# Republican voter intimidation tactics **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 22, 2004, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496 "2004-09-22T15:22:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![pervert](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bbe5ce/32.png) [@pervert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pervert)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/21 "2004-09-22T18:07:30Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > In another thread **clairobscur** mentioned that in France, each political party (there are several) has a representative at each polling station on election day – but I got the impression they’re there to insure an honest vote count, not to check on the bonafides of would-be voters. Don’t you have to do one to ensure the other? I realize it does not happen now as much as it used to, but the old phrase vote early vote often was a joke about political parties trucking their supporters from place to place in order to swing precints. If you do not verify the bonafides of voters, how would you prevent this sort of thing? ---
**Author:** ![Icarus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icarus/32/72_2.png) [@Icarus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icarus)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 6:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/22 "2004-09-22T18:15:33Z")
> [@pervert](#): > > Don’t you have to do one to ensure the other? I realize it does not happen now as much as it used to, but the old phrase vote early vote often was a joke about political parties trucking their supporters from place to place in order to swing precints. If you do not verify the bonafides of voters, how would you prevent this sort of thing? I’m all for verifying the identity and eligibility of a voter, I object to the notion that this is the role of a political party. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/23 "2004-09-22T18:16:50Z")
> [@pervert](#): > > Don’t you have to do one to ensure the other? I realize it does not happen now as much as it used to, but the old phrase vote early vote often was a joke about political parties trucking their supporters from place to place in order to swing precints. If you do not verify the bonafides of voters, how would you prevent this sort of thing? When I registered to vote, I presented identification, filled out a form in which I (IIRC) was required to provide my Social Security number, and swore an oath. I don’t know whether the Supervisor of Elections Office ran a search to see if I had any felony convictions; but I certainly provided them with enough information do to so. Also, enough information to find out whether I were also registered in another state, assuming I registered under my real name and SS#. When I vote, I go to my precinct and present ID (my driver’s license). The pollworker has a preprinted list of the names and addresses of persons registered to vote in that precinct. He/she checks my name and hands me my ballot (which once was a punchcard, but now is in the form of a card resembling a credit card or ATM card, with a magnetic strip, which I insert in the electronic voting computer, cross my fingers, and hope nobody has rigged the software). What more verification is needed? Why do we need a “challenger” from each party to be present? ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/24 "2004-09-22T18:21:37Z")
The “voter fraud” thing is a red herring. First of all, it’s not a widespread problem, but more importantly, political parties are not in the business of law enforcement. Voter fraud is simply an excuse, a snivelling pretense for selective intimidation. It has no place in this discussion except to be derisively dismissed. It justifies nothing. ---
**Author:** ![pervert](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bbe5ce/32.png) [@pervert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pervert)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 6:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/25 "2004-09-22T18:29:21Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > What more verification is needed? Why do we need a “challenger” from each party to be present? For the same reason we need them to verify the count of ballots. You are correct we have many systems in place to prevent the more common types of voter fraud. But do you trust a mostly republican panel to implement them fairly? ---
**Author:** ![pervert](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bbe5ce/32.png) [@pervert](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pervert)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 6:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/26 "2004-09-22T18:32:12Z")
You guys are completely missing the point of challengers. They are not there to implement the vote. That is they do not come up with the official number. They do not vette each and every voter. They are simply the representatives of the respective parties there to _observe_ taht the state apperatus is not missused. As such they should be allowed to verify that voters are being properly vetted. And that the ballots are being properly counted. I cannot see the problem with this general principle. Now if some parties have misused the concept to intimidate voters, I’m pretty sure that is illegal. If nothing else, it could be considered a violation of civil rights. ---
