I Pit the ID-demanding GOP vote-suppressors (Part 1)

[BrainGlutton]

@Drunky_Smurf

If the illegals weren’t voting then the lines wouldn’t be so long.

Not even you believe that.

[BrainGlutton]

If you want a real solution to America’s problems with election administration (those problems being 1) the system is hyperfederalized, every county doing things its own way, and 2) the system is partisan, election officials being elected officials rather than civil servants), election lawyer Richard Hasen provides it in The Voting Wars (discussed on p. 6 of this GD thread):

We need nonpartisan, professional election administration at the federal, state and local levels, with more power in the hands of the federal government than state government and power power in the hands of the states than the localities. Neutral election officials, whose allegiance is not to a political party or candidate but to a fair election system, should be the norm.

<snip>

“Let a thousand flowers bloom” should not be the model for how we run our elections. We should follow the path of other mature democracies. A nonpartisan election czar or panel of three should run our national elections, with political insulation and a long term of service. The czar should impose uniformity, competence, and discipline on the election process.

If used on a national scale, the president would make the nomination subject to a two-thirds or three-fourths confirmation vote by both houses of Congress. The large supermajority requirement would ensure that the person picked is a consensus candidate who cannot be easily manipulated by political forces. The election czar (or committee) should have the power to impose uniform standards on federal elections. Ideally, a voter should be able to walk into any polling place, anywhere in the country, and see the same voting equipment and the same ballot format. Election boards with balanced representation from both parties should have the power to monitor operations conducted by the nonpartisan official, with ample protection for either party to call for grand jury investigations if there are allegations of partisanship or incompetence.

<snip>

There should be uniform standards for how to deal with absentee ballots and provisional ballots. Election laws should be updated so that the rules are clear and established in advance. States should conduct periodic election law audits to ensure that laws are up to date, clear, and match current voting technology. Uniformity not only minimizes the grounds for a potential postelection contest but benefits all voters by ensuring a fair process.

The registration rolls should be uniform as well. The federal government should be in the business of registering all voters, paying all costs associated with registration and voter verification. Registration should begin when someone graduates from high school (or drops out), and voter registration should follow citizens wherever they go with a unique voter identification number (which would differ from a Social Security number). The government should provide a voter identification card to each voter, but voters lacking identification would have the choice of using a thumprint or other means too verify their identity.

Votging machine hardware and software should have government approval. The source code and hardware should undergo rigtorous independent testing and full disclosure to government officials before rollout and implementation. Manufacturers should not be able to frustrate efforts to improve security by claiming that the source code is proprietary.

Forget everything you just read. None of it is going to happen. Despite the Florida debacle, states have not moved toward greater non-partisan election administration. Florida did get rid of its partisan elected secretary of state. But now the position is appointed by the governor, without the supermajority confirmation requirement that would keep the office apolitical. Neither Democrats nor Republicans see much benefit in giving up the chance to have one of their own as the state’s chief election officer.

More generally, the Voting Wars have shown the parties the virtue of manipulating election rules for their advantage. The parties have a vested interest in keeping some partisan control. And local election officials fight for power against state officials, while both fight against federal control. There’s no strong lobby for change. The window for change following 2000 closed quickly with the half-measure of the Help America Vote Act.

Nor is there support for mandatory, government-paid national voter registration with a voter identification – much less with biometric information like a fingerprint. When I first proposed such a system, in 2005, I managed the nearly impossible feat of uniting the two political parties around an idea. Unfortunately, they were united in opposition. Republicans oppose federal control, oppose another government program, and oppose government control on principle. Democrats oppose voter identification requirements, even if the government pays for it and goes out and registers voters, even though a large majority of the public supports such identification. Civil libertarians don’t like the government having your thumbprint. Barring a much worse meltdown than 2000, nationalizing our elections won’t happen in our lifetime.

Is he right? Is there nothing We the People can do to override both parties’ vested interests?

[Bricker]

@Robot_Arm

Voter Suppression Alleged in Florida Panhandle ElectionI find this sort of thing more troubling than the credible in-person voter fraud cases I’ve heard of, and my confidence in the electoral process would increase if it could be eliminated.

