Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 04-25-2016, 10:02 AM
Pantastic Pantastic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
First, you register to vote, and provide whatever documentation your state requires for that.
On election day, you show up to your polling place, and introduce yourself to the nice folks at the table. They look up your name in a big book of everyone registered to vote at that place, and you sign next to your name. They take some sort of measure to verify you're who you say you are: This can be anything from showing photo ID, to comparing signatures, to showing a utility bill that was addressed to you at your registered address, to them recognizing you personally as a neighbor.
Actually no, there is not always a means of verifying identity. Prior to the latest set of laws in NC, if you were registered to vote you would go in, sign a form attesting that you were [person named at address] and vote. In the event that the record showed you had already voted, your vote would be provisionally recorded and the duplicate investigated (with possible felony charges if someone voted falsely). There was no requirement for having photo ID, utility bills, or known neighbors at the polling place.

I don't know of anywhere that would try comparing the handwriting of signatures for ID, that's difficult even for highly trained people (most people involved in an election are volunteers), easy to spoof, lots of legitimate reasons for a signature to not match (especially for elderly or injured people), and so likely to have bias that judges get their gavels revved up for it.
Advertisements  
  #52  
Old 04-25-2016, 10:43 AM
CurtC CurtC is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Texas
Posts: 6,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
On election day, you show up to your polling place, and introduce yourself to the nice folks at the table. They look up your name in a big book of everyone registered to vote at that place, and you sign next to your name. They take some sort of measure to verify you're who you say you are: This can be anything from showing photo ID, to comparing signatures, to showing a utility bill that was addressed to you at your registered address, to them recognizing you personally as a neighbor.
I agree with Pantastic - up until the recent Voter ID laws, I did not have to verify my identity at all, I just had to tell them my name and address, they would look me up in the registration list, and I would sign my name on the list next to where they'd have my printed name.

They never had my signature from anywhere else for a comparison, I didn't have to have a utility bill, and I never knew the poll workers. Just tell them who I am and my address, sign next to my name in the book, and go vote.

I almost always would know other people in the queue, however. If someone came in and tried to present himself as me, there would be a pretty good chance that he would be overheard by someone who knew me.

With the current Voter ID law, I show my drivers license when I tell them my name.

As to the OP, I know it's hard to imagine, but just here in Texas, there are close to a million eligible voters who have no photo ID. A large number of these people are not registered, however. In order to register, they'd have to get their birth certificate and register, which they'd also have to do to get a photo ID, so registering to vote for these people is at least as big a challenge as the photo ID.

But that still leaves hundreds of thousands of registered voters, just here in Texas, who have no photo ID. These people now cannot vote unless they jump through all the hoops. The vast majority of these people would vote for the Democratic party candidate. You may wonder how these people registered in the first place if they don't have their BC, and the answer is that registration stays in effect forever, and many people registered at one time but no longer have the paperwork.
  #53  
Old 04-25-2016, 11:29 AM
KarlGrenze KarlGrenze is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 6,406
For the non US people:

A constant theme is that many of the voting ID laws that are criticized are asking people to jump through hoops instead of making it as easy as possible. PR, part of the US, has voting ID law, but the government tries to catch all. Extended hours, mobile registration, PSAs, etc., all to get as many as possible registered.
  #54  
Old 04-25-2016, 12:31 PM
JohnGalt JohnGalt is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: Med city USA
Posts: 1,839
In Minnesota it's simple to vote in person: tell the official in charge your name, they'll turn to the page with your name, and you sign the line. No ID required. The only thing stopping someone else from signing your name is the election officials are people from your neighborhood (and church, school, clubs) and you can't be sure who they recognize by face. Plus it's a fraud charge if you're caught.

Also in Minnesota we have same-day registration. You can bring a passport or birth certificate and proof of residency (utility bill or school/college record), OR you can have someone who's already registered vouch for you. When my son moved back from college, I vouched for him; it was a simple piece of paper with some nice legal warnings about committing fraud.

No fuss (in spite of proposed laws years ago from the GOP to go all Texas-style and require IDs and advanced registration).
  #55  
Old 04-25-2016, 12:34 PM
Chronos Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 72,106
"PR" here meaning Puerto Rico. Which is a part of the US, but a rather peculiar sort of part. You can't generalize from there to the States.
  #56  
Old 04-25-2016, 03:18 PM
JRDelirious JRDelirious is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Displaced
Posts: 14,556
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
"PR" here meaning Puerto Rico. Which is a part of the US, but a rather peculiar sort of part. You can't generalize from there to the States.


Still it's a valid comparison in the sense of it being a matter of "state" policy to maximize or not ease of suffrage beyond the baseline federal mandate of VRA and HAVA.
  #57  
Old 04-25-2016, 04:50 PM
md2000 md2000 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 13,053
One of the other issues that might be relevant- When I vote in Canada (federal, or provincial), the voting booth is usually in a school (or some such community center) meaning the total electorate served by that polling district is maybe about the area of draw for a primary school. Within that, there are probably 5 to 10 separate "polling stations" depending on which poll you are in - typically no more than several blocks. (Going on a memory from decades ago - A town with a population of 15,000 would have, say, 6 schools of about 8 polls each, plus a few in churches, for 50 polls for less than 10,000 eligible voters, or 200 voters per poll. The worst lineup I found was waiting until an hour before closing, and there were maybe 50 people lined up to get their poll number checked and then waiting, so there was not a confusing line at each poll where they handed out ballots. One vote kiosk per poll.

