Mame
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 10:33 am
@MontereyJack,
In Canada, you apply to the Dept of Vital Statistics for your birth certificate - you just need to know when and where you were born and your parents' names, which I assume pretty much everybody does. I recently did this because I needed it to get a marriage certificate and I had lost my birth certificate years ago.
Cycloptichorn
 
  2  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 10:35 am
@Ticomaya,
Ticomaya wrote:

engineer wrote:
The motive is clearly to disenfranchise people.

No, that is not clearly the motive.


Sorry, but it clearly is the motive. Almost explicitly.

Quote:
Quote:
Penn State Rep Mike Turzai even went on record saying "Voter ID - which is going to allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania - done."

He clearly meant that absent voter fraud, Romney will win. I'm not saying that's a true statement, but I'm suggesting that is what he intended to convey.

If folks can find their way to the voting booth, they can find their way to getting a photo ID.


You're describing a poll tax - 'if folks care enough to vote, they'll pay the tax.' The amounts charged to get an ID are even similar to the costs charged for poll taxes back in the day.

It's not going to matter in PA, though, as the law is likely going to be struck down before the election - the state of PA has already admitted that they don't have a single instance of fraud to point to as justification for this law. That's going to make it tough to defend their case in court.

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 10:37 am
@Mame,
Quote:
That said, if they're now required to produce it, they must have SOME form of identification - how do they collect Social Security or open a bank account
Apples and oranges mame. The newer applicants for SS are mostly all driving. A people get into their high seventies or into their eighties, many just quit driving and let their licenses lapse. MANY MANY folks are like this and Pa has as hevy an old folks population as Florida. So the process of obtaining a photo id (if you have a drivers license , you have a photo id already you see), is purposely archaic and convoluted. It involves waiting and producing at least 2 critical pieces of documentation about yourself THEY WILL NOT EVEN ACCEPT A PAST DRIVERS LICENSE THAT HAS A PHOTO ALREADY>
You tell me, if the process is purposely made difficult and is especially difficult on the elderly (a constituency that has the turnout in ellections), why do you think that most people are totally suspicious of a law that..

1HAS NO BASIS IN NEED (statistics prove it)

2 IS ESPECIALLY HRD ON A CONSTITUENCY THAT VOTES HEAVILY DEMOCRATIC

3 REQUIRES SEVERAL DOCUMENTS AND SOME TIME IN WAITING SO THAT IT MUST BE A LONG TERM ACTION

4 WAS PEOPOSED BY A POLITICAL ENTITY THAT HAS A NEED TO CONTROL THE OPPOSITION VOTE BY ANY MEANS .
OmSigDAVID
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 10:43 am
@farmerman,
Historically, the Democrats have been very prone to as much fraud as possible.

Thay now resent efforts to reduce their chances of success.

Even defeating ONE fraudulent vote is sufficient justification for the law.





David
izzythepush
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 10:46 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Defeating one fraudulent voter does not justify disenfranchising 500,000 legitimate voters.

One fraudulent voter is insignificant statistically speaking, 500,000 are not.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 10:50 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
Historically, the Democrats have been very prone to as much fraud as possible
That was then, this is NOW. In Reconstruction until the 40s, the Dems were the party of racist southerners. Today, the GOP is the part of racism and fraud. "CODE TALK" for voter fraud is to try to limit as much voting by Seniors, minorities, young urban voters , and immigrans who classicaly vote DEM.

DEAL WITH TODAY DAVE. YESTERDAY's DEAD
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 10:51 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
There are tens of thousands of Pa residents who havent had a drivers licene for years and they will now have to schlep (somehow) to the nearest License center to get their pix taken. THE UTTER INCONVENIENCE IS WHAT WILL DISENFRANCHISE THE OLDER VOTERS.

I agree with you about that.

One solution would be to make it easier for people to obtain these photo IDs without having to schlep to a DMV office to do so. Why not make it so they can download and print necessary forms from the internet, even at a public library, and take those, and all necessary and supporting documentation, to some other nearby state office to have a photo taken and the paperwork submitted .

