of worms and essentially make it moot as that means any state could make people pay to vote as long as they weren't doing it by means of a formal tax. Might as well just repeal it at that point.

I haven't seen any of our resident lawyers comment on it in here yet but, as I said before, I think there could be a very convincing case made that this is equal to a tax.

Then so would a gun license, a marriage license etc etc.

It seems like this is a small point. So what if a state provided free ids to those in certain circumstances?

[elkabong82]

Then so would a gun license, a marriage license etc etc.

It seems like this is a small point. So what if a state provided free ids to those in certain circumstances?

Except, as was already pointed out in here, there are no Amendments preventing taxes on those things as there is with the 24th preventing a tax on voting.

If the state provided free IDs to those without so they could vote, or gave them free voter IDs with address and picture of them on it, then there is no tax, and the issue is solved.

Also, I agree marriage license shouldn't have a charge, but although I'm pro gun, it does need licensing and regulation, and again, unlike voting there is nothing in the Constitution and amendments preventing a gun tax.

[Larry]

It's very easy to claim people will get disenfranchised. It's alot harder to show where it actually happens.

Especially when there is no documentation when it happens.

Can you show us some proof that a person who IS legal to vote, has had that right denied?

Just observing, Yusuf was responding to a post you made, which contains the following statistics:

The (Republican) government wants to cancel the registrations of 2500 people.

Of the 2500 people they want to purge:

• 500 people are known to have been on the list incorrectly.
  
• 40 people are known to have been on the list correctly.

Now, I'll point out that that's a ratio of 12 "wrongs" for every "right".

----------

Now, once again, I'll point out that IMO, there's a relatively simple way to reduce the amount of FUD being shoveled on this issue:

Publish the purge list.

Let the sunshine illuminate the thing. Let the media investigate the list. Let the voters see what the government is doing.

Again: If John Doe is registered to vote, and it's illegal for him to do so, then IMO, he doesn't have a right to privacy about it. If he's not a citizen, or if he's a convicted felon, then that's a public record, anyway.

And, if he's on the purge list, and he does have the right to vote, then you haven't harmed him by revealing that fact.

Want to purge voter registrations? Publish the list. Six months before the election.

(Worried about illegals registering to vote, three weeks before the election? Then run another purge,

after

the election. And prosecute a few people who illegally registered at the last minute.)

That takes the whole element of "ooh, just imagine all of the hoards of <whatever your Party is trying to terrify you with>" out of the debate.

---------- Post added July-9th-2012 at 03:11 PM ----------

They were provided with and used the temporary ballot, and they had a mechanism to have their vote counted. They didnt do so. They wwrent denied the right to vote, they chose not to, or didnt realize they had to verify their eligibility. If they had followed the procedure, their votes would have counted.

The 24th says a tax cannot be used as a voting requirement. An ID is not a tax. I have to drive to my polling precinct, that costs gas money. Is that now a tax too?

Right.

They were given the opportunity to pay their poll tax after they voted (but before their vote counted.)

And all they had to do was to jump through some more hoops.

[mistertim]

Then so would a gun license, a marriage license etc etc.

Absolutely. Of course, it wouldn't make any difference if a fee for a gun or marriage license was deemed a tax...seeing as how neither of those are explicitly forbidden to be taxed by the Constitution, like voting is.

It seems like this is a small point. So what if a state provided free ids to those in certain circumstances?

I don't think it is a small point at all if people's Constitutional rights are being violated. There are multiple angles to this whole thing that have been discussed. The philosophical, the legal, the moral, the political. I'm purely talking about the legal at the moment, but it does tie in with the others at certain points. As far as your question, I think it would have to be all IDs are free (otherwise it is still a tax...just a selective one as opposed to universal one), and in theory I would probably be ok with it as long as they also made sure that it wasn't a monumental hurdle for some people to get said ID (the very poor, elderly, disabled, etc).

That being said, I don't think it is necessary because it is purely political. It is trying to "solve" a problem that doesn't even exist in any real statistical sense; its like laying out really expensive traps to catch Bigfoot. There isn't any evidence of real widespread voter fraud and in fact when states do their own internal Bigfoot expeditions to find these elusive but apparently pervasive and nefarious fraudsters they seem to just end up making themselves look stupid and bolstering the argument that it isn't really there other than in a handful of cases (out of tens of thousands or more) and usually those cases are just people being dumbasses and not the intentional work of malicious people who want to stab democracy in the throat while sacrificing babies to the gods of the Democratic party. The funny but sad part is that, despite them failing over and over, the same people/groups just keep pushing the exact same story line about the horrors of voter fraud...and mouth breathers everywhere just keep on eating it up.

