# 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:** 32
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 4:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/621 "2011-09-14T16:20:25Z")
Registration rules vary depending on the state. For example some states require you to be a resident for a certain number of years to vote in that state while others require a few weeks or months. Similarly others allow you to register on election day. Usually there’s a deadline but with rare exceptions, states don’t check the lists of registered voters with convicted felons because that would cause a huge snafu considering how many people have similar names. Also, generally speaking registrations don’t expire unless you don’t vote in a certain number of elections or notify the board you’ve changed your address. That’s why there are a number of areas of the country, most notably college towns, where registered voters exceed the residents. I myself am still registered to vote in two, possibly three different states and realistically there’s nothing in place to stop me from voting in Rhode Island, where I am now, and voting via absentee ballot elsewhere. Like I said, our system operates on the honor system. > [@constanze](#): > > One question about voter registration itself I have: > > So in order to vote on elections, people who are eligible (citizens, over 18 years, no felons\*) must register, either with a party (Rep. or Dem) or as independent. > > I assume they must do this before a deadline some time before the election, so the lists can be verified and compiled and distributed to the election stations. > > On election day (Tuesday, a working day) John Smith goes down to the election station, shows his new photo ID, signature is compared, the volunteer crosses him off the list, he casts his ballot and goes home. > > Or John Smith, who lives out in the boons and can’t afford gas/ is old/ handicapped, applies for an absentee ballot and votes by mail. > > So what happens to the registration roll once the election is over? Is John Smith required to register again for the next election 2 years later (since House and President elections are only 2 years apart)? Is it valid until he moves? Does it vary by state? > > - though that seems to vary ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/622 "2011-09-14T16:38:53Z")
If you have had your wallet lost or stolen, you know what a pain in the ass it is to get all your proof renewed. One problem is a birth certificate. When I applied for a passport, I had to go through a lot of effort . It was expensive. In Michigan, we can get “enhanced licenses”, which get you over the border to Canada easier. But it took time, effort and money to get those things. I live in the city and have a car, so I could get it done. I imagine the frustration for a less mobile person. They have voted for 50 years and now suddenly their right to vote is taken away. Time and money. For some it is a big deal. For all it costs money. The programs themselves cost millions of dollars. All to prevent a practically non existent crime. It is a waste and is stupid all by itself. But when you toss in that its effects are deliberately targeting select groups of citizens, it has no defense. It is wrong. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 4:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/623 "2011-09-14T16:58:44Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > “People of color” > > Now that’s a phrase I haven’t heard in a while and the only people that used it were some well-heeled whites who needed to show how enlightened they were. > > Those same idiots would piss their pants if they spent one hour in Ramallah. Been a while since you offered this. I’m wondering if you’re ashamed of it yet. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 5:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/624 "2011-09-14T17:24:29Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Been a while since you offered this. I’m wondering if you’re ashamed of it yet. Huh? I don’t know what you’re talking about but I obviously struck a nerve. Sorry about that. Anyway I’m done with this silly fight over something that doesn’t prevent anyone from voting while most people either ignore or barely mention the disenfranchisement of felons which suppresses millions of votes. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/625 "2011-09-14T17:51:19Z")
There are not that many people who can improve an argument by removing themselves. We thank you for exercising this rare and special gift. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/626 "2011-09-14T18:02:11Z")
I thought about starting a new thread for this, but I think it fits in with the whole “GOP voting reform” meme. > **[Top Republicans pushing plan to change the way Pa. elects a president](https://www.inquirer.com/philly/news/politics/20110914_Top_Republicans_pushing_plan_to_change_the_way_Pa__elects_a_president.html)** > > HARRISBURG - Top state Republicans are throwing their political heft behind a plan to change the way Pennsylvania elects a president, setting the stage for a showdown this fall over whether the move would wipe out Pennsylvania's clout in national... Top Republicans pushing plan to change the way Pa. elects a president > [@](#): > > A brigade that reads like a who’s who of legislative Republicans wants to do away with the winner-take-all system of apportioning the state’s electoral votes and replace it with one that would do so by congressional district. > … > Democrats counter that the proposed change is not only blatantly political - designed to give GOP candidates the edge - but also bad for Pennsylvania, as it will diminish the state’s role in deciding who occupies the White House. > > To that, Pileggi says: “This concept about clout and perceived importance is secondary to making sure that individual voters have a say in who the president is.” I can see where one could argue for this way of doing things _if all 50 state do it at the same time_, but this strikes me as doing it selectively only where it will benefit Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/627 "2011-09-14T18:19:54Z")
