PDA

View Full Version : New question; Florida voting purge



John Smith
07-16-2012, 01:51 PM
I just heard clip that the judged ruled in favor of the purge, apparently based on more accurate information from the Homeland Security list.

My question: if you are a legal, qualified voter improperly denied your vote, what is your recourse?

Kaa
07-16-2012, 01:54 PM
My question: if you are a legal, qualified voter improperly denied your vote, what is your recourse?

You bring an ID when you register to vote..? ;-)

Kaa

Ian McColgin
07-16-2012, 02:02 PM
As all too often, Kaa, you're confusing the point. NOTHING in these cases has to do with verifications required to register to vote. Those verifications can be examined at leisure and are quite diverse. The polling place ID requirements, on the other hand, are narrow, restrictive and not readily available to large portions of the population.

The proposed laws are all and only about polling place ID.

I do not think most of the righties trying to prevent poor, elderly and minority people from voting actually are confused about this. The evidence for this supposition is in those internal documents circulated in organizing the lobbying efforts. The right introduces the confusion deliberatly to hide the absence of legitimated reason behind their cause. But in your individual case, Kaa, you might not be deliberately misrepresenting the issue. You might just be unable to distinguish registration from polling place ID.

Kaa
07-16-2012, 02:14 PM
The polling place ID requirements, on the other hand, are narrow, restrictive and not readily available to large portions of the population.

Can you give me some real-life examples?

Kaa

Ian McColgin
07-16-2012, 02:16 PM
Read the laws. It's just a google away. It's also been repeated on this Forum enough that there really is no excuse for not already knowing.

Kaa
07-16-2012, 02:33 PM
Read the laws. It's just a google away. It's also been repeated on this Forum enough that there really is no excuse for not already knowing.

Hmmm:


What kind of identification do I need to bring to the polls? (http://election.dos.state.fl.us/gen-faq.shtml/#KindIdentification) When you go to the polling place to vote, you will be asked to provide a current and valid picture identification with a signature. Approved forms of picture identification are: Florida driver's license; Florida identification card issued by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles; United States passport; debit or credit card; military identification; student identification; retirement center identification; neighborhood association identification; and public assistance identification. (Section 101.043, F.S.) If the picture identification does not contain a signature, you will be asked to provide an additional identification with your signature.

Can I still vote if I do not bring identification? (http://election.dos.state.fl.us/gen-faq.shtml/#NoIdentification) Yes. You should not be turned away from the polls because you do not bring identification. If you do not have the proper identification, you will be allowed to vote a provisional ballot.


http://election.dos.state.fl.us/gen-faq.shtml/#link3


What about that seems "narrow, restrictive and not readily available to large portions of the population" to you?

Kaa

pefjr
07-16-2012, 02:42 PM
I just heard clip that the judged ruled in favor of the purge, apparently based on more accurate information from the Homeland Security list.

My question: if you are a legal, qualified voter improperly denied your vote, what is your recourse?As I understand it, this purge is only directed at dems(per Norm), so one could just re-register as uh... well ....anything else and escape the purge. Simple, .....your welcome.

Ian McColgin
07-16-2012, 02:43 PM
There are different effects in different states. From the Roanoke paper:

The polls that are out there right now appear to tip the presidential election securely in President Obama’s favor over Republican challenger Mitt Romney. Even Florida is looking good for Obama these days.

But there’s a key issue they’re not taking into account, and that’s the effect of voter ID laws that have been passed in two dozen or so states.

Already, these have disenfranchised voters in some primary elections. In many cases, those were elderly voters who had given up their driver’s licenses long ago.

From the Associated Press:

The numbers suggest that the legitimate votes rejected by the laws are far more numerous than are the cases of fraud that advocates of the rules say they are trying to prevent. Thousands more votes could be in jeopardy for this November, when more states with larger populations are looking to have similar rules in place.

More than two dozen states have some form of ID requirement, and 11 of those passed new rules over the past two years largely at the urging of Republicans who say they want to prevent fraud.

Democrats and voting rights groups fear that ID laws could suppress votes among people who may not typically have a driver’s license, and disproportionately affect the elderly, poor and minorities. While the number of votes is a small percentage of the overall total, they have the potential to sway a close election. Remember that the 2000 presidential race was decided by a 537-vote margin in Florida.

A Republican leader in Pennsylvania said recently that the state’s new ID law would allow Romney to win the state over President Barack Obama.

Another Pennsylvania official estimated that state’s law could impact more than 750,000 voters there. As Mother Jones has recently reported, 11 percent of all adults of voting age currently don’t have a valid photo ID. Of them, blacks make up the largest group.

# # #

Please read the next to last paragraph again. Get it?

Regarding the Florida law, sure those poor people who have a Capital One photo secure credit card will have no problem. And the law, in its majestic equality, forbids both rich and poor from sleeping under bridges.

Kaa
07-16-2012, 02:49 PM
There are different effects in different states.

Ian, let me repeat myself: Can you give me some real-life examples of polling ID requirements that you consider "narrow, restrictive and not readily available to large portions of the population"?

