Electoral fraud does occur.
It is now being done almost exclusively by Republican politicians and judges.
In person voter fraud is statistically non-existent.
The chances of in person voter fraud are roughly 2 in 10 million votes, and that is mostly people showing up at the wrong polling place.
But election fraud is real.
It occurs when GOP politicians and judges prevent seniors, young people, minorities and poor people from voting by putting up obstacles.
ID requirements more onerous than required to buy a lethal weapon.
They ensure it is harder for people to vote by making voting registration more difficult, voting times more restrictive, and ensuring people wait in long lines to discourage the act of voting.
They are bringing back a modern version of the Poll tax and the Literacy Test to vote.
Right now more than a million people registered to vote in the upcoming election may not be processed in time to cast their vote.
This is a criminal subversion of our democratic process.
It is the same kind of electoral fraud we saw in Florida in 2000 when the co-chair W. Bush's election efforts in Florida purged the voter rolls prior to the Presidential election.
88% of the voters purged were African American.
When Republicans are so desperate as to elect Donald Trump as their standard bearer and embrace wide scale institutional voter suppression, they should just move to Putin's Russia and accept the antidemocratic despotism already in place.
It is now being done almost exclusively by Republican politicians and judges.
In person voter fraud is statistically non-existent.
The chances of in person voter fraud are roughly 2 in 10 million votes, and that is mostly people showing up at the wrong polling place.
But election fraud is real.
It occurs when GOP politicians and judges prevent seniors, young people, minorities and poor people from voting by putting up obstacles.
ID requirements more onerous than required to buy a lethal weapon.
They ensure it is harder for people to vote by making voting registration more difficult, voting times more restrictive, and ensuring people wait in long lines to discourage the act of voting.
They are bringing back a modern version of the Poll tax and the Literacy Test to vote.
Right now more than a million people registered to vote in the upcoming election may not be processed in time to cast their vote.
This is a criminal subversion of our democratic process.
It is the same kind of electoral fraud we saw in Florida in 2000 when the co-chair W. Bush's election efforts in Florida purged the voter rolls prior to the Presidential election.
88% of the voters purged were African American.
When Republicans are so desperate as to elect Donald Trump as their standard bearer and embrace wide scale institutional voter suppression, they should just move to Putin's Russia and accept the antidemocratic despotism already in place.
5
The biggest problem is apathy. It's easier to vote in the US than it ever has been. In Arizona, for example, you can register once, opt to vote by mail, and never have to show an id or even show up at a polling place for the rest of your life. Ironically, one of the most difficult places to vote is New York State, where vote by mail is restricted to a few infirm and the privileged who have a vacation hideaway in places like Florida.
1
I cannot understand why Democratic leaders have allowed this to slide by. It is one of the few things that case me to sit here and steam. It is joined by the Citizens United decision. The political objectives of these two decisions are so painfully obvious. They both have the potential to greatly weaken our democracy. I am really bothered by the idea that the conservative members of the Court are most interested in carrying out a political agenda.
5
Why is it the Democrats don't try to advance a law that requires preclearance from the Justice Department for all states?
The SCOTUS decision simply put all states under the same rules. The abusive rules mentioned in the article are already in place in most states that did not require preclearance. How is it possible that a rule that is discriminatory in Texas, North Carolina or Alabama is not equally discriminatory in NY or Massachusetts?
When Democrats do things, they are being virtuous. When Republicans do the same things they are evil. It's hard to follow without a scorecard.
And yet, the state with the lowest minority turnout is Massachusetts.
The SCOTUS decision simply put all states under the same rules. The abusive rules mentioned in the article are already in place in most states that did not require preclearance. How is it possible that a rule that is discriminatory in Texas, North Carolina or Alabama is not equally discriminatory in NY or Massachusetts?
When Democrats do things, they are being virtuous. When Republicans do the same things they are evil. It's hard to follow without a scorecard.
And yet, the state with the lowest minority turnout is Massachusetts.
2
A very sobering perspective. I keep believing we are becoming more enlightened and making progress, this challenges that assumption.
2
There are too many people voting republican because their daddy or grandfather did. It is like the scene out of Forest Gump where Lt. Dan says “there has been a member of my family that has died in every American war” but with the republican voters it would be “members of my family have voted republican in every American presidential season”. Interestingly enough, the results of both Lt. Dan’s family and the family members who vote republican, both pretty much end with the same results. The cult of “family” passing down through the years the dysfunction all held up proudly as if it was an honor to do so. Women and children being forced to vote republican because their dominating husband or father forced them to do so. Male driven religions, Adams rib, reducing women and children to be less than whatever man has been assigned to govern them. Meanwhile what the GOP stands for is against the very needs of those women and children and in doing so is actually against any healthy man’s family.
Liberals speak for the weak and oppressed; want change and justice, even at risk of chaos.
Conservatives speak for institutions and traditions; want order even at the cost to those at the bottom.
[Psychologist Jonathan Haidt studies the five moral values that form the basis of our political choices, whether we're left, right, or center]
Liberals speak for the weak and oppressed; want change and justice, even at risk of chaos.
Conservatives speak for institutions and traditions; want order even at the cost to those at the bottom.
[Psychologist Jonathan Haidt studies the five moral values that form the basis of our political choices, whether we're left, right, or center]
5
Some distinguished Americans, such former President Jimmy Carter, serve as election observers in other countries to watch and report on fairness during elections. It is disgraceful that Republican state governments here at home are engaged in suppression of certain sections of our citizenry, so openly, brazenly and unjustly. Their claims of widespread fraud as justification isn't reality; much like their standard bearer's made up conspiracies and outright lies. All of this exposes the fact that much of America needs to come down from its pedestal of self-righteous notions of moral superiority among nations/societies and the take up national self-improvement with honesty and decency. There is a lot of moral, social, political muck in our society here that needs to be cleaned up, now.
9
Finally. A tidbit of truth from Lyin' Donald Trump: we may very well be that Third World country he claims, but not for the reason he states -- neglected roads and airports. The Republic Party's push to pass bills imposing Voter I.D. laws in order to prevent minorities, the elderly and students from voting, is one of the most oppressive, yes fraudulent maneuvers the so-called party of Lincoln has perpetrated. I hope we will see more public figures kneel on one knee in recognition of a Constitutional right, until those rights are no longer in danger of being protected.
4
Newt Gingrich told the new republican party to determine policy entirely with a view to electoral outcomes. That is, party over country. No compromise and no cooperation.
That is how a minority party managed to dominate state and federal legislatures and many statehouses. Gerrymandering, re-districting and vote suppression take priority over winning votes by offering popular policies.
What the Republicans have done is to undermine the checks and balances of the Constitution simply by not playing by the rules. The result is Donald Trump.
That is how a minority party managed to dominate state and federal legislatures and many statehouses. Gerrymandering, re-districting and vote suppression take priority over winning votes by offering popular policies.
What the Republicans have done is to undermine the checks and balances of the Constitution simply by not playing by the rules. The result is Donald Trump.
13
"That is, party over country. No compromise and no cooperation."
Gee, how is that any different from the attitude of the Democratic Party?
Gee, how is that any different from the attitude of the Democratic Party?
1
Why have any restrictions on voting?
If a person shows up at a polling place or mails in a ballot, count it and move on.
There is no voter fraud, so there is no reason to restrict voting. Voters are honest and patriotic, or they wouldn't be voting in the first place.
If a person shows up at a polling place or mails in a ballot, count it and move on.
There is no voter fraud, so there is no reason to restrict voting. Voters are honest and patriotic, or they wouldn't be voting in the first place.
7
So "a person" is whom, exactly? A resident of that state or district? A citizen? A legal resident? A non-citizen or illegal alien? Someone not of age? Should we just take anyone's word about everything regarding one of our most precious rights?
2
While an individual person with a felony conviction in Florida will be denied his one vote, a corporate felon like British Petroleum (BP) convicted of the death of 11 people and polluting the entire Gulf of Mexico still gets government contracts and the right of unlimited campaign contributions to make laws favorable to oil drilling business. That is what "democracy" looks like to Republicans like Rick Scott.
18
"While an individual person with a felony conviction in Florida will be denied his one vote..."
That's a state law. If you want it changed, start with your legislator or get organized to get the law changed.
"...a corporate felon like British Petroleum (BP) convicted of the death of 11 people and polluting the entire Gulf of Mexico still gets government contracts and the right of unlimited campaign contributions to make laws favorable to oil drilling business."
Federal or state contracts? Did the BP spill originate in Florida waters? There are untold number of lobbyists for any special interest you care to name. All have the same goal - to alter the tax code/legislation to their favor. And it doesn't apply to just corporations. Don't single out one company or industry. If you're truly interested in changing the political dynamics of this country, start with advocating term limits in Congress. Second, get the power out of our nation's capital and back to the states where it rightfully belongs. Then your voice will have more influence. It's a start...
That's a state law. If you want it changed, start with your legislator or get organized to get the law changed.
"...a corporate felon like British Petroleum (BP) convicted of the death of 11 people and polluting the entire Gulf of Mexico still gets government contracts and the right of unlimited campaign contributions to make laws favorable to oil drilling business."
Federal or state contracts? Did the BP spill originate in Florida waters? There are untold number of lobbyists for any special interest you care to name. All have the same goal - to alter the tax code/legislation to their favor. And it doesn't apply to just corporations. Don't single out one company or industry. If you're truly interested in changing the political dynamics of this country, start with advocating term limits in Congress. Second, get the power out of our nation's capital and back to the states where it rightfully belongs. Then your voice will have more influence. It's a start...
1
"Trouble in Trumpville"
There's trouble in Trumpville
His supporters are retching
They're tired of listening
To Donald's sad kvetching
They're angry, they're furious
At a loss and so bitter
They're begging that man
To stay off of Twitter
The path does look rocky
Their chances are treacherous
They know they can't win
With a candidate who's lecherous
The outcome seems certain
There's no more suspense
Chris Christie breathes easy
That he's not Mike Pence
There's trouble in Trumpville
His supporters are retching
They're tired of listening
To Donald's sad kvetching
They're angry, they're furious
At a loss and so bitter
They're begging that man
To stay off of Twitter
The path does look rocky
Their chances are treacherous
They know they can't win
With a candidate who's lecherous
The outcome seems certain
There's no more suspense
Chris Christie breathes easy
That he's not Mike Pence
4
What I do not understand is why the Democrats and others who are opposed to the Republican's efforts to disenfranchise voters have not actively set up organizations who assist people with getting IDs.
19
There are such a small number of theoretically disenfranchised voters that Democrats prefer to spend their money paying trial lawyers and publicizing the injustices than finding the imaginary disenfranchised voters.
