DiscussMormonism.com

Our right to vote is our most precious asset in a democracy. Voting reflects the will of the people. To the extent that the will of the people is distorted by voter fraud or voter disenfranchisement, the will of the people is in turn distorted and diminished.

Recently many states have enacted tougher voter I.D. laws. Proponents of these laws say the reason is to stop voter fraud. Opponents of the laws says that they will lead to voter disenfranchisement. The question becomes: will the tougher Voter I.D. laws cause more voter disenfranchisement that they will stop voter fraud?

From the Baltimore Sun: “The Justice Department under President George W. Bush, conducted a massive investigation between 2002 and 2006. Only 120 people were charged and 86 convicted during a period when nearly 200 million votes were cast in federal elections. “

So we’ve got 86 convictions out of 200 million votes cast. Not a big problem, right?

Not According to Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach. He sites “221 incidents of voter fraud” in Kansas since 1997, which averages out to 17 a year. During that same period, Kansans cast more than 10 million votes in 16 statewide elections.

A report from the Brennan Center for Justice found the incidence of voter fraud at rates such as 0.0003 percent in Missouri and 0.000009 percent in New York. “Voter impersonation is an illusion,” said Michael Waldman, executive director of the Brennan Center. “It almost never happens, and when it does, it is in numbers far too small to affect the outcome of even a close election.”

But how will Voter I.D. laws affect voter disenfranchisement? Let’s look at Texas:

Since 2002, there have been 50 convictions by the for voter fraud in Texas. But According to the Justice Department, the total number of registered voters lacking a driver's license or personal identification card issued by the Texas Department of Public Safety could range from 603,892 to 795,955. According to state records, a Hispanic registered voter is at least 46.5 percent, and potentially 120 percent, more likely than a non-Hispanic registered voter to lack this identification.

Studies also show that nationally as many as 11 percent of eligible voters don't have government-issued photo ID. That percentage is even higher for seniors, people of color, people with disabilities, low-income voters and students.

Edward and Mary Weidenbener went to vote in Indiana's primary in May. They didn't realize that state law required them to bring government photo IDs such as a driver's license or passport.

The husband and wife, both approaching 90 years old, had to use a temporary ballot that would be verified later, even though they knew the people working the polling site that day. Unaware that Indiana law obligated them to follow up with the county election board, the Weidenbeners ultimately had their votes rejected — news to them until informed recently by an Associated Press reporter.

Edward Weidenbener, a World War II veteran who had voted for Mitt Romney in the Republican presidential contest, said he was surprised by the rules and the consequences. "A lot of people don't have a photo ID. They'll be automatically disenfranchised," he said.

I think the data unquestionably indicates that the amount of distortion created by voter fraud is negligible when compared to the amount of voter disenfranchisement that it caused by the new wave of Voter I.D,.laws.

Cui bono? Who benefits?

Republicans obviously benefit. They're trying to steal another election any way they can. They're intentionally targeting the poor and minorities because they know those people vote overwhelmingly democrat.

Kevin Graham wrote:Republicans obviously benefit. They're trying to steal another election any way they can. They're intentionally targeting the poor and minorities because they know those people vote overwhelmingly democrat.

In his book, The Roadmap Plan, Paul Ryan says "“America is approaching a ‘tipping point’ beyond which the Nation will be unable to change course."

Demographic trends in the United States do not favor the Republican Party. The 'Reagan Democrats' who supported Reagan and the Bushes over Carter, Mondale and Dukakis, have been creeping back into the fold. The GOP has increasingly become a party of white voters without a college education. If college-­educated whites, working-class whites, and minorities had cast the same proportion of the votes in 1988 as they did in 2008, Michael Dukakis would have, just barely, won. In 8 years minorities voters will increase their share of the electorate form one-half to one-third. In 30 years, non-white voters will outnumber white voters.

I think many Republicans look at these demographic trends and recognize that there is, indeed a 'tipping point' coming. The question is, how do you respond to it? With respect to Voter I.D. laws, I think the party is bowing to expediency and sacrificing long-term viability. The 'Party of Lincoln' rhetoric is going to seem pretty thin when compared to the disenfranchisement that will occur from these Voter I.D. laws.

Many years ago, Cadillac did a demographic survey of their customers. The good news: their sales were strong, and their customers were loyal. The bad news: They weren't attracting new customers, and their customer base, while loyal, was getting older and older. Projections showed that in 20 years most Cadillac owners would still be loyal, but dead.

It was a wake up call, and Cadillac responded. They changed their styling and started making cars without landau windows and vinyl tops. They started making cars that could actually go around corners instead of just float over bumps. They started making cars that were enjoyable to drive, and not just provide a bench seat to the Early Bird Special. In short, they started appealing to a changing demographic.

