# 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:** 304
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6061 "2014-09-04T01:52:19Z")
> [@Clothahump](#): > > The solution to all this is quite simple, quite available and quite easy to implement. > > When you sign in to vote, you not only sign in, you leave a fingerprint. If there is a question about irregularities, you compare the fingerprints. Duplicate votes get tossed out and the voter goes to jail. And I agree as well. That’s why I said, in 2012: > [@Bricker](#): > > I would absolutely be in favor of a thumb print at voting time, reliably associated with the name and address of the voter. In fact, that’s better than a photo ID. > [@davidm](#): > > You’re right. The sole remedy would be criminal charges against the cheating voter. You couldn’t find the right vote to toss. But it’s still a huge deterrent to cheating. Very few people would risk this. > > Of course the real fun would come from watching Republicans trying to manufacture a reason that this plan is vastly inferior to voter ID. Ahem: > [@Bricker](#): > > I would absolutely be in favor of a thumb print at voting time, reliably associated with the name and address of the voter.\*\* In fact, that’s better than a photo ID. \*\* Again, my words from 2012. ---
**Author:** ![Lobohan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lobohan/32/79_2.png) [@Lobohan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lobohan)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6062 "2014-09-04T01:53:01Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > You’re right. The sole remedy would be criminal charges against the cheating voter. You couldn’t find the right vote to toss. But it’s still a huge deterrent to cheating. Very few people would risk this. > > Of course the real fun would come from watching Republicans trying to manufacture a reason that this plan is vastly inferior to voter ID. Valid neutral justification. It’s the reason that keeps on giving. ---
**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 4, 2014, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6063 "2014-09-04T02:06:04Z")
One problem I can see would be that it may deter paranoid conspiracy theorists who are worried about the government having their fingerprints. The thought occurs that maybe that wouldn’t be such a bad thing. But that’s treading on the same territory that we’re accusing some Republicans of (board members excepted). Maybe taking your picture when you vote would be better. Again, it would deter most everybody, plus, other than the first time, they can compare you to your previous photo. Instant photo ID with no effort from the voter! ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6064 "2014-09-04T02:07:13Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And I agree as well. > > That’s why I said, in 2012: > > Ahem: > > Again, my words from 2012. Followed, of course, by two years of defending voter ID laws as written. ---
**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 4, 2014, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6065 "2014-09-04T02:08:34Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And I agree as well. > > That’s why I said, in 2012: > > Ahem: > > Again, my words from 2012. I wasn’t referring to you specifically when I mentioned Republicans manufacturing reasons. I was talking about the policy makers and people on places like Fox News. I remember you proposing this idea before. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 3:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6066 "2014-09-04T03:44:26Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > You’re right. The sole remedy would be criminal charges against the cheating voter. You couldn’t find the right vote to toss. But it’s still a huge deterrent to cheating. Very few people would risk this. Actually, I was curious how well the concept of saying goodbye to the secret ballot would go over. As I recall, dictatorial regimes are fond of electoral processes that keep track of how a citizen votes. I wasn’t aware of any movement to set up similar programs in the United States in the name of preventing the rare case of voter fraud, but then I’m not a Fox News viewer. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 1:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6067 "2014-09-04T13:16:01Z")
> [@xenophon41](#): > > Followed, of course, by two years of defending voter ID laws as written. Sure. Voter ID laws, as written, that are perfectly constitutional. You can search the past two years of my defending very carefully, and I guarantee you that not one post will show me defending them by saying they’re the best possible solution. My defense is: they’re a legal solution that adds some value to the framework of voting. Certainly a better solution would be fingerprints. But of course, the opposition to fingerprints in this thread came from liberals – not conservatives. > [@davidm](#): > > Maybe taking your picture when you vote would be better. Again, it would deter most everybody, plus, other than the first time, they can compare you to your previous photo. Instant photo ID with no effort from the voter! That seems like a more expensive solution. But then again, web cams are ubiquitous now; every polling station will be equipped with a laptop or two, I imagine, so perhaps the cost would be minimal. In any case, I certainly don’t object to the idea itself. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 1:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6068 "2014-09-04T13:52:16Z")
