# The most important thing you need to know about the voter ID issue . . . **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 29, 2013, 2:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813 "2013-07-29T14:42:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/41 "2013-07-29T16:54:49Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > Two different sentences, with the first one asking the question where you moved the goalposts, and the second one wondering about how you figured a bunch of fraudulent ID voters could effect the election unless they either all worked together, or all just happened to vote the same way. I don’t know how you managed to synthesize the two sentences into one question, but you are incorrect to do so. OK, I’m confused. But I gather your ultimate question was: Has voter ID fraud ever actually swayed an election? And my answer is: We can’t know, because with no Voter ID, we can’t prove who did and didn’t vote. ---
**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:** [July 29, 2013, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/42 "2013-07-29T16:54:50Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > But without Voter ID, how would we ever know? > > It’s virtually certain that Tom Corbett’s 2010 win in Pennsylvania is legitimate. He had 2.17 million votes to Dan Onorato’s 1.81 million. Even if 150 Svens voted, the result doesn’t change. We don’t know if they did, of course, since the state didn’t enforce a Photo ID law, but even if the Sven parade happened, the result is the same. > > But in Washington State, the governor’s race was a bit different: 1,371,153 votes were initially counted for Christine Gregoire; 1,371,414 for Dino Rossi. That’s a difference of 261 votes, with Rossi the apparent winner. A machine recount narrowed Rossi’s win to 42 votes. The final, legal result was a win for Gregoire by 133 votes. > > Sven and his buddies could certainly have changed the governor of Washington State. There have only been a combined total of 35 fraudulent voter cases in Washington in all of the elections held since 2000. So if every fraudulent vote that has been cast in the state for the last six elections had been cast in that single election it wouldn’t have changed the outcome. [cite](http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/map_of_the_week/2012/09/voter_id_laws_a_state_by_state_map_reveals_how_much_voter_fraud_there_is_in_the_united_states_almost_none_.html) ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 4:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/43 "2013-07-29T16:55:45Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Now that I have shown you a case in which it COULD have been, you ask for a case where it did. As an attorney you should know better than most there are light years of difference between what COULD have been and what happened. Furthermore, the larger question regards efforts to minimize the chances for voter fraud to occur. The first step, as you have done, is shown a case where the race was so close that voter fraud could easily have had a meaningful impact on the election. All well and good but one would then have to suppose that the criminals knew it was going to be close so their efforts would pay off. Historically the vast majority of elections are nowhere near close enough to be swayed by anything short of massive voter fraud (in particular, for this thread, we are talking about voter impersonation/voting more than once and so on). Considering the penalties for voter fraud (which vary state-to-state) are pretty stiff with little upside for the people committing it one is hard pressed to see why anyone would try. The chances they will affect the election are miniscule and the chances of being caught are pretty good and the penalties severe for trying. I am not saying voter fraud isn’t attempted but getting a bunch of people to do it at the polls is an exceptionally poor method. There is a reason anytime this has been studied very few examples of actual, in person voter fraud is ever turned up. ---
**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:** [July 29, 2013, 4:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/44 "2013-07-29T16:56:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > OK, I’m confused. But I gather your ultimate question was: Has voter ID fraud ever actually swayed an election? > > And my answer is: We can’t know, because with no Voter ID, we can’t prove who did and didn’t vote. Have illegal vampires secretly been voting in elections? We can’t know. But as a precaution we should require all voters to pass a garlic test. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/45 "2013-07-29T16:59:19Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > There have only been a combined total of 35 fraudulent voter cases in Washington in all of the elections held since 2000. So if every fraudulent vote that has been cast in the state for the last six elections had been cast in that single election it wouldn’t have changed the outcome. [cite](http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/map_of_the_week/2012/09/voter_id_laws_a_state_by_state_map_reveals_how_much_voter_fraud_there_is_in_the_united_states_almost_none_.html) There have only been 35 confirmed voter fraud cases, meaning cases that were prosecuted. As I have been mentioning, though, if there’s no Voter ID, it’s very difficult to prove an illegal voter actually voted. So that doesn’t mean there were only 35 cases — it means that of all the cases of voter fraud that happened, only 35 produced enough evidence to take to court. Right? ---
**Author:** ![Bridget\_Burke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7cd45c/32.png) [@Bridget\_Burke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bridget_Burke)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 4:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/46 "2013-07-29T16:59:20Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The quote you offer talks about voter impersonation fraud, but you talk about voter fraud. > > What about the case in which Sven Amuldsen votes, correctly identifying himself as Sven Amuldsen, but casts an illegal ballot because he’s not a citizen, or a felon without restoration of his voting rights, or has already voted elsewhere? That’s not impersonation, in the sense your quoted author means, but it’s nonetheless a fraudulent vote. Could you supply a link to the case of the fraudulent voter with the oh so amusingly Nordic name? Nope. Here’s [a real cite](http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/11/13236464-new-database-of-us-voter-fraud-finds-no-evidence-that-photo-id-laws-are-needed?lite): > [@](#): > > A new nationwide analysis of 2,068 alleged election-fraud cases since 2000 shows that while fraud has occurred, the rate is infinitesimal, and in-person voter impersonation on Election Day, which prompted 37 state legislatures to enact or consider tough voter ID laws, is virtually non-existent… > > There is more fraud in absentee ballots and voter registration than any other categories. The analysis shows 491 cases of absentee ballot fraud and 400 cases of registration fraud. A required photo ID at the polls would not have prevented these cases. “The one issue I think is potentially important, though more or less ignored, is the overuse of absentee balloting, which provides far more opportunity for fraud and intimidation than on-site voter fraud,” said Daniel Lowenstein, a UCLA School of Law professor. A Texas study cited on a Houston morning news show agreed. Voter fraud was extremely rare–but those rare cases were usually linked to absentee ballots. This “problem” is usually ignored by the vote restricting Republicans, probably because they think absentee voters tend to be old Republican farts. Old Anglo Republican farts… ---
**Author:** ![The\_Lurker\_Above](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/dc4da7/32.png) [@The\_Lurker\_Above](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Lurker_Above)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 5:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/47 "2013-07-29T17:00:25Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Is it? Suppose the issue is felons voting without restoration of their rights. Would it surprise you to learn that convicted felons do not vote in conformity with the population at large? Oh, it wouldn’t shock me, I just thought all the Sven’s would help even it out a bit. 🆒 ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 5:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/48 "2013-07-29T17:03:35Z")
> [@Little\_Nemo](#): > > Have illegal vampires secretly been voting in elections? > > We can’t know. But as a precaution we should require all voters to pass a garlic test. That’s your view. And the way our system works is this: if you garner enough support for your garlic plan, and get the legislature to pass it and the governor to sign it, then we’ll see. But simply because you personally don’t agree that these concerns are worthy of addressing does not give you any particular power to thwart the attempts to address them. No one gives a shit about vampires voting. People do give a shit about illegal votes cast by unqualified voters. That’s why the proposal I am discussing has become law. You cannot argue against the validity of a law by imagining some other scenario and claiming that it, too, should be law. Because that’s not how it works. ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 5:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/49 "2013-07-29T17:06:57Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > There have only been 35 confirmed voter fraud cases, meaning cases that were prosecuted. > > As I have been mentioning, though, if there’s no Voter ID, it’s very difficult to prove an illegal voter actually voted. So that doesn’t mean there were only 35 cases — it means that of all the cases of voter fraud that happened, only 35 produced enough evidence to take to court. > > Right? All it means is that you’ve got 35 confirmed cases. What percentage of total votes would that be? If it were (being generous here) 10 times as many cases of fraud, what percentage of total votes cast would it be then? If it were(let’s just get silly here) _one hundred times as many_, what percentage of total votes would it be? ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/50 "2013-07-29T17:07:26Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > That’s a fair point. But I’m surely entitled to support some policies from a political party without being responsible for every bad choice they make… Ah! So you renounce, denounce and condemn? And, yes, of course you are so entitled. But these further actions reveal an agenda, an agenda that no fair minded person should support. An agenda that is far more sweeping and destructive than “voter ID” issues. I can certainly understand why you would be at pains to keep us focused on the part of this nefarious plot that you can offer a shred of justification for, however flimsy. I trust you can understand why I have no reason to let you get away with it. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 5:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/51 "2013-07-29T17:07:42Z")
