patrick.net

Vicente says

What’s the point? If it’s fraud they need a mechanism to catch FAKE ID which doesn’t seem likely they’ll achieve. What kind of voter fraud is it, that will be solved exactly?

Exactly. But you know those without ID will almost all be people who would vote for democrats. And the union people will be heavily on the ground getting the vote out for the recall elections. They're scared, and they should be after the shit they've pulled.

Recall elections are bogus, just like the regular ones.

I'd like to hope we aren't that far gone.

marcus says

There must be at least a couple hundred thousand poor or students, who don’t have a car, or a drivers license. That could make the difference in upcoming recall votes. It has to be a photo ID with their address.

Hmmm............ What about student ID's? Most now-a-days have a photo. The article does say ". Currently no college or university ID used in the state, including UW-Madison, meets those standards (address age etc)." but that would be a fairly trivial thing to fix.

I think the whole ID thing is stupid but I frankly I just dont get these inferences that poor people dont have ID's.

"photo ID laws discourage many people from voting, especially college students, seniors, minorities and people with disabilities."

I read that and say "what". Seniors? Why are they included? Many have plenty of time on their hands. Heck they are the ones manning the polling stations and they all already have ID's. "Minorities". What? What does this have to do with being a minority? Would it discourage rich minorities as well as poor minorities?

As far as I can tell poor people are generally ID'd up to the hilt since they deal with so many differing levels of government bureaucracy. The "hundred thousand poor or students" you mention all get free ID"s usually directly from their school. My son has two. They already have all his personal info (too much if you ask me) so producing a new card with a bit more information - whats the big deal.

Id be discouraged if I had to show an ID but Im not poor(at least not yet - not sure whats going to happen to the dollar though). So I am not disputing the "discouraged" part only the - poor and minorities hardest hit part of the argument. Where I live the poor have the most ID's, free transportation and the most public assistance for these kinds of events.

Troy says

every unnecessary administrative hurdle targets the poor, who don’t have cars and work long hours for little money.

Kind of a truism when you say "Who don't have cars and work long hours for little money".

What about the poor who do have cars and do not work long hours for little money? In fact I was talking to a girl a few weeks back - about 27 - poor by most definitions and she was complaining about the fact she could not get enough hours. That is why she was poor really. She liked her wage and wanted to work longer hours . Her car was in good shape.

In fact - dont get me started. The stupid minimum wage and other employments laws designed in theory to "protect the poor" are creating all kinds of poor people. Im beginning to think the minimum wage (and other) laws are a gigantic scam designed by big business so they can get rich off the backs of the working class.

mplangley says

In fact - dont get me started. The stupid minimum wage and other employments laws designed in theory to “protect the poor” are creating all kinds of poor people. Im beginning to think the minimum wage (and other) laws are a gigantic scam designed by big business so they can get rich off the backs of the working class.

LOL. Obviously if your example liked her wage she was getting paid too much which is why she's not getting enough hours. I'm sure if she accepted half the wage she'd get twice the hours, no problem.

Race to the bottom FTW!

Marcus, It is hard to get past your anti Republican Title.

I like what is happening in Wisconsin. Why shouldn't the state require someone to show a valid state ID. to vote?

By showing valid ID the only voters that would face disenfranchisement are the illegal aliens. What is wrong with that!

Marcus you need to be honest with yourself, students and "poor folk" have drivers licenses and state ID, its those with malicious intent like illegal alien voters and people who try to vote multiple times that don't want to show their identification.
I like what is happening in Wisconsin, I hope their public sector union busting and illegal alien voter squashing efforts spread. Califorinia needs Wisconsin common sense desperatly!

mplangley says

free ID”s usually directly from their school. My son has two.

So what? They are not "free" to produce. The machines, blanks, and staff cost money.

Student IDs would be allowed, but would have to include a current address, birthdate, signature and expiration date. Currently no college or university ID used in the state, including UW-Madison, meets those standards.

It clearly does exclude them at present, and the "trivial fix" would involve re-jiggering shool ID systems and reissuing. Wasting more taxpayer dollars, thanks GOP!

Vicente - you missed the point entirely.

Marcus I don't know if you are aware, but in CA they do ask you for your photo ID when you go out to vote. I was asked for one last election although I could have voted by mail instead.

