New Initiatives for Photo ID Voter Requirements

[RedAkston]

LOL. . .so funny. Cons support a solution to combat an unproven supposition of rampant voter fraud with a proven, rampant, serious issue. . .Identification. If someone is serious about voting illegally, do you really think a little thing like a photo ID is an obstacle to them? How many had fake ID's when they were kids?

How many states don't have a magnetic stripe on the back of their ID cards? All the poll worker would have to do is swipe the ID and if it comes up good, they mark them on the list as having voted and have them sign. It would take another 5-7 seconds to verify that they are who they say they are. All the objection to requiring ID's to vote is nothing short of ridiculous.

 

[soccerboy22]

How many states don't have a magnetic stripe on the back of their ID cards? All the poll worker would have to do is swipe the ID and if it comes up good, they mark them on the list as having voted and have them sign. It would take another 5-7 seconds to verify that they are who they say they are. All the objection to requiring ID's to vote is nothing short of ridiculous.

Not that I disagree with you, but some fake IDs can now get swiped and still work.

 

[BWG]

Supporters of voter ID have been asked, repeatedly, to show proof of voter fraud to warrant any more solution than is already in place (Texas's Rick Perry deemed it as emergency legislation, with no reasoning). Most have been examples of fraudulent voter registration, showing registration applications with the names of Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck. Yet no examples of Mr. Duck or Mr. Mouse actually voting have been produced. There is no there, there.

Stolen or false IDs have been shown over and over (not necessarily tied to voting) to be a huge problem. It would take little effort to apply for voter registration to match the fraudulent ID, but that hasn't happened. The sheer numbers it would take to pull off significant, in person voter fraud would collapse under it's own weight, i.e. the more involved, the more likely for a leak/exposure to occur.

The 'I want to protect the integrity of my vote' argument ranks right up there with the 'You must wear a flag pin in your lapel or you're not a patriot' as the biggest bunch of malarkey I've seen in a while. Everybody wants to protect the integrity of our vote. Voter ID does not accomplish that. I've been voting for decades and have never felt my vote was compromised by voter fraud.

Around 62% of eligible voters voted in the last national election. We should be finding more ways to encourage voter turnout, not putting unnecessary hurdles in their way.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

Well - those who oppose it have little reason to do so. So what's the big deal about whipping out your ID to verify name and address?

In my state the MAIN purpose of this is to verify allocation code - I live in the city annex. So when I log into the computerized system to vote they have to enter in my district ID which is related to WHERE I live - not WHERE I go to vote - and it brings up my own local voting options - this means that in our rural areas a voting location has multiple voting options for different people.

Our country has a feeble ID system and it should be improved, overall - fingerprinting should be the main means of verifying who you are to do anything - rather than a randomly assigned number that goes along with a name and nothing more.

 

[BWG]

Well - those who oppose it have little reason to do so. So what's the big deal about whipping out your ID to verify name and address?

Well - those who support it haven't shown any reason that it is a problem. To you, me and Joe-down-the-street, it may not be a big deal, but it isn't about you, me and Joe-down-the-street.

In my state the MAIN purpose of this is to verify allocation code - I live in the city annex. So when I log into the computerized system to vote they have to enter in my district ID which is related to WHERE I live - not WHERE I go to vote - and it brings up my own local voting options - this means that in our rural areas a voting location has multiple voting options for different people.

They can tell your district ID by looking at a photo ID? This information is located on my voter registration card. Besides, the volunteer would have to know every street that is located in a certain voting district or look it up on a map or list to verify your district off of a photo ID. When I go to early voting, several voting districts are located in the county courthouse annex. The different voting districts are indicated by different colored paper pasted on the outside of the voting booth. The volunteer looks at my voter registration to get my district and tells me to choose any 'blue' booth. The verification of your voting district is all done beforehand by the county registrar, to verify your voting district at the voting booth, of each and every voter would consume an enormous amount of time and would accomplish nothing. The idea behind voter ID is to match your voter registration name to your photo ID name, not verify what voting district you live in and that photo ID has been demonstrated to be easily forged.

Our country has a feeble ID system and it should be improved, overall - fingerprinting should be the main means of verifying who you are to do anything - rather than a randomly assigned number that goes along with a name and nothing more.