I don't care what idiots of any party affiliation say. Can you show me what you are concerned about?

Kaa

ljb5
07-16-2012, 02:54 PM
While it is possible to find instances of valid voters turned away for lack of ID (mostly the poor and elderly), I don't think this is the primary goal of voter ID laws.

I think Republicans just want to make the whole process as slow, inconvenient, frustrating and time-consuming as possible.

They're hoping that a large number of people --- even legitimate voters with ID --- will look at the long lines and the slow-moving workers and decide that it's just not worth the time and effort.

It's not voter suppressioin, per se, just voter obstruction.

ccmanuals
07-16-2012, 02:56 PM
When the cat was let out of the bag. So to speak. :)


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EuOT1bRYdK8&feature=player_embedded

Paul Pless
07-16-2012, 02:58 PM
I think Republicans just want to make the whole process as slow, inconvenient, frustrating and time-consuming as possible.

I registered to vote in Michigan today. It took less than 5 minutes.

ljb5
07-16-2012, 03:02 PM
I registered to vote in Michigan today. It took less than 5 minutes.

Do you often have long lines at polling booths in Hell, Michigan --- population 266?

You might be surprised that in urban areas, people often wait over an hour to vote. Imagine how frustrating that would be if everyone were delayed by two minutes.

Paul Pless
07-16-2012, 03:04 PM
Do you often have long lines at polling booths in Hell, Michigan --- population 266?Don't know, I've never voted here - I just registered to vote in Michigan today. Given the opportunity I'll cast an absentee ballot any ways. . .

ljb5
07-16-2012, 03:21 PM
Don't know, I've never voted here - I just registered to vote in Michigan today. Given the opportunity I'll cast an absentee ballot any ways. . .

Well, can you imagine what it might be like for other people who live in denser areas and prefer to vote in person?

There is a world outside of Hell, you know.

Ian McColgin
07-16-2012, 03:23 PM
Ah, absentee ballots. That's where the actual fraud, such as has been found, occurs. The polling place ID laws are just about turning folk off on election day.

We have had threads on this Forum that listed some real life examples of Floridians. The wonderful thing about real life examples is that then folk supporting these law can come up with hypothetical reasons why it's the poor schmuck's own fault and not a result of the polling place ID law's intent.

Take a tour of some actual poor folk. You'll find as many as one in five don't have and don't have reasonable access to an approved photo ID. I do not know of studies that really show us how many of those are also registered voters. Where laws have been challenged with individual plaintiffs, we can see that there are people who register to vote but don't have that state's ID for the polling place, but we don't actually know if they come in numbers anywhere near as large as the total portion of poor, elderly and minorities without the photo ID. These are groups that don't participate so much anyway. Part of being powerless.

All of which is to say, Republicans and Democrats both honestly believe that the polling place ID laws will suppress likely Democratic votes. There really is no question about that. The real question is exactly how many. In truth, we can't know that answer.

Paul Pless
07-16-2012, 03:23 PM
There is a world outside of Hell, you know.Yes I know, I did live in Alabama for nearly forty years before moving here, ya know?;):d

Ian McColgin
07-16-2012, 03:28 PM
Nice to move up, eh?

Paul Pless
07-16-2012, 03:32 PM
Nice to move up, eh?LOL. I like Michigan a lot. But, I still love Alabama. Its amazing how similar the two states are actually; at least to someone like me that's lived primarily in a farm community his entire life, and has a love of the out doors and water and hunting and fishing.

pefjr
07-16-2012, 03:37 PM
Well, can you imagine what it might be like for other people who live in denser areas and prefer to vote in person?

I hope those Repubs don't decide to purge fishing licences.

Ian McColgin
07-16-2012, 03:43 PM
The whole absentee bit seems a bit over-used compared to before. Once it was hard to get an absentee ballot. I remember when Dad had to prove that PanAm would not change his and every other pilot's flight schedule, would not make a day's worldwide service cancellation, for voting. Now it seems that even if you can get from work to the poll during lunch or before or after work, even if you don't work, just a little inconvenience is good enough.

To me there's something really wonderful about showing up.

ccmanuals
07-16-2012, 03:43 PM
I hope those Repubs don't decide to purge fishing licences.


No problem. After they take control of the House and Senate their first acts will be deregulation of the EPA. You'll be able to scoop up all the floating fish you want. :)

Paul Pless
07-16-2012, 03:48 PM
The whole absentee bit seems a bit over-used compared to before. Once it was hard to get an absentee ballot. I remember when Dad had to prove that PanAm would not change his and every other pilot's flight schedule, would not make a day's worldwide service cancellation, for voting. Now it seems that even if you can get from work to the poll during lunch or before or after work, even if you don't work, just a little inconvenience is good enough.

To me there's something really wonderful about showing up.

I prefer the Oregon and Washington State models of postal voting.

ljb5
07-16-2012, 04:00 PM
I prefer the Oregon and Washington State models of postal voting.

You mean.... no ID required, not even proof of a warm body?

