# 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:** 305
**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 12, 2014, 11:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6081 "2014-09-12T11:03:49Z")
Well, by bumping this thread with that announcement, you ruined the perfectly good ending in #6079. ---
**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, 11:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6082 "2014-09-12T11:38:27Z")
> [@Bryan\_Ekers](#): > > Well, by bumping this thread with that announcement, you ruined the perfectly good ending in #6079. Sorry. :o ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 12, 2014, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6083 "2014-09-12T15:24:25Z")
Retrospective: [They’ve been at this since the early 1960s.](http://www.salon.com/2014/09/12/its_disgusting_and_its_still_about_race_southern_republicans_simply_dont_want_minorities_to_vote/) ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 2:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6084 "2014-09-13T02:23:51Z")
Wisconsin’s law goes into effect for this election. Appeals court just ruled. > [@](#): > > CHICAGO (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court in Chicago said on Friday that Wisconsin can implement its 2012 law requiring voters to present photo identification at the ballot box, allowing the state to put the new rules into effect at the general election in November. > . > . > . > “The panel has concluded that the state’s probability of success on the merits of this appeal is sufficiently great that the state should be allowed to implement its law, pending further order of this court,” the appeals court order said. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 11:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6085 "2014-09-13T11:16:18Z")
**Bricker** , be honest. You don’t actually _believe_ that shit about voter confidence, right? Because I know you’re not an idiot. Dishonest, partisan, kind of a douchebag, but not an idiot. So quit acting like one. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 11:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6086 "2014-09-13T11:23:27Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > **Bricker** , be honest. You don’t actually _believe_ that shit about voter confidence, right? Because I know you’re not an idiot. Dishonest, partisan, kind of a douchebag, but not an idiot. So quit acting like one. Sorry, but that’s exactly what I believe. You don’t believe that shit about how asking for ID before you vote is unreasonable, do you? I mean seriously, we get asked for ID to do everything, and almost every other country asks for ID before voting. You’re not a brain dead moron, so I know you don’t actually believe that, right? And be honest. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 11:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6087 "2014-09-13T11:46:13Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Sorry, but that’s exactly what I believe. > > You don’t believe that shit about how asking for ID before you vote is unreasonable, do you? I mean seriously, we get asked for ID to do everything, and almost every other country asks for ID before voting. You’re not a brain dead moron, so I know you don’t actually believe that, right? > > And be honest. As someone who’s actually lived in one of those other countries (rather than just read about it on the internet), here’s a little difference. In Germany, the number of people without photo ID is a hell of a lot closer to 0% than it is to 10%. Because they have a state-issued ID, and in order to do _anything_ you have to have it. And they give it to you for free. And every town with more than 50 people in it has an office for it. And there’s actually a decent public transit network so that getting to the local equivalent of the DMV (which is virtually never more than 10 miles away) isn’t a nightmare. Like, my GF lived in buttfuck, nowhere for quite a while and even there, the most you had to contend with was an hour-long walk or a 10-minute bike ride. I have friends in the US who have gone their whole lives without photo ID. This would be completely impossible here. Make life like that in the US, then voter ID laws would make sense. But we ain’t there. DMVs are often obnoxiously far away. You heard the case from Texas where one person had to travel _120 miles in each direction_. Keeping in mind that this person obviously doesn’t have a driver’s license. Even in my old hometown, we’re dealing with at least 30 miles with no public transit. And of course, all of this is done to prevent something that has never had any effect. Fuck that shit. If you honestly believe what you’re saying, _you’re a moron_. If a large portion of the populace believed that leprechauns were stealing ballots and could only be convinced otherwise by making Americans of Irish descent take expensive tests to prove that they’re not really leprechauns, should you fucking do it? No! You should _bitch-slap the morons who support it!_ ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6088 "2014-09-13T12:10:53Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > I have friends in the US who have gone their whole lives without photo ID. This would be completely impossible here. No you don’t. You’re a credulous simpleton liar. ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 1:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6089 "2014-09-13T13:34:05Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > Retrospective: [They’ve been at this since the early 1960s.](http://www.salon.com/2014/09/12/its_disgusting_and_its_still_about_race_southern_republicans_simply_dont_want_minorities_to_vote/) Following that link we find [a subpoena intended to shut down New Georgia Project, the state’s largest voter registration effort](http://www.scribd.com/doc/239283354/New-Georgia-Project-Subpoena). **Bricker** , as a lawyer what can you tell us about that subpoena? So a state election board can issue a subpoena? Is the wording “laying all other business aside” normal? Are subpoenas often this broad? I’m not interested in your opinion of the merits of the Election Board’s actions – the rational side of the aisle will agree it’s despicable, while I’m sure you think it’s [del]Republiopathy[/del] democracy at its finest. I’m just curious whether the subpoena looks “normal,” legally. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 2:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6090 "2014-09-13T14:22:30Z")
> [@septimus](#): > > Following that link we find [a subpoena intended to shut down New Georgia Project, the state’s largest voter registration effort](http://www.scribd.com/doc/239283354/New-Georgia-Project-Subpoena). > > **Bricker** , as a lawyer what can you tell us about that subpoena? So a state election board can issue a subpoena? Is the wording “laying all other business aside” normal? Are subpoenas often this broad? > > I’m not interested in your opinion of the merits of the Election Board’s actions – the rational side of the aisle will agree it’s despicable, while I’m sure you think it’s [del]Republiopathy[/del] democracy at its finest. I’m just curious whether the subpoena looks “normal,” legally. With the caveat that my far greater familiarity is with Virginia law… I imagine that “laying all other business aside,” is a legacy standard term in Georgia, used since man’s ancestors crawled from the primordial swamp. I don’t think its inclusion is unusual or it transforms the subpoena in any way. In Georgia, the State Elections Board does in fact have the power to issue subpoenas. OGCA § 21-2-33 provides in pertinent part: > [@](#): > > The State Election Board may examine under oath any person concerning any matter connected with or bearing on the proper discharge of its duties; and any member of the board may administer such oath. The board shall have full power to subpoena persons and papers and to compel the witnesses to answer under oath touching any questions which may properly come before the board and to take, through its agent, the depositions of witnesses. So they can both subpoena someone to testify (a _subpoena ad testificandum_) or they can subpoena documents to examine, as they have here (a _subpoena duces tecum_.) Subpoenas are usually written as broadly as the lawyer believes he can defend. But a person subject to such a subpoena can object to it on several grounds that are amde easier the broader the requests are, so there’s a built-in motive to appear at least semi-reasonable. Still, in my opinion virtually all subpoenas are, on the first go 'round, too broad, and this one appears to be no exception. There’s one specific aspect of this subpoena that would make it fairly easy to dodge in my state. In Virginia, if the time between the service of the subpoena on the party summoned and the return date (the date the party is command to appear or to produce records) is less than 14 days, the law provides that a timely objection is basically an automatic winner. In other words, if you issue me a subpoena on September 9th and demand production on September 16th, as was done here, then I can simply send you a reply saying, “Nope, too little time,” and you’re not entitled to the documents. There are other grounds upon which to base a motion to quash, which is the procedural mechanism of going in to court and asking the judge to dismiss the subpoena. For example, a doctor served with a subpoena for his medical records can raise the defense that his records are protected by doctor-patient privilege, and therefore the requesting party is not entitled to them. The defense that comes to mind here is “overbroad.” As discussed above, the subpoena is very far-reaching. The respondent can ask the court to narrow the scope of the subpoena. He can also claim undue expense or undue burden – he cannot reasonably pull together a massive set of files, and cannot pay for massive copying costs. (However, usually a party is entitled to be recompensed for its expenses by the opposing party compelling production). But: whether a request is “overbroad” depends entirely on the basis for the underlying investigation or cause of action. If you’re charged with shoplifting, then the Commonwealth’s Attorney can’t subpoena your school transcripts or baptismal record. But if you’re charged with sexual assault of a fellow student, perhaps your school transcripts would be relevant. So in this case, determining if the requested production of documents is overbroad requires a knowledge of the basis for whatever “Chris Harvey, Chief Investigator,” is investigating. So the tl;dr version: subpoena looks like most subpoenas, is probably quashable for the short time frame, and depending on the underlying investigation may be too broad. It also might be quashable as unduly burdensome or unduly expensive. ---
