# I Pit GOP "voting reform" **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [September 4, 2011, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180 "2011-09-04T19:34:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 28
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/541 "2011-09-13T00:16:31Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > In what way are they the “needs” of the _poor_? :rolleyes: > > Tell us again, in your own words now, what is the real-world, proven-to-exist problem that you purport to be addressing with this extra intrusion of government? Intrusion? What’s the intrusion? Sure photo IDs tend to have shit pictures (funny story. Once had a picture so bad that they used the prior licenses picture), but I’ve never thought of them as an intrusion. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/542 "2011-09-13T00:22:03Z")
That was a dig against a loyal partisan of the party who typically whines about such things except when partisan advantage results. Are you always so damn literal and tone-deaf? ---
**Author:** ![AlienVessels](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ba8739/32.png) [@AlienVessels](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AlienVessels)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/543 "2011-09-13T00:25:29Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Fascinating. > > If the DMV is not open longer, the charge is that the scheme disenfranchises the poor. If I show that the DMV is open longer, the charge becomes “more bureaucracy?” > > OK. Yes. In order to serve the needs of the poor, more bureaucracy is added, and I’m fine with that. No, the charge is that increasing voter ID standards disenfranchises the poor. I’ve already cited literature that is at best undecided on whether it does or not. Your argument as near as I can tell is that it’s irrelevant that Republicans have created a question in the minds of the voting public as to whether there is actual voter fraud and that the appropriate fix is to spend money and grow government to correct the _perception_ that the process is flawed. So when in doubt, violate conservative principles to cover conservative-initiated problems. So the principles in fact are only valid when they don’t obstruct your own ideology. ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 12:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/544 "2011-09-13T00:27:18Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > That was a dig against a loyal partisan of the party who typically whines about such things except when partisan advantage results. Are you always so damn literal and tone-deaf? They have also been against it except when it comes to abortion, and drug testing for welfare recipients, and homosexuals, and evolution in schools, and the patriot act. In other words, they’ve been against it except when they were for it. Why this surprises you is beyond me. I also think it’s a stupid point. For all the worry over disenfranchised voters and stolen elections, none of it has happened. Saying that it’s “un-republican” means nothing and has nothing to do with the issue at hand. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/545 "2011-09-13T00:33:21Z")
> [@AlienVessels](#): > > No, the charge is that increasing voter ID standards disenfranchises the poor. I’ve already cited literature that is at best undecided on whether it does or not. > > Your argument as near as I can tell is that it’s irrelevant that Republicans have created a question in the minds of the voting public as to whether there is actual voter fraud and that the appropriate fix is to spend money and grow government to correct the _perception_ that the process is flawed. > > So when in doubt, violate conservative principles to cover conservative-initiated problems. So the principles in fact are only valid when they don’t obstruct your own ideology. You mean after eight to ten years of liberal and Democrat whinging about hanging chads and Republican-allied Diebold voting machines and “stolen” elections, suddenly concerns about voter fraud are a Republican invention? ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/546 "2011-09-13T00:38:40Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > You mean after eight to ten years of liberal and Democrat whinging about hanging chads and Republican-allied Diebold voting machines and “stolen” elections, suddenly concerns about voter fraud are a Republican invention? It’s two different things. The democrats are concerned with companies and the government manipulating the vote. The republicans are concerned with ineligible voters manipulating the vote. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 12:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/547 "2011-09-13T00:39:00Z")
Do you really not know the difference between voting fraud and vote-\*counting \*fraud? Oh, it’s you. Of course you don’t. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 12:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/548 "2011-09-13T00:41:27Z")