Seems to me, the potential for vote fraud by mail is much worse than the possibility that someone might try to vote falsely in person.

As James O'Keefe found out recently, it's not so easy to commit vote fraud when you have to show your face and can only do it one at a time.

My problem with postal voting is that it's not secure. At the polling station, they only let you in by yourself (and possibly an assistant)... but once the ballots are out in the open, anyone can see them. Could you imagine a company where the boss makes everyone fill out their absentee ballot in front of him... and if they don't like it, they get fired?

It may be convenient, but that's not the American way.

You also have to worry about theft from mailboxes... on both the sending side and the return. How would you feel if you call the elections office and say, "I never received my ballot in the mail" and they say, "Oh, our records show you recieved it last week and returned it yesterday"?

But alas, I guess Republicans aren't really in it because of concerns about fraud.

wardd
07-16-2012, 04:06 PM
why is just one side pushing voter id?

pefjr
07-16-2012, 04:30 PM
No problem. After they take control of the House and Senate their first acts will be deregulation of the EPA. You'll be able to scoop up all the floating fish you want. :)No problem, been there, done it, back in the freeze of '76'. That was a bonanza, 220 lbs of Mutton Snapper in an hour. You think they will de regulate, huh? Fox news again?

Glen Longino
07-16-2012, 06:44 PM
Democrats don't seem to be interested in preventing illegals from voting because they typically vote Democrat.

How many illegals do you know?
None?
I figgered!
Illegal aliens typically Do Not Vote!
There is something about going to the courthouse that does not appeal to them!:D

Paul Pless
07-16-2012, 06:50 PM
:d ...

John Smith
07-16-2012, 06:55 PM
Can you give me some real-life examples?

Kaa
I was rushed when I started this thread. Specifically, Florida is purging registered voters who are not citizens from their voter rolls. They will be doing this from a list they can now get from Homeland Security.

Mistakes will be made. So far no one has cited an illegal in person voter voting in Florida, so this problem doesn't seem to be a problem.

This is one of those things that sounds good, but..... If you go to your polling place to cast your vote and you are denied your vote because someone made a mistake and you've been purged, what is your recourse?

Does someone get fired? Does someone get sued? Or are you just plum out of luck?

As to the new ID laws, they are being put in in place retroactively. First question here is if you are a registered voter are you going to get a letter from the state informing you you'll need a photo ID, or will it be up to you to read the newspaper?

All of the currently registered voters met the criteria required when they registered, and they all get a sample ballot which, IMO, should serve as their ticket to vote. This is an item mailed to them at the address on the envelope.

My question tries to look past election day and simply wonder what is the recourse for those who are legally registered and qualified voters who are denied their vote because someone makes a mistake.

ccmanuals
07-16-2012, 07:00 PM
No problem, been there, done it, back in the freeze of '76'. That was a bonanza, 220 lbs of Mutton Snapper in an hour. You think they will de regulate, huh? Fox news again?

http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/07/16/519351/agribusiness-sneaks-deregulation-of-genetically-modified-foods-into-farm-bill/

John Smith
07-16-2012, 07:01 PM
Ian, let me repeat myself: Can you give me some real-life examples of polling ID requirements that you consider "narrow, restrictive and not readily available to large portions of the population"?

I don't care what idiots of any party affiliation say. Can you show me what you are concerned about?

Kaa

I think simply requiring a photo ID RETROACTIVELY is a bad thing. My dad would have had a great deal of trouble getting one. Many elderly people cannot get to Motor Vehicle for such ID's.

If you want to grandfather it in, and have the state send people to high schools, maybe it's not a bad idea. Problem is, no one I've seen promoting the concept has been able to point to any in person voter fraud this would prevent.

In Florida, however, something else is happening. They are set to purge voters. 2000 ring a bell. A lot of Florida voters were erroneously purged and denied their vote. What will their recourse be? http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/07/16/520021/florida-gains-access-to-new-database-vows-to-restart-voter-purge/

Do you really think these laws won't prevent elligible voters from voting?

John Smith
07-16-2012, 07:03 PM
Ian, let me repeat myself: Can you give me some real-life examples of polling ID requirements that you consider "narrow, restrictive and not readily available to large portions of the population"?

I don't care what idiots of any party affiliation say. Can you show me what you are concerned about?

Kaa

Readily available to large portions of the population simply isn't good enough. They need to be readily available to every qualified voter.

How many otherwise legal to vote people have to not have the required document readily available before youwould have a problem?

John Smith
07-16-2012, 07:05 PM
While it is possible to find instances of valid voters turned away for lack of ID (mostly the poor and elderly), I don't think this is the primary goal of voter ID laws.

I think Republicans just want to make the whole process as slow, inconvenient, frustrating and time-consuming as possible.

They're hoping that a large number of people --- even legitimate voters with ID --- will look at the long lines and the slow-moving workers and decide that it's just not worth the time and effort.

It's not voter suppressioin, per se, just voter obstruction.

If it is possible to find legitimate voters turned away, it is suppression per se.

John Smith
07-16-2012, 07:09 PM
I registered to vote in Michigan today. It took less than 5 minutes.