**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 13, 2014, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6091 "2014-09-13T14:23:17Z")
Some background on that subpoena. > **[Georgia Democrats Have Registered So Many Minorities, Republicans Are...](https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2014/09/stacey-abrams-new-georgia-project-shocks-georgias-gop-republicans-fighting-minority-voter-drive-with-voter-suppression.html)** > > In 2008, under the best possible conditions for a Democrat, Barack Obama lost Georgia by just over 200,000 votes, or 5.2 percent of Georgians who... The New Georgia Project has been extremely successful at registering minority voters, with 85,000 minority voters (and counting) registered. And now they’re being accused of fraud. This appears to be the old trick (used against ACORN,for example) of accusing an organization of voter fraud simply because some of the registration applications they turn in may be fraudulent or have errors. Any large drive like this is bound to produce some questionable applications, it’s unavoidable, and Georgia state law _requires_ that they turn in all registration applications, regardless of concerns about validity. So the organization can hardly be blamed if some of the applications are invalid or fraudulent. This certainly appears to be a fishing expedition, possibly meant to redirect the organization’s resources away from registration and towards document gathering. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6092 "2014-09-13T14:31:15Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > This appears to be the old trick (used against ACORN,for example) of accusing an organization of voter fraud simply because some of the registration applications they turn in may be fraudulent or have errors. When may an organization permissibly be investigated? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 2:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6093 "2014-09-13T14:33:48Z")
Or it might not be intended to serve any more purpose than raising suspicions and firing up the base. As red as Georgia is, there are, no doubt, any number of Republicans who would stay home if they thought the thing was in the bag. Not to mention a racist dog-whistle blasted over every air raid and weather siren in the state! At least it makes no mention of ACORN! Wait, it _doesn’t_ mention ACORN, right? ---
**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 13, 2014, 2:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6094 "2014-09-13T14:56:58Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > When may an organization permissibly be investigated? That’s a legitimate question, but it strikes me that there needs to be some reasonable standard, otherwise organizations can be arbitrarily cherry picked for accusation and investigation. I suppose that you could look at the percentage of rejected applications and compare it to historical numbers. Is the number of rejections substantially higher than average? You also have to consider whether the organization is guilty of _intentionally_ filing false applications. Just how bad are the applications that are being questioned? If, for example, they’re for names like Mickey Mouse or Santa Claus then any reasonable person has to conclude that it’s unlikely that the organization filed those applications with the intent to commit fraud. Rather, some clowns (whether individual workers, or applicants) thought they were being funny, and the organization then had no choice but to submit them because the law requires it. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6095 "2014-09-13T15:45:36Z")
> [@davidm](#): > > That’s a legitimate question, but it strikes me that there needs to be some reasonable standard, otherwise organizations can be arbitrarily cherry picked for accusation and investigation. > I suppose that you could look at the percentage of rejected applications and compare it to historical numbers. Is the number of rejections substantially higher than average? That sounds reasonable. Was that done? What was the result? > [@](#): > > You also have to consider whether the organization is guilty of _intentionally_ filing false applications. Just how bad are the applications that are being questioned? If, for example, they’re for names like Mickey Mouse or Santa Claus then any reasonable person has to conclude that it’s unlikely that the organization filed those applications with the intent to commit fraud. Rather, some clowns (whether individual workers, or applicants) thought they were being funny, and the organization then had no choice but to submit them because the law requires it. Sure. That’s a fair point. When the article says, “Preliminary investigation has revealed significant illegal activities’ including forged voter registration applications, forged signatures on releases, and applications with false or inaccurate information,” it’s hard for me to conclude that this is describing Mickey Mouse / Santa Claus type problems. In other words, I would not expect someone to say, “This is a forgery,” when describing an application that purported to register Santa Claus. But I guess it could be described that way, so I really don’t know. Do you have any more specifics? **septimus** says that it’s despicable. I’m not sure I see any evidence of that, and I’m wondering if you (or he) are aware of any other news sources that more fully describe the initial allegations. ---