Nothing is wrong with it. This would just prevent fraud, it is not controversial at all. Otherwise what is there to stop someone from voting under 100 different names? I can be Bob, Marcus, Vincente, Sam, Joe, Thom, Larry.... any name out there.

Absolutely nothing is wrong with showing your photo ID when you are voting.

ChrisLA says

I could have voted by mail instead.

This is the best solution. All-mail voting. Oregon does it. I'd even have the government pre-pay the envelope.

So you still have to show it at some point, there is nothing wrong with that.

Like I said, last time I voted, I was asked to show my ID so they could pull up my voter form. And I could have perhaps shown them some other government issued paper with name/address. But it's all same.

And here is from the site which should explain the situation:
"In person" voters must show a "current and valid photo identification" or "a copy of a current utility bill, bank statement, government check, paycheck, or other government document that shows the name and address of the voter."

86

That is the number of convictions for voter fraud obtained in the first 5 years of Bush's presidency:

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

I would be way more worried about someone hacking into an electronic voting machine and fixing the results than someone voting two times.

Maybe we should ask computer hackers to show ID:

"Computer scientists from California universities have hacked into three electronic voting systems used in California and elsewhere in the nation and found several ways in which vote totals could potentially be altered, according to reports released yesterday by the state."

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/28/us/28vote.html

HousingWatcher says

would be way more worried about someone hacking into an electronic voting machine and fixing the results than someone voting two times.

Agreed. Maybe 1000 times more worried about that.

"It’s like laws against drunk driving, it doesn’t stop it, but it helps prevent most of it."

We can prevent drunk driving by mandating emission locks in all cars that you have to breathe into for EVERYONE. But, like requiring ID to vote, it does not mean we should do it.

ChrisLA says

Marcus I don’t know if you are aware, but in CA they do ask you for your photo ID when you go out to vote. I was asked for one last election although I could have voted by mail instead.

I have voted since 2005 always in person never by mail in California. I have not been asked for ID. I recall being asked my name and address and to scribble next to my name on the roll. Sounds like your poll workers were behaving improperly.

if you are blind you shouldn’t be doing elections. Just because you volunteer does not mean it is ok for volunteer to not be able to read, write, speak english or see 20 inches away.

Say what Sonny? I'm in my 40's and starting to have problems with small text and fine definition. The average age of the volunteers I've seen around here is easily 60+. Aside from which I wouldn't know a fake ID from a real one without training no matter if I had my reading specs or not.

To be frank, I also have been paying attention lately to what happens when I present ID. Most places I present it, they glance at it for under 1 second and move on. I don't recall ANYONE ever inspecting my ID for long enough to actually determine if it's a fraud. I could substitute Bigfoot for my photo and I doubt anyone would notice. Much like the signatures we scribble on nearly everything, when is that ever looked at?

Good finds there.

It is indeed baffling why we have such a notion of pervasive voting fraud, probably it's simply attributable to human nature. Losers preferring to malign the winner as a cheat, instead of acknowledging their own failure.

We've all heard of "voting the graveyard" but it's not been a real factor since the days of Al Capone.

This is not a partisan issue to me, I do not believe for a second the 2000 election really hung on fraud. Maybe it hung on a "chad", or maybe courts, or maybe even Ralph Nader. I believe there are enough ordinary Americans involved in the voting process who are good and honest, that systemic fraud is extremely unlikely.

You have to wonder how many dollars we are expending on attempting to find a few dozen convicts who were so stupid they thought they could vote. Talk about FedGov waste!

To explain the situation in Wisconsin. The Democratic party needs to prevent verification of voter eligibility, because in a close election the democratic party needs to rely on voter fraud to swing the election in its favor.
All you need to think in this situation is A.C.O.R.N.

http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/the-complete-guide-to-acorn-voter-fraud/

it's amusing that libertarians are anti-government ID cards until it comes to voting rights.

voter fraud is rare and the impact is small.

election fraud is the one that really matters...but those who perpetrate election fraud manage to distract people from the real issue by barking about voter fraud.

of course it's the poor minorities we have to worry about. that's why government has been so heavily stacked in their favor for the past 200 years :rolleyes:

Vicente says

Good finds there.

It is indeed baffling why we have such a notion of pervasive voting fraud, probably it’s simply attributable to human nature. Losers preferring to malign the winner as a cheat, instead of acknowledging their own failure.

We’ve all heard of “voting the graveyard” but it’s not been a real factor since the days of Al Capone.

