Well, I basically agree with that. So if you have a better way to prevent voter registration fraud and actual voter fraud, let’s do it. But checking the spelling of names to make sure they exist or match seems to be the best tool right now. I’d have no problem replacing it with a better method.
We voted in a large school bond in my area and the school system went on a building spree with the money. They overspent by a large amount and the Superintendent left for bigger and better things. Another bond came up to cover the difference and it was voted down. Voters wern’t interested in writing another blank check. I would hate to have someone come in and round up everything that moves to vote on something without any knowledge of the situation.
Well, they’d probably be informed on that one issue. And while I don’t think its wise to vote on one issue, people absolutely have a right to do so. We should also make state that those people fall into two subcategories: those who are informed on many issues, but hold one to be of paramount importance; and those who don’t know squat other than a candidate’s stance on that one issue. I’ve talked to people who fall into both categories. A friend who is very smart and I respect a great deal, simply votes on the abortion issue. He, like me, is pro-choice. A cab driver in NY also had his one issue: “I’m not voting for a black man.” when I tried to ask him about some positions, he was amazingly, mind-numbingly ignorant of anything. I don’t know which of these two frustrate me more. Probably the former, as he has the tools to evaluate all the information available. The again, he’s not terribly interested in politics, which is either be the cause or symptom of his malady. I don’t know which.
My elderly mother rents her house out in NY and lives in an apartment. Taxes were always high, but they just keep shooting up. When they vote on school tax increases, they ALWAYS pass. That’s because they just keep having more an more votes. If they’re having a particularly hard time they vote when they know many of the people without children will be away for the winter. It’s really gotten out of hand.
Force everybody to re-register to vote every election cycle. Problem solved.
The standard I was defending was that in order to add a burden that disproportionately falls on certain nationalities we need a compelling interest and a narrowly tailored program (that is, there cannot be other effective programs that would achieve the same end).
If we agree on the standard, we would ask whether there is an interest compelling enough to create the policy. In this case, the policy is about slightly mis-matched names. The fear is that unregistered people could vote under names very similar to the names on the rolls. Is that fear compelling enough to put extra burdens on people? I would think that in order to disproportionately burden specific classes of people, we would need something more than mere speculation about this kind of similar-name fraud.
The next question, if we agree the interest is compelling, would be whether there are (or for this election, were) other options. I have not been convinced that forcing people to trek to the election offices again after voting is the least burdensome means we could use. But I don’t know enough about the specifics in order to advocate anything more than thoughts off the top of my head. One thought would be to have the election officials make affirmative efforts to verify provisional ballots instead of putting the burden on the voter–though I admit that I don’t know enough to know exactly how that would work. Another thought would be to change the registration process to prevent mis-matched names from happening–assign voters a unique number or something. I’m not sure numbers are less apt to typographical errors though.
I agree. I’d much rather people have knowledge of the situation. Whose job is it to do the work of informing? {besides the SDMB I mean} I’d really appreciate it if our political leaders and our freaking media spent a little more of their efforts on informing.
I think that’s a wishful thinking. It’s probably more likely they have an opinion on that one issue.
I guess that means, “I’m poor and I want to vote for the guy who says he’ll help me” is just as valid as anti abortion, anti gay marriage, anti socialism, or any number of opinionated uninformed things things.
I’d like voters to be better informed on a variety of issues but the reality is many if not most , will not be. A huge part of any election is to make the eligible voters want to vote. To remove the obstacles that might keep them from voting , regardless of what party they want to vote for or what issue seems to be the “one” for them.
So, while most of might agree it’s better to have a more informed voting public I don’t think it’s dumb to encourage the uninformed to vote. You can still strive to inform them while doing so. I think it’s criminal and despicable to try and keep them from exercising that right so that other uninformed voters who tend to favor your party get to choose the next president. Especially if your efforts to “inform” them are composed of false accusations and dishonesty.
Wait a second.
In Florida, there’s no issue on “slightly mismatched names.”
The law is that the voter registration must contain the registrant’s driver’s license or Florida ID card number, or, if the registrant has neither but does have an SSN, the last four of the SSN. It’s those numbers that must match actual driver license database numbers.
So where is this “mismatched name” thing happening?
Say there’s a polling place where the voters are heavily elderly, wealthy, white, and Republican.
If I were to round up a group of large, tattooed, scary-looking young men, and have them hang out in front of this polling place on election day, behaving as young men are wont to do, though legally, would you find that unacceptable?
As I said earlier, I’m unfamiliar with the facts in FL. I thought what was happening there was that, when you go to vote, if your name doesn’t match what they have, you have to go back in and verify your ID. That’s not right? Can you explain what is happening at the polling place that creates the need for the voter to return with ID?
Is that the current Florida law? I seem to recall some problem with people whose names were somewhat similar to a felons list losing their right to vote in 2000.
Says the party of Sarah Palin.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
stop stop my sides hurt.
Too true.