Voter ID laws are inexpensive to implement and to enforce, so Republicans start their true-the-vote efforts there. [Absent a voter ID requirement, it is impossible to prevent in person voting of dead and relocated individuals. Since voter registration no longer requires proof of identity, citizenship or residency, it is easy to set up fictitious voters and then to vote for them. Unless an individual is actually caught voting for someone else in the act by a poll watcher who knows they are not the registered voter, there is no prosecution possible.]
As long as the Democrats are able to get mileage out of the evil Republican attempts to disenfranchise Democrats, the Democrats face little push back from their early voting, absentee voting as well as ballot stuffing/ballot losing strategies that are more significant sources of voting fraud.
Voter ID laws are inexpensive to implement and to enforce, so Republicans start their true-the-vote efforts there. [Absent a voter ID requirement, it is impossible to prevent in person voting of dead and relocated individuals. Since voter registration no longer requires proof of identity, citizenship or residency, it is easy to set up fictitious voters and then to vote for them. Unless an individual is actually caught voting for someone else in the act by a poll watcher who knows they are not the registered voter, there is no prosecution possible.]
As long as the Democrats are able to get mileage out of the evil Republican attempts to disenfranchise Democrats, the Democrats face little push back from their early voting, absentee voting as well as ballot stuffing/ballot losing strategies that are more significant sources of voting fraud.
2
VoterID laws are a poll tax. Plain and simple. Also, it is unconstitutional and against the 15th and 19th Amendments.
How to fix it?! More government and regulations not fewer as well as more and longer voting days and hours, or you get what we have here which is obstructionism AND campaign and election fraud. No such things as Voter fraud unless it comes from tiny minds and Fixed Noise propaganda coolaid and bigot racist unAmerican unpatriotic Republican'ts. Take back the Senate and House 2016!
Tell all you know to vote ONLY Democrat 2016 and shove the Republican'ts and their ilk so far down that they will never recover and end up in the trash heap of history where they belong.
How to fix it?! More government and regulations not fewer as well as more and longer voting days and hours, or you get what we have here which is obstructionism AND campaign and election fraud. No such things as Voter fraud unless it comes from tiny minds and Fixed Noise propaganda coolaid and bigot racist unAmerican unpatriotic Republican'ts. Take back the Senate and House 2016!
Tell all you know to vote ONLY Democrat 2016 and shove the Republican'ts and their ilk so far down that they will never recover and end up in the trash heap of history where they belong.
4
Why is it not a problem that there is no early voting or no excuse absentee voting in New York or Pennsylvania? But if North Carolina reduces its early voting from five weeks to four, that's voter suppression?
1
The only vote fraud we ought to be worried about is the electronic hacking kind.
7
Republicans want only republicans to vote.0
4
I like the Swiss system: if you are 18 and a Swiss citizen (or a foreigner in some cantons where foreigners are eligible to vote), you are automatically registered to vote. The government sends you your ballot at least three weeks before an election. You have to sign a separate sheet that you want to vote by mail (this is separate from your ballot), and you have to return your ballot in a closed envelope with the signed sheet. (You are of course also free to deposit your ballot in a guarded ballot box if you prefer.) The government even uses prepaid postage, so voting does not cost anything.
The system works well.
The system works well.
19
The system works well as long as you are not a foreigner in a canton where they can't vote.
4
The Swiss have a national register of citizens, along with the addresses of all of their eight million citizens. If you want to set up a system where the US federal government tracks the residences of 320 million people, have at it. But the federal government is not even able to verify that someone who submits an income tax return has data that matches what his employer reported until nine months after they have issued a fraudulent refund to an untraceable prepaid debit card, so there's not much hope they would be more competent at creating an accurate voter database.
2
Alexander Keyssar,
As I needn't remind you, You're "preaching to the choir".
How 'bout registering beings upon birth ?
Anyone subject to government surveillance for purposes of Selective Service, Social Security, Watch Lists, Gun Purchases, Medicare, or just 'cause we feel like it, as Mr. Snowden informed us, is just as worthy of "not by default" Voter Registration.
I will be watching C-Span for said bill.
As I needn't remind you, You're "preaching to the choir".
How 'bout registering beings upon birth ?
Anyone subject to government surveillance for purposes of Selective Service, Social Security, Watch Lists, Gun Purchases, Medicare, or just 'cause we feel like it, as Mr. Snowden informed us, is just as worthy of "not by default" Voter Registration.
I will be watching C-Span for said bill.
3
Speaking of Florida , trump is intensively registering and campaigning among overseas voters from this stage. Wonder how that together with obstacles related in this article will affect results there.
1
Wonderful that the NYT trots a few old examples of Amercian's lacking ID. Yet no coverage of the recently lucky discovery of new voter registration by dead people in Harrisonburg, VA. And no mention of the fraud in the Minnesota Senate election of Mr. Franken or Washington state election of Governor Gregorie! Add to those cases the big unknown fraud from the manipulation of mail-in ballots from nursing homes ship. In person voting on Election Day is the only way to ensure only legal votes are counted!
10
Yes there is voter fraud. It is minuscule but it is there. The Republican efforts to make it hard for legitimate voters to register has nothing to do with fraud. It is intended to keep people who would probably not vote Republican from voting.
5
The only way the Republicans can win is to cheat.
9
Hmmm...So, Ms Rockford, you are accusing Republicans are using the laws "to cheat", right?
Care to comment on the Democrat's proclivity for cheating by completely DISREGARDING LAWS that they don't like?
Remember, that in addition to the recent Harrisonburg cases, the mantras of "Vote Early, Vote Often" and "Dead Men Can Vote Twice" were/rare common practice in your own, "Democratic" Chicago.
Care to comment on the Democrat's proclivity for cheating by completely DISREGARDING LAWS that they don't like?
Remember, that in addition to the recent Harrisonburg cases, the mantras of "Vote Early, Vote Often" and "Dead Men Can Vote Twice" were/rare common practice in your own, "Democratic" Chicago.
5
Sounds like "The Owl" and a few others have bought into the myth that voter fraud is a.) significant and b.) committed by Democrats. To this end he trots out apocryphal stories from a century ago.
Move into the twenty-first century, Owl. Numerous studies show that voter fraud is rare to nonexistent, and that it doesn't decide elections. Ms Rockford is referring to the many GOP-led states that have passed voter suppression laws to disenfranchise minorities, the poor, students and the elderly. That is the problem. That kind of bad behavior--as you well know--is what is skewing our elections. In other words, the GOP can only win by rigging the system.
Why not try to win on policy and ideas?
Move into the twenty-first century, Owl. Numerous studies show that voter fraud is rare to nonexistent, and that it doesn't decide elections. Ms Rockford is referring to the many GOP-led states that have passed voter suppression laws to disenfranchise minorities, the poor, students and the elderly. That is the problem. That kind of bad behavior--as you well know--is what is skewing our elections. In other words, the GOP can only win by rigging the system.
Why not try to win on policy and ideas?
But for the votes of dead people in Chicago, Nixon would have been president in 1961. But Nixon had too much class to demand a recount. He said, "No one steals the American Presidency." It's quite a commentary that Nixon had more class than Al Gore, who has chosen to not accept the fact that all evidence substantiates that he lost in 2000.
Democrats will go to their graves believing the presidency was stolen from them in 2000 and that John Kerry is smarter than George W Bush.
Democrats will go to their graves believing the presidency was stolen from them in 2000 and that John Kerry is smarter than George W Bush.
1
IF the GOP ideas and philosophies of governing were so snow-driven pure, so divinely inspired as they claim - restricting voting would be the opposite of what they want. More would be better, right?
Clearly in their hearts, at least in those behind these restrictive laws, they know their ideas are long bankrupt, lacking in morality and common-sense and wholly lacking in any understanding of the US Constitution. They must know this, or why go to such lengths to restrict voting?
Instead of spending time and money, strengthening the security of the national voting systems - they take this line of action which in the short and long term will only bring ruin upon the entirety of the system. They fret about the security of the systems, using it in their weak arguments - but then DO ZERO about it. But instead wish to damage it.
More troublesome IMO, is how quiet the Democrats are on this subject. This would make for great campaign rhetoric - as things will only get worse under a Trump presidency. Where a GOP led Congress with more politically sophisticated scavengers of civil rights, would run circles around him and his woefully inept "family-advisors".
The issue is ripe for the Democrats to exploit, to "get the vote out" on one of the most foundational aspects of our civil rights - easy access to voting by all citizens! This is a millennial issue ripe for the picking!
But where is the Democratic Party? Where are the party leaders? HRC cant cover every base! DNC wake-up!
Clearly in their hearts, at least in those behind these restrictive laws, they know their ideas are long bankrupt, lacking in morality and common-sense and wholly lacking in any understanding of the US Constitution. They must know this, or why go to such lengths to restrict voting?
Instead of spending time and money, strengthening the security of the national voting systems - they take this line of action which in the short and long term will only bring ruin upon the entirety of the system. They fret about the security of the systems, using it in their weak arguments - but then DO ZERO about it. But instead wish to damage it.
More troublesome IMO, is how quiet the Democrats are on this subject. This would make for great campaign rhetoric - as things will only get worse under a Trump presidency. Where a GOP led Congress with more politically sophisticated scavengers of civil rights, would run circles around him and his woefully inept "family-advisors".
The issue is ripe for the Democrats to exploit, to "get the vote out" on one of the most foundational aspects of our civil rights - easy access to voting by all citizens! This is a millennial issue ripe for the picking!
But where is the Democratic Party? Where are the party leaders? HRC cant cover every base! DNC wake-up!
3
It has been repeatedly proven that voter ID fraud is essentially nonexistent in this nation. It could not be clearer that the purpose of the Republican voter ID campaign other voting restrictions is simply to suppress the franchise of those who might vote wrong. Everyone knows this to be the case, in particular the Republican leadership.
Since their party rejects the most fundamental foundation of our democracy, why does it deserve any role whatever in our body politic?
Since their party rejects the most fundamental foundation of our democracy, why does it deserve any role whatever in our body politic?
4
This comes up every four years. Amazingly, regardless of the voter laws are, poor old "Aunt Edna" still can't manage to get any state-issued ID (even though it's free). Apparently she can only vote on Sunday, and if early voting is reduced from 17 days to 10 days well, that just isn't enough time...and seemingly she has no friends on the face of the Earth to help her. "Bill" has known of the changes in the voter law for the last three years, but still hasn't taken the time to register to vote.
I'll concede that some restrictions are aimed at making things more difficult, and that's the fault of political parties. But the Aunt Edna's and Bill's of the world have all sorts of help from the very people who constantly cry foul every four years. No one has been denied either their right to vote. If they have, then they should come forward and state their case, including all details of their circumstance.