Not so long ago. The Feds started taking vote fraud seriously here in the 80s. In one hotly contested election, the US Attorney estimated there were 100,000 votes stolen in Chicago alone. 100,000? Who knows? It's hard to pin a number on a well done fraud.

One not so well done fraud involved a nursing home resident who claimed he didn't vote although his signature was clearly visible on the register. The fact the guy had no fingers was taken as relevant. And the fact that he voted twice that day.

Those with longer memories than mine tell me the 1960 election was a complete circus.

There was a period in which there was a regular cycle of elections, investigations, indictments and convictions. Now it looks like the election shenanigans are mostly part of the past.

It's quiet, but it's a weird sort of quiet. Back in the days of the voting booth wars, it sure seemed like there were more real choices on the ballot. There was a small, but real, Cook County Republican party.

But now the winnowing process seems to take place before the first vote is cast. More viable candidates seem to drop out. It seems more candidates are running unopposed, or there's one viable candidate against a bunch of goofs, stumblebums and wannabes.

No proof or evidence, though. It's just my gut feeling.

Why is it that allegations of voter fraud only seem to arise when Democrats win?

"The Democratic party needs to prevent verification of voter eligibility, because in a close election the democratic party needs to rely on voter fraud to swing the election in its favor.
All you need to think in this situation is A.C.O.R.N."

If your going to post silly things like that, it helps to know the difference between voter fraud and voter REGISTRATION fraud. ACORN did not commit one single case of voter fraud. Voter registration fraud does not have any impact on the results of an election. ACORN might have registered Donald Duck to vote, but I guarantee you he did not show up to vote.

HousingWatcher says

Why is it that allegations of voter fraud only seem to arise when Democrats win?

did you forget the voter fraud allegations when Bush beat Al Gore? That circus lasted for a few month.

I don't remember anyone claiming fraud in 2000. It was the recount stuff that was the heart of the debate.

So on the one hand ChrisLA says NYT is an invalid biased source.

On the other, ChrisLA says it's OK to use citation-free websites like "rottenacorn.com".

Amazing.

OK since we have diverged into "voter registration fraud" that seems an equal opportunity game:

·Knowing that voter registration fraud was taking place in Riverside County, Carol Robb got a list from the Registrar of Voters, containing new registrations and re-registrations between Aug. 18 and Sept. 3. That file was used to identify over 400 voters whose registration changed from Democrat, or "declined to state," to Republican.

·Phone interviews determined that 27, of the 33 voters reached had been "slammed" -- their party affiliation was improperly changed.

http://www.calitics.com/diary/6962/

ChrisLA says

http://rottenacorn.com/activityMap.html - enjoy.

Here's an example:

"An ACORN employee admitted to forging signatures and registering three of her friends to vote 40 times."

This would seem to be a case where someone who was paid to register voters cheated. Which I would not defend. Do you think it meant that if it hadn't been caught, that 40 votes, or even more than one, was going to come from it? Or does it simply mean that 39 or 40 non-existant people were registered, who would then not vote.

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/politics/item_8dh7PaKRiPc0BFNPZVnGMM

Please don't imply that I am defending this. I'm just asking whether it would have affected the actual election. It's obvious some of these acorn people were paid for the number of people they register. IF they cheat and get some homeless guy to register a bunch of times, that is far different than getting the guy to vote a number of times, under different identities on election day.

Or this one:

The owner of a firm that the California Republican Party hired to register tens of thousands of voters this year was arrested in Ontario over the weekend on suspicion of voter registration fraud.

State and local investigators allege that Mark Jacoby fraudulently registered himself to vote at a childhood California address where he no longer lives so he would appear to meet the legal requirement that all signature gatherers be eligible to vote in California. His firm, Young Political Majors, or YPM, collects petition signatures and registers voters in California and other states.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/oct/20/local/me-fraud20

However these cases are most typically about scamming the party to get MONEY for registrations. I don't see much in the way of investigations proving they result in vote fraud or changing the outcome of elections.

Indeed from the same story:

Jacoby's arrest by state investigators and the Ontario Police Department late Saturday came after dozens of voters said they were duped into registering as Republicans by people employed by YPM. The voters said YPM workers tricked them by saying they were signing a petition to toughen penalties against child molesters.

The firm was paid $7 to $12 for every Californian it registered as a member of the GOP.

