# I Pit the ID-demanding GOP vote-suppressors (Part 1) **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [June 12, 2012, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943 "2012-06-12T19:15:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 137
**Author:** ![CannyDan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cannydan/32/548_2.png) [@CannyDan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CannyDan)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2012, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2721 "2012-10-18T14:25:12Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > See post [1908](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=15322190&postcount=1908) for one. You said > [@Uzi](#): > > Actually, many people in this thread have used the argument about the cost of voter ID (to the government) not being justifiable. That makes it pretty damned clear that they are against voter ID in any form because any form of ID costs money. This seems to me to be a claim that many people in this thread find the cost of voter ID measures to be the most significant, or at least a very significant, objection. Your cite says > [@Post 1908](#): > > …legislation which would make the voting process more difficult, cost millions upon millions of dollars to implement, and that would solve a problem which is completely and utterly non-existent, while encouraging voter apathy… Four objections (difficulty imposed on voters, cost, non-existent problem, encouraging apathy), of which cost is but one. Significant? Perhaps. Very significant? I’m not feeling it. Most significant? I’m sure **Budget Player Cadet** can contradict me if he wishes, but I just don’t see cost as being his primary objection. That’s one partial. How about the “many”? > [@Uzi](#): > > If you are willing to admit that democrats are mostly incompetent boobs who can’t complete simple task, then sure I’ll admit it affects them more than someone else in similar circumstances. But if the circumstances are the same, it will affect both parties equally. So, a black person working 15 jobs and has 42 kids living 500 miles away from the nearest DMV which is only open 1 day a month for an hour at 3am to 4am where the employees have a 2 hour lunch break, well, I don’t think it matters that the person is voting left or right. Now if you want to argue that the white person who only lives 499 miles away has some inherent advantage, by all means have at it. Again with the strawman. It has not been argued that the voter ID measures pose a differential difficulty to ethnic (or, better, cultural) groups. It is asserted that Democratic leaning voters are statistically more likely to be among the groups having the greatest difficulty meeting the requirements. Thus Democratic leaning voters will be asymmetrically impacted, although some voters of all stripes will feel some impact. The net effect is that, while some strongly Republican groups (e.g., older voters) may see some disenfranchisement, far larger numbers of predominantly Democratic strongholds (e.g., minorities, students) will be disenfranchised. > [@Uzi](#): > > For a guy who claims I’m not paying attention:rolleyes: > “But it **shouldn’t** be called a ‘Voter ID’. It should be a **standardized form of national ID** that **can be used** for voting along with many other things. But, l **et the poor have them for free** if you want.” > Maybe read more than the first sentence, huh? If you scroll way up to the top of the page, you will find the topic of this thread. You should read it. Pro tip: It isn’t about a National ID. (If you actually read the thread, you would have seen that I support a national ID, but that is tangential.) And my reference to the original “user fees” noted that they had been withdrawn or modified so that cost of the ID itself (although not all other costs) would not be a barrier. It was the Constitution, not you, who “let the poor have them for free”. Your belated and apparently grudging acquiescence is though gratefully and humbly acknowledged. > [@Uzi](#): > > I’ve answered these complaints many times. I have explained the difference between an ‘excuse’ and a ‘valid reason’ ad nauseam. It is you and your compatriots who can’t seem to see the difference and expect the government to wipe people’s noses (and asses) for them in every aspect of their lives. You have offered us your own judgment of what constitutes a valid reason versus an excuse, yes, _ad nauseam_. You may have noticed that a substantial number of posters disagree with your judgment. You may also have seen that several courts have decided that what might not be a significant barrier in the long term is in fact enough of a problem in the short term as to effectively disenfranchise legitimately registered voters. They apparently agree with us that a phased in program in which voters are given a realistic opportunity to comply is preferable, indeed even legally required, to prevent disenfranchisement of voters. So it isn’t an “excuse” after all. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2012, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2722 "2012-10-18T16:48:57Z")
> [@CalMeacham](#): > > Yeah, but I can’t believe he’d enter the same line three times in different years. He’d express it differently. > > And I stand by my lack of “ain’t” – Twain didn’t like to use it in his own discourse, although he’d put it in the mouths of his characters. He was trying to avoid sounding like Huck Finn in everyday life, though, and wanted to project the image of a knowledgeable gentleman with wit. It didn’t matter if some people used it. Twain generally didn’t. “The temporary decadence of the English language is due, like so much else, to our anachronistic class system. “Educated” English has grown anaemic because for long past it has not been reinvigorated from below. The people likeliest to use simple concrete language, and to think of metaphors that really call up a visual image, are those who are in contact with physical reality. A useful word like _bottleneck,_ for instance, would be most likely to occur to someone used to dealing with conveyor belts: or again, the expressive military phrase _to winkle out_ implies acquaintance both with winkles and with machine-gun nests. And the vitality of English depends on a steady supply of images of this kind. It follows that language, at any rate the English language, suffers when the educated classes lose touch with the manual workers. As things are at present, nearly every Englishman, whatever his origins, feels the working-class manner of speech, and even working-class idioms, to be inferior. Cockney, the most widespread dialect, is the most despised of all. Any word or usage that is supposedly cockney is looked on as vulgar, even when, as is sometimes the case, it is merely an archaism. An example is _ain’t,_ which is now abandoned in favour of the much weaker form _aren’t._ But _ain’t_ was good enough English eighty years ago, and Queen Victoria would have said _ain’t._” – George Orwell, _The English People_ (1942) ---
**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:** [October 18, 2012, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2723 "2012-10-18T17:07:26Z")
It’s always nivce to real Orwell, but I don’t see the relevance of this passage. I wasn’t saying that “ain’t” wasn’t allowable. I was saying that Twain preferred not to use it himself. I nthink this is enough of a hijack. Sorry about that. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [October 18, 2012, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2724 "2012-10-18T17:59:18Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > They have? All of them? Lots of them? Who? No, I have only heard the one from pennsylvania admit that political motives were behind the voter ID law. Once again, in light of the how much more fraud exists in absentee ballots than in in person voting, why so much concern and political capital spent in voter ID laws and nothing on absentee ballots? Are you denying that these laws are being passed with voter suppression in mind? > [@Euphonious\_Polemic](#): > > So… > > A flawed perception by the public - perception that has been, shall we say, “guided” by groups with an interest in whose votes are cast aside - that incorrect, wrong and can we even say, specious perception… > > Your premise would be that correcting that wrong perception should trump the right to vote for thousands of people. bricker isn’t trying to fix the wrong perception, he is pandering to the wrong perception and suppressing mostly Democratic voters while he’s at it. > [@Uzi](#): > > Probably the same place that says millions of people will be disenfranchised due to working multiple jobs, and,..fuckit, I’m not going through the bullshit list of excuses again. It isn’t important. > > My comment is that it will always be easier to find people who say they couldn’t vote due to one reason (or excuse) or another, rather than find those who have voted illegally. Those numbers will never match. The latter requires a burden of proof that the former does not. Yeah but we’re not talking about a difference of 10 :: 1 or even 1000 :: 1. We are talking about a handful of cases of in person voter fraud (and even the examples repsented here were not examples of voter fraud that would be caught by voter ID laws) versus millions of voters nationwide that have to do something more than show up at the polls to vote. > [@](#): > > Well, you could decide that education will resolve the issue, but many will think you are doing it for the same partisan reasons of the other side and not change their opinion. > Or, you could implement an ID system (that most of the civilized world has, btw. I guess they have been brainwashed by the Republicans as well?) and remove their objection entirely? Maybe you prefer bashing your head pointlessly against a wall. Most of the rest of the world have national ID cards or use voter ink. > [@Bricker](#): > > To what do you attribute your stunning failure to make that case thus far? A very good Republican propoganda machine. > [@Bricker](#): > > That approach doesn’t seem to be working. > > Again, for the purposes of this discussion, we assume the Evil Republicans’ Lie has caused even a large majority of Democrats in the public to favor Voter ID. I ask what you plan is to fix it, and you plaintively say that you wish intelligent and articulate men would stop supporting cynics. > > But they are. Your plan to just tell the truth, as you see the truth, is not working – as your Twain quote acknowledges. > > Is it going to start working in the future? I think the best way to fix it is through the courts. Where there is a popular idea that infringes on the rights of a group, the courts have been the traditional guardian of those rights. It is (or should be) especially so when the right in question is the right to vote. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2725 "2012-10-19T01:03:22Z")