A photo ID is really an essential item for most people to have for many reasons. The state can demonstrate that the intention is not to disenfranchise anyone in terms of voting by making it more convenient to obtain the photo ID at places other than the DMV.
farmerman
 
  5  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 10:51 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
Even defeating ONE fraudulent vote is sufficient justification for the law
pply thi logic to GUN CONTROL and tlk to me
Would saving one life from being smoked by a gun , justify new gun control laws?
(DONT EVEN ATTEMPT AN ANSWER you old hypocrit)
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  4  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 10:53 am
@firefly,
Quote:
Why not make it so they can download and print necessary forms from the internet, even at a public library, and take those, and all necessary and supporting documentation, to some other nearby state office to have a photo taken and the paperwork submitted .
GUESS WHAT demographic is the least connected and least cyber savvy?
engineer
 
  5  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 10:55 am
@Mame,
Mame wrote:

Do they have a paycheque, a copy of last year's tax return, a cheque book with their name and address on it? A health card, an unemployment stub, a library card? A credit card, a pharmacy receipt, a Safeway card, Airmiles card?

Of course all of those aren't acceptable in Pa and any of them are easily forged so they don't prevent fraud. If requiring an ID doesn't prevent fraud and does prevent voting, what's the purpose again?
engineer
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 10:59 am
@OmSigDAVID,
OmSigDAVID wrote:

Even defeating ONE fraudulent vote is sufficient justification for the law.

And by corrollary, preventing even one armed homicide is sufficient justification for requiring strict ID checks and long waiting periods for gun ownership or even preventing ownership for the poor and the elderly, right?

(Oh, and Penn has admitted that the law will not prevent even ONE frauduent vote since they have no record of any.)
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:00 am
@engineer,
I asked about several cards that have photos on them

1CHUKEE CHEESE CARD (GOLD)

2SAMs CLUB

3 PA State COMMISSIONERs CArd (I sit on several River basin comissions)

4 STATE DEP ID

5 FED "Q" CLEARANCE CARD FOR NUKE FACILITIES

NONE of these will qualify , why? because the lit has been made puposely difficult
Lustig Andrei
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:03 am
@farmerman,
The Q Clearance card won't serve as acceptable ID???

Be damned.

Tico must be right. This new law has nothing to do with disenfranchising voters.

Laughing
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:06 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
GUESS WHAT demographic is the least connected and least cyber savvy?

That's why every public library has computers and printers and librarians who can help you out. Many senior citizen centers have computers and printers too, and people who can help you use them. The necessary forms for the photo ID can all be accessed online and printed out.
Quote:
Opinion: Past the Spin, Why Voter ID Laws Make Sense
July 16, 2012
By Solomon Kleinsmith : IAFC Blogger

As usual, both sides of the fight over voter ID laws are acting so childish that it's hard to have a serious conversation about it. Depending on where you're getting your news, the media noise on this would seem to indicate that the two sides are roughly on equal footing, or even that opponents on the left are winning the argument. But, in reality, polling data shows widespread support for Voter ID laws.

Let's not pretend that the Republicans aren't at least partly for Voter ID laws because it will benefit them a bit, or that Democrats aren't against it because it will hurt them. But as much as the left wingers and race baiters would like to think otherwise, you can't get to 70 percent of the country supporting someone with Jim Crow-loving racists and right-wing activists hell bent on seeing fewer black people vote for President Obama.

Most people haven't even heard the Republican talking points on this issue. I'd venture to say that the super-majority, and then some, that is for Voter ID laws aren't that way because of the (often rather ridiculous) Republican rhetoric, but because having a law that says that you should show some form of ID to verify that you're who you say you are when you vote just plain makes good sense to most people. I've tested this out on a few non-political people, and they thought the same thing. One of them even got one of the two caveats that I think are necessary to make Voter ID fair.

At it's most basic level, requiring that ID makes sense, but it occurred to the aforementioned friend that some people might not have the ID. So, like me and other people looking at this, they thought that Voter ID should have to be coupled with a law that said some form of necessary identification must be made available for free, so even the most poor wouldn't be barred from voting. This would serve a secondary benefit of making it easier for the poor to have identification, which has all sorts of upsides.

Those who compare Voter ID to Jim Crow only have a bit of a point if, and only if, the necessary identification costs money. If it does, then this does amount to a back door poll tax.

With free identification, the Jim Crow labeling just doesn't make any sense. Requiring identification to cast a vote isn't segregation. It doesn't require people to take a difficult test intentionally designed to weed a segment of the population out. It applies to everyone and people aren't crying foul over the requirement for some form of identification with all sorts of other activities that involve interacting with governments.

The left is right about one thing though. The chink in the GOP's rhetorical armor is that there really isn't evidence of much voter fraud going on. A bad salesman, making a bad pitch, doesn't change the merits of the product itself though.

The other caveat I'd add is that there needs to be a way for someone who accidentally forgets their identification to cast some form of provisional ballot, then verify their identity in some convenient way within a few days. I have to stress here that it has to be easy, as I've heard that some states make this somewhat complicated.