I'll concede that some restrictions are aimed at making things more difficult, and that's the fault of political parties. But the Aunt Edna's and Bill's of the world have all sorts of help from the very people who constantly cry foul every four years. No one has been denied either their right to vote. If they have, then they should come forward and state their case, including all details of their circumstance.
2
State IDs are not really free. One must have a certified birth certificate in order to get any of those "red state" IDs. A birth certificate costs at least $50 and in order to get a copy, one has to have some other Governmental proof of identity. To get many forms of governmental ID one has to have a birth certificate. The Republicans have purposely made it harder for citizens to vote.
If the Republicans were only interested in fair elections why are they closing polling places, stopping early voting, and trying to stop mail in voting? Only a fool or a liar would claim that reducing voter fraud is the objective. The real reason is that people who would vote for Democrats out number those who would vote for Republicans.
If the Republicans were only interested in fair elections why are they closing polling places, stopping early voting, and trying to stop mail in voting? Only a fool or a liar would claim that reducing voter fraud is the objective. The real reason is that people who would vote for Democrats out number those who would vote for Republicans.
6
Opponents of voter ID laws assert they disenfranchise millions of voter, but the Justice Department has been unable to produce any disenfranchised voters to testify in the lawsuits it has brought against states that require state-issued photo IDs. The state-issued photo IDs are easier to get than alternate forms of IDs. For example, Texas issues free voter photo IDs to voters who have no state-issued IDs such as drivers’ licenses. It furnishes free birth certificates to those who need them to show proof of citizenship in order to get a free voter IDs. Few Americans go through life without proof of citizenship just because they were born without a birth certificate. They get delayed birth certificates or affidavits of non-availability that provide proof of citizenship. But Texas voter registrars recently searched online Census Bureau data to find proof of citizenship for a 96-year-old woman who couldn’t remember whether she ever had a birth certificate. There is also an appeals process, which apparently has never been used. No eligible voter gets denied a voter ID. Demand for the free voter IDs is virtually nil. Texas issues about 300 a year, less than two county. Some Texas counties has never had a request for a voter ID. The myth that voter ID laws disenfranchise millions of voters is a lie.
5
One would believe that it should be one of the goals of any democracy to make the process of voting as easy and as accessible as possible to get as many people as possible to vote and truly reflect the will of the public.
But voter ID laws and many other obstacles make it harder for many Americans - especially those with low incomes and living in rural areas - to vote. Oftentimes those laws are said to prevent voter fraud. A thing that is barely prevalent in America (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/20/opinion/the-success-of-the-voter-fraud....
It is quite obvious that those laws are not meant to prevent voter fraud but to make sure that certain groups of people will have a harder time voting. The Republican party is trying to delay the effects of the ongoing demographic shift of the American population towards a more mixed and less white one. They are artificially creating obstacles for poor communities, and communities with a high degree of non-white voters to cast their vote, because those communities tend to vote for the Democratic candidates. Doing that tells you a lot about the people behind those laws. They have no interest in representing the general public. They represent their own bubble of the public, disregarding anyone outside of it. Looking at Republican politics this is a pattern you can find over and over again.
But voter ID laws and many other obstacles make it harder for many Americans - especially those with low incomes and living in rural areas - to vote. Oftentimes those laws are said to prevent voter fraud. A thing that is barely prevalent in America (http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/20/opinion/the-success-of-the-voter-fraud....
It is quite obvious that those laws are not meant to prevent voter fraud but to make sure that certain groups of people will have a harder time voting. The Republican party is trying to delay the effects of the ongoing demographic shift of the American population towards a more mixed and less white one. They are artificially creating obstacles for poor communities, and communities with a high degree of non-white voters to cast their vote, because those communities tend to vote for the Democratic candidates. Doing that tells you a lot about the people behind those laws. They have no interest in representing the general public. They represent their own bubble of the public, disregarding anyone outside of it. Looking at Republican politics this is a pattern you can find over and over again.
2
Preclearance, unless applied nationwide, is in itself a violation of the equal protection under the law concept. A citizen of Massachusetts has the right to vote for and apply changes in voting procedures, which can only be challenged in court after application and by someone with standing. That same citizen moves to Alabama and now he can only implement the exact same change if he gets permission from the Federal government first.
While this may be race neutral on it's face, the law mostly impacts states with a white majority, therefore it is racist under the doctrine of disparate impact.
If preclearance is ever put back into effect, it must be a nationwide program.
While this may be race neutral on it's face, the law mostly impacts states with a white majority, therefore it is racist under the doctrine of disparate impact.
If preclearance is ever put back into effect, it must be a nationwide program.
4
Perhaps the solution to this thorny problem would be to create uniform requirements to register, identify ourselves and vote in national elections. States could remain in control of setting i.d. requirements for local elections.
In my town the local contests are so hotly disputed that I have no doubt that there are people who would feel entirely justified in stuffing the ballot box since elections are often decided by a mere handful of votes. (I have actually witnessed voter fraud where an employee of a local home for the severely intellectually disabled was "helping" her charges to fill out their ballots. Her rationalization was that they had a "right" to vote for their own best interests, even if she was the one deciding for them what those best interests were.) But national elections are a different story. Municipalities have no vested interest in supervising a national election.
I voted in the last national election using my library card as identification at the polling place, just on principle. But I was required to show proof of citizenship, address and age when I registered. Birth certificates should be free of charge to procure so there are no barriers to participation in society. (I have one even though I was born at home.) That seems reasonable.
In my town the local contests are so hotly disputed that I have no doubt that there are people who would feel entirely justified in stuffing the ballot box since elections are often decided by a mere handful of votes. (I have actually witnessed voter fraud where an employee of a local home for the severely intellectually disabled was "helping" her charges to fill out their ballots. Her rationalization was that they had a "right" to vote for their own best interests, even if she was the one deciding for them what those best interests were.) But national elections are a different story. Municipalities have no vested interest in supervising a national election.
I voted in the last national election using my library card as identification at the polling place, just on principle. But I was required to show proof of citizenship, address and age when I registered. Birth certificates should be free of charge to procure so there are no barriers to participation in society. (I have one even though I was born at home.) That seems reasonable.
3
Todd, I like your idea that certified birth certificates should be free of charge. However, I believe any form of voter I.D. should be unnecessary at the polling place. I can't remember ever using an I.D. when voting in California, and I can't remember any instances of voter fraud. If an individual commits fraud when registering to vote (i.e., signs an affidavit of citizenship), then he can be prosecuted. If he's registered and on the voter rolls, then presenting and verifying I.D.s is just an annoyance that slows down the line for everyone.
I have heard of one instance of voter fraud in a nursing home, where an individual "helped" the residents fill out their ballots. (This happened in Iowa in 2000, when everyone in the home voted for Bush.) I think this kind of fraud should be severely punished. Nursing homes should be on the watch for anyone bringing ballots onto the premises.
I have heard of one instance of voter fraud in a nursing home, where an individual "helped" the residents fill out their ballots. (This happened in Iowa in 2000, when everyone in the home voted for Bush.) I think this kind of fraud should be severely punished. Nursing homes should be on the watch for anyone bringing ballots onto the premises.
1
Just as their candidate, Donald Trump, has no ideas - so too does the GOP have no offerings worthy of any citizen's vote...so they have to narrow those coming in to vote to those who no longer care for reasons to vote for GOP candidates, just as they no longer care for facts and no longer care for truth. Winning is their god, and theirs is the only voter fraud actually happening across America.
7
No fairness in Florida
I can't speak for other states, but Florida is a great example of motivated actions against voting, solely depending on the method of voting.
The poor/elderly/minorities tend to vote in-person and tend to vote Democrat. Whites and other are more likely to vote by absentee ballot, called vote-by-mail in Florida.
You would think that the ID requirements for the two types of voting would be similar? Not in vote suppressing Florida.
If you vote-by-mail/ register by mail, no worries. Registration is a breeze even without a Driver's License or even a SSN. Just about anything will do and you just need to show it before you vote. To vote, request a ballot package and when you return it, all you need is a signature that matches the one at the election office or the DMV. No photo ID needed nor a scan of photo ID.
But if you vote in person, the rules are very different. No needed Photo ID, you cast a provisional ballot and you've got days to straighten it out --it is your problem. If this wasn't voter suppression, then the elections officials would apply the same rules as vote-by-mail. A laptop at the polls can include signatures from the elections office, if they match, a regular vote is cast. Otherwise, take them back to the office and see if they match, yes - count, no - treat like vote-by-mailwith problems.
To see how Florida treats its preferred voters see: http://preview.tinyurl.com/bannontrump
I can't speak for other states, but Florida is a great example of motivated actions against voting, solely depending on the method of voting.
The poor/elderly/minorities tend to vote in-person and tend to vote Democrat. Whites and other are more likely to vote by absentee ballot, called vote-by-mail in Florida.
You would think that the ID requirements for the two types of voting would be similar? Not in vote suppressing Florida.
If you vote-by-mail/ register by mail, no worries. Registration is a breeze even without a Driver's License or even a SSN. Just about anything will do and you just need to show it before you vote. To vote, request a ballot package and when you return it, all you need is a signature that matches the one at the election office or the DMV. No photo ID needed nor a scan of photo ID.
But if you vote in person, the rules are very different. No needed Photo ID, you cast a provisional ballot and you've got days to straighten it out --it is your problem. If this wasn't voter suppression, then the elections officials would apply the same rules as vote-by-mail. A laptop at the polls can include signatures from the elections office, if they match, a regular vote is cast. Otherwise, take them back to the office and see if they match, yes - count, no - treat like vote-by-mailwith problems.
To see how Florida treats its preferred voters see: http://preview.tinyurl.com/bannontrump
7
Thanks for making this important distinction, yes in voting by mail all that is checked is the signature. Why the difference, white "snowbirds" versus the others?
2
Apathy is an issue at election times, if people want change they should vote.
2
Rather than complaining to the courts or the feds, just get the required ID and vote the bums out.
No fire hoses, no beatings, it really ain't the bad old days. We're not going back to "whites only" voting - not even close.
No fire hoses, no beatings, it really ain't the bad old days. We're not going back to "whites only" voting - not even close.
6
You don't take into consideration the possibility that acquiring the required I.D. might cause a financial burden on some people.
Which basically has the same effect as fire hoses, beatings, and the bad old days -- because then you can't "vote the bums out".
Which basically has the same effect as fire hoses, beatings, and the bad old days -- because then you can't "vote the bums out".
6
" We go to the election site where we have been told to go, show up with an officially-recognized piece of ID (Driver's license or passport), and then vote."
Those same pieces of ID will allow one to register to vote in the US.