From your link:

All three black voters who filed complaints said they were questioned about their addresses and were told they couldn’t vote because they didn’t live within city limits. They insisted they did.

Willie Mae Stevens said she was eventually allowed to vote, Wilton Booth said he was given a provisional ballot that was never counted, and Thomas Rosier, who is Anginita Rosier’s great-uncle, said he was turned away.

If you were to learn that, in fact, Wilton Booth and Thomas Rosier did not live within the city limits, would your opinion change?

[Robot_Arm]

@Bricker

If you were to learn that, in fact, Wilton Booth and Thomas Rosier did not live within the city limits, would your opinion change?

Possibly. I would want to know if white voters received the same scrutiny on whether they lived within the city limits, or were given extra encouragement to vote by the city clerk. Why do you ask, do you have information that they didn’t live within the city limits?

And a question for you in return. If you were to learn that, in fact, Wilton Booth and Thomas Rosier did live within the city limits, would you seek reforms to this part of the voting process (as laid out by BrainGlutton) as a higher priority than voter ID laws?

[elucidator]

But imagine their restored confidence! OK, they had a problem voting, possibly feel discriminated against, but what is that compared to the reassurance that every effort is being made to ensure that illegal aliens, scofflaws, and schizophrenics are not being allowed to sully the purity of the voting rolls!

[Bricker]

@Robot_Arm

And a question for you in return. If you were to learn that, in fact, Wilton Booth and Thomas Rosier did live within the city limits, would you seek reforms to this part of the voting process (as laid out by BrainGlutton) as a higher priority than voter ID laws?

Absolutely.

[BigAppleBucky]

Exactly Zero Of The 17 Suspected Voter Fraud Cases In Boulder, CO Exist

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2013/08/15/2475561/colorado-gessler-zero-illegal-voters/

Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler (R) announced last month that he had found a whopping 155 possible illegal voters in his review of the November 2012 election — out of the more than 3,050,578 voters in the Centennial State. But a review by a Boulder County prosecutor found that of the 17 names from his county that were forwarded by the “election fraud” crusader, every single one of them was a verifiable U.S. citizen.

Another one bites the dust.

[BigAppleBucky]

http://thecontributor.com/my-voter-registration-was-cancelled-will-i-be-one-350000

350,000 Would-Be Voters Dropped from Books in Virginia 30 Days Before Registration Deadline

Writer gets a notice of being removed from the Virginia registered voters list. Called the registrar’s office and had this conversation:

This was news to me. I called the county Registrar (or at least her office, not certain it was the Registrar herself who answered) and asked why they thought I’d moved.

“Let me pull up your file. It’ll take me a while, because these records are on kind of a inconvenient spreadsheet.”

After about three minutes she comes back to me and says, “Here it is. You registered to vote in South Carolina in 2009, right?”

“Well, yes.” I admit. “But I moved here to Virginia in 2012 and registered to vote here, and filled out the Virginia registration form requesting for my SC registration to be cancelled.”

“Oh, well, South Carolina gave Virginia a list that had your name on it.”

She then went on to explain that Virginia is participating in a data exchange with certain other states, in an effort to eliminate the possibility of people voting in more than one state.

“It’s new, and it’s kind of a mess right now. The State Board in Richmond collected 350,000 names of people that moved. They’ve split them up by county and dumped them on a pretty crude Excel spreadsheet and sent that to the county registrars. It’s hard to work with.”

She goes on to say (if I understood her correctly) that her instructions from Richmond were to drop everyone on this list from the county rolls. If people on the list thought they should be allowed to vote in Virginia, they can do what I did — call the Registrar. She then helpfully offered to send me another registration form to get re-registered.

The voter then called South Carolina officials and confirmed that the registration there had been cancelled.

