Geography was always my worst subject, though I’m getting better. Still, I’m assuming that we could identify those SS #s that shouldn’t be voting.
Let’s say you show up, show your ID, and the system tells you that your ID has already been used to vote. A full investigation of your ID proves that your ID is legitimate, but the other is fake- clearly you’re the victim of identity theft.
How do we identify and prosecute the previous voter, the one with the fake ID?
In both cases, you get to vote. In both cases, the perpetrator goes unpunished.
Yes, it’s easier to punch in someone else’s SSN. But identity theft is already a growth industry, so even photo ID isn’t infallible. What’s next, genetic testing?
On edit: I’d be all for the thumbprint thing, as well. Almost everyone’s got thumbs.
Careful - almost getting rational in a GD spun off pit thread! 
I also tried to toss out some ideas in the GD thread as well. While this thread has become a “bash Bricker” thread, I think that there is a lot of room for improvement on the basis of registration checking along with ID checking.
California, for example, asks for either a CA driver’s license number or the last 4 of a social security number to register to vote. I don’t know what they do after that to check eligibility (residence, appropriate felony convictions, citizenship status).
I mentioned that having a national ID check database, based off of three existing databases might be helpful in eliminating the purges like Florida is doing, and also in ensuring that the registration lists are accurate and checked.
- Social Security
- NICS for convictions (currently used for firearms purchases)
- E-verify (currently used for eligibility to work)
This could be a central place that each state could use to determine voting eligibility by state (since that is a state issue).
There are some interesting ideas here. Fingerprint scanners could work.
I’ve got a more pragmatic solution: do nothing. You’d stop the same amount of fraudulent voting without having to set up one or more fingerprint scanners at each polling place in the US and provide ongoing maintenance and training. I’m assuming that programming, storage and retrieval from some database will be needed.
I’m all for government stimulus, although I’m not sure this is the ideal way to go.
Presumably a central database can determine whether a Social Security number corresponds to a person eligible to vote. Though, there would be difficulties along the lines of putting in the wrong Social Security number accidentally and having one’s vote discarded and possibly being accused of voter fraud.
People can vote without proving who they are?! And people are arguing that this is a good thing? 
Elections Canada
Simple. You show up at the polling station having chosen one of the many ID options available to you, including the option, if you are so incompetent or incapable of utilizing any of the other options available, of dragging a friend along who has the proper ID to vouch for you. Easy Peasy. Gah, you Americans are imbeciles sometimes.
“OMG! I have to vote! Wait, no ID.:mad: Well, maybe next time…”
<4 years later>, “OMG! I have to vote! Wait, no ID.:mad: Well, maybe next time…”
Frankly, who wants people voting who can’t figure out how to get a proper ID?
What is this, the fiftieth time? OK, what the hell. Not about the validity, or lack thereof, for voter id laws. Its about using that as an excuse to empower one party over another.
No, I think their plan is to suppress just enough votes to make the difference in the close elections, which succeeded perfectly in Florida in 2000. And your pathetic lameass strawmanning only makes my point for me, liar.
So far as I am aware – and I am open to correction – no. There is no difference between SSNs issued to non-citizen permanent residents and citizens. And if a permanent resident becomes a naturalized citizen, there is no mechanism to inform the Social Security Administration.
Under the current system, in states with no ID check, we have no way to identify a non-citizen who actually votes. Even when we identify the name of a non-citizen and a record of his voting, he has merely to deny it was him.
The proposed fingerprint system does just what I wanted to do with photo IDs: provides a reliable way of tying a voter to a person. That is, it creates a system of non-repudiation; a person cannot vote and then later successfully deny voting. It doesn’t prevent a non-citizen from registering and voting, but it serves as a deterrent. The fear of punishment, virtually zero under the no-ID system, becomes strong.
Since that’s exactly what I wish to accomplish, I absolutely favor it.
Interesting that you still oppose it. This removes any cost from the poor. I thought that was your big objection.
Amen.
OK, fifty one, then, as many time as it takes. Not about voter id. About voter suppression.
You’re joking, right? If it is valid, who gives a shit whether it affects one party more than another?
Is your real concern that people don’t get to vote, or that the Democratic party will lose votes? Because most of the rest of the Western world requires some sort of identification for voting and most of them are decidedly left of the political spectrum of both parties in the US. Voter ID hasn’t stopped them from getting leftist parties elected.
You want to make it about voter suppression, but your marketing department keeps failing. The other side can point to so many other Rights that we have that require ID such as drinking (21st Amendment) and shooting (2nd Amendment).
Keep trying though! Right now, however, you are only convincing your fellow true believers that allowing people to vote without any check to see if they are eligible is a Good Thing.
If the solution, voter ID laws, causes more valid people to not be able to vote than would cast fraudulent votes it is a stupid solution.
If your hand is infected, cutting your arm off isn’t a great solution. Get it?
This should be an obvious thing.
Now getting ID is very difficult in some places. It involves very long waits, and sometimes long trips where buses don’t go. If you want to demand that there be a US ID card that everyone has, I agree with you. But you need to set that up before you can demand that someone take a day off work to get an ID.
Because the proposed solution doesn’t do a damn thing BUT suppress possible votes. Well, it Bricker’s mind, it also instills voter confidence.
I’m all for a fair and robust system. Looking at the laws passed, voter suppression is the only reasonable explanation for what they’re trying to accomplish.
See Elucidator’s comments on Florida banning Sunday voting. Or the laws to limit registration submitals to a 48 hour window. These guys don’t want to make voting more secure. Or if they do, then they’re mentally handicapped (apologies to mentally handicapped persons for comparing them to Republican legislators). They want to make it a bit harder for the “wrong” people to vote.
Voter ID doesn’t do a damn thing to make elections more secure. If you want to brainstorm ways to make voting more secure without disenfranchising people, I’m with you.
Which is easily rectified by getting a bleeding ID. Something that most people in the civilized world manage to do quite effectively. A stunning plot to stop people from voting, this is.
Snidely Wiplash: “Ha ha! You can’t vote without ID now!”
Voter: “Ah, okay. Here it is.”
Snidely Wiplash: 
I have a hard time believing that someone who wants to vote, and actually will (rather than just whinging about how they were ‘suppressed’ to some pollster), can’t make the effort. And a sad state for the Democratic party that they have to rely upon people who can barely make even that minimal effort.
See the part where I said “Fingerprint scanners could work”? Look again. Nowhere in my post did I say I objected to fingerprint scanners based on disenfranchisement. Dimwit. It’s a very, very costly solution to a non-problem, which is why I wouldn’t favor it. Generally I prefer to avoid implemeting solutions when there is no problem.
I find it interesting that you continually confound prosecution with identification of voter fraud. Are you acknowledging that it would not at all be impossible to identify fraudulent voting now?
In your preferred voter ID scenario, what’s to stop the person from saying it wasn’t them wen confronted.
So?
So?
So?
Sucks to want to participate such that you won’t make the sacrifice to get an ID that would probably benefit you in many other ways.
What is the Democratic party doing to rectify the situation? In Alberta we used to have the equivalent of the DMV. Lines were around the block. Now we have private registries where you can access all sorts of government services including getting your ID. They are all over the place. Line ups are usually quite short.
Okay, so do it. The other side has opened the door a crack. Kick it open.
To those who continually oppose this because it won’t solve a particular issue, why does most of the rest of the Western world do it, do you think?
[Quote=uzi]
To those who continually oppose this because it won’t solve a particular issue, why does most of the rest of the Western world do it, do you think?
[/QUOTE]
Because they’re all socialists who don’t mind giving over all their info to Big Government.