**Author:** ![Munch](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/munch/32/5281_2.png) [@Munch](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Munch)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 6:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/27 "2004-09-22T18:42:25Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > How does that work? Are there two challengers stationed at every precinct to question every voter who comes in the door? And how does that effect voter turnout? They can challenge anyone who comes in to verify they live in the precinct. I’ll admit - it’s a bit outdated, as it was most likely instituted in a less populated time when the challengers knew most of the people in the area. > [@Icarus](#): > > I don’t accept that these 2 dominant parties feel they have the power to co-opt that right. They don’t, and they don’t claim to. However, they as citizens have the right to help ensure that people who do not have the right to vote (or vote in their precinct) don’t vote. The fact that the two major parties are involved is simply due to the fact that the two major parties insisted they be involved - do you expect Republicans to allow Democrats sole authority over this matter, or vice versa? That’s a level of idealism I’ve never had. If there were an area that had a sufficiently large Libertarian (or Green Party, or whathaveyou) population (large enough to ensure that at least one person would want the job of “challenger”), I wouldn’t be surprised to see their involvement. Ultimately, it’s not a “party role” to check the veracity of a voter’s credentials. It’s a “party role” to ensure that it remains so. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/28 "2004-09-22T18:55:25Z")
> [@Icarus](#): > > This brings up an interesting puzzle. Let’s say I own a home in NY and one in Fla. I divide my time between the two homes. I pay taxes in both states, I expect to receive the benefit of those taxes in both states. > > Should I be given the opportunity to vote in both locales, at least for the local, county and state governments? No. The potential for abuse is too high, this benefit would disproportionately favor the rich (who tend to own property more) and this would be a violation of the principle of “one man, one vote.” For starters. But I think, right now, these reasons are quite sufficient. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 7:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/29 "2004-09-22T19:28:28Z")
When you step back & look at it, it’s amazing that plebiscites without intimidation exist at all. But yeah, I’d charge state party officials with corruption, & investigate to see if it merits a RICO case. Of course, the parties, running the government, might write laws “legitimizing” all their own activities before I got to court. ---
**Author:** ![Zakalwe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zakalwe/32/270_2.png) [@Zakalwe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zakalwe)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 7:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/30 "2004-09-22T19:38:27Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > I agree that voter intimidation is terrible. > > I also think that actively pursuing every possible avenue to keep a candidate off the ballot in the first place is often questionable – why bother intimidating the voter if you simply remove his choice at the ballot? > > Right? Wow. Where did you get all the straw for that strawman? Actually, based on your own statements, the fact that the Democratic Party was simply trying to ensure that the state followed its own guidelines in determining eligibility to be on the ballot should be encouraged. Good for them! ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/31 "2004-09-22T19:44:34Z")
> [@Zakalwe](#): > > Wow. Where did you get all the straw for that strawman? Actually, based on your own statements, the fact that the Democratic Party was simply trying to ensure that the state followed its own guidelines in determining eligibility to be on the ballot should be encouraged. Good for them! That’s not a strawman. A strawman is when I construct an argument that is not the same as my opponent’s, and then argue against my creation. If you claim this is a fallacy, it’s probable you meant False Analogy. Right? ---
**Author:** ![lissener](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lissener/32/6139_2.png) [@lissener](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lissener)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 7:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/32 "2004-09-22T19:44:41Z")
There’s a long article in last week’s New Yorker about how John Ashcroft is working to make such tactics easier to accomplish, and for efforts against such tactics to be more difficult. ---
**Author:** ![Fear\_Itself](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fear_itself/32/19637_2.png) [@Fear\_Itself](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fear_Itself)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/33 "2004-09-22T20:22:21Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > Do you have any evidence that there is widespread voter fraud occurring that is being ignored by law enforcement authorities? If there’s no outcry, then maybe that’s because there’s no actual problem. _Oooh! Ooohh! Mister Kotter! I know this one!!_ There may be laws against non-citizens voting, but they are rarely enforced. My ex was a Canadian, and she voted in every election, including the 1992 presidential election. At my request, a special investigator with the California Secretary of State’s office completed an investigation, and recommended to the Los Angeles DA that she be prosecuted for voter fraud. The DA declined to prosecute, even though the case was well researched and documented. The Los Angeles District Attorney’s office has never prosecuted a voter fraud case. Ever. This was documented in a 1995 article in the Wall Street Journal. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/34 "2004-09-22T20:24:35Z")
From a Reuters article dated today: > [@](#): > > Vicky Beasley, a field officer for People for the American Way, listed some of the ways voters have been “discouraged” from voting. > > “In elections in Baltimore in 2002 and in Georgia last year, black voters were sent fliers saying anyone who hadn’t paid utility bills or had outstanding parking tickets or were behind on their rent would be arrested at polling stations. It happens in every election cycle,” she said. > > In a mayoral election in Philadelphia last year, people pretending to be plainclothes police officers stood outside some polling stations asking people to identify themselves. There have also been reports of mysterious people videotaping people waiting in line to vote in black neighborhoods. > > Minority voters may be deterred from voting simply by election officials demanding to see drivers’ licenses before handing them a ballot, according to Spencer Overton, who teaches law at George Washington University. The federal government does not require people to produce a photo identification unless they are first-time voters who registered by mail. > > “African Americans are four to five times less likely than whites to have a photo ID,” Overton said at a recent briefing on minority disenfranchisement. > > Courtenay Strickland of the Americans Civil Liberties Union testified to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights last week that at a primary election in Florida last month, many people were wrongly turned away when they could not produce identification. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [September 22, 2004, 8:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/35 "2004-09-22T20:41:27Z")
> [@foolsguinea](#): > > When you step back & look at it, it’s amazing that plebiscites without intimidation exist at all. Why is it amazing? To insure that, we only need two things in place: 1. A secret ballot – so that nobody has a way of being sure his or her threats and/or bribes have had any effect on how a given voter voted. 2. Well-enforced laws against anybody trying to discourage voters from voting. Which is what this thread is about. ---
**Author:** ![Little\_Nemo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/little_nemo/32/3120_2.png) [@Little\_Nemo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Little_Nemo)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2004, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/36 "2004-09-23T06:00:10Z")
Maybe we need a meaningful form of punishment to befit the crime. How about we fine violators of election laws votes? ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2004, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/37 "2004-09-23T15:52:28Z")
> [@pervert](#): > > You guys are completely missing the point of challengers. They are not there to implement the vote. That is they do not come up with the official number. They do not vette each and every voter. They are simply the representatives of the respective parties there to _observe_ taht the state apperatus is not missused. From what you describe, it sounds like to me that you’re talking about a couple of semi-official people who sit at the check-in table and make sure that the poll workers are properly double-checking the names. If that’s what it is, then fine. But as soon as you get to the point where they are getting in people’s faces independent of any actual poll workers, then that’s crossing the line. Demanding proof of citizenship from someone who’s merely waiting in line is intimidation and nothing else. Your description of challengers has nothing to do with the tactics complained of. ---
**Author:** ![mks57](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/b9bd4f/32.png) [@mks57](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mks57)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2004, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/38 "2004-09-23T16:36:37Z")
When the party in power (Democratic Party) benefits from loose or nonexistent enforcement of the voting laws, why should Republicans lie back and think of England? ---
**Author:** ![Icarus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/icarus/32/72_2.png) [@Icarus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Icarus)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2004, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/39 "2004-09-23T16:42:31Z")
> [@Mr. Moto](#): > > No. > > The potential for abuse is too high, this benefit would disproportionately favor the rich (who tend to own property more) and this would be a violation of the principle of “one man, one vote.” > > For starters. But I think, right now, these reasons are quite sufficient. Um, no. It’s more like taxation without representation (or one man, no vote). I fail to see how my one vote for a local official in NY should keep me from exercising my one vote for a local official in FLA. I am not “voting twice” in either precinct. I accept that there is a puzzle in how to administer such a plan in order to prevent multiple votes for national office (or state office, if one has a vacation home “up north”). As for the argument that this type of plan would favor the rich, I see no evidence that this argument gains any traction in any other segment of society. ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [September 23, 2004, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496/40 "2004-09-23T16:51:10Z")
> [@mks57](#): > > When the party in power (Democratic Party) benefits from loose or nonexistent enforcement of the voting laws, why should Republicans lie back and think of England? Yeah, instead they should gird up and start harassing poor people and people who “look foreign.” Because there’s absolutely no other means for Republicans to bring the injustice of unenforced laws to the public’s attention. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/republican-voter-intimidation-tactics/265496.md?page=3)