HousingWatcher says

Why is it that allegations of voter fraud only seem to arise when Democrats win?

They don't. I think a lot of people were suspicious of Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004. I still recall the wild swings on election day 2004. I like to play http://tippie.uiowa.edu/iem/index.cfm and it's fun to watch what the money says.

On election day 2004, at about 4:00 0r 4:30pm pacific time, the money (and this would have been true anywhere else elections are gambled on) was saying, or maybe I should say the money was screaming an over 90% chance that Kerry had won.

Why ? Because of exit polls, including those in Ohio, had showed a significantly different result than what ultimately occurred. This was with electronic voting machines.

I don't think there was any fraud in Florida. You had people who did not know how to use the chads and you had a biased Supreme Court. Also, I do think Pat Buchanan stole enough votes from Gore to to allow Bush to win.

Marcus, stop making excuses for A.C.OR.N. Acorn is a communist organization that has spent years trying to steal ellections, to further its leftist agenda. For some reason you are unable to admit it, but it is a fact that A.C.O.R.N. does ingage in voter fraud. and it is to benefit the Democratic party.

Didn't Barack Obama use to work for A.C.O.R.N?

Perhaps that is one of the reasons that Barack Obama is so distrusted by those who are on the watch against voter fraud.

"Didn’t Barack Obama use to work for A.C.O.R.N?"
No, he represented them in court as an attorney. He represented them in a lawsuit with other plaintiffs, such as the US Dept. of Justice and the League of Women Voters, in a lawsuit against the state of Illinois.

From the decision (retrieved from the Lexis database):

COUNSEL: For ASSOCIATION OF COMMUNITY ORGANIZATIONS FOR REFORM NOW, (ACORN), EQUIP FOR EQUALITY, INCORPORATED, JACQUELINE ANDRADE, SWENDOLYN COLEMAN, CHINETHA DIXON, JOEY L. WOODEN, Plaintiffs - Appellees (95-1800): Judson H. Miner, Jeffrey Cummings, Barack H. Obama, DAVIS, MINER, BARNHILL & GALLAND, Chicago, IL.

For CATHERINE A. CALDER, RENE D. LUNA, LEAGUE OF WOMAN VOTERS OF ILLINOIS, Plaintiffs - Appellees (95-1801): Thomas R. Meites, Joan H. Burger, Lynn S. Frackman, Paul W. Mollica, MEITES, FRACKMAN, MULDER & BURGER, Chicago, IL.

For UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee (95-1802): Joan C. Laser, AUSA, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Criminal Division, Chicago, IL. Steven H. Rosenbaum, Samuel R. Bagenstos, DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Civil Rights Division, Appellate Section, Washington, DC. Thomas P. Walsh, AUSA, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Civil Division, Chicago, IL. Tricia A. Tingle, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, DC.

marcus says

I always wonder, how does it work? You hear an intelligent tight argument versus one that is dishonest and contrived. I would love to know how one buys the latter. Is it simply because you have an incredibly high ability to believe whatever you want to believe?

propitup1 says

Marcus, stop making excuses for A.C.OR.N. Acorn is a communist organization that has spent years trying to steal ellections, to further its leftist agenda. For some reason you are unable to admit it, but it is a fact that A.C.O.R.N. does ingage in voter fraud. and it is to benefit the Democratic party.

HousingWatcher says

If your going to post silly things like that, it helps to know the difference between voter fraud and voter REGISTRATION fraud. ACORN did not commit one single case of voter fraud.

ChrisLA says

did you forget the voter fraud allegations when Bush beat Al Gore?

There was no fraud allegations. There was a serious mechanical reliability problem that favored the wealthier counties, which had optical scanners, compared to the poorer counties, which had unreliable punch machines that produced many spoiled ballots that would have been legally valid with further manual review of voter intent.

The Gore team just wanted some ballots where voter intent was clearly evident -- Florida's legal standard -- to be counted. The Bush team fought this to the Fl Supreme Court and lost, but the SCOTUS decided 7-2 that it would be unfair to Bush if all the votes Gore wanted to recount were actually recounted to determine voter intent.

Later on it was determined that if the SCOTUS had let the Gore recount go on he would have still lost Fl. Gore needed a statewide manual analysis of voter intent to get those 500-odd votes he needed.