What's that got to do with the question at hand? We're not talking about going to register to vote. I'm talking about people who are and have been registered to vote: people who have voted in many elections, legally, who may not be allowed to vote this year because of new rules and purging.

I've been registered for years, and I've been asking a question that, again, goes unanswered. Why isn't the sample ballot I get a week or so before the election, delivered to me at my address by the Postal Service an adequate proof that I am me and serve as my ticket to vote?

What is the responsibility of the state, should they pass a law requiring I obtain something else, to inform me by certified mail? Or at least send me a card?

John Smith
07-16-2012, 07:11 PM
Do you often have long lines at polling booths in Hell, Michigan --- population 266?

You might be surprised that in urban areas, people often wait over an hour to vote. Imagine how frustrating that would be if everyone were delayed by two minutes.
I've never had to wait more than 15 minutes to vote. I was shocked to see how long the lines were in some areas. Seems there ought to be some standard as to number of voting machines for every so many voters.

Paul Pless
07-16-2012, 07:12 PM
i forgot, what was the question at hand???

John Smith
07-16-2012, 07:14 PM
Ah, absentee ballots. That's where the actual fraud, such as has been found, occurs. The polling place ID laws are just about turning folk off on election day.

We have had threads on this Forum that listed some real life examples of Floridians. The wonderful thing about real life examples is that then folk supporting these law can come up with hypothetical reasons why it's the poor schmuck's own fault and not a result of the polling place ID law's intent.

Take a tour of some actual poor folk. You'll find as many as one in five don't have and don't have reasonable access to an approved photo ID. I do not know of studies that really show us how many of those are also registered voters. Where laws have been challenged with individual plaintiffs, we can see that there are people who register to vote but don't have that state's ID for the polling place, but we don't actually know if they come in numbers anywhere near as large as the total portion of poor, elderly and minorities without the photo ID. These are groups that don't participate so much anyway. Part of being powerless.

All of which is to say, Republicans and Democrats both honestly believe that the polling place ID laws will suppress likely Democratic votes. There really is no question about that. The real question is exactly how many. In truth, we can't know that answer.

Let me repeat the thread question: what can the recourse be if you are a legal voter and are denied your right?

At least a state by state suit to sign on to if only for statistical data. I think that the purging may be more accurate if the people doing it face some penalty for getting it wrong.

John Smith
07-16-2012, 07:15 PM
LOL. I like Michigan a lot. But, I still love Alabama. Its amazing how similar the two states are actually; at least to someone like me that's lived primarily in a farm community his entire life, and has a love of the out doors and water and hunting and fishing.

Now your trees are the right height.

John Smith
07-16-2012, 07:18 PM
I don't remember the details, but I did read about it a while back. If someone's eligibility is challenged, they are allowed to cast a provisional ballot. The details about how this works are on the FL Election Board website. There seem to be a number of steps taken to ensure that qualified voters aren't prevented from voting.

Casting a provisional ballot sounds good, but what gets them processed and counted in a timely manner? I'll check out the website tomorrow.

pefjr
07-16-2012, 07:47 PM
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/07/16/519351/agribusiness-sneaks-deregulation-of-genetically-modified-foods-into-farm-bill/This has to do with de regulation and floating fish? Quite a stretch. Butttt.. what do expect with a bunch of no counts that voted for a national motto of "In god we trust" to keep the citizens happy and safe.

Curtism
07-17-2012, 02:06 AM
I just heard clip that the judged ruled in favor of the purge, apparently based on more accurate information from the Homeland Security list.

My question: if you are a legal, qualified voter improperly denied your vote, what is your recourse?

Governor Scott was asked a similar question during a radio interview and he responded that he had been denied back in 2006. Apparently he shared first and last names (but different middle initial) with someone who'd died in January of that year and when he showed up to vote, his eligibility was questioned. He showed all the required ID and was allowed to vote by provisional ballot. He claimed it was no problem, just a minor inconvenience. Make of his personal anectdote what you will.

Voter officials confirmed that he'd voted twice that year, in a primary and general election, by provisional ballots due to the mixup. And both times his vote was counted.

State law says that if your eligibility is questioned at the polls for some reason, and you are registered in that district, you can still vote by provisional ballot. You then have two days to provide whatever proof or documentation was in question before they'll count your vote. My question is; if you find out there's a problem when you vote on super Tuesday, and they call the election late that night, what good does the two days do you?

Add to that the fact that lawmakers have cut down hours of early voting and are trying to eliminate the Sunday prior to the election which, in the past, was when we had the highest turnout of blacks, hispanics and other minorities, along with the poorer people and working folks who couldn't take time off work to get to the polls, etc. So, for those who don't manage to vote early and have some sort of issue that requires further validation, I guess it's either take time off work to aquire whatever papers you're missing and hope to get it back to an election official in time or it's "better luck next time, amigo" for them.