What, if anything, is wrong about the idea that additional safeguards of any kind are unnecessary, as the problem ostensibly being addressed is near-nonexistent? Is that a specifically “liberal” stance? ---
**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 4, 2014, 4:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6069 "2014-09-04T16:11:29Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > What, if anything, is wrong about the idea that additional safeguards of any kind are unnecessary, as the problem ostensibly being addressed is near-nonexistent? Is that a specifically “liberal” stance? Nothing at all. I’m just trying to come up with a solution that will solve the claimed problem without deterring voting in any way. Not because I think that there’s a real problem to be solved but rather to disarm Republicans of this particular weapon. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6070 "2014-09-04T16:26:56Z")
This is just the latest in a generations-long effort by the party of race and money, under whatever name at the time, to find ways to limit voting by the wrong kind of people. Take this one away and they’ll just move on to another one. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 4:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6071 "2014-09-04T16:37:47Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sure. Voter ID laws, as written, that are perfectly constitutional. > > You can search the past two years of my defending very carefully, and I guarantee you that not one post will show me defending them by saying they’re the best possible solution. > > My defense is: they’re a legal solution that adds some value to the framework of voting. “Adds some value” is the assertion you’ve spent the bulk of your voluminous efforts in this thread pursuing. Two years worth of borderline eloquent, undeniably verbose defense of “not the best solution.” Some might take that as more of a… what’s the word? An _endorsement_ of all the intended consequences of those laws, not just those which might address the nominal “problem” the laws purport to fix. But that’s just some folks who’d think that, so I wouldn’t worry about it. > [@](#): > > But of course, the opposition to fingerprints in this thread came from liberals – not conservatives. Really? Can’t find any objections from liberals to the principle of voter verification, through fingerprints or any other method that doesn’t create disparate burdens. Can you narrow that down to a few usernames? ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6072 "2014-09-04T16:39:22Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > Nothing at all. I’m just trying to come up with a solution that will solve the claimed problem without deterring voting in any way. Not because I think that there’s a real problem to be solved but rather to disarm Republicans of this particular weapon. Meh. Maybe if you deny them opportunities to pander to their racist nativitist base, it’ll starve the beast or something. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 5:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6073 "2014-09-04T17:31:28Z")
> [@xenophon41](#): > > “Adds some value” is the assertion you’ve spent the bulk of your voluminous efforts in this thread pursuing. Two years worth of borderline eloquent, undeniably verbose defense of “not the best solution.” Some might take that as more of a… what’s the word? An _endorsement_ of all the intended consequences of those laws, not just those which might address the nominal “problem” the laws purport to fix. But that’s just some folks who’d think that, so I wouldn’t worry about it. > > Really? Can’t find any objections from liberals to the principle of voter verification, through fingerprints or any other method that doesn’t create disparate burdens. Can you narrow that down to a few usernames? Well, **Czarcasm** : > [@The most important thing you need to know about the voter ID issue . . .](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/28): > > > [@The most important thing you need to know about the voter ID issue . . .](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/25): > > > > I have no objection to that. What’s more, your stained fingertip would serve as an “I Voted” sticker, like the purple ink some countries use. > > If the goal is to further decrease the number of voters, it’s an excellent idea. The passage of such a law coupled with some timely rumors about what the government will be doing with all those fingerprints, and the voting ranks will be thinned out even more than they are now, which is certainly one of the goals of the Republican Party. You will be losing many more legitimate(but already paranoid) voters than fraudulent voters. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 5:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6074 "2014-09-04T17:49:36Z")