When I see news reports of lineups around the block in elections elsewhere in the world, especially the USA where they've done it for centuries - I often think "WTF?".

Oh, and almost all paper ballots marked by pencil, counted within 4 to 5 hours - why? Because typically there's one position to vote for.
  #58  
Old 04-25-2016, 06:11 PM
Chronos Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 72,106
Quote:
Oh, and almost all paper ballots marked by pencil, counted within 4 to 5 hours - why? Because typically there's one position to vote for.
This is another point about US elections, for any foreigners who might not know: We have long ballots. We have elected officials at many different levels of government, plus most states have some mechanism for ballot initiatives the public votes on directly. At a single election, an American voter might well be voting for a city council member, mayor, a half-dozen judges, a county commissioner, the city coroner and prosecutor, a member each of the state senate and house, governor, the state attorney general and secretary of state, US representative, US senator, and President. Plus possibly as many as a dozen different ballot initiatives. The joke is that we even vote for the dogcatcher, and while I've never actually seen that, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that there's some locality where the animal control officer is actually elected.

Now, not all localities have elections for all of those positions, and you won't always get all of them on the same ballot, but a lineup like that wouldn't be considered extraordinary.
  #59  
Old 04-25-2016, 07:05 PM
Rick Kitchen Rick Kitchen is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Posts: 13,365
Quote:
When I see news reports of lineups around the block in elections elsewhere in the world, especially the USA where they've done it for centuries - I often think "WTF?".
A large reason for this is because state legislatures, generally controlled by Republicans, have been cutting back on the number of polling places, allegedly for financial reasons. You used to be able to walk to your polling place, now you're lucky if it's in the same town you live in.
  #60  
Old 04-25-2016, 09:14 PM
GMANCANADA GMANCANADA is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 77
Great John Oliver Explanation

Back to the OP's question: As a Canadian observer I found this John Oliver explanation very helpful and answered many of the questions I had about this same issue.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHFOwlMCdto

My suggestion to the OP is the next question they should to ask should be about gerrymandering. I only heard about that concept a couple years ago, but my jaw hit the floor.

Of course I can only speak for myself as a non-American, but I really did grow up admiring and believing that America was the country to which all democracies should aspire to be. Now I realize how untrue that is and I find it very sad that these kinds of voting system manipulations are allowed to happen. This is the kind of stuff I'd expect to hear about in some banana republic. not the United States of America.
  #61  
Old 04-25-2016, 09:25 PM
UDS UDS is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 7,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMANCANADA View Post
Of course I can only speak for myself as a non-American, but I really did grow up admiring and believing that America was the country to which all democracies should aspire to be. Now I realize how untrue that is and I find it very sad that these kinds of voting system manipulations are allowed to happen. This is the kind of stuff I'd expect to hear about in some banana republic. not the United States of America.
In many ways America is an exemplar for other democracies. But in the actual mechanics of conducting elections, no, it's not.

American electoral practices, like British plumbing, suffer from the fact that they were one of the first in the field. They are really antiquated, really clunky, and not that well-designed. There are other countries who have come later to the game who have superior democratic technology.
  #62  
Old 04-25-2016, 10:50 PM
t-bonham@scc.net t-bonham@scc.net is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 13,445
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Feldon View Post
Except some states do exactly that. You can show up at a polling place and register to vote on the spot.
And the states that do that are always the top ones in voter turnout. (Which is why some people oppose it -- they don't want more people to vote.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by JohnGalt View Post
In Minnesota it's simple to vote in person: tell the official in charge your name, they'll turn to the page with your name, and you sign the line. No ID required. The only thing stopping someone else from signing your name is the election officials are people from your neighborhood (and church, school, clubs) and you can't be sure who they recognize by face. Plus it's a fraud charge if you're caught.

Also in Minnesota we have same-day registration. You can bring a passport or birth certificate and proof of residency (utility bill or school/college record), OR you can have someone who's already registered vouch for you. When my son moved back from college, I vouched for him; it was a simple piece of paper with some nice legal warnings about committing fraud.

No fuss (in spite of proposed laws years ago from the GOP to go all Texas-style and require IDs and advanced registration).
I agree, it works very well here in Minnesota.

Also, we vote on paper ballots, marked with a pen. So no chance that any local government can manipulate the number of machines to force long lines in certain areas. Here, the lines move as fast as people can sign the voter register and get their paper ballot. In 2008, when it was very busy at my precinct, all the curtained voting booths were full -- so people just sat down at tables to fill out their ballot, not caring about somebody seeing who they voted for. Then they insert the ballots into the scanner tht records their votes, get their "I Voted" sticker, and leave.