On top of that, due to "budget constraints" the DMV is closing certain offices here that issue drivers licenses and state IDs. In my area they closed one recently . . . guess where it was located? Give up yet? It was one of the busiest offices in one of the poorer areas of the city. Apparently they'll still do road tests and re-qualification for commercial licenses but will no longer have staff to provide services for renewals or new applicants at that location. But hey, on their web site it says you can do renewals online if you have an existing license, which is fine if you happen to have a computer handy.

A little checking will show that Wisconsin (another state with a TEA party guv) is dealing with budgetary difficulties in a similar manor by trimming certain state services. If I'm not mistaken, they've also started requiring a DL or state ID to vote. Coincidence? I doubt it.

hokiefan
07-17-2012, 02:20 AM
My issue is that we should be encouraging more people to do their civic duty and vote. The key word there was MORE. Anything we do that makes it harder for people to do the right thing (step up and voice their opinion) is a step in the wrong direction. I've seen nothing that demonstrates that in-person fraudulent voting is a significant issue. Discouraging people from voting by making life more complicated is real. I don't care what persuasion you are, I want you to vote.

Cheers,

Bobby

Curtism
07-17-2012, 02:24 AM
At a local event a couple days ago Senator Bill Nelson, D-Fl, (not to be confused with Sen. Ben Nelson, Dirtbag from Nebraska) had some thoughts about what he see's going on in Florida. This story ran on our local community lefty-liberal-commie-socialist-radio station yesterday, so it might offend or run counter to viewpoints of the "nah, nothing to see here" crewe.

http://www.wmnf.org/news_stories/nelson-says-florida-voter-purge-isnt-the-only-challenge-facing-minority-voters


The Department of Homeland Security granted Florida access to a database that will provide information about potential non-citizens. It will likely lead to the resumption of the state’s controversial voter purge. At a press event today, U.S. Senator Bill Nelson weighed in on what he thought of efforts to remove people from the voter rolls so close to an election.

“I have no problem with anyone who is not a legal citizen from not being able to vote because that’s what we’re supposed to have. But at the same time, when it is done in a way to try to intimidate people, that’s a different matter.”



Instead, Nelson is more concerned with Florida’s new voter law often referred to as the voter suppression act (http://www.wmnf.org/news_stories?tag=voter+suppression). It reduces the number of early voting days and requires people to cast provisional ballots if they’ve moved and not updated their voter registration. Nelson said those stipulations more strongly affect minority and low-income voters.

“Which is suppressing the vote of minorities by constricting the amount of early voting time and the elimination of Sunday voting before the Tuesday election. Historically what has happened in Florida is that minorities, particularly Hispanics and African-Americans, utilize the Sunday in order to vote in the early voting and when you eliminate that, you’re making it more difficult for those particular subsets of voters to vote.”



The law originally imposed restrictions on third party voter registration that led groups like the League of Women Voters (http://www.lwv.org/) to stop holding registration drives. That provision has since been ruled unconstitutional. The database Florida will likely use to resume removing ineligible voters from the rolls is called SAVE (http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.eb1d4c2a3e5b9ac89243c6a7543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=75bce2e261405110VgnVCM1000004718190aRCR D&vgnextchannel=75bce2e261405110VgnVCM1000004718190a RCRD) - Systematic Alien Verification for Entitlements. It lists both legal immigrants and green-card holders who aren’t eligible to vote. Supporters of the purge say it is a more accurate way of ensuring the election is fair.

Curtism
07-17-2012, 02:26 AM
My issue is that we should be encouraging more people to do their civic duty and vote. The key word there was MORE. Anything we do that makes it harder for people to do the right thing (step up and voice their opinion) is a step in the wrong direction. I've seen nothing that demonstrates that in-person fraudulent voting is a significant issue. Discouraging people from voting by making life more complicated is real. I don't care what persuasion you are, I want you to vote.

Cheers,

Bobby

I couldn't agree more.

Curtism
07-17-2012, 02:46 AM
A few years back my wife moved down here from Wisconsin and went to get her Florida DL. After she filled out the forms they asked if she wanted to register to vote. "Sure" she said and filled out that form as well. No check was done for citizenship, just a local utility bill with her name on it and her old ID. Of course, she happens to be a natural citizen but, if she hadn't been, it doesn't seem to have mattered. A few minutes later she walked out with a DL and voter ID.

If this "aliens voting illegally" is an issue, and there were in fact a few cases of this happening, how did those people obtain voter registration cards? You can not vote without being registered, well in advance of a given election, in the district where you live. If it's such a problem, wouldn't you think they'd try to head this off at the pass by checking applicants eligibility prior to issuing them voter registrations?

And if they knew this was a problem, why did they wait until this close to the election to start these background checks and purges?

Curtism
07-17-2012, 03:50 AM
Here's another example of dysfunction in our voting system down here.

A little while back one of our friends from across the pond wrote a post about how their voting system works. I think it was Nick who posted it, thanks by the way for that interesting bit of info.

Our system has certain similarities in that, a few weeks back the wife and I recieved our new voter ID cards, just like every election year. We also recieved two new cards for Alphege and his wife Jean, the previous owners of this house. The last time I saw them they were leaving to convalesce with their kids in NY. They were in their late eighties and that was over twenty years ago. And I know from a note from his wife fifteen years ago that Alphege is deceased and she probably wasn't far behind him.