[Well, it looks like we’ve found another real case of shenanigans:](http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/10/colin_small_virginia_gop_voter_registration_fraud.php) > [@](#): > > A Pennsylvania man employed by a company working for the Republican Party of Virginia was arrested by investigators from the Rockingham County Sheriff’s office on Thursday and charged with destroying voter registration forms. > > Colin Small, a 31-year-old resident of Phoenixville, Pa., worked for Pinpoint, a company hired to register voters on behalf of the Republican Party of Virginia. Prosecutors charged him with four counts of destruction of voter registration applications, eight counts of failing to disclose voter registration applications and one count of obstruction of justice… ---
**Author:** ![Uzi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/91b2a8/32.png) [@Uzi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Uzi)\ **Post date:** [October 19, 2012, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2726 "2012-10-19T01:17:55Z")
> [@CannyDan](#): > > I’m sure **Budget Player Cadet** can contradict me if he wishes, but I just don’t see cost as being his primary objection. Ah, my mistake. He doesn’t like voter ID for many reasons. And as the cost of a national ID program would be similar or higher, then can we safely assume that the arguments against one would apply to the other? > [@](#): > > It is asserted that Democratic leaning voters are statistically more likely to be among the groups having the greatest difficulty meeting the requirements. Yes, to clarify then, there is a subset of the population that is less capable of accomplishing or following simple tasks than the majority. Most of these people vote for the Democrats. Gotchya. Additionally, it is very important that we get their opinion on how best to run the country because, given their ability to run their own lives, we can’t lose out on such wisdom. > [@](#): > > Pro tip: It isn’t about a National ID. (If you actually read the thread, you would have seen that I support a national ID, but that is tangential.) And my reference to the original “user fees” noted that they had been withdrawn or modified so that cost of the ID itself (although not all other costs) would not be a barrier. It was the Constitution, not you, who “let the poor have them for free”. Your belated and apparently grudging acquiescence is though gratefully and humbly acknowledged. And I’ve said instead of whinging about a voter ID, leverage the requirement to implement a national ID system, which I also support and the democrats have in the past. A national ID isn’t a ‘poll tax’ (but then having a specific ID to prove who you are really isn’t either, but you got to have something to whinge about). > [@](#): > > You have offered us your own judgment of what constitutes a valid reason versus an excuse, yes, _ad nauseam_. You may have noticed that a substantial number of posters disagree with your judgment. A rather dangerous card to play as the majority of the population agrees with having an ID to vote with. Now you use the same argument that your ‘majority’ is more correct than the greater majority. As I’ve said previously, having been dirt poor myself, it did not hamper my ability to interact with the government unduly when required. It just required more planning on my part. I want you to focus on the word ‘planning’ in that last sentence. My circumstances may have been completely different than someone else’s. Lack of planning, and most people are capable of planning simple tasks, means that accomplishing the task is just an excuse. > [@](#): > > You may also have seen that several courts have decided that what might not be a significant barrier in the long term is in fact enough of a problem in the short term as to effectively disenfranchise legitimately registered voters. Where did you get the idea I disagreed? If you change the requirements overnight, then it would be almost impossible to meet them. If the people who implement the changes are incompetent or deliberately obtuse, then it will be difficult to meet them. If the requirements are known 6 months ahead of time, then we are moving towards an excuse not to comply vs an actual disenfranchisement. That Pennsylvania(?) site was just confusing, so unless they change it, it could stop people from getting their ID. If it wasn’t confusing (a simple change really), then we’re back into it just being an excuse to not comply. I just believe people are more competent than the majority in this thread seem to think they are, so my timelines will naturally be shorter than yours. But then I also believe that if they are not so competent, then their opinion won’t be missed. ---
**Author:** ![rooostra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d07c76/32.png) [@rooostra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rooostra)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 6:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2727 "2012-10-22T06:23:28Z")
I am curious about the response of any Virginians (or others) about the fact that the Republican-controlled Board of Elections will not prosecute the fine Republican fellow who was arrested for discarding completed voter registrations. I suspect that this may impact voter confidence. Bricker, as a Virginia resident (as i was back in the day), any comment? > **[Examiner is back - Examiner.com](https://examiner.com)** > > Examiner.com is the go-to source for millions of people who want to know what's happening in their city. And we're still growing! > **[State Board of Elections won’t ask attorney general to investigate worker...](https://www.wtvr.com/2012/10/20/attorney-general-wont-investigate-worker-arrested-for-dumping-voter-registrations)** > > State Senator Donald Mceachin, who is chair of the Senate Democratic Caucus, asked the attorney general to investigate following the arrest of after Colin Small. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 7:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2728 "2012-10-22T07:33:10Z")