Also, the paper ballots make a recount quite easy -- the officials just take the stack of ballots and spend a few minutes re-running them thru the scanner. In local elections, they often do this whenever the vote is at all close.

It's really hard to interfere with voting by marking paper ballots. We once had the electricity go out in a polling place on election day. But people continued to vote, marking their ballots by candlelight. (It was in a church basement, so many candles were available.) The scanner couldn't work without electricity, but the voting officials just collected them in a box, and fed them through the machine when the power was restored.
  #63  
Old 04-26-2016, 12:23 AM
Haldurson Haldurson is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 129
Jon Oliver had a great story about voter ID (I love his show): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHFOwlMCdto
  #64  
Old 04-26-2016, 12:50 AM
md2000 md2000 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 13,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMANCANADA View Post
Back to the OP's question: As a Canadian observer I found this John Oliver explanation very helpful and answered many of the questions I had about this same issue.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHFOwlMCdto

My suggestion to the OP is the next question they should to ask should be about gerrymandering. I only heard about that concept a couple years ago, but my jaw hit the floor.

Of course I can only speak for myself as a non-American, but I really did grow up admiring and believing that America was the country to which all democracies should aspire to be. Now I realize how untrue that is and I find it very sad that these kinds of voting system manipulations are allowed to happen. This is the kind of stuff I'd expect to hear about in some banana republic. not the United States of America.
I read an interesting analysis a few weeks ago, "why the Republicans will not lose the House of Congress". The basic thesis was that the majority of states, where Republicans have been in control, offloaded the design (i.e. gerrymanding) of congressional districts from politicians to "independent" committees, nominated by those same politicians. (to be fair, Democrats have often done this where they can too.) Much like the design of who can vote, the allocation of voters into districts is such that the incumbent party is heavily favoured and upsets are much less common. once the districts have been set, it's a decade or more before that can be changed and then, the other party has to dominate the state for that time.
  #65  
Old 04-26-2016, 04:59 PM
elfkin477 elfkin477 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NH
Posts: 21,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Kitchen View Post
A large reason for this is because state legislatures, generally controlled by Republicans, have been cutting back on the number of polling places, allegedly for financial reasons. You used to be able to walk to your polling place, now you're lucky if it's in the same town you live in.
Cite? I've never once heard of anyone having to vote outside of their own town.
  #66  
Old 04-26-2016, 05:32 PM
AHunter3 AHunter3 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: NY (Manhattan) NY USA
Posts: 18,849
First you register to vote. You show up, appropriate documentation in hand, and you fill out forms and in due time you receive a voter registration card. At this point, insofar as you had to show ID as well as proof of residence location in order to become registered, one might think the voter registration card itself woud be sufficient form of ID when voting day comes. One might think so but one would be wrong, at least in the venues that are attracting all the political hoopla you've been hearing about.

One might think that opening one's wallet and displaying a driver's license would be sufficient then?

Not necessarily.

Well, one might think at least that the set of documents that one must show up with would be well-publicized so you know what to bring?

Naaah. What's well-publicized is that they're making it difficult, so you might be standing in line a long time and then still get told "nope you can't vote wtihout proof that you pay bills addressed to you at this address, in your name, by bringing in an unopened business envelope from three utilities, and two forms of photo ID showing your name and signature, plus a retina scan printout by a US certified optometrist notarized and signed in blood at midnight..." well OK probably not that, but the problem is, it isn't made obvious what you do need to carry in with you.

What they ought to do is issue whatever ID is sufficiently authoritative and secure to you, free of charge, when you register to vote.
  #67  
Old 04-26-2016, 07:18 PM
slash2k slash2k is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 2,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by elfkin477 View Post
Cite? I've never once heard of anyone having to vote outside of their own town.
Youngtown, Maricopa County, Arizona (population 6000)

The Maricopa County Recorder's list of polling places does not show any locations in Youngtown, and running some test addresses (gleaned from Google Maps) through the address locator returns polling places in El Mirage and Sun City.

Granted Youngtown is in the thick of the Phoenix metro area, so it's not like Sun City is very far away, but any Youngtown resident who wants to vote in person has to vote outside of their own town.
  #68  
Old 04-26-2016, 08:32 PM
Acsenray Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 32,809
Quote:
Originally Posted by slash2k View Post
Youngtown, Maricopa County, Arizona (population 6000)

The Maricopa County Recorder's list of polling places does not show any locations in Youngtown, and running some test addresses (gleaned from Google Maps) through the address locator returns polling places in El Mirage and Sun City.

Granted Youngtown is in the thick of the Phoenix metro area, so it's not like Sun City is very far away, but any Youngtown resident who wants to vote in person has to vote outside of their own town.
I had a professor who had extensively litigated voting rights cases with the SPLC who talked about how the county boundaries in Arizona were drawn to slice the Navajo reservation up into narrow pieces and then put the sole voting locations in the county seats, which were all in the far south of the counties, way outside the reservation.
  #69  
Old 04-26-2016, 11:07 PM
Rick Kitchen Rick Kitchen is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Citrus Heights, CA, USA
Posts: 13,365
Quote:
Originally Posted by elfkin477 View Post
Cite? I've never once heard of anyone having to vote outside of their own town.
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/...tion/82096726/
  #70  
Old 04-27-2016, 09:31 AM
Max Torque Max Torque is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Raiderville, TX
Posts: 10,303
A touch of info about Texas: Texas doesn't have party registration. When you vote in a party's primary, you are considered "affiliated" with that party for the duration of that election cycle. So, if you voted in the Democratic primary, and the Republican primary results in a run-off election, you can't vote in that run-off.