So, just like every other election year we write 'invalid address' on the envelopes and return them to the sender.

Wouldn't you think, with all the modern marvels of the computer age, that some election worker would catch a returned ID card, maybe check the record to see that the person hasn't voted since the late eighties and perhaps make a courtesy call to the long-since disconnected phone number and maybe update or at least flag their files?

It's fairly of obvious that any glitches, illegally registered voters and dead people, are flaws from within the system itself. This is why it frosts my bacon to hear local pols spout and demonize this group or that when they themselves are the only ones in a position to fix their broken system. Instead we get more of the old "watch the hand, those people are stealing your democracy" crap.

Iceboy
07-17-2012, 07:12 AM
"If I'm not mistaken, they've also started requiring a DL or state ID to vote. Coincidence? I doubt it."

You are.

John Smith
07-17-2012, 09:31 AM
Governor Scott was asked a similar question during a radio interview and he responded that he had been denied back in 2006. Apparently he shared first and last names (but different middle initial) with someone who'd died in January of that year and when he showed up to vote, his eligibility was questioned. He showed all the required ID and was allowed to vote by provisional ballot. He claimed it was no problem, just a minor inconvenience. Make of his personal anectdote what you will.

Voter officials confirmed that he'd voted twice that year, in a primary and general election, by provisional ballots due to the mixup. And both times his vote was counted.

State law says that if your eligibility is questioned at the polls for some reason, and you are registered in that district, you can still vote by provisional ballot. You then have two days to provide whatever proof or documentation was in question before they'll count your vote. My question is; if you find out there's a problem when you vote on super Tuesday, and they call the election late that night, what good does the two days do you?

Add to that the fact that lawmakers have cut down hours of early voting and are trying to eliminate the Sunday prior to the election which, in the past, was when we had the highest turnout of blacks, hispanics and other minorities, along with the poorer people and working folks who couldn't take time off work to get to the polls, etc. So, for those who don't manage to vote early and have some sort of issue that requires further validation, I guess it's either take time off work to aquire whatever papers you're missing and hope to get it back to an election official in time or it's "better luck next time, amigo" for them.

On top of that, due to "budget constraints" the DMV is closing certain offices here that issue drivers licenses and state IDs. In my area they closed one recently . . . guess where it was located? Give up yet? It was one of the busiest offices in one of the poorer areas of the city. Apparently they'll still do road tests and re-qualification for commercial licenses but will no longer have staff to provide services for renewals or new applicants at that location. But hey, on their web site it says you can do renewals online if you have an existing license, which is fine if you happen to have a computer handy.

A little checking will show that Wisconsin (another state with a TEA party guv) is dealing with budgetary difficulties in a similar manor by trimming certain state services. If I'm not mistaken, they've also started requiring a DL or state ID to vote. Coincidence? I doubt it.

The problem is that for many this does equal a poll tax. That's why I've argued against the retoractive nature of these laws. Someone who has been registered for years ought not be required to do anything new unless the state has some serious cause, and then the burden should be on them to prove this person should not be able to vote.

There are several states passing these ID laws AND closing Motor Vehicle locations, making it that much more difficult for some to get the required ID. If these laws were truly designed for their stated purpose, the state would make getting an ID as convenient as possible. They'd set up dates where you could get one at the same place you go to vote. If you can get there to vote, you can likely get there to obtain your ID. At least that would seem a sound argument.

If there's one thing we need it's the perception that all legal voters have the opportunity to vote. No one wants anyone else to vote. This gets back to the serious question as to which is worse: allowing an illegal vote to be cast or preventing a legal vote from being cast?

If the purpose of these laws was really to eliminate voter fraud, which no one seems to be able to cite any of insofar as in person fraud is concerned, the state would spend the money to protect the elections AND to protect the rights of legal voters. The guy in Pa. got it right when they said this will help Romney win that state.

Maybe the years have left me overly skeptical, but I don't believe anyone is changing these laws for the stated reasons.

We live in a country where all sorts of false comparisons/rationale get used to make points. As I write this Katrina comes to mind and memories of many, many people who in an effort to defend Bush attacked the Mayor of New Orleans by comparing his actions to those in NYC on 9/11. New York wasn't under 4 feet of water with power and phones out.

I have no doubt that legal voters are not going to be allowed to vote, even with provisional ballots. My dad had no birth certificate. You'd be surprised how many Americans don't have one. Many Americans do not have drivers' licenses.

This whole thing is a ruse, IMO, and there seems to be no viable recourse for a legal voter who is not allowed to vote. Maybe he can get it straightened out by next election.

Meanwhile, under present law, I would think any voter can be challenged at the poll with cause.

ljb5
07-17-2012, 10:56 AM
You've stated the case for the "purge", with both of your posts, very well.

Like everything, there needs to be a balance between competing interests.