My read is that the guy is a doofus. Fuhgeddaboutit. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 1:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2729 "2012-10-22T13:45:33Z")
[International observers to monitor U.S. elections for voter suppression.](http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/263141-international-monitors-at-polling-places-draw-criticism-from-voter-fraud-group) > [@](#): > > The Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), a United Nations partner on democratization and human rights projects, will deploy 44 observers from its human rights office around the country on Election Day to monitor an array of activities, including potential disputes at polling places. It’s part of a broader observation mission that will send out an additional 80 to 90 members of parliament from nearly 30 countries. 44 observers? That ain’t even one per state, guys. Do you realize how big this country is? At any rate, the RW is pissed! 😃 > [@](#): > > Liberal-leaning civil rights groups met with representatives from the OSCE this week to raise their fears about what they say are systematic efforts to suppress minority voters likely to vote for President Obama. > > The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, the NAACP and the ACLU, among other groups, warned this month in a letter to Daan Everts, a senior official with OSCE, of “a coordinated political effort to disenfranchise millions of Americans — particularly traditionally disenfranchised groups like minorities.” > > The request for foreign monitoring of election sites drew a strong rebuke from Catherine Engelbrecht, founder and president of True the Vote, a conservative-leaning group seeking to crack down on election fraud. > > “These activist groups sought assistance not from American sources, but from the United Nations,” she said in a statement to The Hill. “The United Nations has no jurisdiction over American elections.” > > Neil Simon, director of communications for the OSCE’s parliamentary assembly, agreed the U.N. does not have jurisdiction over U.S. elections but noted all OSCE member counties, which include the United States, have committed since 1990 to hold free and democratic elections and to allow one another to observe their elections. ---
**Author:** ![CannyDan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cannydan/32/548_2.png) [@CannyDan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CannyDan)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2730 "2012-10-22T14:15:12Z")
> [@Uzi](#): > > Ah, my mistake. He doesn’t like voter ID for many reasons. And as the cost of a national ID program would be similar or higher, then can we safely assume that the arguments against one would apply to the other? > Yes, to clarify then, there is a subset of the population that is less capable of accomplishing or following simple tasks than the majority. Most of these people vote for the Democrats. Gotchya. > Additionally, it is very important that we get their opinion on how best to run the country because, given their ability to run their own lives, we can’t lose out on such wisdom. > And I’ve said instead of whinging about a voter ID, leverage the requirement to implement a national ID system, which I also support and the democrats have in the past. A national ID isn’t a ‘poll tax’ (but then having a specific ID to prove who you are really isn’t either, but you got to have something to whinge about). > A rather dangerous card to play as the majority of the population agrees with having an ID to vote with. Now you use the same argument that your ‘majority’ is more correct than the greater majority. As I’ve said previously, having been dirt poor myself, it did not hamper my ability to interact with the government unduly when required. It just required more planning on my part. > I want you to focus on the word ‘planning’ in that last sentence. My circumstances may have been completely different than someone else’s. Lack of planning, and most people are capable of planning simple tasks, means that accomplishing the task is just an excuse. > Where did you get the idea I disagreed? If you change the requirements overnight, then it would be almost impossible to meet them. If the people who implement the changes are incompetent or deliberately obtuse, then it will be difficult to meet them. If the requirements are known 6 months ahead of time, then we are moving towards an excuse not to comply vs an actual disenfranchisement. That Pennsylvania(?) site was just confusing, so unless they change it, it could stop people from getting their ID. If it wasn’t confusing (a simple change really), then we’re back into it just being an excuse to not comply. > I just believe people are more competent than the majority in this thread seem to think they are, so my timelines will naturally be shorter than yours. But then I also believe that if they are not so competent, then their opinion won’t be missed. Your paragraphs 1 and 4 return to the national ID issue, which is still a hijack. This thread is about the Republican voter ID initiative, its motivation, and its consequences. Mentioning national ID as a potential solution makes some sense, and I think you’ve seen that many ‘liberal’ posters favor it, in concept anyway. But constantly harping on it does nothing further to advance the actual topic under discussion. Oh, and have you now given up on supporting, rather than just repeatedly asserting, the “many” objections to cost? The rest of your argument goes to the, shall I say, ‘worthiness’ of voters – or lack thereof. In