[Bricker]

@BigAppleBucky

http://thecontributor.com/my-voter-registration-was-cancelled-will-i-be-one-350000

350,000 Would-Be Voters Dropped from Books in Virginia 30 Days Before Registration Deadline

Writer gets a notice of being removed from the Virginia registered voters list. Called the registrar’s office and had this conversation:

The voter then called South Carolina officials and confirmed that the registration there had been cancelled.

And this shows discriminatory intent, because only Democratic-leaning voters would move…?

[elucidator]

Well, this could be nothing more than a simple fuck up. Besides, the Democrats have already locked up the felon vote, does the transient vote count for that much?

[raventhief]

@elucidator

Well, this could be nothing more than a simple fuck up. Besides, the Democrats have already locked up the felon vote, does the transient vote count for that much?

So moving - and re-registering in a new area- means I’m likely to be dropped unless I make an effort to make sure i am not dropped?

Am I reading this correctly? I re-register-correctly- but without extra effort on my part, that means I will be dropped? And that’s the way it’s supposed to work?

[elucidator]

You may have misunderstood my intention due to the unfortunate non-existence of a “sarcasm” smiley. Roll eyes, we got, sarcasm, no.

[Uzi]

No comment that they are running the voter register using a bloody spreadsheet?

I hereby renounce any comments I made on having some form of advanced ID in the US. It appears that the only technology you can handle is the kind that allows you to spy on, and blow up, your neighbors.

[elucidator]

We can raise your rent, you know. tts our planet, you guys just live here.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Bricker

And this shows discriminatory intent, because only Democratic-leaning voters would move…?

Let’s make sure that it was applied equally across districts. That would be the first way to make this fuck-up discriminatory.

It also solves a problem that does not exist.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Uzi

No comment that they are running the voter register using a bloody spreadsheet?

I hereby renounce any comments I made on having some form of advanced ID in the US. It appears that the only technology you can handle is the kind that allows you to spy on, and blow up, your neighbors.

It is good to see the light bulb finally go on. Most of my concerns about photo voter ID go away if we set up the ID system first and then apply it to voting after it has been up and running.

[Bridget_Burke]

Funnily enough, a secure national ID is feared by some folks. Often the same folks who want Voter ID.

The unfortunately-named Rand Paul is all for Voter ID laws. But one reason he opposes immigration reform is that the data might be the beginning of a anational ID. Which he is agin’…

The controversial immigration-reform bill that passed the SenateJudiciary Committee this week is expected to be considered by the Senate in June. Many see measures contained in this bill, such as a strong E-Verify and a “photo tool,” as a means to control unlawful immigrants’ access to unlawful employment. I worry that they go too far.

What’s a Conservative to do?

[Bricker]

@Hentor_the_Barbarian

Let’s make sure that it was applied equally across districts. That would be the first way to make this fuck-up discriminatory.

It also solves a problem that does not exist.

People registered and voting twice, in two different jurisdictions, is a problem that doesn’t exist?

Here’s an entire page devoted to that accusation against Ann Coulter.

As to the “applied equally” – the article doesn’t advance any factual basis to support a conclusion that it was NOT applied equally – does it?

Are you aware of some other fact, beyond the article’s four corners, that DOES suggest this wasn’t applied equally across all districts?

[Bricker]

@Bridget_Burke

Funnily enough, a secure national ID is feared by some folks. Often the same folks who want Voter ID.

The unfortunately-named Rand Paul is all for Voter ID laws. But one reason he opposes immigration reform is that the data might be the beginning of a anational ID. Which he is agin’…

What’s a Conservative to do?

I can’t speak for Mr. Paul. But I have no particular objection to a national ID card, and I think it would solve many of the issues we’ve discussed concerning voting. I’d be all in favor of such a program.

You do understand that merely finding one conservative voice that differs with other conservative voices does not create any particular conflict, don’t you? Neither Mr. Paul nor I have been crowned King of the Conservatives (although if nominated I will run and if elected I will serve).

[Fear_Itself]

@Bricker

You do understand that merely finding one conservative voice that differs with other conservative voices does not create any particular conflict, don’t you?

I shall try to remember that next time you go on one of your “Liberal Hypocrisy!” rants.