> [@Bridget\_Burke](#): > > Could you supply a link to the case of the fraudulent voter with the oh so amusingly Nordic name? Nope. > > Here’s [a real cite](http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/08/11/13236464-new-database-of-us-voter-fraud-finds-no-evidence-that-photo-id-laws-are-needed?lite): > > A Texas study cited on a Houston morning news show agreed. Voter fraud was extremely rare–but those rare cases were usually linked to absentee ballots. This “problem” is usually ignored by the vote restricting Republicans, probably because they think absentee voters tend to be old Republican farts. Old Anglo Republican farts… From your real cite: > [@](#): > > Analysis of the resulting comprehensive News21 election fraud database turned up 10 cases of voter impersonation. But of course, as I said above, we’re not talking about voter impersonation. And: > [@](#): > > Of reported election-fraud allegations in the database whose resolution could be determined, 46 percent resulted in acquittals, dropped charges or decisions not to bring charges. Minnite says prosecutions are rare. “You have to be able to show that people knew what they were doing and they knew it was wrong and they did it anyway,” she said. “It may be in the end" that prosecutors "can’t really show that the people who have cast technically illegal ballots did it on purpose.” But that’s the point, isn’t it? If they “technically” cast an illegal ballot, why isn’t their number added to the mix? I’m not saying people voted knowingly illegally. I’m saying their votes shouldn’t be counted, even if they cast those votes confident, but mistaken, about their legal right to do so. > [@](#): > > Felons or noncitizens sometimes register to vote or cast votes because they are confused about their eligibility. The database shows 74 cases of felons voting and 56 cases of noncitizens voting. And those are just the ones they know about. ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/52 "2013-07-29T17:10:12Z")
> [@The\_Lurker\_Above](#): > > If the illegitimate voters vote R:D in the same proportion as the legitimate voters than including or excluding them makes no difference to the results. > > You can’t just say, for example, 300 illegitimate voters swing the vote totals 300 one way or the other. As a worst-case scenario they _can_, but it would be a massive coincidence/conspiracy. In reality the R:D ratio of illegitimate votes is probably a lot closer to the rest of the population rather than monolithicly for one party or the other. Jeff Manza, Christopher Uggen, and Marcus Britton Abstract As incarceration levels have risen in the United States, an ever-larger number of citizens have temporarily or permanently lost the right to vote. What are the political consequences of such franchise restrictions for convicted felons? To estimate expected turnout and vote choice among disfranchised felons, we combine legal sources with data series from the National Election Study, the Current Population Survey Voting Supplement, Surveys of State Prison Inmates, and National Corrections Reporting Program. To assess political impact, we examine two counterfactual conditions: (1) whether removing disfranchisement laws would have altered the composition of the U.S. Senate; and, (2) whether applying contemporary rates of disfranchisement to prior presidential elections would have affected their outcomes. Because felons are drawn disproportionately from the ranks of racial minorities and the poor, disfranchisement laws tend to take votes from Democratic candidates. Our results suggest that felon disfranchisement played a decisive role in several U.S. Senate elections, contributing to the Republican Senate majority of the early 1980s and mid-1990s. Moreover, at least one recent Democratic presidential victory would have been jeopardized had contemporary rates of disfranchisement prevailed during earlier periods. This working paper has been published in the American Sociological Review (2002, 67, December: 777-803). ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/53 "2013-07-29T17:10:31Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > You cannot argue against the validity of a law by imagining some other scenario and claiming that it, too, should be law. Because that’s not how it works. How about arguing the validity of a law via popularity instead of necessity? :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/54 "2013-07-29T17:10:42Z")