this post and previous posts you impute some generalized lack of intelligence or lack of competence to virtually all people who may be unable to speedily meet the newly imposed paperwork criteria and offer your own personal anecdote as evidence that “planning” is the only relevant factor. Folks who cannot meet the criteria _must have_ failed to plan properly, clearly demonstrating their unworthiness. You even (in other posts) belittle by exaggeration the hurdles posed by multiple jobs, multiple kids, lack of a car, etc. because these are only obstacles to people that indulge in bad planning. To say that this demonstrates nothing except your misunderstanding of the ramifications of poverty is a massive understatement. Further, please note that this country has no test of intelligence or general competence as a prerequisite for voting. Even the much more limited literacy tests of days past have been found to be illegal. You reveal your own feelings, apparently without shame, stating “if they are not so competent, then their opinion won’t be missed”. Your elitist attitude isn’t likely to be agreed with by most American liberals, or most Americans of any stripe who hold dear the Constitution. Frankly, I find statements like this > [@Uzi](#): > > Additionally, it is very important that we get their opinion on how best to run the country because, given their ability to run their own lives, we can’t lose out on such wisdom. to be abhorrent, shallow, and blind to the multiple uncontrollable circumstances that can reduce even a thoughtful and intelligent person to a bottom rung on the socioeconomic ladder. I can though see how an unstated, perhaps even a subconscious, version of this belief could underlie some conservative support for the “Voter ID _NOW_” hysteria, with its xenophobic references to illegals and felons. It fits perfectly with the Just-World philosophy that seems to be the basis of your own argument. But using it to justify or rationalize a new ‘general competence’ requirement for voting remains unacceptable. ---
**Author:** ![John\_DiFool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_difool/32/19543_2.png) [@John\_DiFool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_DiFool)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 2:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2731 "2012-10-22T14:24:54Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > My read is that the guy is a doofus. Fuhgeddaboutit. You are being far too kind. ---
**Author:** ![Skip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ebca7d/32.png) [@Skip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skip)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 3:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2732 "2012-10-22T15:10:40Z")
Lengthy profile on Hans von Spakovsky in the New Yorker: [The Voter-Fraud Myth](http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2012/10/29/121029fa_fact_mayer) I’m still reading it but this stuck out already: > [@](#): > > Von Spakovsky recently sat down with me in a conference room at the Heritage Foundation, wearing rimless eyeglasses and a sports jacket with a crisp white pocket square. In our conversation, and in later phone calls and e-mails, he expressed himself with lawyerly reserve. He said of True the Vote and its affiliates, “They’re doing a great job.” Earlier this year, he noted, the Pew Center on the States found that more than 1.8 million people who had died were still registered to vote in America, and that 2.75 million people were registered to vote in multiple states. How many of these errors translate into fraudulent votes? “It is impossible to answer,” he said. “We don’t have the tools in place.” But he cited a 2000 investigation, by the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, of voting records in Georgia over the previous two decades; the paper reported that it had turned up fifty-four hundred instances of dead people being recorded as having voted. “That seems pretty substantial to me,” he said. > > He did not mention that the article’s findings were later revised. The Journal-Constitution ran a follow-up article after the Georgia Secretary of State’s office indicated that the vast majority of the cases appeared to reflect clerical errors. Upon closer inspection, the paper admitted, its only specific example of a deceased voter casting a ballot didn’t hold up. The ballot of a living voter had been attributed to a dead man whose name was nearly identical. So from 5400 down to 0. Another glaring example: > [@](#): > > When Sharp heard her house described as a vacant lot, and learned that Marlene Kocher—the member of the Ohio Voter Integrity Project who had filed the challenge against her—had not bothered to visit her address, she exploded. “This lady has nothing else better to do?” she said. “I think she needs to get a life!” > > Faux recalled that Kocher “apologized and kind of shrunk back.” > > “We made a mistake,” Mary Siegel, a leader of the Ohio Voter Integrity Project, who has been involved in a local Tea Party group, told me. “We’re just here to protect the voter. We have no idea when we look at the registrations what color or creed or party you are. We just look at where your property is and how many people are living there.” ---