That's a problem with the identification system, not the voting system. Yet voter ID proponents want that 'feeble ID system' to verify a nonexistent voter fraud problem. Voter ID does nothing but institute an unwarranted hurdle for some.

 

[joe six-pack]

And restricting access to guns is hardly something I would reasonable my friend.

Well, go cry me a river.

Nice little rant there or whatever you call that, but I already have the right.

Where does it say you have a right to buy any type of weapons in the Constitution?

Do you have a right to by Chemical Weapons? Do you have a right to buy mini-Nukes?

If the answer is no, then you don't have a universal right to buy all weapons and arms. If you tried to deal or sell a Nuke or a weapons-grad Chemical agent, you would end up on a terrorists watch-list. So you don't have the "right" to buy all arms imaginable.

Get some common sense, reading compression skills

I would suggest the same thing to you, since you have yet to refute my argument.

Try again. Fail again.

 

[joe six-pack]

LOL. . .so funny. Cons support a solution to combat an unproven supposition of rampant voter fraud with a proven, rampant, serious issue. . .Identification. If someone is serious about voting illegally, do you really think a little thing like a photo ID is an obstacle to them? How many had fake ID's when they were kids?

So, you are saying it's not effective as a deterrent to a problem we don't know truly exists? I agree. What it will do is discourage voter turnout, especially for people who don't drive, don't own a license. Seniors have the highest voter turnout, but most seniors don't drive and have expired driver's licenses.

I wounder if these unnecessary, ineffective Laws will discourage senior voting?

 

[DiAnna]

Well - those who support it haven't shown any reason that it is a problem. To you, me and Joe-down-the-street, it may not be a big deal, but it isn't about you, me and Joe-down-the-street.


They can tell your district ID by looking at a photo ID? This information is located on my voter registration card. Besides, the volunteer would have to know every street that is located in a certain voting district or look it up on a map or list to verify your district off of a photo ID. When I go to early voting, several voting districts are located in the county courthouse annex. The different voting districts are indicated by different colored paper pasted on the outside of the voting booth. The volunteer looks at my voter registration to get my district and tells me to choose any 'blue' booth. The verification of your voting district is all done beforehand by the county registrar, to verify your voting district at the voting booth, of each and every voter would consume an enormous amount of time and would accomplish nothing. The idea behind voter ID is to match your voter registration name to your photo ID name, not verify what voting district you live in and that photo ID has been demonstrated to be easily forged.


That's a problem with the identification system, not the voting system. Yet voter ID proponents want that 'feeble ID system' to verify a nonexistent voter fraud problem. Voter ID does nothing but institute an unwarranted hurdle for some.

In California, we don't have voter registration cards. We have to show our drivers' license or other photo ID that proves residency (available from the DMV for non-drivers) when we register. Then we go to the polls, tell someone with a big book our name, they look us up in the big book and give us a ballot. I could give them any name at all in that book, and they'd give me a ballot. I see nothing wrong with producing a drivers license or other photo ID (with address) at the voting booth.

Why is this even a controversy?

 

[Albert Di Salvo]

In California, we don't have voter registration cards. We have to show our drivers' license or other photo ID that proves residency (available from the DMV for non-drivers) when we register. Then we go to the polls, tell someone with a big book our name, they look us up in the big book and give us a ballot. I could give them any name at all in that book, and they'd give me a ballot. I see nothing wrong with producing a drivers license or other photo ID (with address) at the voting booth.

Why is this even a controversy?

Fraudulent documents allow an illegal alien to get a driver's license and to register to vote at the same time. Fraudulent docs are big business out here.

 

[DiAnna]

Fraudulent documents allow an illegal alien to get a driver's license and to register to vote at the same time. Fraudulent docs are big business out here.

It's fairly easy to validate a driver's license. Cops do it all the time in a matter of minutes during traffic stops. Just set up a laptop with the proper web access at the voter registration offices.

Fraudulent photo IDs will always be a problem, so creating a new ID for people to fake isn't going to help a thing. We've already got a photo ID system in place, and the means to validate. Easy peasy.

 

[TurtleDude]

California, to my knowledge, does not require a photo ID to vote.

Without any proof of widespread voter fraud I find these initiatives to be inappropriate.

99% of people who buy guns from retail stores don't use them improperly

so you are in favor of eliminating the requirement of providing a photo ID and more to exercise this other constitutional right?