But we should adopt the Canadian method, just show up with the correct ID. Sounds good. Now to get rid of the gerrymandering, racial and other wise, all will be well. We could have computers redraw districts irrespective of race or creed, truly a democratic dream.
Those same pieces of ID will allow one to register to vote in the US.
But we should adopt the Canadian method, just show up with the correct ID. Sounds good. Now to get rid of the gerrymandering, racial and other wise, all will be well. We could have computers redraw districts irrespective of race or creed, truly a democratic dream.
5
Or we could eliminate districts completely. Divide the number of citizens by the number of representatives; you get 1 representative for X number of citizens. Anyone who gets X votes, statewide, represents those citizens.
First, there is no gerrymandering because there are no districts to tweek.
Second, a representative represents only those who voted for him, he is not representing a bunch of people who happen to live in his district but want someone else.
Policy, not geography, should be the criterion for who gets elected.
First, there is no gerrymandering because there are no districts to tweek.
Second, a representative represents only those who voted for him, he is not representing a bunch of people who happen to live in his district but want someone else.
Policy, not geography, should be the criterion for who gets elected.
1
If a prospective voter is not willing to go to the effort of registering to vote and getting a valid ID, how likely is it that the prospective voter is informed about the issues and the candidates?
6
Perhaps you can answer the question of why the attempts at revised voting laws never require identification for absentee/mail in ballots? This latter form of voting is precisely where North Carolina found voter fraud, and where there was no revision of voter laws! Sounds like a violation of the equal protection clause of the Constitution. Want to see my copy?
3
Have you thought about the fact that some prospective voters might not have cars, or other immediate forms of mass transportation to allow them to register? -- being uninformed isn't always the case.
2
Every U.S. citizen, regardless of where they reside, should be able to vote. Congress NEEDS to dismantle the other obstructions to voting that are based on outdated laws and policies. There are whole populations of American citizens who are unable to exercise their full voting rights because the U.S. government restricts them based on where they live. Is it right that someone is unable to vote for U.S. president because of where they live? Imagine that a citizen moves from any of the 50 states to Guam, a U.S. territory in the Western Pacific, or to American Samoa, in the South Pacific. That citizen loses the right to vote in the presidential election simply because his or her vote is not counted.
A constitutional amendment must be made to extend full, unabridged voting rights to EVERY U.S. citizen, no matter where they live.
A constitutional amendment must be made to extend full, unabridged voting rights to EVERY U.S. citizen, no matter where they live.
2
If cutting back early voting is considered voter suppression, then New York must be the worst state in the nation for voter suppression.
The Voting Right Act was clearly unconstitutional.
It is not up to the Federal Government to tell a State how to hold elections.
If you want a change, then have it written into the Constitution.
It is not up to the Federal Government to tell a State how to hold elections.
If you want a change, then have it written into the Constitution.
3
You need to become more familiar with the constitution.
With the 15th amendment, an important guarantee to vote was already written in the constitution shortly after the civil war. Interference with the right to vote, such as having special literacy tests (of course different for blacks and whites) was widely implemented in the south, clearly in violation of the 15th amendment.
Lyndon Johnson was right to make sure that unfair registration practices could not interfere with the right to vote.
It is up to the Federal Government to tell states how to hold elections if they prevent minorities from voting.
With the 15th amendment, an important guarantee to vote was already written in the constitution shortly after the civil war. Interference with the right to vote, such as having special literacy tests (of course different for blacks and whites) was widely implemented in the south, clearly in violation of the 15th amendment.
Lyndon Johnson was right to make sure that unfair registration practices could not interfere with the right to vote.
It is up to the Federal Government to tell states how to hold elections if they prevent minorities from voting.
3
Ansolutely! If Texas wants to hold Whites Only primaries, then its not the Federal Government's business!
1
@kenarmy
Does that mean we should bring back Jim Crow laws as well???...because that's what it would amount to.
Does that mean we should bring back Jim Crow laws as well???...because that's what it would amount to.
2
Federal government uses the threat of withholding federal funds to press states in all kinds of ways. Why not condition some major federal funds on fair voting procedures?
3
We are a democracy and every adult gets to vote. And if those voters elect a racist, homophobic, narcissist that must be what the country wants.
2
Sad....but I think you are right
I find it hard to believe that ALL Americans want to elect a racist, homophobic narcissist -- and he certainly wouldn't be representing those who don't.
The Supreme court has been republican for decades. Congress has been republican for quite a few recent years. Republicans do not want people who arent white to be able to vote, that is it plain and simple. So congress will pass no laws to make voting easier, because they would lose their jobs. Iowa Gov. Branstad did the same thing as Florida's Scott - abruptly turned off the law allowing felons to vote after they did their time... both are republicans. This is one of the many areas the Koch brothers and their ALEC teammates have had success in ruining our country. This election year we need to oust as many of these republican leaders as we can so maybe our country will again be moving in a positive direction.
9
Most states have voter id laws and the stated purposes of these laws vary. The claim that they are all designed to eliminate voter fraud is simply untrue. For the most part, the laws are justified as being necessary for the proper administration of voting. The real issue in voter id cases is whether the law reasonably regulates voting or whether it is discriminatory. Courts generally don't much care if there is voter fraud or not. That issue is basically a non sequitur.
2
Universal ID requirements can sound reasonable - but they also sound chilling and costly in their introduction and very big government.
The question is: what makes anyone think that the existing registration systems are insufficient?
To which the answer is: only the scare tactics used to justify the voter suppression laws that where enacted as soon as the Supreme Court removed the pre-review process.
The question is: what makes anyone think that the existing registration systems are insufficient?
To which the answer is: only the scare tactics used to justify the voter suppression laws that where enacted as soon as the Supreme Court removed the pre-review process.
5
In Arizona, voter id laws had an unexpected effect. Many voters encountered id problems that poll workers could not resolve. So thousands of ballots were deemed provisional. This affected both Republicans and Democrats, and both whites and Hispanics, though the proportions are unknown. The effect of voter id laws proved fairly substantial. But, practically speaking, the main problem wasn't discrimination but the delay in results as it was determined whether the provisional ballots were valid. Most Arizonans were not pleased and the county recorder in the Phoenix area is under intense bipartisan attack.
3
In a country where tens of millions of citizens routinely don't even bother to TRY to vote, maybe its time to talk a little bit more about civic responsibility, e.g. a little bit at all, and a little bit less (e.g. less obsessively and exclusively) about voting rule gimmickry, based on Republicans wanting to score points by pandering to racism, but rarely posing much practical hindrance to non-felons with post 12 year old attention spans and some semblance of a concept of the duties of citizenship. And, by the way -not that today's "reporters" seem to understand how to research this- why can't America at least once in a while make a modicum of an attempt to finally adopt federal-level standard voting procedures, as most other democracies did decades or centuries ago?
3
I have seen arguments that take the position that ID laws are not discriminatory. And of course, most of the discrimination comes with implementation, not the law itself - which region gets the cut in polling places, what locations and hours the registration office has, what forms of ID are acceptable, and how difficult of expensive it is to get a copy of a valid birth certificate, for instance.
But fundamentally, stepping in to keep people from voting, to assure a high percentage of voters that support the ruling party - those are the actions of leaders in countries which have their elections overseen by the UN. Is that really the template we want to promote?
I understand that politics is a dirty business, and that both sides play games. But to institute rules which are targeted to exclude large numbers of specific voters is as un-American as codifying in a document which types of torture we can find acceptable.
How about we try to live up to the ideal of Democracy that we are constantly trying to export abroad?
But fundamentally, stepping in to keep people from voting, to assure a high percentage of voters that support the ruling party - those are the actions of leaders in countries which have their elections overseen by the UN. Is that really the template we want to promote?
I understand that politics is a dirty business, and that both sides play games. But to institute rules which are targeted to exclude large numbers of specific voters is as un-American as codifying in a document which types of torture we can find acceptable.
How about we try to live up to the ideal of Democracy that we are constantly trying to export abroad?
5
"Judges are also expressing growing skepticism about the claim that these laws are needed to prevent fraud since nobody seems able to find evidence that fraud is anything other than a minuscule problem."
The idea of fraud is laughable as an excuse. The cause of this problem rests squarely on the GOP, the party responsible for limiting voter rights in states they control. The way to reverse these policies, is simple: vote Democratic.
Of all the Republican "ideas" touted by their party and their candidates, this is the most heinous. Yes, if we have to, we should enshrine the right to vote by Constitutional Amendment. It's outrageous that our "grand experiment" in Democracy has boiled down to one party trying to take away the right to vote from the very constituents most likely to vote for their opponents.
Donald Trump is always yelling that debates, campaign rules, etc. are rigged against him. But the real truth is, our voting today is rigged in Republican states, making a mockery of our attitudes towards universal franchise.
The idea of fraud is laughable as an excuse. The cause of this problem rests squarely on the GOP, the party responsible for limiting voter rights in states they control. The way to reverse these policies, is simple: vote Democratic.
Of all the Republican "ideas" touted by their party and their candidates, this is the most heinous. Yes, if we have to, we should enshrine the right to vote by Constitutional Amendment. It's outrageous that our "grand experiment" in Democracy has boiled down to one party trying to take away the right to vote from the very constituents most likely to vote for their opponents.
Donald Trump is always yelling that debates, campaign rules, etc. are rigged against him. But the real truth is, our voting today is rigged in Republican states, making a mockery of our attitudes towards universal franchise.
32
Get Out The Vote, and after we elect more Democrats, to Congress and state legislatures, we can work on returning to earlier, inclusive voting laws, that give access to every eligible voter, regardless of identification sources. Voters should know that Republicans ARE attempting to keep the opposition from voting, and that's not only un-democratic, but also un-American. The cheating we usually see, what there is of it, is mainly by Republicans, since it's the most reliable way for them to win. Cheating is pretty much all they've got, it's not really "change."
10
Another article on this web page is titled “Democrats Rake in Money, Thanks to Suit by Republicans”. The Democrats could have been using some of this money to organize volunteers or minimum wage workers to methodically go to homes where people have not registered to vote. They could have used laptops and /or carried all of the forms necessary for people to apply for birth certificates or what-ever else they needed to prove their citizenship. If necessary, the Democrats could have paid any minimal cost the government might charge for such papers.
If the person needed transportation to a place to get a photo I.D. or to register to vote, the Democrats could have arranged for transportation.
The Democrats are awash in money. I wonder why they have not been using it to help people to register. Perhaps it is because the idea that the other party wants to restrict voting is worth more to them than actually enabling more people to vote.
It could be that not that many more would vote, even if they were registered to do so and had valid identification. Most Americans do not like either candidate.
Or some of the newly registered could have voted for Trump.
If the person needed transportation to a place to get a photo I.D. or to register to vote, the Democrats could have arranged for transportation.