Another: > [@Fox: 102 year old woman had to wait in line 3 hours to vote, "What's the big deal?"](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/fox-102-year-old-woman-had-to-wait-in-line-3-hours-to-vote-whats-the-big-deal/650380/251): > > > [@Bricker](#): > > > > I have two proposals for voter ID. The first is, I believe, relatively inexpensive: require each voter to affix a inked fingerprint to the voter rolls next his his name, unless there is some compelling reason he cannot. . > > You “believe” that this would be inexpensive. Based on a gut feeling? An estimate? A guess? > > I say it would cost a ton of money. To pay for your proposal, should we raise taxes by 50%? That will kill the economy – if it turns out that’s what’s needed, should we do it? > > Wait… is there an echo in here? ---
**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:** [September 4, 2014, 6:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6075 "2014-09-04T18:33:05Z")
One, maybe. Maybe. **Czarcasm** might have been serious. And I’m not convinced it is a liberal position. Certainly I don’t share it. I believe **Euphonious Polemic** is sarcastically riffing off one of the common “justifications” proponents have given for many different voting “reforms” (like reducing early voting opportunities) – that being to save money. The silly “raise taxes by 50%” gives it away. ---
**Author:** ![MaxTheVool](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9fc29f/32.png) [@MaxTheVool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MaxTheVool)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 9:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6076 "2014-09-04T21:44:17Z")
> [@CannyDan](#): > > One, maybe. Maybe. > > **Czarcasm** might have been serious. And I’m not convinced it is a liberal position. Certainly I don’t share it. > > I believe **Euphonious Polemic** is sarcastically riffing off one of the common “justifications” proponents have given for many different voting “reforms” (like reducing early voting opportunities) – that being to save money. The silly “raise taxes by 50%” gives it away. I agree that in both cases it’s a bit hard to tell exactly how serious those posters are being. I personally have no objection to vote-time fingerprinting. I think that it’s pretty far down on the list of priorities of how to actually improve actual voter confidence, WAY behind paper-auditable-electronic-voting-machines (and I suspect that others might agree, and disgust at an issue of such perceived triviality might be leading to the above-mentioned sarcasm), but I don’t have any actual problem with it. ---
**Author:** ![xenophon41](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xenophon41/32/253_2.png) [@xenophon41](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/xenophon41)\ **Post date:** [September 4, 2014, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6077 "2014-09-04T21:54:15Z")
Yeah, I think I’m gonna have to give you **Czarcasm** ’s comment, **Bricker** , but not **Euphonious Polemic** ’s. So, unless **Czarcasm** comes in to clarify otherwise, I think that’s legitimately one objection from one liberal poster. I think it was offered in the context of the NSA hysteria that had just ramped up at the time, and I’m not sure it was an objection **Czarcasm** actually felt was justified, or just one he felt would negatively affect voter turnout. In either case, I’m not sure it was an objection to the principle, just to the imagined effect. ---
**Author:** ![ILikeForeignLanguages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/bc8723/32.png) [@ILikeForeignLanguages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ILikeForeignLanguages)\ **Post date:** [September 5, 2014, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6078 "2014-09-05T04:46:23Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > You’re all worthless motherfucking liars with the civic virtue of a sewer-rat’s tapeworm. “Voter fraud” is a non-problem and you **know** it. The Dems don’t want undocumented immigrants to vote any more than you do, and you know that, too. This is all about disfranchising the poor and minorities. Shame on you all, and STFU forever. You are a cotton-headed ninny-muggins and a farty-pants. ---
**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 5, 2014, 1:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6079 "2014-09-05T13:15:30Z")
> [@ILikeForeignLanguages](#): > > You are a cotton-headed ninny-muggins and a farty-pants. Well. I think that ends it then. Argument over. ---
**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 12, 2014, 10:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6080 "2014-09-12T10:25:57Z")
I’ve started a thread in Great Debates on an interesting new take on this subject. The possibility that voter ID laws may actually increase the chances of a fraudulent outcome. > **[Can voter ID laws increase the chance of a fraudulent outcome?](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=733952)** > > I considered posting this in the never-ending pit thread on this subject, but decided that it deserves it’s own thread in Great Debates. There’s an interesting new paper, forthcoming in the Columbia Law Review next year, by University of Virginia... [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=303) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=305)