**Author:** ![Skip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ebca7d/32.png) [@Skip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skip)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2733 "2012-10-22T15:16:34Z")
Posting again because Hans Van Spakovsky is the biggest POS ever to walk the planet: > [@](#): > > on Spakovsky offered me the names of two experts who, he said, would confirm that voter-impersonation fraud posed a significant peril: Robert Pastor, the director of the Center for Democracy and Election Management, at American University, and Larry Sabato, a political-science professor at the University of Virginia. Pastor, von Spakovsky noted, had spoken to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights about being a victim of election fraud: voting in Georgia, he discovered that someone else had already voted under his name. > > When I reached Pastor, he clarified what had happened to him. “I think they just mistakenly checked my name when my son voted—it was just a mistake.” He added, “I don’t think that voter-impersonation fraud is a serious problem.” ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2734 "2012-10-22T15:42:23Z")
> [@rooostra](#): > > I am curious about the response of any Virginians (or others) about the fact that the Republican-controlled Board of Elections will not prosecute the fine Republican fellow who was arrested for discarding completed voter registrations. I suspect that this may impact voter confidence. > > Bricker, as a Virginia resident (as i was back in the day), any comment? > > [StockBot by Examiner.com - Stock Examiner bot by Examiner.com](http://www.examiner.com/article/gop-controlled-virginia-board-of-elections-refuses-to-prosecute-gop-voter-fraud-1) > > [http://wtvr.com/2012/10/20/attorney-general-wont-investigate-worker-arrested-for-dumping-voter-registrations/](http://wtvr.com/2012/10/20/attorney-general-wont-investigate-worker-arrested-for-dumping-voter-registrations/) According to the WTVR link, the reason they have have not referred this to the AG is that Virginia voter registration forms do not identify a party for the voter. That’s true: in Virginia, we don’t register to vote by party and no form indicates party affiliation. So as I understand it, the Registrar, Brandi Lilly, is saying that they don’t believe they have evidence of a partisan-motivated crime. I don’t know of any facts that contradict this claim, but I’d be willing to hear them. Now, the [examiner.com](http://examiner.com) site says: > [@](#): > > [WTVR.com](http://WTVR.com) has reported locally from Virginia that The Virginia State Board of Elections (VSBE) will be refusing to prosecute Colin Small, 31, who was arrested on charges of obstruction of justice and voter fraud. Under the written law the Virgina Attorney General is unable to move forward with a prosecution unless it is requested to investigate by the VSBE. Small, therefore, is off the legal hook despite the fact he was witnessed and there is evidence of him committing a crime. That’s not quite what the WTVR report says, though: > [@WTVR](#): > > The State Board of Elections says it will not ask Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli to investigate the case of a Republican Party contract worker, accused of throwing voter registration forms in the trash. > . > . > . > “There’s no way to tell by party when people fill out these forms, what party they’re affiliated with, so I don’t think there’s any political motivation,” Virginia Registrar Brandi Lilly said Friday. The video expands on this, mentioning that the Rockingham Sheriff also did not see any probable cause to believe the issue was politically-based. There is nothing in Virginia law that prevents the sheriff from accusing Colin Small of a crime, and the Commonwealth’s Attorney of Rockingham from then prosecuting that crime. There is no requirement that the state Attorney General investigate this crime before it is prosecuted, contrary to the suggestion made by the [examiner.com](http://examiner.com) story. So – my comment is that the WTVR link accurately lays out the facts, but that the [examiner.com](http://examiner.com) article claims to draw information from WTVR’s article, but adds additional, false, claims to the mix. As I understand it, Colin Small is, in fact, not free from legal consequences at present, and that state has absolutely zero to do with the AG’s office. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 4:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2735 "2012-10-22T16:12:55Z")
> [@](#): > > …There’s no way to tell by party when people fill out these forms, what party they’re affiliated with, so I don’t think there’s any political motivation," Virginia Registrar Brandi Lilly said Friday… I still think this is too small a variety of potato to matter, but this says much less than it pretends. So party affiliation isn’t recorded on the forms? OK, great, settles that. But how does that ensure that the guy doing the registering work is innocent of any such knowledge? Anyone with an IQ above warm cottage cheese who spends five minutes talking with a prospective voter is likely to suss out their political leanings. So if he doesn’t turn in the forms that come from people he thinks lean left, what friggin’ difference does it make that the form does not record it? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 4:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2736 "2012-10-22T16:50:09Z")