Look, guys, if you really want to make absolutely sure no noncitizen or felon ever votes illegally, there’s only one way: A national ID card (issued free of charge so there’s no question of it being a poll tax) combined with a **national database.** Your file on this database would be referenced and accessible by any of your ID numbers (national ID, SSN, DL, passport, etc.). It would include scanned copies of every documentary record of every personal interaction with American government you ever have had on any level – birth certificate, school records (“I hope you know this will go down on your permanent record.” It **will!** :)), DL applications, welfare or unemployment applications, any records of arrest, conviction, restoration-of-rights, naturalization record if applicable, military record if applicable, etc., etc. Any time you interact with government, the paperwork will be emailed to the agency running the database automatically. Including, at the last, your death certificate, and then your file will be marked “DECEASED.” This would eliminate the need for voter registration. If you are legally eligible, your ID – **any** ID – would **be** your registration; everyone who is in this database is registered to vote automatically. Just walk in and show it to the poll workers. They’ll slide it through a credit-card reader and be able to see any disqualifying points right in front of them; if it turns out you can’t vote, you will not be arrested but simply be politely turned away, no harm, no foul. If the system is done right, you’ll be listed on the precinct-rolls already, just because government has a record of your current address. A problem arises only if you have not interacted with government since the last time you moved; that would be the only case where a “provisional ballot” might be in order. Otherwise, the only purpose of voter registration is to let you register as D, R, or I, and the only point of that is which party’s primary you get to vote in; but that could be an election-day choice, why not. If you maliciously want to vote in the other party’s primary for strategic reasons – well, you can do that **now,** just register for that party. This database would also make identity theft much harder, and fugitives or anyone under an arrest warrant easier to catch. Undocumented immigrants, too – and those who employ them. And, of course, the database would be an important source of accurate statistics. Heck, it might even substitute, to some limited degree, for the Census. Apart from the expense, I see no objections to such a system. “You have zero privacy anyway. Get over it.” But I think some will object. It just doesn’t sound American, y’know? "Are hyour paperz in order, _mein Herr?"_ But, look, we’ve already gotten used to a system where, when you’re driving, a cop can pull you over for any reason that seems good to him, and demand to see your DL, and check it against a database with his onboard computer, and if you have any arrest warrants you’ll be arrested. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 5:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/55 "2013-07-29T17:15:05Z")
And here’s the [biggest problem](http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/08/12/National-Politics/Polling/release_116.xml?uuid=E1kPqOQZEeGJ93biOpgtBg) you guys on the Left have in fighting this issue: > [@](#): > > In your view, should voters in the United States be required to show official, government-issued photo identification – such as a driver’s license – when they cast ballots on Election Day, or shouldn’t they have to do this? > > SHOULD BE REQUIRED: 74% SHOULD NOT BE REQUIRED: 23% NO OPINION: 3% ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/56 "2013-07-29T17:18:19Z")
> [@Czarcasm](#): > > How about arguing the validity of a law via popularity instead of necessity? :dubious: Well, basically, in a representative democracy, this is how it works: we select representatives to enact the wishes of the people, and those represen… You know, maybe you should just [review this link](http://bensguide.gpo.gov/) and get back to me with any questions. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 5:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/57 "2013-07-29T17:19:15Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > And here’s the [biggest problem](http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/08/12/National-Politics/Polling/release_116.xml?uuid=E1kPqOQZEeGJ93biOpgtBg) you guys on the Left have in fighting this issue: See post #54. How would **that** poll, do you think? ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/58 "2013-07-29T17:21:01Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Well, basically, in a representative democracy, this is how it works: we select representatives to enact the wishes of the people, and those represen… Well, not exactly. We elect them to do what they think is best by their own lights (knowing any decision **too** unpopular will cost them at the next election). ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/59 "2013-07-29T17:21:28Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > But, look, we’ve already gotten used to a system where, when you’re driving, a cop can pull you over for any reason that seems good to him, and demand to see your DL, and check it against a database with his onboard computer, and if you have any arrest warrants you’ll be arrested. Yes, good point. I still say my fingerprint idea would be cheaper than this, but i have no real objections to it, other than cost. And I think the cost problems would be offset by the various advantages you outline. I’d agree to this. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [July 29, 2013, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813/60 "2013-07-29T17:22:28Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > See post #54. How would **that** poll, do you think? Well, you know the result of the Bricker poll: AGREE: 100% DISAGREE: 0% For the public at large, I think there’d be a bare majority approving it. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/the-most-important-thing-you-need-to-know-about-the-voter-id-issue/664813.md?page=4)