The Democrats are awash in money. I wonder why they have not been using it to help people to register. Perhaps it is because the idea that the other party wants to restrict voting is worth more to them than actually enabling more people to vote.
It could be that not that many more would vote, even if they were registered to do so and had valid identification. Most Americans do not like either candidate.
Or some of the newly registered could have voted for Trump.
3
There are several Democrat leaning groups in Texas doing exactly that.
2
To me it's a simple calculation regardless of motivation (which may be an important point to get these discriminatory laws overturned). Mathematically speaking, a legitimate voter prevented from voting has the same impact on an election as an illegitimate voter participating. If your law stops 1 illegitimate voter at the cost of disenfranchising 100 legitimate voters, your election just got more fraudulent, not less. All evidence indicates that the ratio is many many times more than this. Voter ID laws are perpetrating fraud, not preventing it.
8
America can only be a great country if we are a people of the people, by the people and for the people. Let us make it as easy as we can for people to participate in the voting process so that our democracy reflects the will of all the people.
2
Is the implicit argument here that minorities are less able or likely to have a drivers license or government issued ID? What prevents a citizen of the U.S. from getting a non-operator picture ID, which can be obtained for no cost in many states?
There's a fine line between ensuring that only legal U.S. residents vote, and patronizing the communities that voter ID laws supposedly disadvantage.
Those wanting to vote should obtain a proper photo ID within the ample time afforded. If certain demographics do not have a photo ID, then let's address that issue rather than lowering the standard of identification.
There's a fine line between ensuring that only legal U.S. residents vote, and patronizing the communities that voter ID laws supposedly disadvantage.
Those wanting to vote should obtain a proper photo ID within the ample time afforded. If certain demographics do not have a photo ID, then let's address that issue rather than lowering the standard of identification.
4
Lower income people tend to move more often. Moving means another trip to the DMV to update their non-license ID. That need for repeated updates, is a big part of the burden.
2
I hate to be a wet blanket here, but does anyone have any actual numbers on who would be disenfranchised by a reasonable ID requirement? We all need ID to access a bank account, to use a credit card, to travel, to access welfare or food stamps, to drive, to marry, to divorce, to own property... to function at all in this society. Some of these articles would have you believe that there are vast numbers of hapless usually very elderly voters (always people of color) whose birth records were lost in forlorn burnt-down courthouses, who are "rural" way out in the swamp someplace, who do not have automobiles or bus passes (how do they buy food?) and who are generally so isolated that they cannot satisfy the simplest requirements for living in the US in 2016, since they cannot not use bank accounts, bus passes, credit cards, automobiles or telephones. I don't doubt for an instant that there are some people like that, but I'm suspecting the numbers are vanishingly small.
North Carolina's legislature really blew it when they conducted an inquiry into how to tailor a discriminatory law, and then got caught at it. They can't even use intelligence to cheat. But leaving out that kind of thing, what is wrong with reasonable requirements? The banks, after all, do not take us at face value, they insist that we identify ourselves. Shouldn't the republic have some such requirement?
North Carolina's legislature really blew it when they conducted an inquiry into how to tailor a discriminatory law, and then got caught at it. They can't even use intelligence to cheat. But leaving out that kind of thing, what is wrong with reasonable requirements? The banks, after all, do not take us at face value, they insist that we identify ourselves. Shouldn't the republic have some such requirement?
6
Why not make your voter ID a Social Security Card. We are now making parents have a Social Security Number for their children at birth. If you need a second form of ID, how about a Social Security check, or a yearly Social Security report that the elderly receive. How about showing your taxes, or a utility bill, or your driver's license. After these are seen, a Permanent Voter Registration Card should be issued. They still issue them you know. That used to be the only thing needed to vote. That would verify someone has seen your ID and you are eligible to vote.
4
Signatures. We used signatures for ID, long before photos could be put on our cards. They worked fine, and they're free and easy to obtain.
Voter suppression strikes at the very heart of democracy. The disenfranchising of US citizens by the gop is at the very least unpatriotic and at the very most treasonable. The reason is obvious... with their anti-progressive policies (which mainly consists of tax cuts for the rich and obstructionism) they're losing elections/power and gerrymandering and voter suppression are the only way they can remain relevant. They wouldn't win in fair elections so they rig the game. They see the coming (latino) writing on the wall and they are fearful. They're suppressing the vote so, when elected, they can do even more to restrict potential democratic voters. Traitors in our midst.
8
I am totally opposed to the use of ID rules for the purpose of barring or discouraging eligible voters. Nonetheless, for other reasons, I fully favor everyone having a highly reliable form of identification. It should be issued by the government, without charge, to all persons. While it does not appear that our electoral system has ever been undermined by ineligible people seeking to vote, it is clear the manipulative political obstructionists, described in the article, will continue to try to prevent eligible voters from voting. A reliable ID will prevent that.
Lack of adequate identification often has substantial impact upon the lives of the poor, minorities, and, sometimes, just about everyone. A reliable means of immediate identification empowers people. The lack of such identification leaves them at the mercy of petty governmental and business bureaucrats. It is often an excuse to bar or delay people from having access to their own funds and other property and to wrongfully restrain or harass.
Everyone should have both a registered biometric ID and a unique ID number They complement each other. The ID number says: "This is who I claim to be". The biometric, establishes that you are the person you claim to be. Together they provide the legal tender that enables immediate exercise of those rights that are dependent upon your identity or status.They will also help to substantially reduce the undeniable extent of financial fraud and domestic security vulnerability.
Lack of adequate identification often has substantial impact upon the lives of the poor, minorities, and, sometimes, just about everyone. A reliable means of immediate identification empowers people. The lack of such identification leaves them at the mercy of petty governmental and business bureaucrats. It is often an excuse to bar or delay people from having access to their own funds and other property and to wrongfully restrain or harass.
Everyone should have both a registered biometric ID and a unique ID number They complement each other. The ID number says: "This is who I claim to be". The biometric, establishes that you are the person you claim to be. Together they provide the legal tender that enables immediate exercise of those rights that are dependent upon your identity or status.They will also help to substantially reduce the undeniable extent of financial fraud and domestic security vulnerability.
7
This is nothing new. It's a well-known fact that there has long been a concerted effort to reduce African-American's participation at the polls by enforcing a series of strict I.D. laws and other impediments that disproportionately effect that community at large.
This is especially true in several southern states that already have a long and dark history when it comes to race.
It's not only shameful that in this day and age there are Americans who are still subject to this kind of discriminatory and unlawful activity -- but that there's apparently no will or the ability to correct it.
This is especially true in several southern states that already have a long and dark history when it comes to race.
It's not only shameful that in this day and age there are Americans who are still subject to this kind of discriminatory and unlawful activity -- but that there's apparently no will or the ability to correct it.
11
As a visually disabled person, I would be disenfranchised (and have often been stymied) by regulations that require a driver's license as default ID. There should be other options (passport, medical card, citizenship card, etc. etc).
6
In some U.S. states (New York, being one), there is the option of obtaining a non-Driver's Driving license.
1
Let us shame our government. We need a clear and open discussion of how to facilitate universal enfranchisement - led by the People. Gather and discuss steps both necessary and sufficient to allow every citizen to cast their vote and then ask the legislature in every State: why not?
Those who refuse, we replace at the next election.
Time for the People to own their Democracy.
Those who refuse, we replace at the next election.
Time for the People to own their Democracy.
7
There is no doubt that Shelby v. Holder has resulted in restrictive voting laws in former Section 5 states. Still, this misses the point. Most new restrictive voting laws have been passed in non Section 5 states. They are generic Republican efforts to shift the balance of power in favor of the Republicans. Section 5 was all about racial discrimination at the polls. It was not about Republican efforts to gain undue influence. It makes no sense to single out the Section 5 states when they are not the principal problem. Voter i.d. laws constitute partisan overreaching, but they are not principally about states that once segregated. The suggestion that voter discrimination is all about race is a Democrat fiction.
1
Here in Canada we are soon going to change the rules about how we vote. No matter what system we choose, it will fail if people do not bother to go to the polls.
What I propose is a Voter Tax Credit: you get to deduct $100 from your taxes in any year in which you vote in all elections for which you are eligible. If you don't owe any taxes, you get a $100 cheque from the government. If you only vote in one out of two elections in a given year, you get $50. If there are no federal, provincial or municipal elections in a given year, the $100 is carried over to the next year in which there is an election. The $100 amount is increased proportionate to cost of living increases.
It is my belief that democratic participation increases civic responsibility. Therefore it is good to tie income redistribution to civic participation, which the Voter Tax Credit does. Those who take part in making the law will have greater respect for the law.
What I propose is a Voter Tax Credit: you get to deduct $100 from your taxes in any year in which you vote in all elections for which you are eligible. If you don't owe any taxes, you get a $100 cheque from the government. If you only vote in one out of two elections in a given year, you get $50. If there are no federal, provincial or municipal elections in a given year, the $100 is carried over to the next year in which there is an election. The $100 amount is increased proportionate to cost of living increases.
It is my belief that democratic participation increases civic responsibility. Therefore it is good to tie income redistribution to civic participation, which the Voter Tax Credit does. Those who take part in making the law will have greater respect for the law.
2
Paying people to vote is a bad idea, a very bad idea. Those who are paid to vote will have zero respect for the process.
1
The only way out of this mess caused by seditious people of the Grand Old Pirates is to vote for Hillary first and all democrats after. Until we get a democrat in the White House and a democrat congress so we can also have a Supreme Court that rules on the basis of the constitution and the evidence, these seditious attempts to cheat the system will persist.
26
Can't we separate voting permission into 2 parts. Let the US govt certify ability to vote and restrict states and localities to inspecting residency to ensure folks are voting in the right local elections. A utility bill should work.
k
k
1
Kathryn, your idea to take voter qualification out of local hands has much to commend it. Surprisingly, there are significant numbers of voters who do not get utility bills in their own name. Although I live in the same house as my wife, the power and water bills are in her name which she did not change when we married. I do not have a land-line phone account and do not receive paper billing statements for my cell phone. Although I have a driver's license, Wisconsin does not require that it be replaced when moving and the address on it is not current. Nor is there an address on my VA health card. I have previouly lived in transitory situations such as staying with family or friends during which I had no address documentation at all. My point is, if local officials are intent on disenfranchising voters, simple solutions must give way to systematic federal laws.
5
Every European country, many which the forgetful and hypocritical left sing the praises of, require voter IDs. Sensible, simple, effective. Of course these three basic requirements of any governmental policy are considered burdensome, racist and who knows what loopy adjective the idiot savants spew in knee jerk fashion. Personally we can't wait for the day their chickens come home to their palaces to roost.