On one hand, we have the goal of purging ineligible voters. On the other hand, we have the goal of allowing all eligible voters to vote.

There is no perfect solution that serves both needs perfectly. Any voter purge wil inevetiably result in some voters being disenfranchised --- or at least inconvenienced to the point that they willl not vote.

I find it hard to believe that one deceased guy getting a voter ID card in the mail (not actually voting, mind you) poses such a large threat that it justifies obstructing eligible voters.

The numberes just don't add up.

Kaa
07-17-2012, 11:09 AM
The US is just transitioning to a "your papers, please" country.

You cannot refuse to tell a cop your name (see e.g. the Hiibel case), you are subject to suspicionless random searches just for trying to use a subway, and have you been to an airport lately? X-(

Kaa

John Smith
07-17-2012, 12:13 PM
A few years back my wife moved down here from Wisconsin and went to get her Florida DL. After she filled out the forms they asked if she wanted to register to vote. "Sure" she said and filled out that form as well. No check was done for citizenship, just a local utility bill with her name on it and her old ID. Of course, she happens to be a natural citizen but, if she hadn't been, it doesn't seem to have mattered. A few minutes later she walked out with a DL and voter ID.

If this "aliens voting illegally" is an issue, and there were in fact a few cases of this happening, how did those people obtain voter registration cards? You can not vote without being registered, well in advance of a given election, in the district where you live. If it's such a problem, wouldn't you think they'd try to head this off at the pass by checking applicants eligibility prior to issuing them voter registrations?

And if they knew this was a problem, why did they wait until this close to the election to start these background checks and purges? Of all the interviews I've seen with people supporting the new laws, I've not seen anyone point to a single in person voter fraud case. The only numbers I've seen indicate this problem is 0.0003% in size.

That tells me the present system has solved this problem.

In a state where the election is close, denied voters (legal ones) may well make the difference. This is the "beacon of democracy" we claim to be?

Curtism
07-17-2012, 12:19 PM
"If I'm not mistaken, they've also started requiring a DL or state ID to vote. Coincidence? I doubt it."

You are.

You're right, I stand corrected. From an article this past February.

http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/breaking-judge-grants-temporary-injunctgion-stopping-voter-id-law-dc4fadl-141623083.html


A Dane County judge has granted a temporary injunction against Wisconsin's new voter identification law, which he called "the single most restrictive voter eligibility law" in the country.

Circuit Judge David Flanagan's ruling Tuesday means the voter ID requirement would not apply for the April 3 presidential primary and local general election.


I wonder how the appeal is going and if supporters of the ID law will get the injunction overturned in time for November?

John Smith
07-17-2012, 12:20 PM
Here's another example of dysfunction in our voting system down here.

A little while back one of our friends from across the pond wrote a post about how their voting system works. I think it was Nick who posted it, thanks by the way for that interesting bit of info.

Our system has certain similarities in that, a few weeks back the wife and I recieved our new voter ID cards, just like every election year. We also recieved two new cards for Alphege and his wife Jean, the previous owners of this house. The last time I saw them they were leaving to convalesce with their kids in NY. They were in their late eighties and that was over twenty years ago. And I know from a note from his wife fifteen years ago that Alphege is deceased and she probably wasn't far behind him.

So, just like every other election year we write 'invalid address' on the envelopes and return them to the sender.

Wouldn't you think, with all the modern marvels of the computer age, that some election worker would catch a returned ID card, maybe check the record to see that the person hasn't voted since the late eighties and perhaps make a courtesy call to the long-since disconnected phone number and maybe update or at least flag their files?

It's fairly of obvious that any glitches, illegally registered voters and dead people, are flaws from within the system itself. This is why it frosts my bacon to hear local pols spout and demonize this group or that when they themselves are the only ones in a position to fix their broken system. Instead we get more of the old "watch the hand, those people are stealing your democracy" crap.

This would be even more interesting if the people you mention voted, but my guess is they didn't.

Why this doesn't get straightened out is an interesting question. First guess is lack of proper personnel. Second guess would be that they would need an official change of address from the Post Office or a copy of a birth certificate. Mail can be stamped "Address correction requested" and the Postal Service will provide updated data for a small fee. When I moved I made notification to get my voter registration moved with me. It's likely that anyone who plans to vote again would do the same.

ccmanuals
07-17-2012, 12:20 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x0G01zbHGM8

Curtism
07-17-2012, 12:25 PM
You've stated the case for the "purge", with both of your posts, very well.

Well, I guess it's all a matter of perspective . . .

I'll say this though; at least these latest maneuvers are more forthright than letting a SC justice stop the recount in a close election after the fact, eh? It should all make for an interesting fall.

John Smith
07-17-2012, 12:26 PM
The US is just transitioning to a "your papers, please" country.

You cannot refuse to tell a cop your name (see e.g. the Hiibel case), you are subject to suspicionless random searches just for trying to use a subway, and have you been to an airport lately? X-(

Kaa

Good point. It's the old pendulam swinging too far in the other direction. No one supports voter fraud of any kind. The question here involved finding a reasonable means of protecting the integrity of our vote without denying legal voters their rights. Again, the numbers I've seen indicate in person voter fraud is only at 0.0003%. That hardly justifies a system that may disenfranchise 10% of legal voters. and then there is the question if, after the election, we find several millions of people were denied a legal vote, what happens?