The GOP needs to have a 'Cadillac Moment'. They are so concerned about appealing to their 'repeat customers' (their base) that they are oblivious to the fact that they are not attracting new customers, and the base is getting smaller. Window dressing like Bobby Jindal or Marco Rubio aren't the answer. You can put racing stripes on a Sedan Deville, but you're not going to fool anyone.

One thing that disturbs me is the apparent willingness to disenfranchise millions of legal voters in the effort to stop a tiny number of claimed in-person voting fraud.

It's like a farmer who believes there is a rat in his barn, and his solution is to fumigate the barn. He believes it's worth it to also poison a few of the horses, sheep and cows inside, as long as he makes sure there are no rats (even if the only evidence for a rat being there is his belief that it must be).

Some of the same people who support this idea also believe that the level-of-doubt threshold required for criminal conviction should be changed, because convicting some innocent people is an acceptable cost of making sure all the guilty are convicted.

I do think that many conservatives sincerely believe there is widespread voter fraud happening that is just not detected. It's the only way many of them can explain Democrats getting elected, because they believe (as they are constantly told by radio and TV hacks) that they are in the majority in this country.

They also believe that people only vote for Democrats because they have been bribed by government handouts.

some years back the Utah Senate paid for a study to be done which they expected to find massive voter fraud by illegal immigrants who'd obtained Utah drivers licenses. but when the study was released in Feb 2005 it was a massive FAIL.

it identified a total of 95,000 people who'd been issued a UT drivers license or personal ID card using an ITIN instead of a SSN. this is a perfectly valid option but the report states, "we have been told that those who file for an ITIN and who reside in the United States are, for the most part, undocumented aliens." the report doesn't attempt to justify this assertion but let's just assume that it's true.

next the report's authors check all 95,000 people in the suspicious pool and find there are 383 who are also registered to vote. this means 99.6% of people in the suspicious pool did not register to vote. they then asked ICE to verify the immigration status of these 383. ICE looked at a sample of 135 out of the 383 on this list and found that 3.7% were naturalized citizens while the rest were presumably undocumented. if we extrapolate to the larger list, that would mean about 14 of the 383 are naturalized citizens and therefore eligible to vote.

finally the report's authors checked how many of the 383 who were registered had actually voted in the election. guess how many they found? 14 of the 383. (whether it's the same 14 who are also citizens they weren't able to say)

In 30 years, non-white voters will outnumber white voters.

Which would explain the country being bankrupt. It's a tipping for sure. Soon there will be nobody left to pay for your socialism.

ajax18 wrote:

In 30 years, non-white voters will outnumber white voters.

Which would explain the country being bankrupt. It's a tipping for sure. Soon there will be nobody left to pay for your socialism.

Wow.

You really are a racist.

Do they make you show a picture ID to get food stamps? You have to have a picture ID to cash your social security/disability check even if you're not permitted to drive a car. Most negroes have a picture ID. Illegal immigrants might be discouraged from voting in US elections but not blacks.

Yet we get voting disctricts such as in Philadelphia where the number of voters outnumbers the number of citizens in the census and you still say there isn't a voter fraud problem. I guess that was the same district where our government determined that voter intimidation laws only applied to whites intimidating blacks, not black panther party members intimidating whites with bully clubs at the voting booth. In a country where 537 votes decided the Bush vs. Gore election, how can we accept the currently sloppy way in which we run elections. Third world countries have more accurate voting than we do in this country.

I think you should have to be a taxpayer to vote. Nontaxpayers shouldn't be voting. Here's another radical racist view for you. I believe as a descendant of those who were here before the revolutionary war that I am not an immigrant. My ancestors bled for this land and they gave it to me, not the rest of the world. I believe that this is my country and it doesn't belong to every other human being in the world just the same. I don't believe illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote. But obviously that's way over the top and racist to believe such things. I

People who aren't subject to the draft shouldn't be permitted to vote either. If you're the one who has to die for the country, that should be your right not the right of one who is unwilling to do so. But that was the way this country used to be before liberalism. Now everybody has rights and nobody has responsibility. Who woud ever want to die for such a country?

ajax18 wrote:In a country where 537 votes decided the Bush vs. Gore election...

Correction, five votes decided that election.

I don't believe illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote. But obviously that's way over the top and racist to believe such things.

No, the racism was the implication that only white people make money and pay taxes, so a non-white majority means US bankruptcy.

I don't know anyone who says illegal immigrants should be allowed to vote, and as it happens, they don't (vote, that is -- they do pay taxes, however). The people being disenfranchised by ID laws are just as legal as you and I are.