> [@Harborwolf](#): > > They have also been against it except when it comes to abortion, and drug testing for welfare recipients, and homosexuals, and evolution in schools, and the patriot act. In other words, they’ve been against it except when they were for it. Why this surprises you is beyond me. No, what is beyond you is how all of us who are not as utterly loyalist _already know they’re hypocrites to the core_. I already pointed out it was a tweak. You really are that unaware of how people interact, aren’t you? > [@](#): > > I also think it’s a stupid point. For all the worry over disenfranchised voters and stolen elections, none of it has happened. That is both incredibly naive and incredibly ignorant of you. ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 12:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/549 "2011-09-13T00:50:07Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > No, what is beyond you is how all of us who are not as utterly loyalist _already know they’re hypocrites to the core_. I already pointed out it was a tweak. Indeed. Because I’m a republican loyalist. I point out a laundry list of republican “small government” hypocricies and that’s what you take from it. That I’m a republican? I think this is why most moderates stay quiet. They get bounced from one party to the other depending on where they are on what issues. Gets frustrating really. > [@](#): > > You really are that unaware of how people interact, aren’t you? Not sure where this accusation is coming from. > [@](#): > > That is both incredibly naive and incredibly ignorant of you. How is it naive? It has not been proven that acquiring a photo ID is a hardship. In states where these laws have been enacted, voter turnout has yet to go down. As the evidence stands, the claims of disenfranchisement and election stealing have not been proven at all. How is that naive or ignorant? ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/550 "2011-09-13T00:54:15Z")
> [@Harborwolf](#): > > Indeed. Because I’m a republican loyalist. No, you \*really \*don’t understand, and it would obviously be a waste of time to try anymore - other than to point out the partisan in question is **Bricker**. Not you. The naivete and ignorance comments were about your calm certainty that voter suppression and fraud have never happened. That too is something I’m not about to start spoonfeeding you - do your own research into Florida 2000, or read the back threads, for your own damn self. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 12:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/551 "2011-09-13T00:54:21Z")
Corporations are people. That is why they should show up a a poll with a proper voter ID to get recognized as such. Then we could all agree. ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 12:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/552 "2011-09-13T00:56:23Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > No, you \*really \*don’t understand, and it would obviously be a waste of time to try anymore - other than to point out the partisan in question is **Bricker**. Not you. > > The naivete and ignorance comments were about your calm certainty that voter suppression and fraud have never happened. That too is something I’m not about to start spoonfeeding you - do your own research into Florida 2000, or read the back threads, for your own damn self. And I was referring to the current thread about photo ID. The one we’re both in. Right now. Maybe you should keep your comments about spoonfeeding to yourself. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/553 "2011-09-13T01:11:21Z")
> [@Harborwolf](#): > > It’s two different things. The democrats are concerned with companies and the government manipulating the vote. The republicans are concerned with ineligible voters manipulating the vote. Are they claiming that this has been a problem in the past because because unqualified people have been voting, or is it a problem they foresee and therefore want to prevent? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 1:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/554 "2011-09-13T01:13:13Z")
> [@AlienVessels](#): > > …I’ve already cited literature that is at best undecided on whether it does or not… Would have expected that. The results mentioned of 3 to 4 percent were more than I expected. I think the ultimate source of this is gerrymandering, creatively adjusting House districts to partisan political ends. The fine art of gerrymandering is to create a district that is just _barely_ in your favor, but reliably so. Say you have a district with a fifteen percent advantage to Republicans, next to a district with a three point advantage to Dems. Well, then, you slice off a section of the Pubbie leaning district so that you have a three point advantage for Republicans in the previously Dem district. It is this demographic art that creates wildly malformed districts that look like fractals on acid. Now, when the situation is this close, when the situation is _deliberately_ that close, it is delicate, it can be overthrown. If you have such a situation in your favor, the last thing you want to hear about is new voter registrations, you like the old voters just fine, thank you very much. Which brings us round to ACORN. ACORN was publicly murdered by a stampede of fake outrage. Early on, I wondered why, why would anyone need to kill tiny little innocuous ACORN. Sure, they were registering the poor and unconnected, but so what, only a few thousand here and there. Its because it was working. Its because the balance was so carefully drawn, that a few thousand here and there, in one year, isn’t a threat. Two years? Four? Ten thousand, fifteen thousand voters, maybe? They killed ACORN because it was working, probably working better than even ACORN realized. Those hyper-earnest people with their Goodwill suits, second hand Hondas and their pencils…were a threat. Anyway, I would expect any polling results to be ambivalent, because the expected result is, almost by definition, marginal. ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/555 "2011-09-13T01:16:04Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Are they claiming that this has been a problem in the past because because unqualified people have been voting, or is it a problem they foresee and therefore want to prevent? Honestly? In my opinion they’re either doing it in the hopes of reducing the number of voters (which they seem to be failing at) or in order to look like they’re tough and that they’ve actually done something productive. I don’t believe for a second that voter fraud is actually an issue worth passing emergency measures over. Haven’t seen any evidence to make me believe otherwise. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 1:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/556 "2011-09-13T01:23:01Z")
> [@zamboniracer](#): > > Not so. Not only is it not a strawman, GOP politicians weigh in against regulations at all levels of government as anyone’s who’s been paying attention can attest, one example of which is cited here: > > [Link.](http://www.cleveland.com/open/index.ssf/2011/03/gov_john_kasich_signs_legislat.html) OK. I concede the point; it’s hardly central to my thesis. Small government at all levels is the Republican mantra, and this violates that. It’s an un-Republican solution. Agreed. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/557 "2011-09-13T01:24:16Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > Are they claiming that this has been a problem in the past because because unqualified people have been voting, or is it a problem they foresee and therefore want to prevent? Well, they’d be hard pressed to claim its a problem in the past, or at least the recent past. Lord knows they tried to uncover the dreadful threat, but it always eluded them. So, yeah, pretty much has to be a “foreseen” problem. You have to be vigilant when there are so many miscreants about. Like me, for instance. I’m just guessing there, not having any definition of the term from the Foremost Authority. But I’m on pretty solid ground there. Between the years 1968 to 1974, probably did enough miscreanting in any given week to put ol’ \*\*Starkers \*\*into a cataleptic coma. Clutch his pearls, faint dead away. Anyway, us miscreants are often rather clever. Hey, maybe that’s why they never found any voter registration fraud, us miscreants are just too damn smart for them! Nah. ACORN was more Opie than Trotsky. ---
**Author:** ![Starving\_Artist](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/aeb1de/32.png) [@Starving\_Artist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starving_Artist)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 1:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/558 "2011-09-13T01:27:43Z")
Okay. The reason I’m wondering is the **Alien Vessels** keeps claiming that the Republicans have invented a problem where none exists and has convinced everyone of it. I myself haven’t heard much about voter fraud except with regard to the instances I mentioned. To me it’s entirely possible that the Republicans in certain districts have gotten wind of a voter drive that might produce problems with people trying to vote who aren’t qualified to do so, and so they’ve attempted to make sure that steps are taken to prevent people who aren’t legitimately qualifed to vote from doing so. Mixed in with this however is the fact that both sides are going to do whatever they can get away with in order to benefit their side, so some Republican shenanigans in this regard are likely too. So basically I’m just trying to find out if the Republicans have invented this issue out of whole cloth to try to make voting more difficult, or whether their recent increased efforts to ensure proper ID might not be based upon legitimate concern. ---
**Author:** ![CalMeacham](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/calmeacham/32/35_2.png) [@CalMeacham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CalMeacham)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 1:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/559 "2011-09-13T01:37:57Z")
Of course, there’s also this study: Alvarez, R. Michael Michael, Bailey, Delia and Katz, Jonathan N., The Effect of Voter Identification Laws on Turnout (January 1, 2008). California Institute of Technology Social Science Working Paper No. 1267R. Available at SSRN: [http://ssrn.com/abstract=1084598](http://ssrn.com/abstract=1084598) > [@](#): > > Abstract: > Since the passage of the Help America Vote Act in 2002, nearly half of the states have adopted a variety of new identification requirements for voter registration and participation by the 2006 general election. There has been little analysis of whether these requirements reduce voter participation, especially among certain classes of voters. In this paper we document the effect of voter identification requirements on registered voters as they were imposed in