Curtism
07-17-2012, 12:55 PM
Speaking of "papers please", here's a story about a Wi. state employee being fired for revealing (alleged) voter suppresion efforts.

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2011/09/09/whistleblower-fired-after-revealing-wisconsin-voter-suppression/

I ties in well with the very telling video CCmanuals posted in #58. (Thanks for the video and reminder, Tom.)

Ian McColgin
07-17-2012, 01:01 PM
Thank you Curtism. Excellent supporting evidence that this is all about voter suppression and nothing else.

pefjr
07-17-2012, 01:52 PM
The numberes just don't add up. Adding non existent numbers just don't add up. Excellent to outstanding math LJ, is that the "new math"?

ljb5
07-17-2012, 02:04 PM
Adding non existent numbers just don't add up.

Exactly.

So tell me again why it's so important to purge the voter rolls?

How many elligible voters will be disenfranchised or discouraged?

How many inelligible voters vote?

You want us to believe this is a critical problem? Your numbers?

pefjr
07-17-2012, 02:15 PM
Exactly.

So tell me again why it's so important to purge the voter rolls?

How many elligible voters will be disenfranchised or discouraged?

How many inelligible voters vote?

Your numbers?purge? what purge? I hear Dems complaining about non existent purges, wars, etc. Some where down in Florida. I hear numbers in the hundreds of thousands. Lj, I don't pay much attention to dems whining about votes, chads, Florida, purges and wars. Do you know why? I consider the source, and I remember the attempted White House Theft, and I do my own math, which always has added up to dem BS. Now, you can ask me questions, and I will do my best to enlighten you, but don't bother me with dem BS, and loaded questions.

This concludes a lesson on loaded questions.

Ian McColgin
07-17-2012, 02:29 PM
Speaking of numbers, exactly how many fraudulent votes cast in past elections could have been prevented by these polling place ID laws. In point of fact, the Republicans have been unable to find the cases because modern voter fraud is known to be done by playing with absentee ballots and suspected to be at least doable by rigging the paperless computer voting machines. Voter suppression is simply the third method that works these days.

Those who think the laws are needed have an obligation to show that there's a problem and that that problem could be fixed by the "solution." They have refused to even attempt either because they know they cannot.

ccmanuals
07-17-2012, 02:40 PM
purge? what purge? I hear Dems complaining about non existent purges, wars, etc. Some where down in Florida. I hear numbers in the hundreds of thousands. Lj, I don't pay much attention to dems whining about votes, chads, Florida, purges and wars. Do you know why? I consider the source, and I remember the attempted White House Theft, and I do my own math, which always has added up to dem BS. Now, you can ask me questions, and I will do my best to enlighten you, but don't bother me with dem BS, and loaded questions.

This concludes a lesson on loaded questions.

What do you mean by attempted White House theft. Bush and his henchmen pulled it off!

ljb5
07-17-2012, 02:46 PM
...I do my own math, which always has added up to dem BS....

Everyone has the right to their own opinion.

We don't have the right to our own math.

pefjr
07-17-2012, 03:00 PM
We don't have the right to our own math.No, you don't have the right to make up numbers. I don't try to do math with non existent numbers like you do. Norm started with hundreds of thousands of a fictitious number, and that got deflated like a pin in a balloon. Last I heard he was down on Flagler St., begging for one disenfranchised voter to show up.

pefjr
07-17-2012, 03:05 PM
What do you mean by attempted White House theft. Bush and his henchmen pulled it off!See LJ, this is some of the dem BS I mentioned to you. I pay it no mind, they have been whining and trying to sell this molarkey for almost 12 years now.

ljb5
07-17-2012, 03:38 PM
that got deflated like a pin in a balloon.

How does a pin get deflated?


I pay it no mind.

I imagine you'd run a deficit if you did.

Ian McColgin
07-17-2012, 03:43 PM
pefjr was just metaphoring his mixes.

pefjr
07-17-2012, 03:54 PM
I imagine you'd run a deficit if you did.Good one, LJ.:d

ccmanuals
07-17-2012, 03:59 PM
See LJ, this is some of the dem BS I mentioned to you. I pay it no mind, they have been whining and trying to sell this molarkey for almost 12 years now.

Sorry puffy, I forgot you were the chief Bush apologist. :)

pefjr
07-17-2012, 08:17 PM
Sorry puffy, I forgot you were the chief Bush apologist. :)Chief? Does that come with a salary?

ccmanuals
07-17-2012, 08:18 PM
Chief? Does that come with a salary?

Better move quick, your Chief job is gonna be outsourced to China.

pefjr
07-17-2012, 09:28 PM
Better move quick, your Chief job is gonna be outsourced to China.That's nothing more than a Obama political scare tactic lie. Course you boys ate that stinky bait, hook, line, and sinker.:D