Basically it came down to counting partial punches as votes if other votes on the ballot were similar, and also finding multiple votes on optical ballots that still had clear voter intent for one candidate.

"Out of Palm Beach County emerged one of the least restrictive standards for determining a valid punch-card ballot. The county elections board determined that a chad hanging by up to two corners was valid and that a dimple or a chad detached in only one corner could also count if there were similar marks in other races on the same ballot. If that standard had been adopted statewide, the study shows a slim, 42-vote margin for Gore."

HousingWatcher says

Also, I do think Pat Buchanan stole enough votes from Gore to to allow Bush to win.

Due to the confusing "butterfly" ballot design with its sketchy graphic design, yes:

But the real main thing was the 97,488 idiot Nader voters. I would hope we could find 547 of them who wished they could have their vote back.

marcus says

These guys seem slimy to me, please decide for yourself (that is those of you are honest with yourselves, and have integrity)

They hope to prevent poor folk who would vote from voting in recall election if they don’t have a drivers license.
http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/elections/article_5aa8adfa-7845-11e0-82be-001cc4c03286.html

And it suggests that that the political duopoly in Wisconsin isn't yet in a conspiracy against the public.

marcus says

They admit that the anti union push is about winning elections. Unbelievable.
http://thinkprogress.org/2011/03/09/scott-fitzgerald-obama/

It would be unbelievable if the public sector unions had been attacked if they had supported both parties.

HousingWatcher says

Why is it that allegations of voter fraud only seem to arise when Democrats win?

I think the 1960 election put a burr under the Republican saddle. Vote fraud in Illinois and Texas may have given the Presidency to Kennedy rather than Nixon.

The Justice department under Reagan took a particular interest in the 1982 elections in Chicago.

"On December 14, 1984, Chief Judge Frank Mc­Garr of the U.S. District Court for the Northern Dis­trict of Illinois publicly released the federal grand jury's report on the 1982 election-only the third time in the history of the court that a grand jury report had been made public.[15] The evidence re­vealed substantial vote fraud in Chicago during the November 2, 1982, election and found "that similar fraudulent activities have occurred prior to 1982."[16]

"What particularly struck FBI agent Ernest Locker was how routine vote fraud was for the pre­cinct captains, election judges, poll watchers, and political party workers he interviewed. They had been taught how to steal votes (and elections) by their predecessors, who had in turn been taught by their predecessors. Based on his investigation, Locker came to believe the claims, hotly debated among historians, that Mayor Daley threw the 1960 presidential election for John Kennedy with massive ballot stuffing in Chicago.[17] This type of voter fraud, stated Locker, "was an accepted way of life in Chicago."[18]"

Oddly enough, the defeated Democratic candidate for Governor was suing for a recount, claiming voter fraud in Republican areas.

Republicans are often accused of voter intimidation. Again, there's a history:

"Most damaging were the charges that in the early '60s Rehnquist intimidated black and Hispanic voters at polling places in Phoenix, where he was then a local Republican activist, by questioning their ability to read."

Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,962033,00.html#ixzz1MOw0Lhto

Oops. Left out a link for the vote fraud story:

http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/04/where-theres-smoke-theres-fire-100000-stolen-votes-in-chicago

What was it in Minnesota with the Al Frankin election. He won by a few hundred votes?

I am sure that voter fraud played no role in Al Frankin winning that election.

HousingWatcher says

Didn’t Barack Obama use to work for A.C.O.R.N?”
No, he represented them in court as an attorney. He represented them in a lawsuit with other plaintiffs, such as the US Dept. of Justice and the League of Women Voters, in a lawsuit against the state of Illinois.

Housing watcher, Just representing A.C.O.R.N. in court was not the full extent of Obama's links with that scandalous organization. I just looked it up, but Obama was on the board of several other organizations that had links to A.C.O.R.N and extensively funded A.C.O.R.N.

Troy says

But the real main thing was the 97,488 idiot Nader voters. I would hope we could find 547 of them who wished they could have their vote back.

DO you people even know what a VOTE even is, or what it represents?

You know it's not 97,488 Nader Voters that voted wrong, it's more like the millions of Demotards, that thought for one single moment that a monumental Douche like Kerry could ever the President of those 97,488 Voters that not only said, "FUCK NO!" but voted accordingly. It was those Democrat Voters that were on the wrong side of History. Because "History", when the history books are written Bush will be dead.