states in the 2000 and 2004 presidential elections, and in the 2002 and 2006 midterm elections. Looking first at trends in the aggregate data, we find no evidence that voter identification requirements reduce participation. Using individual-level data from the Current Population Survey across these elections, however, we find that the strictest forms of voter identification requirements - combination requirements of presenting an identification card and positively matching one’s signature with a signature either on file or on the identification card, as well as requirements to show picture identification - have a negative impact on the participation of registered voters relative to the weakest requirement, stating one’s name. We also find evidence that the stricter voter identification requirements depress turnout to a greater extent for less educated and lower income populations, for both minorities and non-minorities. Note that although they say that _Looking first at trends in the aggregate data, we find no evidence that voter identification requirements reduce participation._, they also state that \*…we find that the strictest forms of voter identification requirements…have a negative impact on the participation of registered voters relative to the weakest requirement, stating one’s name. We also find evidence that the stricter voter identification requirements depress turnout to a greater extent for less educated and lower income populations, for both minorities and non-minorities. \* or this one: > [@](#): > > The Empirical Effects of Voter-ID Laws: Present or Absent?Article author querymycoff jd [Google Scholar]wagner mw [Google Scholar]wilson dc [Google Scholar] > Jason D. Mycoffa1, Michael W. Wagnera2 and David C. Wilsona1 > > PS: Political Science & PoliticsPS: Political Science & Politics (2009), 42: 121-126 Has this abstract: > [@](#): > > The effect of voter-identification (voter-ID) laws on turnout is a hot-button issue in contemporary American politics. In April of 2008, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed Indiana’s voter-ID law, the nation’s most rigorous, which requires voters to arrive at the polls with a state-issued photo ID containing an expiration date (Crawford v. Marion County 2008). **In a famous incident highlighting how Hoosiers were dealing with their state’s voter-ID law, representative Julia Carson (D-IN) was initially blocked from voting during Indiana’s 2006 primary election for failing to comply with Indiana’s voter-identification standard. Carson identified herself with her congressional ID card; since that card did not include an expiration date and therefore did not meet Indiana’s voter-identification law, she was turned away at the polls before later being allowed to vote (Goldstein 2006). The rising wave of public, political, and legal debate crested two years later in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling and during the Indiana primaries, with reports of a dozen nuns being denied ballots at the polls due to their lack of appropriate identification** (Urbina 2008). And there is this one: > [@](#): > > Can Voter ID Laws Be Administered in a Race-Neutral Manner? Evidence from the City of Boston in 2008 > > Rachael V. Cobb > Suffulk University - Department of Government > > D. James Greiner > Harvard Law School > > Kevin M. Quinn > UC Berkeley School of Law > > Quarterly Journal of Political Science, Forthcoming > [@](#): > > Abstract: > Is it feasible in the current United States to administer voter identification laws in a race-neutral manner? In this paper, we studied a jurisdiction and an election in which such laws would be unlikely to pose issues of racial difference. We also used state-of-the-art field methods and statistical techniques to account for sources of uncertainty that previous studies had suppressed, including survey non-response. **Our results are discouraging. We find strong evidence that Hispanic voters, and reasonably strong evidence that black voters, were asked for identification at higher rates than white voters. The magnitudes of the differences are troubling. We suggest that it may not be feasible to administer voter ID laws in a race-neutral manner in the current United States, and we explore the theoretical and legal consequences of such a conclusion.** I won’t leave you with the impression that all other papers are of the opinion that Voter-ID laws are harmful. Many others see them as neutral. The point is that, although **Bricker** has provided one such paper saying that Voter ID has negligible effect, it is certainly not the last word on the topic – most of these papers are more recent than his cite. I haven’t read them, because I can’t download the papers at home (a least not without paying a fee. If I’m gonna pay, there are other papers I’d want to get), but the Abstracts tell the relevant results. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2011, 1:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/560 "2011-09-13T01:38:39Z")
Now ask yourself: What would someone do whose interest was not any particular party’s advantage over the other, but in increasing participation in democracy for the sake of strengthening and deepening democracy? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180.md?page=27) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180.md?page=29)