Unfortunately, yes. People can place their priorities wherever they’d like.
I’m less interested in removing minor obstacles than heightening their interest. The obstacles discussed in this thread make it more difficult, but it still way shy of difficult.
Well false accusations an dishonesty are never good. The Republican guy that got caught lately should be made an example of. But I also feel that ACORN is gaming the system by playing a numbers game, and that some of the higher-ups there need to be similarly placed in the stocks.
You “feel”? Well, now, we’re getting somewhere, now we got something solid to go with, here. magellan01 “feels” something. Now, I had been thinking that ACORN was just a bunch of idealistic do-gooders with a crazy idea, A crazy idea that democracy might actually mean what it advertises, that the people rule.
That you can change how things are if the people vote. Like I said previously, I’ve met some of these people, and they are so sincere they make me want to drink, so earnest they make my teeth hurt. Bucky Beaver with an agenda.
But I’ll certainly toss that aside, because magellan01 has a feeling. And, to be perfectly frank, that feeling ranks up pretty high on the stack of evidence offered so far, which amounts to, oh, I estimate, pretty close to…diddly squat. Zero, zip, zilch, nada damn thing.
Federales climb up their collectivist asses, high-power Republicans sic high power prosecutors on them, and the sum total of their investigation? Inferences, innuendos, suggestions of chicanery…and a feeling.
Well, whoopity fucka do!
You want to know why the got problems? Because they are fucking naive idealists, they don’t have my pessimism, they wouldn’t take my pessimism if I offered it. They are the kind of dumb-asses who think that poor people are inherently more noble, more honest, can be trusted. And of course, the truth is that poor people are no better than anyone else, save that they have less to squandor.
And you know what? I admire them for it. I’m smarter than they are, but they are better than I am.
Now, I think I’ve asked this of everybody on these ACORN threads, and now you, (maybe even again you). Outside of your rock solid feeling, what have you got that you can bandy such accusations around? Outside of you blowing smoke up my dress and then saying where there’s smoke there’s fire…what have you got? If someone made suggestions about you like you make about them, with a “feeling”…what would you think of them?
You got, you bring. You got?
Wow! A post from you with actual content, not just lame, snide attempts for yuk-yuks.
So, forgive me for offering an opinion, never mind one based on feelings conjured up by the facts. Tell me, do you feel Obama would be a better President? Do you feel that OJ is guilty of murder? Do you feel that there is a god? Well, how dare you!!!:eek:
Now, why do I feel the way I do? Look at the evidence they’re being investigated in something like ten states. They’ve been fined in the past, for the same type of thing. The game they play is to flood the system with as many registrations as possible. They know that the more thousands they can get into play, the more fraudulent ones that will get through. Such is the beauty when a supposed non-partisan organization works to increase voters in areas that are likely to vote overwhelmingly for the Dems. They can even flag some and maintain some plausible deniability with the handwavers.
You say, they are idealists. No doubt they are. But I’m unaware of a claise in the law that says it’s okay to aid in voter registration fraud if you’re really, really super idealistic about voting and your candidate. Perhaps I missed it and you can point it out.
So thats their cunning plan! Sneaky devils! But, if you don’t mind my asking, or even if you do, who told you? Did you beat a confession out of one of them? You have a copy of The Protocols of the Elders of ACORN?
And what was the rest of their plan, you being so well informed, and all? Suppose they sneak 5,000 fake registrations into the system. Were they going to get Commissar Soros to get them 5,000 fake IDs to go with them? And then they recruit 5,000 volunteers (sworn to silence!) to vote? Or maybe just 50 ACORN fanatics dashing madly from polling place to polling place, and voting a hundred times each?
That seems a bit impractical, you don’t mind my saying so. And even then, after all this expensive skullduggery, they could only effect an election that was really, really close! How would they know, in advance, that the election would be close enough for their evil plan to bear fruit?
But clearly, you have the facts at your fingertips, and are simply reluctant to embarass me. Well, hey, its OK, you go right ahead! I’ll clear out a space here, you can start piling up all your facts, just back up the truck and dump 'em right here. Don’t be shy!
See, thing is, nobody else had the facts like you do, they were all just farting through the hole with teeth. So, its a real good thing you showed up.
With all those facts.
First off, who says it’s just Florida with a problem.
Second off, you don’t seriously believe that the voter registration system only checks to see if the number provided matches a valid number, do you? The system checks to see if the number you provided matches the number they have for the NAME you’ve put on the registration.
For example, you put SSN 1234 on your application, they’re not checking to see if 1234 exists, they’re going to check to see if their records show a Mr. Bricker B. Bricker with SSN 1234. When those records show only Mr. Briker B. Bricker, the state has the right to call that a mismatch, and run you through a bunch of hoops before you get to vote.
Agreed… but attempting to suppress illegal votes is a legitimate tactic.
Even if there are relatively few illegal votes… especially if your political opponents make it more difficult to identify illegal voters thru their own tactics.
Agreed?