4
In context, it should be noted that voter id laws may have a single digit effect on the upcoming election whereas approximately 40% of eligible voters simply won't turn up. Who gets to vote is a much smaller issue than who chooses to vote.
8
The last twenty years are a sad chapter in American history, in spite of the election of a black man to the presidency for two terms. We have many states and the Republican-controlled Congress and the Supreme Court doing anything and everything possible to curtail the voting of black and Hispanic Americans.
It is no accident that the states most active in this voter suppression tend to be those from the former Confederacy or those sympathetic to the C.S.A.
It is no coincidence that the Republicans lead this effort and that they are the ideological successors to the Dixiecrats and Southern Democrats who championed Jim Crow.
It is no surprise that the Supreme Court has had a Republican majority during this period. It is also fitting, given that majority, that the unelected Court has such disdain for elections.
How all of this turns out is unknown, but if there is such a thing as justice in America, the officeholders who have engaged in this conduct – and their families and descendants – will carry this shame for many generations.
It is no accident that the states most active in this voter suppression tend to be those from the former Confederacy or those sympathetic to the C.S.A.
It is no coincidence that the Republicans lead this effort and that they are the ideological successors to the Dixiecrats and Southern Democrats who championed Jim Crow.
It is no surprise that the Supreme Court has had a Republican majority during this period. It is also fitting, given that majority, that the unelected Court has such disdain for elections.
How all of this turns out is unknown, but if there is such a thing as justice in America, the officeholders who have engaged in this conduct – and their families and descendants – will carry this shame for many generations.
6
This country is badly in need of a Constitutional amendment requiring prospective voters to achieve passing scores on basic psychological, reading and arithmetic tests, sufficient to assure the country that all future elections will be limited to voters who are mentally alert and functioning at educational levels at least equivalent to the levels usually achieved by sixth-graders.
.
The first order of business after the Amendment is passed must be the testing of all voters in this current election who had difficulty deciding whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton was the more dishonest and untrustworthy person.
.
The first order of business after the Amendment is passed must be the testing of all voters in this current election who had difficulty deciding whether Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton was the more dishonest and untrustworthy person.
3
Democrats have a long history of stealing elections. We have no idea how much in person vote fraud occurs, because it happens in Democratic areas in which all the officials, including the prosecutors, are Democrats. Democrats are the perps and the beneficiaries; they have 0 incentive to investigate or prosecute their own.
Last week, a trial began in Paterson, with one Democrat charging another with stealing an election. Not long ago, supporters of an Essex County Senator were (!!) prosecuted for vote fraud. Atlantic City was infamous for shady absentee ballots. Just the other day, it transpired that the CA mall shooter, although not a citizen, was registered and had voted. (I wonder which Party he likely supported?) Yesterday, it transpired that 20 dead folks were registered to vote in VA, by a group run by a prominent Democrat. (The dead are a reliable Democratic constituency.)
There are no Republican analogs to ACORN, Hudson County, Cook County, or Tammany. (If there were, vote fraud prevention would shut them down, too.)
And anyone who believes that Democrats are now less addicted to power, or less willing to cheat to get it, is nuts.
As between excluding someone, otherwise eligible to vote, who couldn’t be bothered to actually register in advance, get ID, etc., or permitting an election to be decided by fraudulently cast votes, the latter is an infinitely worse alternative.
Last week, a trial began in Paterson, with one Democrat charging another with stealing an election. Not long ago, supporters of an Essex County Senator were (!!) prosecuted for vote fraud. Atlantic City was infamous for shady absentee ballots. Just the other day, it transpired that the CA mall shooter, although not a citizen, was registered and had voted. (I wonder which Party he likely supported?) Yesterday, it transpired that 20 dead folks were registered to vote in VA, by a group run by a prominent Democrat. (The dead are a reliable Democratic constituency.)
There are no Republican analogs to ACORN, Hudson County, Cook County, or Tammany. (If there were, vote fraud prevention would shut them down, too.)
And anyone who believes that Democrats are now less addicted to power, or less willing to cheat to get it, is nuts.
As between excluding someone, otherwise eligible to vote, who couldn’t be bothered to actually register in advance, get ID, etc., or permitting an election to be decided by fraudulently cast votes, the latter is an infinitely worse alternative.
3
Voting doesn't need to be difficult nor should it be. I'm blessed to be living in Oregon where we are able to vote by mail. Not only is this more convenient but it also gives me an opportunity to make an informed vote because I have time to research both sides of the issues before casting my vote.
We can register to vote online as long as we have an Oregon id, in person or by mail. During each election cycle there are always volunteers out reminding people to update their registration if they have moved or helping them register if they are not currently registered.
A healthy democracy goes out of its way to make sure that its citizens are able to participate and vote. We vote on Tuesday because in the 19th century farmers needed a full day to get to the city to vote and officials didn't want to interfere with the Sabbath or market day. Our politicians need to stop trying to disenfranchise people and go back to making the vote as convenient as possible for all citizens. We are supposed to be an example of democracy for the rest of the world.
We can register to vote online as long as we have an Oregon id, in person or by mail. During each election cycle there are always volunteers out reminding people to update their registration if they have moved or helping them register if they are not currently registered.
A healthy democracy goes out of its way to make sure that its citizens are able to participate and vote. We vote on Tuesday because in the 19th century farmers needed a full day to get to the city to vote and officials didn't want to interfere with the Sabbath or market day. Our politicians need to stop trying to disenfranchise people and go back to making the vote as convenient as possible for all citizens. We are supposed to be an example of democracy for the rest of the world.
9
President Obama addressed the campaign of voting restrictions several weeks ago while speaking to the Congressional Black Caucus. They are the latest in a long, calculated, deplorable effort at keeping *some* citizens from exercising their Democratic rights. Further, President Obama noted, there have been all of 10 cases of voter fraud in recent history making it, at best, a nominal concern, while voter disenfranchisement remains a very real problem.
4
I'm convinced this is part of a long term plan to keep republicans in office for perpetuity: destroy the public school system so the voters aren't smart enough to vote their own self-interest, and suppress the vote of anyone who doesn't buy the tripe they're selling. Frightening stuff!
17
This is the ultimate betrayal of the principles on which the Republican Party was founded. Abe Lincoln would certainly never be a 21st century Republican.
10
Apply the same pre-clearance rules everywhere.
That would avoid much of the legal debate.
The current pattern of abuses shows that it is needed in many more places than we admitted int he past.
Have the same rule for everyone. That is very much in the spirit of voting rights for everyone.
That would avoid much of the legal debate.
The current pattern of abuses shows that it is needed in many more places than we admitted int he past.
Have the same rule for everyone. That is very much in the spirit of voting rights for everyone.
5
That would certainly avoid MY primary problem with the pre-clearance parts of the 1965 Voting Rights Act, because it would no longer treat some states and counties as second-class. However, it would place immense power in the hands of the Justice Dept., and impose ideological views on ALL the states that can vary from administration to administration. I'd have less problem with that than a lot of true conservatives, but you'd never sell it in America, Mark.
"but you'd never sell it in America, Mark"
That is of course why it was originally done in a discriminatory way, picking out the "bad guys" who are not like the noble righteous states that would never do that -- ones now doing it too, including my own Michigan with voter ID laws and more.
Since Congress won't vote for anything, on any subject except repealing Obamacare, that really isn't a relevant consideration.
There are other ways to govern, far less desirable, but they keep us limping along. We'll have to use some of those.
This is fundamental. Voting comes first in fixing democracy. We can't shrug it off as impossible. We must find a way.
That is of course why it was originally done in a discriminatory way, picking out the "bad guys" who are not like the noble righteous states that would never do that -- ones now doing it too, including my own Michigan with voter ID laws and more.
Since Congress won't vote for anything, on any subject except repealing Obamacare, that really isn't a relevant consideration.
There are other ways to govern, far less desirable, but they keep us limping along. We'll have to use some of those.
This is fundamental. Voting comes first in fixing democracy. We can't shrug it off as impossible. We must find a way.
2
There's no reason why voter registration shouldn't be automatic through the Social Security Administration.
10
Or the DMV or the Post Office, any government office. I'd rather citizens be automatically considered registered at age 18, with a party choice to be selected thereafter, or have to opt out of voting. Maybe everybody should vote by mail (postage free).
I came across a good information sheet about voter suppression. Anybody who thinks it is not a deliberate, targeted effort would do well to take a look. It's part of the Koch instrument ALEC's effort to take over government at every level by making it hard for working stiffs struggling to get by to get IDs.
http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/Democracy,_Voter_Rights,_and_Federal_Power
"These bills limit the democratic influence of average Americans in favor of corporations by:
* Disenfranchising disabled, low-income, elderly, people-of-color, and student voters who move more frequently or do not drive, by requiring all voters show a state ID at the polls -- even though counties have traditionally accepted other proofs of residence without any significant problems.
* Opposing public financing of elections designed to reduce the influence of moneyed interests ... untrue assertion that "campaign contributions have no effect upon legislative behavior."
* opposing the disclosure of donors, before many others recognized how corporations, CEOs, and corporate front groups would hide behind non-disclosure rules
* Opposing the use of statistical sampling to get an accurate count of urban people of color and immigrants in the U.S. Census ... politicians ... [assert] this would increase the number of electoral votes and districts to favor Democrats.
* Opposing "false statement" laws passed by states designed to ensure that campaign ads do not mislead voters with false statements.
http://www.alecexposed.org/wiki/Democracy,_Voter_Rights,_and_Federal_Power
"These bills limit the democratic influence of average Americans in favor of corporations by:
* Disenfranchising disabled, low-income, elderly, people-of-color, and student voters who move more frequently or do not drive, by requiring all voters show a state ID at the polls -- even though counties have traditionally accepted other proofs of residence without any significant problems.
* Opposing public financing of elections designed to reduce the influence of moneyed interests ... untrue assertion that "campaign contributions have no effect upon legislative behavior."
* opposing the disclosure of donors, before many others recognized how corporations, CEOs, and corporate front groups would hide behind non-disclosure rules
* Opposing the use of statistical sampling to get an accurate count of urban people of color and immigrants in the U.S. Census ... politicians ... [assert] this would increase the number of electoral votes and districts to favor Democrats.
* Opposing "false statement" laws passed by states designed to ensure that campaign ads do not mislead voters with false statements.
16
"The fault, dear Brutus is not in our stars,
But in ourselves, that we are underlings."
While it is easy and accurate to blame Republicans for their anti-democratic policies put in place to depress the vote of minorities in pursuit of power, the question remains - why do Americans let them get away with it? Our commitment to democracy is marked by indifference and laziness.
But in ourselves, that we are underlings."
