Jump to content

Iowa Poll: Access to voting trumps voter fraud concerns

Politics   (1,699 Views 17 Comments)
6 Followers; 100,635 Visitors; 16,580 Posts
If you find this topic helpful leave a comment.

Which do You think is most important?

  1. 1. Which do You think is most important?

    • That every eligble registered voter has the opportunity to cast a ballot.
      6
    • That no person ineligible to vote slips through the cracks and casts a vote.
      0
    • Not sure.
      0
    • Both
      3
    • Other
      0

9 members have participated

I would suggest that if one wanted to "steal an election", individual voter fraud, you know voting as an individual when you are not that person or not eligible to vote, would not be the way to accomplish the theft. If you think about it critically it just doesn't make good sense.

Keeping that in mind when considering the laws which are reportedly designed to prevent that rare form of fraud it makes sense that so many wonder what other, underlying intent is represented in the legislation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In general, there is more likelihood of collusion when limiting hours, use of a very restrictive voter ID, and/or manipulation of voting machines than an individual who is attempting to vote illegally. There have been very few people who have been found to be voting or trying to vote illegally. Much more common is the efforts to limit certain populations from voting, usually by limiting access. This can be done by creating such long lines that a person is unable to wait in line or gives up due to the length of the line. It is also accomplished by decreasing the hours the polls are open. We have had many discussions about the use of these and other efforts to decrease the vote. More insidious is the manipulation of the machines themselves. We have seen this done and a vote changed by the computer once the vote is cast. Voting Machine Verifications Show Walker Lost Recall Election | Publius #9 The individual has no way of knowing that his vote was registered incorrectly. The GOP had been found to have done this in previous elections and may have counted on this in the presidential election of 2012. Voting Machine Turns Obama Votes into Romney Votes

This is one explanation of why Karl Rove was unable to accept that Romney was defeated. Manipulation of machines and tampering with machines had been anticipated and I suspect the fix could not be implemented in many machines.

We all have heard or read about the dead who have voted. In our state and most I have lived you will be removed from the rolls if you do not vote frequently enough. So the chance of a long dead person voting is slim. In states where mail in is the only way to vote I would anticipate a greater amount of fraud as there is no opportunity to eyeball the person to be sure no zombies can vote and that each person only votes for himself, no one else can fill out his vote. This seems to me to be an unsafe vote, certainly less accurate than an in-person vote.

Actually I would much rather see someone who is not eligible to vote participate in voting rather than deny any legit voter. If a person cares enough to vote that says something positive to me. I know many people who lost their ability to vote due to a felony charge. Actually I write pardons because of this reason. If a person is rehabilitated and wishes to vote, I suspect they might be an informed voter. I applaud their citizenship.

I am glad Iowa was able to see that voter fraud has less to be afraid of than denial of access. We should work to be sure every person has the ability to vote, in person, if possible. We should limit mail in votes to those who really need it. There are many who will be out of town on election day. Many who cannot physically make it to the polls, and other reasons for need of an absentee ballot or mail in one. And before there are cries that it happens in WA and that state is Red, it is not acceptable regardless of party or other identification.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dale Schultz: 'I am not willing to defend them anymore' : Ct

Last week, Schultz argued that there were no legitimate justifications for some of the election reforms pushed by Republicans.

“It’s all predicated on some belief there is a massive fraud or irregularities, something my colleagues have been hot on the trail for three years and have failed miserably at demonstrating,” he said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Supreme Court Gutted the Voting Rights Act. What Happened Next in These 8 States Will Not Shock You. | Mother Jones

When the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 to overturn a key section of the Voting Rights Act last June, Justice Ruth Ginsburg warned that getting rid of the measure was like "throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm because you are not getting wet." The 1965 law required that lawmakers in states with a history of discriminating against minority voters get federal permission before changing voting rules. Now that the Supreme Court has invalidated this requirement, GOP lawmakers across the United States are running buck wild with new voting restrictions.

Three outliers are Kansas, Ohio, and Wisconsin, all of which passed or implemented voting restrictions this year, and were never covered under Section 5. But Dale Ho, director of the ACLU's voting rights project, argues that they could have still been influenced by the Supreme Court decision. "When you see half a dozen or more states immediately passing laws to restrict voting after Shelby, that spreads to other parts of the country," he says. "It's not like Vegas. What happens in one state doesn't stay there."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Many states require an ID to apply for public assistance. What is happening to make sure those folks who can't get an ID are able to apply?

How about using Medicaid or Medicare. Do you have prove who you are when you go to a healthcare provider or pick up your prescription? I wonder what the democrats are doing to make sure people's access to those things aren't hindered by having to show a ID?