This has resulted in some awkwardness when candidates don't understand the consequences, because you are not eligible to be a candidate for a party when you are affiliated with another party. There was a case where an incumbent county judge, running unopposed as a Democrat, voted in the Republican primary to help a friend, and found that he had rendered himself ineligible to appear on the ballot as a Democrat (and, because of the "sore loser" provision that prevents a candidate from switching parties after the primary, he couldn't run as a Republican either). The case is at 92 S.W.3d 489, if you're interested. A similar situation popped up in a county I used to work in, so I'm betting it happens more often than you'd think.
  #71  
Old 04-27-2016, 11:13 AM
KarlGrenze KarlGrenze is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 6,406
Quote:
Originally Posted by AHunter3 View Post

What they ought to do is issue whatever ID is sufficiently authoritative and secure to you, free of charge, when you register to vote.
And this is what the PR government does. And they do drives to get as many people as possible registered.
  #72  
Old 04-27-2016, 12:08 PM
md2000 md2000 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 13,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chronos View Post
This is another point about US elections, for any foreigners who might not know: We have long ballots. We have elected officials at many different levels of government, plus most states have some mechanism for ballot initiatives the public votes on directly. At a single election, an American voter might well be voting for a city council member, mayor, a half-dozen judges, a county commissioner, the city coroner and prosecutor, a member each of the state senate and house, governor, the state attorney general and secretary of state, US representative, US senator, and President. Plus possibly as many as a dozen different ballot initiatives. The joke is that we even vote for the dogcatcher, and while I've never actually seen that, I wouldn't be at all surprised to find that there's some locality where the animal control officer is actually elected.

Now, not all localities have elections for all of those positions, and you won't always get all of them on the same ballot, but a lineup like that wouldn't be considered extraordinary.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Max Torque View Post
A touch of info about Texas: Texas doesn't have party registration. When you vote in a party's primary, you are considered "affiliated" with that party for the duration of that election cycle. So, if you voted in the Democratic primary, and the Republican primary results in a run-off election, you can't vote in that run-off.

This has resulted in some awkwardness when candidates don't understand the consequences, because you are not eligible to be a candidate for a party when you are affiliated with another party. There was a case where an incumbent county judge, running unopposed as a Democrat, voted in the Republican primary to help a friend, and found that he had rendered himself ineligible to appear on the ballot as a Democrat (and, because of the "sore loser" provision that prevents a candidate from switching parties after the primary, he couldn't run as a Republican either). The case is at 92 S.W.3d 489, if you're interested. A similar situation popped up in a county I used to work in, so I'm betting it happens more often than you'd think.
This is the joke in Canada about US elections - "they even elect the Dog Catcher". Even worse, they elect some judges (WTF?), so the one office that should NOT be pandering to the masses also has a strong incentive to do so.
  #73  
Old 04-27-2016, 05:59 PM
elfkin477 elfkin477 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: NH
Posts: 21,755
Quote:
Originally Posted by slash2k View Post
Youngtown, Maricopa County, Arizona (population 6000)

The Maricopa County Recorder's list of polling places does not show any locations in Youngtown, and running some test addresses (gleaned from Google Maps) through the address locator returns polling places in El Mirage and Sun City.

Granted Youngtown is in the thick of the Phoenix metro area, so it's not like Sun City is very far away, but any Youngtown resident who wants to vote in person has to vote outside of their own town.
A single example hardly justifies a statement like "now you're lucky if it's in the same town you live in" which suggests that this is a common problem.
  #74  
Old 04-27-2016, 06:37 PM
slash2k slash2k is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 2,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by elfkin477 View Post
A single example hardly justifies a statement like "now you're lucky if it's in the same town you live in" which suggests that this is a common problem.
You said you'd "never once heard" of the phenomenon; I showed you the first example that I could find easily. There are 25 incorporated cities and towns in Maricopa County, plus ten large "census-designated places" (such as Sun City, which isn't incorporated but has 38,000 residents), and only 60* polling places in the recent presidential primary; that math suggest a fair number of people found themselves voting outside of their own town.

*The list currently available at the Maricopa County website has 116 locations, but reporting on the primary says only 60 were open that day.
  #75  
Old 04-27-2016, 07:02 PM
iamthewalrus(:3= iamthewalrus(:3= is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 10,475
Quote:
Originally Posted by aldiboronti View Post
What's to prevent multiple voting, voting by foreign nationals, etc. I saw the reply saying that the problem was negligible but how would they even know how big the problem was without some form of control?
You don't need to control access to know how big a problem authentication is. You only need to be able to examine the record.