While it is easy and accurate to blame Republicans for their anti-democratic policies put in place to depress the vote of minorities in pursuit of power, the question remains - why do Americans let them get away with it? Our commitment to democracy is marked by indifference and laziness.
10
Can we divert all this energy arguing about IDs to programs to get people IDs? They're generally helpful in life whether there are voter ID laws or not.
Yes, there is little evidence of voter fraud. But there is also little evidence that voter ID laws reduce turnout. If you look at the data from 2008 and 2012, minority turnout--if anything--increased after voter ID laws passed. This was due to Obama inspiring higher turnouts. Nevertheless, there isn't strong evidence of voter ID laws reducing minority voting.
Yes, there is little evidence of voter fraud. But there is also little evidence that voter ID laws reduce turnout. If you look at the data from 2008 and 2012, minority turnout--if anything--increased after voter ID laws passed. This was due to Obama inspiring higher turnouts. Nevertheless, there isn't strong evidence of voter ID laws reducing minority voting.
3
Well stated. We can use data to skewer just about anything. However, one of the few real Constitutional rights we have left is the right to vote. Why wouldn't anyone want to protect their right to do that? We have to get a social security card and register for the selective service. How hard would it be to issue an identification card at that time?
Republicans are cowards. They hide behind false crisis such as the wholly invented "voter fraud" myth, knowing full well that if they revealed their true intentions then they would be shamed as the bigoted, self-entitled, un-American racists they are.
Real men don't hide. Real men stand up proudly and say who they are, what they are, and what they want. That's called integrity and honor. Republicans trying to oppress the vote are cowards because they can't stand up and say plainly what they all know privately.
Real men don't hide. Real men stand up proudly and say who they are, what they are, and what they want. That's called integrity and honor. Republicans trying to oppress the vote are cowards because they can't stand up and say plainly what they all know privately.
44
Among all the upsetting, frightening and appalling political developments in the U.S., this issue--voting restrictions targeted at minorities and the poor--is the one that actually makes me feel sick. I can barely read about it or listen to discussions. The motivation is so clear so dishonorable, and so unpatriotic, it must be stopped. I can only hope that some day--soon!--the Supreme Court will intervene, because Congress certainly won't.
49
Want to see record turnout? National election day lottery. Every registered person who votes is entered into a national lottery. Prize is derived from a very small portion of every state lottery conducted over the previous four years. The impact on other lottery prizes would be insignificant.
12
That sounds like a dangerous precedent. Give a prize to people who exercise a constitutional right?
1
Why would giving people an incentive to vote be dangerous? We encourage all kinds of socially positive behavior - business investment, home ownership, charitable giving, to name just a few - by offering an income tax deduction. I'd argue that voting as a behavior is far more important than any of those. Why would it be any different when it comes to a financial incentive?
1
The right to vote should be made easy for EVERY American citizen. This piece clearly points out that state control erodes this privilege and makes it only an American ideal. So let's cut to the chase and put it in the Constitution. The Federal government can then ensure this right and put an end to state restrictions such as North Carolina's. ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS must be granted equality to vote.
10
Putting things in the Constitution is a great idea until you remember what that requires: a vote of 2/3rds of Congress and 3/4ths of the states to add anything to the Constitution. Do you really believe the Congress and the states, disproportionately controlled (for now) by the Republican party, would pass such legislation? Dream on...
This is a puzzling issue to those who live outside the United States. I live in Canada. It has been accepted practice for as long as I have been alive that in order to vote, you need to present identification. Why is this such a big deal in the United States?
4
It's the specific nature of the ID. When I registered to vote, I had to prove I was myself, but I'm comfortable and have a driver's license. I'm on a list and they check me off when I go vote. It's fast.
There's plenty of evidence of veterans and old people, students and working stiffs being refused the right to vote.
6-8 hour lines and few polling places and difficulty getting to where the IDs are available with offices rarely open are used to limit voting by those who have little transport, day jobs, or other difficulties getting to vote.
There's plenty of evidence of veterans and old people, students and working stiffs being refused the right to vote.
6-8 hour lines and few polling places and difficulty getting to where the IDs are available with offices rarely open are used to limit voting by those who have little transport, day jobs, or other difficulties getting to vote.
16
It's a longer story...:A select few who think they know what is best for everyone else...but who use double speak to push their own agenda for what they want, but regress to shaming and name calling when everyone else expresses an opposition to their views.
1
You should actually find out about Canadian ID requirements. Unlike US states virtually anything with your address suffices (e.g. Utility bill). The rules are the same nationwide. And if you have no ID with an address, someone can vouch for you. Oh yes, and we didn't require ID (or have measurable fraud) before vote suppressor Stephen Harper changed the laws knowing that poor people didn't vote for him and were less likely to have ID.
1
It's sad that there have been and are so many restrictions and "hoops" that people have to go through just to vote in the USA.
In Canada we don't have "registration laws". We go to the election site where we have been told to go, show up with an officially-recognized piece of ID (Driver's license or passport), and then vote. And this applies for all provinces (similar to states in the USA), both for provincial and federal elections.
Our "slight" problem is to motivate many more voters to vote.
In certain countries YOU HAVE TO VOTE-period.
Below is the reference for countries that require people to vote:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/22-countries-voting-mandatory/
In Canada we don't have "registration laws". We go to the election site where we have been told to go, show up with an officially-recognized piece of ID (Driver's license or passport), and then vote. And this applies for all provinces (similar to states in the USA), both for provincial and federal elections.
Our "slight" problem is to motivate many more voters to vote.
In certain countries YOU HAVE TO VOTE-period.
Below is the reference for countries that require people to vote:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/22-countries-voting-mandatory/
14
Sort of.
In Canada, you only vote for one office at the provincial or federal level. This allows small paper ballots to be used and counted by hand with lots of people watching. When I ran a poll (DRO), there might be 5 people watching the count and able to object, but I decided and objected ballots went into a special envelope if a recount was needed.
Voter ID was tightened by the little lamented Conservative government. But even then, non-partisan Elections Canada managed to still make many types of non-Photo ID acceptable. The new government will bring back the rules from before the Conservatives.
Gradually, the franchise has expanded. Convicted, on parole and even those in prison can vote.
Voting in advance takes a few minutes. At its worst, voting might take 30 minutes.
In Canada, you only vote for one office at the provincial or federal level. This allows small paper ballots to be used and counted by hand with lots of people watching. When I ran a poll (DRO), there might be 5 people watching the count and able to object, but I decided and objected ballots went into a special envelope if a recount was needed.
Voter ID was tightened by the little lamented Conservative government. But even then, non-partisan Elections Canada managed to still make many types of non-Photo ID acceptable. The new government will bring back the rules from before the Conservatives.
Gradually, the franchise has expanded. Convicted, on parole and even those in prison can vote.
Voting in advance takes a few minutes. At its worst, voting might take 30 minutes.
2
You apparently do not understand that one of the major problems we have here in the states right now is that some citizens do not have a driver's license or a passport. For many years in most parts of the U.S. (and, yes, states set many of the laws regarding how elections are carried out in their states; there are only a few broad laws that are set by the federal government), a citizen registered to vote in the municipality in which they lived using any of a number of different forms of ID. They then showed up, said who they were, signed a form, their signature was compared to the one on file and if they agreed, the person voted. This may not have been the "best" way of doing things, but it worked well nonetheless. In recent years, in addition to other shenanigans some Republicans have claimed that voter fraud is widespread (it's not) and demanded that voters show a photo ID to vote--NOT the American tradition, but not really a problem for people who already possess a driver's license, a passport, or one of a few other acceptable forms of identification with a photo. The problem is the people who do not have any of those. To get the photo ID they need, they are faced with a variety of issues--almost all of which could be handled IF the Republicans were sincere and not just trying to block voting among the poorer and minority segments of our country as well as the young and idealistic college-age segment.
5
Actually Canada does have voter registration, it is just so easy you might not have noticed. Check the box on your income tax. Answer the door. Go online. Or show up and get registered on the spot. And all votes count. There are no placebo ballots.
2
Well, we’ve been offered three easy lessons on how to be a liberal Democrat.
Frankly, I don’t think TOO many readers of the New York Times need guidance on this.
Here’s the other argument, not held just by Republicans but, admittedly, probably by more than Democrats.
Every citizen of age has the right to vote if he or she wishes. However, it’s no obligation of government to make it ridiculously easy to vote because the value to society of a vote is inversely related to the ease of voting. The easier it is to register and vote, the greater number of totally disengaged, ignorant people out there will cast a vote on nothing other than the flip of a coin or because one candidate’s name appears first in a voting booth. But if it’s inconvenient to obtain Voter-ID or you have to wait awhile to vote, then it’s far more likely that the voter IS engaged, DOES have some familiarity with the issues and candidates, and that the vote is informed.
This applies equally to Democrats AND Republicans, and people of all sexual identifies, races and ethnicities. The argument that we should facilitate voting to the point where it becomes so trivial that a very large proportion of votes are cast by the disengaged and ignorant is just absurd on its face.
Voter-ID laws whose motivations are patently racist, such as NC’s, SHOULD be struck down. But if laws affecting voting procedures passively tend to keep the vote to the engaged and informed, of WHATEVER ideology, then I’m for them.
Frankly, I don’t think TOO many readers of the New York Times need guidance on this.
Here’s the other argument, not held just by Republicans but, admittedly, probably by more than Democrats.
Every citizen of age has the right to vote if he or she wishes. However, it’s no obligation of government to make it ridiculously easy to vote because the value to society of a vote is inversely related to the ease of voting. The easier it is to register and vote, the greater number of totally disengaged, ignorant people out there will cast a vote on nothing other than the flip of a coin or because one candidate’s name appears first in a voting booth. But if it’s inconvenient to obtain Voter-ID or you have to wait awhile to vote, then it’s far more likely that the voter IS engaged, DOES have some familiarity with the issues and candidates, and that the vote is informed.
This applies equally to Democrats AND Republicans, and people of all sexual identifies, races and ethnicities. The argument that we should facilitate voting to the point where it becomes so trivial that a very large proportion of votes are cast by the disengaged and ignorant is just absurd on its face.
Voter-ID laws whose motivations are patently racist, such as NC’s, SHOULD be struck down. But if laws affecting voting procedures passively tend to keep the vote to the engaged and informed, of WHATEVER ideology, then I’m for them.
25
Richard Luettgen writes, "the value to society of a vote is inversely related to the ease of voting." Nonsense! Ease of voting is directly related to wealth and leisure, being able to take time off from your workplace and drive home to vote on a Tuesday, and having access to transportation and to knowledge about where to go to get what.
It is not true that poor people's votes are of less value. It is true that our increasingly greater ID restrictions are making it harder for poor people to vote.
It is not true that poor people's votes are of less value. It is true that our increasingly greater ID restrictions are making it harder for poor people to vote.