[Hersh]

It seems like this is a small point. So what if a state provided free ids to those in certain circumstances?

I think the state providing free IDs would be a great solution to the problem. I would go further and have some kind of mobile ID making bus that goes to different communities/retirement homes if needed. Of course I'm also in favor of presidential elections being federal holidays and stores having Sunday type hours to make it easier to vote.

[Predicto]

Hersh, think about this scenario. Without a photo ID, somebody who knows your name and address can walk into your precinct and say they are you, then vote for the candidate that you don't support.

That pretty much never, ever happens.

It is not worth it. Who is going to commit a felony just to change one single vote in one single precinct? What is the return when conpared to the huge risk?

I'm not saying that vote fraud doesn't happen, but it really never happens that way.

[Larry]

Yeah, I think it's pretty obvious that the only way vote fraud works in the real world, is if it's done by the election workers.

[elkabong82]

I think the state providing free IDs would be a great solution to the problem. I would go further and have some kind of mobile ID making bus that goes to different communities/retirement homes if needed. Of course I'm also in favor of presidential elections being federal holidays and stores having Sunday type hours to make it easier to vote.

Those are excellent solutions, and I like the voting holiday idea a lot.

[The Sisko]

Then so would a gun license, a marriage license etc etc.

It seems like this is a small point. So what if a state provided free ids to those in certain circumstances?

It's not just about the direct cost, it's also about the barriers it raises. There are a lot of older and disabled people who can't even get out to shop for themselves even though they're intact enough mentally to understand the issues. So for these types requiring photo ID is probably too much of a hurdle for them. For the working poor it may be getting the time off work more than the actual cost.

However it's not just cost per se. What about the onerous regulations designed to make it harder to register. And then there's the reduction in early voting opportunities. Taken all together it's clear to anyone without a far-right agenda such as yourself, to see what the goal of this kind of legislation is and quite frankly it's reprehensible.

[Thiebear]

The non drivers license is approx. 2$ a year for 5 years. (Basically Free and is useful say Obamacare and flying and cigs and alcohol and prescriptions and over17 movies etc.)

[skinsmarydu]

It's not just about the direct cost, it's also about the barriers it raises. There are a lot of older and disabled people who can't even get out to shop for themselves even though they're intact enough mentally to understand the issues. So for these types requiring photo ID is probably too much of a hurdle for them. For the working poor it may be getting the time off work more than the actual cost.

However it's not just cost per se. What about the onerous regulations designed to make it harder to register. And then there's the reduction in early voting opportunities. Taken all together it's clear to anyone without a far-right agenda such as yourself, to see what the goal of this kind of legislation is and quite frankly it's reprehensible.

Where is the "like" button to click? You need to put that there quote on a blog...see maddowblog.com. Knowing where it comes from, you might even get an ES plug. That's the best summary I've heard since Rachel, Ed, and Lawrence. Testify. It's what we're gonna have to do. Keep hammering it in.

[Thiebear]

Florida removing the wrong people from a list is not the same thing as voter ID and should be fixed separately, no?

And you should always be allowed to vote, just in different pools if you don't have a voter registration card.. or id.

[War Paint]

That pretty much never, ever happens.

It is not worth it. Who is going to commit a felony just to change one single vote in one single precinct? What is the return when conpared to the huge risk?

I'm not saying that vote fraud doesn't happen, but it really never happens that way.

I'm sure it rarely happens, but just because it's a felony doesn't mean it never happens. Taking somebody's mail from their mailbox is a felony (at least I think it is), but I bet it happens sometimes. The thing is, at least in NC, it would be real easy to do. When I walk into my precinct, they ask for my name. I tell them. They look on their list and ask me if my address is this. I say yes. I then go vote. I just don't see the big deal about having to show a photo ID. The election is still a few months away. That's plenty of time for somebody to get an ID if they don't have one.

Maybe somebody knows the answer to this question...

When people die shortly before an election, when are precincts notified? If John Doe of Elm St. died a week before the election, would his name still appear on the log at his precinct?

[skinsmarydu]

Florida removing the wrong people from a list is not the same thing as voter ID and should be fixed separately, no?

And you should always be allowed to vote, just in different pools if you don't have a voter registration card.. or id.

I like how someone earlier referred to the 2700 folks there pulled from the voter rolls on false pretenses "wasn't near the thousands claimed by the left".

Were those 2700 people not harmed by this "outcry for true voter registration"? Every vote counts, just like every game counts.