Generally, the list of registered voters, and the list of who voted in a given election is part of the public record (how they vote is private). Anyone can get the list. It would be very hard to keep any kind of large problem like this a secret for very long, since people are actually examining the record and looking for this kind of fraud. And, for the most part, they've found almost none of this type.

The benefits of casting a single fraudulent vote are very small. The punishment if you get caught is very large.

There are so many more effective ways to rig elections if you're willing to commit felonies.
  #76  
Old 04-28-2016, 11:23 AM
md2000 md2000 is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 13,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamthewalrus(:3= View Post
You don't need to control access to know how big a problem authentication is. You only need to be able to examine the record.

Generally, the list of registered voters, and the list of who voted in a given election is part of the public record (how they vote is private). Anyone can get the list. It would be very hard to keep any kind of large problem like this a secret for very long, since people are actually examining the record and looking for this kind of fraud. And, for the most part, they've found almost none of this type.

The benefits of casting a single fraudulent vote are very small. The punishment if you get caught is very large.

There are so many more effective ways to rig elections if you're willing to commit felonies.
Yes.

You not only have to give your name if you register at the poll, you would have to give address (to prove you were resident). Too many people at one address, or invalid addresses, or people at that address (on the voters list) who did not know the people signing in and claiming to live there - these are all scenarios that can be verified after the fact from the swear-in sheet.

As Warlus points out, one vote doesn't do much. To sway an election, you typically would have to cast say, 5% or more fraudulent ballots (for a close election) and often more than 10%. This would require a vast concerted program of fraud in a statewide election, or even in a big city, with hundreds of "fake" voters presenting themselves. The number people signing in when that was allowed simply did not come close to that level; and when investigators checked, they were legit.

(Except in old-time Chicago, where the number of ballots typically exceeded the voters list count, and people often voted long after they were dead. I believe the line in the Nixon movie was that there was no point in contesting the Illinois result, "Kennedy stole it from us fair and square." But then, ballot box stuffing by the poll workers is a different kettle of fish from attempting voter fraud against an honest and vigilant poll station crew.)

Last edited by md2000; 04-28-2016 at 11:24 AM.
  #77  
Old 04-28-2016, 01:55 PM
Omar Little Omar Little is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Within
Posts: 11,673
Can WIC card be used as a government issued ID?
  #78  
Old 04-28-2016, 02:05 PM
t-bonham@scc.net t-bonham@scc.net is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 13,445
Quote:
Originally Posted by Omar Little View Post
Can WIC card be used as a government issued ID?
In which state? Cause it will vary in all 50 states.

Here in Minnesota, it looks like that is not on the list of acceptable documents -- bills or statements are OK, but only from a utility company. You'd need to have an other registered voter vouch for you.

Besides, do WIC cards have an address on them?
  #79  
Old 04-28-2016, 02:22 PM
Saint Cad Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 12,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamthewalrus(:3= View Post
Anyone can get the list. It would be very hard to keep any kind of large problem like this a secret for very long, since people are actually examining the record and looking for this kind of fraud. And, for the most part, they've found almost none of this type.
But as raised upthread, how do we really know how widespread the problem is especially with low voter turnout? In my case I of course reported that someone had voted under my name, but suppose I hadn't gone to vote? How would anyone had known what happened?
  #80  
Old 04-28-2016, 02:29 PM
Richard Parker Richard Parker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 11,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
So a person is willing to do all that it takes to be in the country illegally but THAT will stop them from an illegal act. OK ya got me
Most people in the country illegally have not committed any crime, much less a felony. And since committing a crime would have far greater consequences for them than the average citizen, they tend to be even more deterred from doing so--which is part of why their crime rate is so low.
  #81  
Old 04-28-2016, 02:52 PM
Omar Little Omar Little is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Within
Posts: 11,673
Just an aside to the OP re: the thread title, the US colloquialism you were searching for is fuss, not fuzz.
  #82  
Old 04-28-2016, 02:53 PM
Schnitte Schnitte is offline
Intermittently active
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 3,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pantastic View Post
Why do you imagine that, exactly? It's very obviously not true, and if everyone did have the documentation at hand there wouldn't be a controversey in the first place.
Because I would imagine everybody to have at least a birth certificate. Is that assumption really far-fetched?
  #83  
Old 04-28-2016, 03:04 PM
Saint Cad Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 12,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post
Most people in the country illegally have not committed any crime, much less a felony.
Entering or staying in the country illegally is not illegal?

8 USC §1181 Begs to disagree
(a) Documents required; admission under quotas before June 30, 1968

Quote:
Except as provided in subsection (b) and subsection (c) no immigrant shall be admitted into the United States unless at the time of application for admission he (1) has a valid unexpired immigrant visa or was born subsequent to the issuance of such visa of the accompanying parent, and (2) presents a valid unexpired passport or other suitable travel document, or document of identity and nationality, if such document is required under the regulations issued by the Attorney General. With respect to immigrants to be admitted under quotas of quota areas prior to June 30, 1968, no immigrant visa shall be deemed valid unless the immigrant is properly chargeable to the quota area under the quota of which the visa is issued.
Do you wish me to quote 8 CFR Part 316 as well.
  #84  
Old 04-28-2016, 03:43 PM
Richard Parker Richard Parker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 11,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
Entering or staying in the country illegally is not illegal?
Gee, I wonder how I could possibly have missed the truth of your tautology!