> [@Ibn\_Warraq](#): > > Anyway I’m done with this silly fight over something that doesn’t prevent anyone from voting while most people either ignore or barely mention the disenfranchisement of felons which suppresses millions of votes. Then may we assume you are also done with the silly fight over what the hell we need the voter ID laws for in the first place, since there is virtually no voter fraud issues for them to correct? ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 7:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/628 "2011-09-14T19:01:54Z")
I did not mention the felons because a lot of people like the idea that they can not vote, When I was doing voter registration ,I was surprised to find that felons thought they were not allowed to vote . In Michigan, if you served your time and your probation is done, you can vote. There are states that do not allow felons. I guess their felons are worse than ours and deserve lifetime punishment. ---
**Author:** ![Ibn\_Warraq](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/e19b73/32.png) [@Ibn\_Warraq](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ibn_Warraq)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 7:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/629 "2011-09-14T19:13:02Z")
> [@Jack\_Batty](#): > > Then may we assume you are also done with the silly fight over what the hell we need the voter ID laws for in the first place, since there is virtually no voter fraud issues for them to correct? I’ll address this one since it’s perfectly reasonable. I don’t think voter ID laws are something we need and think we’d be fine without them. I’ve also repeatedly pointed out that they don’t stop actual fraud because when it’s done it’s usually via absentee ballots so I’m bit confused by your question. It’s phrased in a way that implies that I think voter identification fraud is a problem and we need voter ID laws to stop it. The closest I ever came to that was mentioning that America has a long history of that sort of voter fraud, as anyone familiar with Jim Curley can attest. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/630 "2011-09-14T19:14:35Z")
And just to offer clarity, once again, for the stubbornly dim. Not about “preventing” anyone from voting. About making it more difficult for a relatively small number of voters, to hamper, to discourage. As a matter of principle, this unacceptable, it is not kosher for the legislature to craft laws to partisan advantage. If principle is important, this ought to be enough. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/631 "2011-09-14T19:45:42Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > I thought about starting a new thread for this, but I think it fits in with the whole “GOP voting reform” meme. > [Top Republicans pushing plan to change the way Pa. elects a president](http://www.philly.com/philly/news/pennsylvania/20110914_Top_Republicans_pushing_plan_to_change_the_way_Pa__elects_a_president.html) > Top Republicans pushing plan to change the way Pa. elects a president > > I can see where one could argue for this way of doing things _if all 50 state do it at the same time_, but this strikes me as doing it selectively only where it will benefit Republicans. Don’t a couple of states already do this? And if we’re opening up the thread to discuss changes in procedure that benefit only one party, how about the Massachusetts appoint-a-senator dance? Once upon a time, Massachusetts had the same rule many states do: if one of its US Senate seats becomes vacant, then the governor may appoint a replacement, who serves until the next senate election. Then tragedy struck. Massachusetts, though heavily Democratic in its state legislature, went and elected a Republican governor. And further tragedy: a Massachusetts senator was running for President! If he won, his senate seat would be vacant and the Republican governor would appoint a replacement. So the democratic-controlled state legislature rushed through a change: from now on, the governor does NOT have the power to appoint a replacement senator. Instead, if the senate seat becomes vacant, a special election will be held to fill it. As it happens, of course, Kerry did not win, and the scenario did not come to pass. But some time later, with a Democratic governor once more safely at the helm, tragedy (real tragedy this time) struck: the Lion of the Senate, Ted Kennedy, died. Now the seat would be vacant until the special election, and with a close vote on the health care bill coming up, that would be a real . . .er . . . tragedy for Democrats. So once again the Democratic state legislature acted, this time restoring the governor’s power to appoint a temporary US senator to serve until the special election. Does anyone believe that each of those moves was not precisely calculated to give maximum advantage to the Democrats? Anyone? Still, each move was perfectly legitimate. And as long as you can point to a legitimate result, your motive is irrelevant. Those moves were made with the idea of creating partisan advantage… but they were also legitimate changes. Each change lessened the time that a senate seatc would be vacated of an elected senator. ---
**Author:** ![davidm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/davidm/32/225_2.png) [@davidm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/davidm)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/632 "2011-09-14T19:55:17Z")
Tu quoque. Two wrongs don’t make a right. Passing laws to directly create partisan advantage is unethical regardless of who does it. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/633 "2011-09-14T20:19:14Z")