Edited by SC_RNDude
Typo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Many states require an ID to apply for public assistance. What is happening to make sure those folks who can't get an ID are able to apply?

How about using Medicaid or Medicare. Do you have prove who you are when you go to a healthcare provider or pick up your prescription? I wonder what the democrats are doing to make sure people's access to those things aren't hindered by having to show a ID?

When people get medicare or medicaid a card is mailed to them. They do not have to show an ID to visit the doctor or obtain a prescription, just their insurance card. Do you have to show ID under those circumstances?

http://nygcm.org/Documents/1017-PROOFOFIDENTITY.DOC

Don't the requirements for obtaining medicaid differ somewhat from state to state?

That aside, making it more difficult to vote has nothing to do with accessing insurance or health care. Placing new requirements on identification and reducing hours and days for voting has everything to do with limiting voting rights of citizens.

Voter laws: Imposter anxiety | The Economist

Registering to vote in Kansas and Arizona just got more difficult

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/30/us/new-gop-bid-to-limit-voting-in-swing-states.html

If we had as many people in jail or facing prosecution for voter fraud as we did for say bank robbery, I might be impressed with the efforts to end the widespread abuse. Instead I am reminded of a marketing campaign from the 80's; "where's the beef"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When people get medicare or medicaid a card is mailed to them. They do not have to show an ID to visit the doctor or obtain a prescription, just their insurance card. Do you have to show ID under those circumstances?

http://nygcm.org/Documents/1017-PROOFOFIDENTITY.DOC

For the past couple of years, we have been asked for Photo ID's at just about every medical and dental office we have had to visit. Some even take photos prior to the doctor entering the room. Some of these HCP have known us for 20 years or more.

I don't know if it is required or just office policy, but it makes perfect sense that would actually care about providing care to the person whose card they have just been handed.

You are right about just getting the Medicare cards mailed to you.

People who think getting the AARP literature in the mail is a shock are in for a much bigger surprise!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
When people get medicare or medicaid a card is mailed to them. They do not have to show an ID to visit the doctor or obtain a prescription, just their insurance card. Do you have to show ID under those circumstances?

http://nygcm.org/Documents/1017-PROOFOFIDENTITY.DOC

Don't the requirements for obtaining medicaid differ somewhat from state to state?

That aside, making it more difficult to vote has nothing to do with accessing insurance or health care. Placing new requirements on identification and reducing hours and days for voting has everything to do with limiting voting rights of citizens.

Voter laws: Imposter anxiety | The Economist

Registering to vote in Kansas and Arizona just got more difficult

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/30/us/new-gop-bid-to-limit-voting-in-swing-states.html

If we had as many people in jail or facing prosecution for voter fraud as we did for say bank robbery, I might be impressed with the efforts to end the widespread abuse. Instead I am reminded of a marketing campaign from the 80's; "where's the beef"?

I would agree that limiting hours and days to vote is dumb, and the idea of it is to give an edge to Republicans.

Just as dumb though, is the idea having to show a photo ID is a hardship. Not having to show an ID gives an edge to the Democrats, which obviously they are in favor of.

And yes, I do have to show a photo ID when I go to a provider that does not know me.

I do know that on the Colorado Medicaid card it states that "providers are responsible for verifying identity".

Edited by SC_RNDude
Edit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recently visited a surgeon who did not know me, we had never met before, they did not ask for my ID card. They asked for my insurance card. They asked me to fill out a form which stated my name, DOB, address, etc.

Not having to show an ID gives an edge to the Democrats, which obviously they are in favor of.

This gives an 'edge' to voters, to citizens of all stripes but particularly to those who might be burdened by being REQUIRED to show a new form of photo ID because of trumped up voter fraud anxiety. Clearly many, many poor people vote for Republicans, some of the poorest states in the union regularly elect Republican officials at every level.

Interactive Poverty Map | State and County Level Poverty Information

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again we are going back to the half truth of voter ID? The concern was never about identification but the fact that PA wanted to refuse "reasonable ID". In the case of voting the issue is access. There are no lines of 6 hours long to wait to vote in some districts. As gerrymandering has been taken to an art form we see the restructuring of voting is along the same lines. We need to be sure that every eligible person has equal opportunity to vote and have that vote counted properly, without any chance of a machine changing it to an alternate candidate. We know this has happened and is a real threat to voting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×

This site uses cookies. By using this site, you consent to the placement of these cookies. Read our Privacy, Cookies, and Terms of Service Policies to learn more.