Could it be that you've improperly substituted a term in order to make your incorrect claim appear to be correct?
  #85  
Old 04-28-2016, 03:44 PM
Pantastic Pantastic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schnitte View Post
Because I would imagine everybody to have at least a birth certificate. Is that assumption really far-fetched?
I know you intend that as a rhetorical question, but it really is far-fetched to expect that every person, regardless of how troubled their life is, keeps ahold of a small piece of paper that they don't do anything with over the course of decades. Some people's parents lose their birth certificate or never pass it on to the kid when they're older, some people run away from home, some people just lose it from carelessness when moving, some have to move in a hurry because of violence, others suffer from a house fire, others have their stuff stolen, others pack it away and then can't remember where they packed it years later, and many more.

Further, a birth certificate does not have a photo (and wouldn't have a useful photo even if it did), so isn't even considered a form of ID in any state that I'm aware of, so even if you were correct that everyone had their birth certificate handy, they still wouldn't have a valid ID to vote.
  #86  
Old 04-28-2016, 04:06 PM
Saint Cad Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 12,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post
Gee, I wonder how I could possibly have missed the truth of your tautology!

Could it be that you've improperly substituted a term in order to make your incorrect claim appear to be correct?
You're the one claiming being in the country illegally is not in of itself a crime.
  #87  
Old 04-28-2016, 04:08 PM
Richard Parker Richard Parker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Manhattan
Posts: 11,529
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
You're the one claiming being in the country illegally is not in of itself a crime.
Do you see how your last post fails to address that claim?

(Perhaps you did not know that not everything that violates a law is a crime?)
  #88  
Old 04-28-2016, 04:14 PM
Acsenray Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 32,809
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schnitte View Post
Because I would imagine everybody to have at least a birth certificate. Is that assumption really far-fetched?
It's not only far-fetched, it's exactly wrong. There are millions of people in this country that never were issued a birth certificate at birth—there's no national law requiring them. And the kind of people who are unlikely to have them in their possession are exactly the kind of people who will find it difficult to replace them or get one issued anew decades later—old people, poor people, people with less education, people with difficult childhoods or difficult family relationships.
  #89  
Old 04-28-2016, 04:32 PM
ftg ftg is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Not the PNW :-(
Posts: 15,686
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schnitte View Post
Because I would imagine everybody to have at least a birth certificate. Is that assumption really far-fetched?
As noted, incredibly far-fetched.

Take the recent case of Virginia McLaurin who at one point actually danced with Pres. Obama. Due to the circumstances of her birth and the officious rules of her birth state, she was unable to get photo id and hence wasn't eligible to vote (and had other problems).

Simply due to her fame and the resulting press about her case, D.C. issued her a special temporary photo id.

But she still isn't out of the woods yet. She has to convince others the temp id is good enough to get a birth certificate (which isn't what you think it is in a case like this) and then get a real id.

Note: She will be able to settle this matter eventually only because she danced with Obama. Less PR-friendly folk are just plain screwed.

Speaking of PR. Puerto Ricans* are US citizens. They can move to the mainland, get driver's licenses, vote, etc. In theory. In practice it's a mess. Some records are lost or never existed. There's a thriving industry in Puerto Rico to generate suitable documents. Some places, like Florida, treat all PR documents suspiciously. Even for a time denying the validity of all PR documents.

Note that it's not just birth certificates, you also have to document name changes (which hit married/divorced women** particularly hard). So you have to get all those records and each state has its own quirks and such.

And it's all security theater. To renew our driver's licenses, we had to get birth certificates. To get the birth certificates we had to send them copies of our current driver's licenses. Note something odd about this process? We are who we say we are because we were who we say we were. Wow, that sure fixes everything.

* and ** Both groups more likely to vote Democrat.
  #90  
Old 04-28-2016, 05:47 PM
Pantastic Pantastic is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Posts: 2,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by ftg View Post
Note that it's not just birth certificates, you also have to document name changes (which hit married/divorced women** particularly hard). So you have to get all those records and each state has its own quirks and such.
And just to add, doing all of this stuff requires that you know you need it well in advance of voting. And requires a lot of form-filling and keeping track of information, which ill-educated and elderly people often have difficulty with. And requires fees at various steps along the way, which poor people may not have available. And often requires appearing in person somewhere during regular business hours, which is rough for people who have jobs with limited or no time off, and expensive and/or time consuming for many people who don't have a car.
  #91  
Old 04-28-2016, 06:19 PM
bob++ bob++ is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Worcestershire UK
Posts: 5,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by t-bonham@scc.net View Post
And the states that do that are always the top ones in voter turnout. (Which is why some people oppose it -- they don't want more people to vote.)

I agree, it works very well here in Minnesota.