We are grateful, as always, for the **Counselor’s** vigilant attention to liberal hypocrisy. I hereby concede that these Massachussets incidents were unsavory, and not in the finest traditions of our nation. Which means I’m up by two, **Counselor**. Neener-neener. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/634 "2011-09-14T21:18:16Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > We are grateful, as always, for the **Counselor’s** vigilant attention to liberal hypocrisy. I hereby concede that these Massachussets incidents were unsavory, and not in the finest traditions of our nation. > > Which means I’m up by two, **Counselor**. Neener-neener. Yup, Bricker actually found an instance in which some liberals somewhere were acting less than ethically. That means we close the SDMB, he wins, we all go home? Is that it? I forget. I mean, there must have been SOME reason for him to type up that lengthy and fact-filled post… ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 9:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/635 "2011-09-14T21:21:13Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > 😕 😕 > Who can afford champagne most easily, the rich or the poor? Depends on the champagne, doesn’t it? There’s some rather lovely value priced domestic these days. Hmm. I wonder if you’re not just asking a wine question here. > [@](#): > > If you can answer that, then I ask who can more easily afford the burden in transport costs, know-how, and fees to obtain ID? Oooh. This one’s a thunker. So you’re contention is that only the rich can afford to get an ID despite my link that states that a rather large majority have already done it? That’s what I’m getting at any rate because you left out a big piece of middle ground in your post. I’m also curious as to this burden of “know-how” and how exactly people can’t afford it. > [@](#): > > That’s two questions. If I’m allowed a third, it will be: Why do you need help connecting such simple dots? I’m connecting dots just fine. Thanks for your concern. > [@gonzomax](#): > > So you are at peace with **15 percent of the poor being denied the right to vote**. I guess they are just poor and don’t count to you. But the American idea is that all American citizens have the right to vote. That is why we eliminated the voters tests . That is why we dumped laws that stopped blacks from voting. That is why poll taxes are against the law. > Nobody should have their right to vote diminished by not having enough money or living in the country. You are not less of an American if you are poor. Bolding mine. They’ve already been denied the right to vote? Must’ve missed that. Everything I’ve seen has stated that a percentage of the population doesn’t have ID yet. I hadn’t realized that the burden of getting one was so severe that every last one of them has already given up. I mean they must have otherwise you’d be making a very large assumption that has certainly not been proven just for emotional effect. Oh. I’d also hate to forget to salute you on your subtly stating that I think poor people are less of an american than I am and that they don’t count. Nicely done sir. I tip my top hat at you. I’m almost tempted to remove my monocle. > [@gonzomax](#): > > [Voter suppression - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voter_suppression#Caging_lists) The new regulations are intended to suppress votes of likely Dem voters. You can see from this article that the intent has been to keep Dems from voting. Is it not to clean up elections because voter fraud is practically unknown. There is no reason to spend millions of dollars to prevent a crime that does not exist. I’ll just look down that page and find the part talking about voter ID laws. Wait. It’s not there.:eek: Were you trying to imply a link between the two? Oh but you’re a sharp one. > [@elucidator](#): > > And just to offer clarity, once again, for the stubbornly dim. Not about “preventing” anyone from voting. You and Gonzomax ought to have a chat then. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/636 "2011-09-14T21:28:27Z")
He can read my posts just as easily as you, he at least appears to understand them. ---
**Author:** ![Harborwolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Harborwolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Harborwolf)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/637 "2011-09-14T21:44:11Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > He can read my posts just as easily as you, he at least appears to understand them. I just wanted to make sure that when I question his posts about all the poor being denied their rights to vote (his words), you don’t think I’m being dim. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 10:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/638 "2011-09-14T22:33:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Does anyone believe that each of those moves was not precisely calculated to give maximum advantage to the Democrats? Anyone? We’ve been over that before, you babbling Murdoch chimp. You have yet to explain how what they did was in any way distinguishable from what they would have done if their interest was in democracy itself. Nor has anyone else. But, since you can conceive of no greater principle than partisan advantage, that’s inevitably the only way you can console yourself. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 11:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/639 "2011-09-14T23:11:14Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > We are grateful, as always, for the **Counselor’s** vigilant attention to liberal hypocrisy. I hereby concede that these Massachussets incidents were unsavory, and not in the finest traditions of our nation. > > Which means I’m up by two, **Counselor**. Neener-neener. Yes, and thank you. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2011, 11:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180/640 "2011-09-14T23:17:23Z")
> [@MaxTheVool](#): > > Yup, Bricker actually found an instance in which some liberals somewhere were acting less than ethically. > That means we close the SDMB, he wins, we all go home? Is that it? I forget. I mean, there must have been SOME reason for him to type up that lengthy and fact-filled post… Because there are (or were at the time) posters here who insisted that the Massachusetts efforts were nothing but a shiny example of commitment to democracy and had nothing to do with gaining partisan advantage. In fact, although my ignore settings prevent me from being completely certain, I would venture a comfortable guess that at least one poster still feels this way. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180.md?page=31) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-gop-voting-reform/595180.md?page=33)