[Interesting piece in Salon.](http://www.salon.com/2012/10/21/if_ballots_were_bullets/) > [@](#): > > Since 2000, there have been only about 10 cases in the United States of people impersonating someone else at the polls, the only type of fraud that voter ID laws could conceivably prevent, according to a study by News21. This small number is not surprising. Impacting an election through voter impersonation would require a scheme of comically byzantine proportions, including “an army of individual impersonators,” notes Barbara Arnwine, president of the Lawyers Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. That’s why it’s more likely, according to the Brennan Center, for a person to be struck by lightning than to pretend to be someone else at the polls. > > Nevertheless, Republican state officials are responding to fewer than a dozen errant voters by disenfranchising more than three million eligible ones; for every one person charged with voter impersonation in the past 12 years, 300,000 legal voters could be blocked from the ballot box. > > Imagine if such an obnoxiously lopsided ratio were applied to guns – we would be deafened by the outcries from Second Amendment advocates, who are firm in their belief that crime prevention is not a valid reason to curtail any law-abiding citizen’s ability to obtain a gun. Instead, they insist, we should simply prosecute gun crimes after they are actually committed. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2737 "2012-10-22T17:17:38Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [Interesting piece in Salon.](http://www.salon.com/2012/10/21/if_ballots_were_bullets/) Fascinating. Another source quotes the Brennan Center. You know what this reminds me of? Some idiot group – Human Rights Watch, I think – authored an article that claimed a criminal conviction for urinating in public was grounds to force someone to register as a sex offender. GFactor and I co-authored a SDSAB piece that addressed this claim. We found dozens, if not hundreds, of citations on the wen to support the claim… except that they all seemed to trace back to that single HRW claim, and our independent review of the claim found it to be essentially false. But everyone with an axe to grind about sex offender registries had credulously repeated the claim, giving it an air of authority. And here comes BrainGlutton, genius extraordinaire, saying how interesting that yet another article agrees with him… and shockingly, that article ALSO relies on the Brennan Center conclusions. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2738 "2012-10-22T17:19:51Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > I still think this is too small a variety of potato to matter, but this says much less than it pretends. So party affiliation isn’t recorded on the forms? OK, great, settles that. But how does that ensure that the guy doing the registering work is innocent of any such knowledge? > > Anyone with an IQ above warm cottage cheese who spends five minutes talking with a prospective voter is likely to suss out their political leanings. So if he doesn’t turn in the forms that come from people he thinks lean left, what friggin’ difference does it make that the form does not record it? That’s a reasonable point. Of course, there is nothing preventing local law enforcement from charging him, if they please. And are you really saying that you believe the correct course of action is to rely on the discretion of Virginia AG Ken Cuccinelli to take over the investigation? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2739 "2012-10-22T17:38:21Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Fascinating. Another source quotes the Brennan Center. 😕 Very high-credibility source, [the Brennan Center.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brennan_Center_for_Justice) What is your point? BTW, the [Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawyers'_Committee_for_Civil_Rights_Under_Law) which the piece quotes, is a completely different (and much older) organization. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [October 22, 2012, 6:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/2740 "2012-10-22T18:26:02Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > 😕 Very high-credibility source, [the Brennan Center.](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brennan_Center_for_Justice) What is your point? > > BTW, the [Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law,](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawyers'_Committee_for_Civil_Rights_Under_Law) which the piece quotes, is a completely different (and much older) organization. The phrase appears to come from [this PDF letter](http://www.lawyerscommittee.org/admin/site/documents/files/Delbert-MO-Voter-ID.pdf) from the Lawyers’ Committee. > [@](#): > > Such a scheme would require coordinating an army of individual impersonators in > order to generate enough votes to sway an election, and each impersonator > ostensibly would have to: > Take steps to ensure an accurate forging of the voter’s signature; > Travel to the appropriate polling precinct site for the particular voter; > Make sure the voter has not voted absentee or requested an absentee ballot; > Have accurate knowledge that the voter has not been removed from the > rolls or moved and re-registered at a different location; > Wait in line, which can often be in excess of three hours, at the polling > place to cast a ballot in that voter’s name; > Know that the registered voter has not already voted that day and does not > plan to before the polls close; and > Risk detection by a hard working poll worker who may know the registered > voter personally All of those objections are correct as to a person who impersonates another specific person. But as I have repeatedly said in this thread, that is not the primary issue. The primary issue is a non-citizen, or other unqualified voter, casting a ballot. This is “impersonation” only in the sense that the non-citizen impersonates a generic citizen, not a specific person. So this objection has been answered. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=136) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=138)