Also, we vote on paper ballots, marked with a pen. So no chance that any local government can manipulate the number of machines to force long lines in certain areas. Here, the lines move as fast as people can sign the voter register and get their paper ballot. In 2008, when it was very busy at my precinct, all the curtained voting booths were full -- so people just sat down at tables to fill out their ballot, not caring about somebody seeing who they voted for. Then they insert the ballots into the scanner tht records their votes, get their "I Voted" sticker, and leave.

Also, the paper ballots make a recount quite easy -- the officials just take the stack of ballots and spend a few minutes re-running them thru the scanner. In local elections, they often do this whenever the vote is at all close.

It's really hard to interfere with voting by marking paper ballots. We once had the electricity go out in a polling place on election day. But people continued to vote, marking their ballots by candlelight. (It was in a church basement, so many candles were available.) The scanner couldn't work without electricity, but the voting officials just collected them in a box, and fed them through the machine when the power was restored.
Pretty much how it's done in the UK. When I vote next week I will be given a sheet with all the candidates names and their party affiliation (if any). This is just for local councillors so only one sheet with maybe five names. When there is a general election, there are two sheets - one for the locals and one for the MPs.

The big difference is that the votes are counted by hand. Volunteers sit round a big table and the ballot boxes are tipped out in the middle. You just grab some and start sorting into piles and every now and then someone takes the sorted papers away to be checked and counted. There used to be a bit of a competition to see who could declare first, but some constituencies wait until the following day now, rather that sit up all night.
  #92  
Old 04-28-2016, 08:29 PM
UDS UDS is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 7,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by bob++ View Post
The big difference is that the votes are counted by hand. Volunteers sit round a big table and the ballot boxes are tipped out in the middle. You just grab some and start sorting into piles and every now and then someone takes the sorted papers away to be checked and counted. There used to be a bit of a competition to see who could declare first, but some constituencies wait until the following day now, rather that sit up all night.
Nitpick; they're not volunteers doing the counting. Some of them are local government staff diverted from their more usual duties, and others are additional temporary staff hired by the returning officer for the occasion.
  #93  
Old 04-28-2016, 08:51 PM
Saint Cad Saint Cad is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: N of Denver & S of Sanity
Posts: 12,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Parker View Post

(Perhaps you did not know that not everything that violates a law is a crime?)
Or perhaps you are wrong
Quote:
What Is Illegal Entry?

The immigration law actually uses the term "improper entry," which has a broad meaning. It’s more than just slipping across the U.S. border at an unguarded point. Improper entry can include:

entering or attempting to enter the United States at any time or place other than one designated by U.S. immigration officers (in other words, away from a border inspection point or other port of entry)
eluding examination or inspection by U.S. immigration officers (people have tried everything from digging tunnels to hiding in the trunk of a friend’s car)
attempting to enter or obtain entry to the United States by a willfully false or misleading representation or willful concealment of a material fact (which might include, for example, lying on a visa application or buying a false green card or other entry document).

(See Title 8, Section 1325 of the U.S. Code (U.S.C.), or Section 275 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (I.N.A.) for the exact statutory language - http://www.uscis.gov/laws/immigratio...ationality-act.)
Criminal Penalties

For the first improper entry offense, the person can be fined (as a criminal penalty), or imprisoned for up to six months, or both. For a subsequent offense, the person can be fined or imprisoned for up to two years, or both. (See 8 U.S.C. Section 1325, I.N.A. Section 275.)

Last edited by Saint Cad; 04-28-2016 at 08:51 PM.
  #94  
Old 04-28-2016, 09:06 PM
Musicat Musicat is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sturgeon Bay, WI USA
Posts: 19,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by slash2k View Post
You said you'd "never once heard" of the phenomenon; I showed you the first example that I could find easily. There are 25 incorporated cities and towns in Maricopa County, plus ten large "census-designated places" (such as Sun City, which isn't incorporated but has 38,000 residents), and only 60* polling places in the recent presidential primary; that math suggest a fair number of people found themselves voting outside of their own town.
I still don't understand what makes you think that if your designated polling place is busy, you can vote somewhere else. Absolutely impossible.

Maybe Arizona is different, but in all the states that I have lived and voted in, you are registered in only one ward or district. If you go to any other polling place, your name won't show in the official list. If you aren't registered there, you won't be voting. That's one of the primary purposes of registering; to show that you live in only one place and can vote in only one place.
  #95  
Old 04-28-2016, 09:16 PM
UDS UDS is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 7,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saint Cad View Post
Or perhaps you are wrong
Well, on a nitpick, the claim you're challinging is not that it's not a crime to enter the country illegally; it's that it's not a crime to be in the country illegally.

It's perfectly possible to enter the country without infringing the law you cite, but at a later stage to have no authority to remain (e.g. you overstay your visa). As far as I'm aware, no crime is committed in that case.
  #96  
Old 04-28-2016, 09:56 PM
Chronos Chronos is offline
Charter Member
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: The Land of Cleves
Posts: 72,106
Quote:
Quoth Musicat:

I still don't understand what makes you think that if your designated polling place is busy, you can vote somewhere else. Absolutely impossible.
Does slash2k think that? If so, he hasn't given any indication of it in this thread.
  #97  
Old 04-28-2016, 10:02 PM
slash2k slash2k is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 2,127
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicat View Post
I still don't understand what makes you think that if your designated polling place is busy, you can vote somewhere else. Absolutely impossible.