47
Howard:
You accuse me of outrageous premises about "poor people" that my comment doesn't come close to suggesting. You might consider re-reading it.
You accuse me of outrageous premises about "poor people" that my comment doesn't come close to suggesting. You might consider re-reading it.
By this logic there should be different rules for different income groups. To make it as hard for a white collar worker, or a person of leisure, to vote as it is for a poor person, they should be required to forego salary, the use of private transportation, baby & elder sitters, etc.
9
This essay doesn't call a spade a spade.
Republicans want to choose their voters....not the other way around.
The Republican version of democracy is tyranny by their right-wing minority, carefully orchestrated through gerrymander, filibuster, obstruction, the Big Lie, court hijackings and voter suppression.
Look at the 2000 Presidential Election, the largest case of American voter fraud in modern history...Republican voter fraud.
The key in 2000 was a combination of Republican voter suppression before the election by purging the central voter file followed by a refusal to count all the votes cast during the election.
http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/exesum.htm
Republicans followed the Josef Stalin election strategy in 2000:
"The people who cast the votes don't decide an election, the people who count the votes do." - Josef Stalin
And now, Republicans are doing their patriotic best to suppress votes and dissent on a full-time basis all across America.
Vladimir Putin's United Russia party is the only other major political party that dedicates itself so strongly to staging the vote.
Republicans prefer Russian-style authoritarianism democracy, as does their standard bearer, Donald Trump.
Automatic voter registration, free voter ID cards for all citizens, and extended voting days and hours are all easy solutions that would address America's voting problems and increase voter turnout.
Republican tyranny would never stand a chance in a real democracy.
Republicans want to choose their voters....not the other way around.
The Republican version of democracy is tyranny by their right-wing minority, carefully orchestrated through gerrymander, filibuster, obstruction, the Big Lie, court hijackings and voter suppression.
Look at the 2000 Presidential Election, the largest case of American voter fraud in modern history...Republican voter fraud.
The key in 2000 was a combination of Republican voter suppression before the election by purging the central voter file followed by a refusal to count all the votes cast during the election.
http://www.usccr.gov/pubs/vote2000/report/exesum.htm
Republicans followed the Josef Stalin election strategy in 2000:
"The people who cast the votes don't decide an election, the people who count the votes do." - Josef Stalin
And now, Republicans are doing their patriotic best to suppress votes and dissent on a full-time basis all across America.
Vladimir Putin's United Russia party is the only other major political party that dedicates itself so strongly to staging the vote.
Republicans prefer Russian-style authoritarianism democracy, as does their standard bearer, Donald Trump.
Automatic voter registration, free voter ID cards for all citizens, and extended voting days and hours are all easy solutions that would address America's voting problems and increase voter turnout.
Republican tyranny would never stand a chance in a real democracy.
107
You can blame the Republicans, but have the Democrats done anything when they were in power relative to voting laws?
Being Canadian, I'm unfamiliar with voting laws, but am I correct to assume, that a state has more jurisdiction over federal elections than does the federal government?
Being Canadian, I'm unfamiliar with voting laws, but am I correct to assume, that a state has more jurisdiction over federal elections than does the federal government?
5
"Republicans prefer Russian-style authoritarianism democracy, as does their standard bearer,"
Beating those war drums.
"Republican tyranny would never stand a chance in a real democracy."
Sure it would, just bring on another Great Society and Democratic Party race based politics and you'll see the Republicans thrive.
My family and friends were hurt physically and financially by the racial politics of the Democratic Party in Detroit. Many cities escaped the reach of the Federal Government in dictating their public school attendance and pretend it wouldn't affect them. The NY City public schools are an example of this.
It'll be interesting to see what excuses there are for segregated school systems like NY City are offered up after HRC is elected president. There shouldn't be any except for the fact that the residents want it so.
Beating those war drums.
"Republican tyranny would never stand a chance in a real democracy."
Sure it would, just bring on another Great Society and Democratic Party race based politics and you'll see the Republicans thrive.
My family and friends were hurt physically and financially by the racial politics of the Democratic Party in Detroit. Many cities escaped the reach of the Federal Government in dictating their public school attendance and pretend it wouldn't affect them. The NY City public schools are an example of this.
It'll be interesting to see what excuses there are for segregated school systems like NY City are offered up after HRC is elected president. There shouldn't be any except for the fact that the residents want it so.
1
There is no right to vote in the Constitution and the States are in charge of voting regulations. What Federal jurisdiction that exists (the pre-clearance issue) was in part recently removed by our supreme court. In some ways we are handcuffed by an increasingly outdated Constitution.
1
There is no reason to prevent people who live in the United States and are citizens from voting by absentee ballot or in advance of Election Day as long as they are registered to vote and have a valid id. And valid ids can be a government id, a work id, a driver's license, and even an expired US passport. The GOP is behaving in an extremely undemocratic fashion when it tries to intimidate legal citizens into not voting. It is also lying when it says that illegal immigrants try to vote or do vote: illegal immigrants don't want the attention such actions would bring if they were discovered doing that. The only reason the GOP doesn't want African Americans voting is because they might not vote for them. The same goes for other ethnic groups.
The one way to fight this is to register to vote and then do it. If you are a naturalized citizen bring a copy of your papers with you. You worked hard to become a citizen. You deserve to exercise your right to vote! What the GOP is doing is unpatriotic.
The one way to fight this is to register to vote and then do it. If you are a naturalized citizen bring a copy of your papers with you. You worked hard to become a citizen. You deserve to exercise your right to vote! What the GOP is doing is unpatriotic.
65
Just why do I need a "valid id" to vote if I am willing to sign under Penalty of Law and prosecution for representation that I am someone who I am not. Including being a US citizen. I didn’t need an ID to sign up for the Selective Service in 1963 or to serve in Vietnam. Do I as a US citizen somehow need a license to Vote?
6
Agreed, deblacksmith. I'm old enough to remember using "traveler's checks" where your ID was your counter-signature, which could be compared to the original. Signatures are harder to fake than I.D.'s.
When I sign into vote, the poll workers have my registration signature in their book for comparison. This cheap accurate system has served our nation well for centuries, long before advances in photography enabled states, schools and employers to issue picture ID's, which started gradually after the mid-60's.
There were reliable alternatives then, and there are reliable alternatives now. I don't see any states banning absentee votes for lack of ID -- which means they don't really care about fraud but about disenfranchising specific groups of voters.
When I sign into vote, the poll workers have my registration signature in their book for comparison. This cheap accurate system has served our nation well for centuries, long before advances in photography enabled states, schools and employers to issue picture ID's, which started gradually after the mid-60's.
There were reliable alternatives then, and there are reliable alternatives now. I don't see any states banning absentee votes for lack of ID -- which means they don't really care about fraud but about disenfranchising specific groups of voters.
3
Somehow we have to help young people understand the incredible privilege they have to be citizens of America and that it it their responsibility to vote - and vote intelligently - because that is what our democracy is about.
The radical right has tried for 40+ years to convince people that their vote doesn't count by trying to make the electoral college and "super" delegates look like bad ideas. Both help our democracy work because although electoral college delegates aren't required to vote with the majority in their state most do and Super delegates are the people most informed about their party's ideals because they are part of it. The good news is that we now have a solid "independent" block of voters who judge candidates on their policies instead of simply party politics and they will bring America back to the middle of the political spectrum in the next few elections.
Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton and many others have suggested that American citizens be automatically registered to vote when they turn eighteen years of age and I agree. They could be notified by their state government that they now have the privilege of voting and be given basic facts about OUR governments at all levels - perhaps using the citizenship test immigrants must pass to become citizens. What a great way to provide a basic course in civics and improve voter participation by our youth.
The radical right has tried for 40+ years to convince people that their vote doesn't count by trying to make the electoral college and "super" delegates look like bad ideas. Both help our democracy work because although electoral college delegates aren't required to vote with the majority in their state most do and Super delegates are the people most informed about their party's ideals because they are part of it. The good news is that we now have a solid "independent" block of voters who judge candidates on their policies instead of simply party politics and they will bring America back to the middle of the political spectrum in the next few elections.
Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton and many others have suggested that American citizens be automatically registered to vote when they turn eighteen years of age and I agree. They could be notified by their state government that they now have the privilege of voting and be given basic facts about OUR governments at all levels - perhaps using the citizenship test immigrants must pass to become citizens. What a great way to provide a basic course in civics and improve voter participation by our youth.
48
I disagree about the "super" delegates. Without the "Super" delegates, the Democratic nomination for president would have definitely been much closer with Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Sanders.
It was obvious from the start that Mrs. Clinton was supposed to be the "shoo-in" for the position, but Mr. Sanders put up a great fight. Even the DNC turned out to be corrupt, having been biased against Mr. Sanders, and supportive for Mrs. CLinton, when they were supposed to be neutral!
It was obvious from the start that Mrs. Clinton was supposed to be the "shoo-in" for the position, but Mr. Sanders put up a great fight. Even the DNC turned out to be corrupt, having been biased against Mr. Sanders, and supportive for Mrs. CLinton, when they were supposed to be neutral!
6
Yes, Majortrout, Ms. Hillary Rodham Clinton was the democratic nominee and why not? Did you ever see a horse owner put anything but a horse that could win in the Kentucky Derby? She is the person with the most knowledge and political capital BUT she is a woman. They all knew what an uphill battle it would be for her and they want her to win - because she is obviously the best candidate in the field. It's smart politics because democrats want to keep the White House and regain control of the senate and U.S. house. That is what I want also. This whole idea of democrats being "unfair" in today's BIG republican democracy-destroying money master political climate is preposterous.
20
No, the supers had nothing to do with it. Sorry but that is baloney. Secretary Clinton won millions more votes.
Also, she's been a Democrat for decades. Much as I love Bernie he's an Independent who only became a Democrat in order to use the party's infrastructure and resources for his Presidential run. HRC has contributed tens of millions of dollars for downstream Democrats and Bernie, last I heard, had raised about a grand.
I don't understand why it's a revelation that the Party would have backed her in view of her tireless work.
Nobody brainwashed the voters.
Also, she's been a Democrat for decades. Much as I love Bernie he's an Independent who only became a Democrat in order to use the party's infrastructure and resources for his Presidential run. HRC has contributed tens of millions of dollars for downstream Democrats and Bernie, last I heard, had raised about a grand.
I don't understand why it's a revelation that the Party would have backed her in view of her tireless work.
Nobody brainwashed the voters.
6
States-rights folk claim that managing the process of voting is reserved to the states by the 10th Amendment. Translation: states have a Constitutional right to suppress voting so long as their intentions are not too blatant.
Let's establish an absolute right for US citizens to vote .