**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 13, 2014, 4:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6096 "2014-09-13T16:43:47Z")
I don’t have any specifics. I’m not aware that there are any available to the public at this time. However, while it’s possible, it seems unlikely to me that the organization would intentionally forge large numbers of legitimate appearing applications that can apparently be easily detected (and the claim is that they’ve been detected). Let’s look at the statement you quoted: “Preliminary investigation has revealed significant illegal activities’ including forged voter registration applications, forged signatures on releases, and applications with false or inaccurate information,” What exactly does “Preliminary investigation” mean? “Preliminary” sounds like a weasel word to me. Significant" is kind of a fuzzy term also, but okay, let’s let that go for now, maybe it has a legal definition that I’m not aware of. But then we get to “including” followed by a list of alleged problems. I see no indication of the magnitude of each the mentioned problems. From the wording, it’s entirely possible that the bulk of the infractions are outright intentional forgery. It’s just as possible that the bulk fall under “inaccurate information” with a handful in the other categories. It’s impossible to tell from the wording. So why word it like that? Suppose I was arguing for an increase in a law enforcement budget and I said that “there has been a dramatic increase in lawbreaking including mass murder, grand theft, and littering”. Wouldn’t you suspect that I was trying to mislead you as to the magnitude of the problem and that most of the increase was in littering? Otherwise, why would I word it that way? Wouldn’t I just mention mass murder and grand theft if those are the ones that increased dramatically? Similarly, the wording of that quote makes me suspicious. It sounds a little to weaselly. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 13, 2014, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6097 "2014-09-13T17:57:23Z")
If you were to learn that the percentage of rejected applications, compared to historical numbers, is substantially higher than average, would you agree that the investigation is warranted? ---
**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 13, 2014, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6098 "2014-09-13T18:28:56Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > If you were to learn that the percentage of rejected applications, compared to historical numbers, is substantially higher than average, would you agree that the investigation is warranted? Possibly, but it would depend on the reasons for the rejections. Here’s a Georgia application, for reference. [http://sos.ga.gov/admin/files/Voter\_Registration\_Application\_8-10.pdf](http://sos.ga.gov/admin/files/Voter_Registration_Application_8-10.pdf) If most of the increases in rejections were for things like a mistake in the application date or neglecting to check the gender box, then I would suggest to the organization that they train their workers better, but I wouldn’t think that a fraud investigation would be warranted. If the increase was mostly due to apparent attempts at outright fraud, then definitely an investigation is warranted. I’m skeptical that that’s the case here because of the way they word their claims, but I could be proven wrong if more evidence is forthcoming. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2014, 1:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6099 "2014-09-14T01:53:46Z")
Boy, sure surprised them, didn’t it! Those colored folks doing this registration drive, probably never crossed their minds that anyone would be keeping a close and unfriendly eye on them! Sure didn’t see _that_ coming! ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [September 14, 2014, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943/6100 "2014-09-14T03:04:05Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > No you don’t. You’re a credulous simpleton liar. Oh really? One in ten. _One. In. Ten_. The fact that you think it’s so unrealistic that I know a few people in the US with no ID is downright pathetic given that 10% of US citizens have no photo ID. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=304) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-the-id-demanding-gop-vote-suppressors-part-1/624943.md?page=306)