Maybe Arizona is different, but in all the states that I have lived and voted in, you are registered in only one ward or district. If you go to any other polling place, your name won't show in the official list. If you aren't registered there, you won't be voting. That's one of the primary purposes of registering; to show that you live in only one place and can vote in only one place.
Actually, in the most recent elections in Maricopa County, Arizona, you can vote at whatever polling station you want. "Voters will be able to vote at any of the polling places listed below in the May 17 Election. " and their polling place locator by default shows the three locations closest to your home address.

Yes, definitely odd, and different than how it works in most other places. However, I will dispute that "you won't be voting" in those other places. This very much depends on local laws. I've worked as a poll worker here in Kansas; our instructions have always been to try to steer the person to the right location, but if they want to vote at our location instead, take a provisional ballot. Whether that ballot gets counted depends on how the offices/issues align with the offices/issues on the ballot the voter should have cast. For example, in the last election the major race was school board elections; I had a voter who was at the wrong precinct but in the right school district, and all of the seats were at-large anyway, so he voted in the same races he would have voted in at his home precinct, and his ballot would have been counted. If he'd tried to vote in another school district, though, his ballot would have been discarded unopened.
  #98  
Old 04-28-2016, 10:18 PM
slash2k slash2k is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2014
Posts: 2,127
However, my point was that with 60 polling places spread across 35 cities/towns/locales, and some of the cities having multiple polls (Phoenix, e.g., had 12 of the 60), Youngtown would likely not have been the only town in the county that did not have even a single polling place. (By contrast, they are planning to have *724* polling places, twelve times as many, for the November election. cite)
  #99  
Old 04-29-2016, 03:37 AM
Musicat Musicat is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sturgeon Bay, WI USA
Posts: 19,901
Quote:
Originally Posted by slash2k View Post
Actually, in the most recent elections in Maricopa County, Arizona, you can vote at whatever polling station you want. "Voters will be able to vote at any of the polling places listed below in the May 17 Election. " and their polling place locator by default shows the three locations closest to your home address.

Yes, definitely odd, and different than how it works in most other places. However, I will dispute that "you won't be voting" in those other places. This very much depends on local laws. I've worked as a poll worker here in Kansas; our instructions have always been to try to steer the person to the right location, but if they want to vote at our location instead, take a provisional ballot. Whether that ballot gets counted depends on how the offices/issues align with the offices/issues on the ballot the voter should have cast.
So how do they determine if the voter is registered (elsewhere) if there's no record in that particular ward/precinct? Call around to every other ward/precinct? It must take weeks to get everything certified and counted.
  #100  
Old 04-29-2016, 03:59 AM
UDS UDS is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 7,672
Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicat View Post
So how do they determine if the voter is registered (elsewhere) if there's no record in that particular ward/precinct? Call around to every other ward/precinct? It must take weeks to get everything certified and counted.
If it's policy that voters can vote in any of a number of polling places, it doesn't take rocket science to work out that each polling place needs to have a complete copy of the register of electors for all the wards/precincts/districts that are entitled to vote there. So you supply one. Or, you give all the polling places electronic access to a digital register of electors, rather than giving each of them a paper printout. Viola! Problem solved.

Of course, there's a different problem. What's to stop me voting, say, six times, at six different polling stations?

If they have electronic access to the voters' register, then each polling station can record electronically that a particular voter has voted. If that voter later presents at a different polling station to vote they'll see, when they check his eligibility, that he (or someone claiming to be him) has already voted.

If they're still using paper copies of the register and recording who has voted on paper then that can't happen. On the other hand, after the election when they reconcile the voting records from each polling station they'll see that I have voted six times, and no doubt they will call around to me to discuss the implications of this. Unless I'm more than ordinarily stupid I will foresee that this will happen, and that may be enough to deter most people from voting multiple times.

I should say that it's standard in Australian elections that you can vote in any polling place in your electorate. Furthermore, in every electorate there are several polling places which hold copies of the voters register, and ballot papers, for every electorate throughout the country. So if you live in (say) Sydney and you happen to be in (say) Melbourne on election day and you have failed to cast an early ballot because you would be out of town, there will be places in Melbourne where you can go, identify yourself as a voter from Sydney, get the appropriate ballot paper and cast a vote in the election for the electorate in which you live.

It does mean that the final total of votes for any election isn't known for a few days. But the total of all the votes cast within the electorate is known on election night, and it is rare for out-of-electorate votes to be so numerous that they could affect the outcome. Consquently the winner of the election is known, even if it may be some days before the exact total of votes he got is known.

Last edited by UDS; 04-29-2016 at 04:04 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:22 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@chicagoreader.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Publishers - interested in subscribing to the Straight Dope?
Write to: sdsubscriptions@chicagoreader.com.

Copyright © 2017 Sun-Times Media, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017