It’s certainly not a rate of zero. And since there has been no reliable attempt to actually measure it, how can you say it’s so negligible?
Now, if you mean “negligible” in the sense of actually affecting the result of an election, I agree with you – for the vast majority of elections.
But I don’t agree the number is negligible if the election itself turns on a hundred and fifty votes. In other words, in the rare occasion when the margin of an election is so razor thin that 150 votes separate the winner and the loser, I don’t agree with your claim that the number of improper votes cast is also negligible.
We get new voters registration ID’s in Texas every year. According to the new law, that card will not be enough. State issued picture ID’s are now requried.
Voter fraud has been discovered in the state. Overwhelmingly, absentee ballots are the cause. The new law does not apply to them…
One way to solve the problem is to make issuing voter ID an obligation of the government rather than the voter - set in law that the government is required to issue ID to all eligible citizens, and can be sued if it fails to do so. That should make everyone happy, right?
I live in CA and I only had to register once. I also get my ballot in the mail several weeks before the election. I vote every election and haven’t been to a polling station in, literally, decades.
There are about 9 million registered voters in PA, which puts Judge Simpson’s estimate at “somewhat more” than 90,000 and “significantly less” than 810,000 of…
I didn’t forget, it’s simply irrelevant. Again, from the decision bottom of page 59
I’ll sum up:
the parties stipulate that
there have been no investigations or prosecutions of in person voter fraud
the parties are unaware of ANY incidents of in person voter fraud
respondents will not offer any evidence that in person voter fraud has ever occurred
respondents will not offer any evidence that in person voter fraud is likely to occur
Please excuse me if I don’t agree to potentially disenfranchise thousands of people to assist in prosecuting crimes that nobody can show even happen, ever, anywhere.
Just because this is a different thread than the Pit thread in which I painstakingly walked you through the issue doesn’t mean you get to feign ignorance now. That’s just a bullshit move.
Again, bullshit and you know it! We already discussed the multiple efforts to find in person voter fraud that have been carried out previously. You were explicitly told all of this information before, and you were reduced to “yeah, well, but, it’s what the current law says, so there!”
Again, bullshit. You know this. It is negligible in the absolute sense.
Nonsense. You know very well that voter log books exist and show every single person who voted, with their address. How impossible is it to ask the people who’s names have a signature next to them “Hi, I’m doing research for the State of Pennsylvania… did you vote on Tuesday?”
And to reiterate what someone else has already said: while the incidences of in-person voter fraud are so rare as to be nonexistent, we *know that absentee voting has resulted in voter fraud. Why do none of the proposed voter ID schemes attempt to prevent absentee voter fraud?
*Surely it’s nothing so simple as “Democrats are more likely to vote in person, while Republicans are more likely to absentee vote”?
Not impossible at ask that question, no. But for what purpose? The non-citizen who voted illegally responds, “No, of course not,” or even “I don’t have to say a word to you – go away.” The latter response may even come from legitimate voters.
No, you didn’t. You described a way in which a survey could be done. I rebutted by showing cases your idea didn’t reach. I also pointed out, as I did again in response to Cheesesteak above, that spending money to ask those questions would not happen anyway, because there’s no realistic way to get a conviction.
Why would the person who voted illegally pick up the phone? You’re not calling them, you’re calling the name in the book, the legally registered voter, the person who’s identity was stolen at the polling location.
Just for those watching at home, I’ll address this.
Do you all want to know the case (not cases) that Bricker came up with? A foreigner who obtained a Social Security Number prior to approximately 1970 (prior to the requirement that one demonstrate citizenship in order to get a SSN) who has been living and voting here ever since. The Scandinavian Sleeper voter.
Does anyone really think that there are any such voters, let alone any number of such voters that the rate of in-person voter fraud would be altered?
And I pointed out that whatever methodology he would want to employ for the new photo ID system will have the same success in identifying this individual as the current process, so the point is moot. Bricker could not successfully contest this.
He could not refute the idea that it is quite easy to measure the rate of in-person voter fraud.
You’ll notice that what he keeps on wanting to do is conflate the description of the scope of the problem with the conviction of individuals who commit the crime. He contends that somehow the voter ID protocols that have been put into place will help with the latter, but one has to continue to remind him that that issue is completely independent of the former.
True, but citizenship status is recorded in the system, meaning that one can use it to assess fraudulent voters. That is, unless they obtained their SSN prior to approx. 1970.
? I don’t have to register prior to every vote. I registered in town when we first moved here and haven’t needed to do anything except show up to vote, or call the town offices and request them to send out an absentee ballot a month or so prior to other elections if I was having health issues preventing me from driving to town hall to vote. [Though last election the flare was just starting that morning so I sent my roomie to get my absentee ballot because it would not have had time to get there in the mail.]
I agree. Call it a voter registration card and use it as a payment mechanism for a universal health care system. Oh yeah, and hold elections on weekends.