Put those three things together - having a free basic state ID, a simple provisional ballot and requiring identification to vote - is one of those rare situations where two plus two equals more than four. I'd even venture to bet that you could get into the 75 percent range in polls if you gave this as an option.

But, as usual, I don't expect many (if any) of the people with the megaphones to be talking this sort of sense. The Democrats will keep playing the race card, passing up an opportunity to try and take the high road, and get proper identification into the hands of the poor in states where they can't already get it for free. The Republicans see the writing on the wall in the polling numbers, and aren't likely to quit spreading the myth of widespread voter fraud. Meanwhile, most of the media seems intent on merely reporting on the battle going on between the two sides, rather than informing people that there is more to the debate than race baiting and blatantly false talking points.
http://www.wnyc.org/blogs/its-free-blog/2012/jul/16/opinion-how-end-voter-fraud-without-voter-id-laws/
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:07 am
@Lustig Andrei,
They want to disenfranchise as many Americans as possible; I think it's a numbers game for the GOP.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:22 am
Quote:
The New York Times
July 31, 2012
Voting Systems’ Plagues Go Far Beyond Identification
By ETHAN BRONNER

Twelve years after a too-close-to-call presidential contest imploded in a hail of Florida punch card ballots and a bitter 5-to-4 Supreme Court ruling for George W. Bush, the country’s voting systems remain as deeply flawed as ever with any prospect of fixing them mired in increasing levels of partisanship.

The most recent high-profile fights have been about voter identification requirements and whether they are aimed at stopping fraud or keeping minority group members and the poor from voting. But there are worse problems with voter registration, ballot design, absentee voting and electoral administration.

In Ohio, the recommendations of a bipartisan commission on ways to reduce the large number of provisional ballots and long lines at polling stations in 2008 have come to naught after a Republican takeover of both houses of the legislature in 2010. In New York, a redesign of ballots that had been widely considered hard to read and understand was passed by the State Assembly this year. But a partisan dispute in the Senate on other related steps led to paralysis.

And states have consistently failed to fix a wide range of electoral flaws identified by a bipartisan commission led by former President Jimmy Carter and former Secretary of State James A. Baker III in 2005. In Florida, for example, the commission found 140,000 voters who had also registered in four other states — some 46,000 of them in New York City alone. When 1,700 registered in both places asked for absentee ballots in the other state, no one investigated. Some 60,000 voters were also simultaneously registered in North and South Carolina.

The commission made numerous recommendations on how to fix things, including impartial election administration, better voter list maintenance, uniform photo ID requirements and paper trails for electronic voting machines. But Republicans in some states liked the ideas that fit their notion of what was wrong — potential for fraud. And Democrats preferred others ideas — increasing voter participation. Little was done.

“This has all become incredibly politicized in recent years,” noted Daniel Tokaji, an election law professor at Ohio State University. “If you go back in our history, you can find voter registration rules used to exclude blacks or immigrants from voting. But since 2000 it seems to have gotten worse. Both parties have realized that election administration rules can make the difference between victory and defeat in a close election. And unlike virtually every other country in the world, our systems are administered by partisan officials elected as candidates of their parties.”

Robert A. Pastor, co-director of the Center for Democracy and Election Management at American University, who was executive director of the Carter-Baker commission, said the voter identification fights of recent months pale when compared with some of these other issues, especially voter registration. Only half of eligible voters in the country are registered and few of them lack photo IDs, he said.

“The proponents of voter ID are adamant that it is essential to stop electoral fraud even though there is hardly any evidence of voter impersonation, and the opponents are sure that it will lead to voter suppression even though they haven’t been able — until Pennsylvania — to point to a single instance where a voter could not vote because of a lack of ID,” he said. “I did a survey of Indiana, Maryland, and Mississippi and found only about 1.2 percent of registered voter did not have photo IDs. The problem remains registration — not IDs — in reducing voting participation. To quote Jorge Luis Borges on the Falklands war, ‘It’s a fight between two bald men over a comb.’ ”

But the registration issue is acute. Nearly every other advanced country maintains a national voter roll. In this country, which eschews a national identity card, there are 13,000 separate rolls maintained by counties, towns and municipalities. David Becker, director of Election Initiatives at Pew Charitable Trusts, said his group’s research shows that 2.2 million votes were lost in 2008 as a result of voter registration difficulties.

“So many problems that can result on Election Day are a result of inaccurate and incomplete information on the voter lists, which can lead to more provisional ballots because voters are in the wrong precinct because officials didn’t have the correct information,” he said. “Officials don’t get information about a move unless a voter affirmatively does something about their voter registration and that is usually in the 30 days before a presidential election. In between elections, officials are sending mail to some people who are no longer there.”