[mikered30]

This is coming up in PA, but there is plenty of time to get an ID, and a government ID is free at a PennDOT Driver License Center. I guess this blocks the Amish from getting an ID, but I dont think they vote anyway.

[Kilmer17]

It's not just about the direct cost, it's also about the barriers it raises. There are a lot of older and disabled people who can't even get out to shop for themselves even though they're intact enough mentally to understand the issues. So for these types requiring photo ID is probably too much of a hurdle for them. For the working poor it may be getting the time off work more than the actual cost.

However it's not just cost per se. What about the onerous regulations designed to make it harder to register. And then there's the reduction in early voting opportunities. Taken all together it's clear to anyone without a far-right agenda such as yourself, to see what the goal of this kind of legislation is and quite frankly it's reprehensible.

Ive said over and over what the real reason behind the GOP attempts to pass these laws and to limit the "prevoting etc etc".

What gets lost is I NEVER see a lefty here admit that the democrats try to pass relaxed voting laws, or early voting extensions etc FOR THE EXACT SAME REASON.

Both sides are only interested in doing whatever it takes to make sure they get more voters to the polls than the other side.

[Larry]

This is coming up in PA, but there is plenty of time to get an ID, and a government ID is free at a PennDOT Driver License Center. I guess this blocks the Amish from getting an ID, but I dont think they vote anyway.

OK, so the ID is free.

You just walk in, say "I'm John Doe", and they hand you a free ID that says you're John Doe, right?

---------- Post added July-9th-2012 at 07:29 PM ----------

Ive said over and over what the real reason behind the GOP attempts to pass these laws and to limit the "prevoting etc etc".

What gets lost is I NEVER see a lefty here admit that the democrats try to pass relaxed voting laws, or early voting extensions etc FOR THE EXACT SAME REASON.

Perhaps because trying to suppress the votes of people who vote Democrat is despicable? IMO, bordering on Treason?

Whereas trying to register people who vote Democrat, isn't?

Maybe it's just me, but I do see a moral distinction between trying to get people who vote for you, to vote, and trying to prevent people who vote against you, from voting.

Just a theory.

----------

Edit:

Now, if you want to draw a parallel between the Republican's push for voter ID laws and making voting tougher, and the Florida 2000 efforts to discard large numbers of absentee ballots, (Because the law which was in effect at the time, stated that they had to be discarded), then I'd say you've got a pretty good parallel, there.

Both are (were) efforts to disenfranchise actual voters from demographics that tend to favor the opposing Party.

(Although, I will observe that the Dems efforts, in Florida, in 2000, had an existing law on their side, and I think, weren't implemented. Whereas the current, ongoing, Republican effort is based on changing the rules to favor their Party, and are being implemented.)

But then, no parallel is identical in 100% of the aspects.

IMO, those two examples are about as close to identical, morally, as you're going to see, in reality.

[deejaydana]

Ive said over and over what the real reason behind the GOP attempts to pass these laws and to limit the "prevoting etc etc".

What gets lost is I NEVER see a lefty here admit that the democrats try to pass relaxed voting laws, or early voting extensions etc FOR THE EXACT SAME REASON.

Both sides are only interested in doing whatever it takes to make sure they get more voters to the polls than the other side.

well bravo to that post. I'll say the unseemly elements on each side---which don't represent the majority---will use the issue to tip the scales in their favor. Any fair-minded person wants everyone out there who can lay legal claim to be able to vote. We also don't live in the 1960's any more where there exist wholesale efforts to screw people out of voting. I find it odd that our country hasn't enacted a more advanced system to both ensure proper and rightful participation as well as the technology to fully verify the identity of each person. It seems like there are at least for now going to exist holes and flaws in the system.

[NavyDave]

Ah, the old "I'm in favor of not letting people vote, in they disagree with me".

Took me a year and a half to get one for Mom.

And she was born in the US, has lived at the same address for 15 years, has a fax machine and Internet access, to facilitate communications with bureaucracy, and has a person who has valid ID, acting on her behalf.

Thats California for ya. Same day service for my mom in Maryland who unfortunately is a Democrat.

[mikered30]

You just walk in, say "I'm John Doe", and they hand you a free ID that says you're John Doe, right?

Not quite that simple, you need your SS card, and one of the following:

Certificate of U.S. Citizenship

Certificate of Naturalization

Valid U.S. Passport

Birth Certificate with a raised seal

AND 2 proofs of residency, such as a telephone bill or electric bill. Takes about 10 days and is free, at least in PA.

http://www.dmv.state.pa.us/voter/voteridlaw.shtml