Pew has been working with some states to promote online voter registration and sharing of lists among government agencies for that purpose. Mr. Becker said that this year a number of states working with his group — Colorado, Oregon, Maryland, Utah and Virginia, among others — are going to reach out by mail for the first time ever to eligible but unregistered voters.

“Republicans are very much in favor of cleaning up and maintaining voter lists and Democrats want to make sure access is available, and we believe there are tools that address both,” he said.

One set of recommendations is being released on Tuesday by The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law. Called “Better Designs, Better Elections,” the report estimates that in the 2008 and 2010 general elections combined, as many as 400,000 people had absentee or provisional ballots rejected because they made technical mistakes completing the forms or preparing the envelopes. It adds that the loss appears to be greatest in low-income and minority groups as well as among the elderly and disabled.

Lawrence Norden, a co-author of the study and deputy director of the Brennan Center’s Democracy Program, said that in Texas machines in 50 counties are set up so that if a voter marks a straight party option and also pulls the levers for the candidates that vote gets annulled. Research has shown that blacks and Latinos tend to do this more often than others, leading Democrats there to try to change the design but to little avail.

Looking broadly at such design flaws, Mr. Norden said he doubted that they were set up to suppress voting and were likely the result of error. But because of mutual suspicion between the parties, they have been hard to fix.

His co-author, Whitney Quesenbery, a design expert, said the private sector has learned a great deal about the significance of design — fonts, shadings, colorings, instructions — for the user of any product but election systems have been very slow to adopt them.

“These are people who got elected under the old system and are not especially motivated to change it,” Ms. Quesenbery said of state and county officials.

Richard L. Hasen, a professor at the University of California, Irvine, who has just published a book, “The Voting Wars,” said that each party has found that pushing electoral reform that suits it “is a great way to motivate its base.” He has also studied court decisions on voting disputes and found a high percentage of them break down along party lines — judges appointed by Democrats back their policies, and those appointed by Republicans back theirs. Broadly, he believes, the risk of another debacle like the 2000 election is high.

“Elections are not well funded in this country and the people running them are not professionals,” he said. “There are different rules in every district. When there is a razor-thin election — and we may have one in November — there is room for chicanery.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/01/us/voting-systems-plagues-go-far-beyond-identification.html?pagewanted=all

0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:23 am
@firefly,
Quote:
The left is right about one thing though. The chink in the GOP's rhetorical armor is that there really isn't evidence of much voter fraud going on. A bad salesman, making a bad pitch, doesn't change the merits of the product itself though
So the Chevy NOVA was really a good idea, it ws just marketed incompetently.

A ''SOLUTION" To a nonextstent problem is actually a cynical scheme.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:26 am
@firefly,
Quote:
That's why every public library has computers and printers and librarians who can help you out


lIBRARINS ARE ILL EQUIPPED TO DO BOTTOM UP TRAINING IN A TECHNOLOGY THAT HAS MORPHED SO MANY TIMES SINCE ITS INCETION THAT MANY OLDER FOLKS ARE JUST GONNA BE OVERWHELMED AND WILL DROP AWAY. I think the GOP is actually counting on it. Like gift cards, the manufacturers have a cushion of at least 25% of the gift caeds that are never redeemed
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:28 am
@Mame,
In Germany, the only legally approved identification paper is either the passport or the ID-card (that's why the latter is used for crossing borders as well).

All other cards are used for the only purpose for which they are called such: driving licence for driving, health insurance cards for going to the doctor's, therapies, hospitals, and so on.

I've worked this year since 30 years at polling stations. Very rarely we ask for an ID-card - if the person is personally unknown by the poll workers AND if he/she has forgotten the personal notification for that election.
Everyone, who is 16 respectively 18 gets such a notification six weeks before the election.
On the election day, we get an updated list in the morning, with marks behind the name if that person had died recently or already voted by post.

But when in Rome ...
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Tue 31 Jul, 2012 11:30 am
@farmerman,
Quote:

lIBRARINS ARE ILL EQUIPPED TO DO BOTTOM UP TRAINING IN A TECHNOLOGY THAT HAS MORPHED SO MANY TIMES SINCE ITS INCETION THAT MANY OLDER FOLKS ARE JUST GONNA BE OVERWHELMED AND WILL DROP AWAY

They don't have to train anyone to do anything. If I go to my public library and tell the librarian in the computer section I need to access the DMV Web site and print out the application form for a non-driver photo ID, the librarian will do it for me if I say I can't do it myself.
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 02/26/2024 at 05:30:10