re Darrel "If PhotoID is required, the State must provide me with one, free
of charge, otherwise it is a poll tax (my DL cost $25 for 5 years, or roughly
$25 to vote for President.)"How much does it cost you to have to
be an American citizen in order to vote and would you consider the taxes we pay
as citizens to be a "poll tax?"
So how many instances of voter fraud have happened here in Utah in the past 30
years? Is Utah really suffering from an influx of fraudulent voters? How is this
any different than requiring literacy tests. Come on people you may celebrate
the day you get to restrict someone else's freedom, but how will you
respond when your own freedom is restricted.
First of all, thiere is no foolproof way to prevent voter fraud. So what ever
method slected has to be cost effective in its approach. Instituring a voter ID
system may reduce fraud to a degree, but at what cost? If it costs millios of
dollare to implement and prevents thousands of legitimate voters from voting, is
it worth it? If it costs nation wide 100 million dollars to implement and it
only prevents 100 instances of voter fraud, is it worth a million dollars per
@RRBonce again there are proven harms to allowing people to not have
certain restrictions on all the activities you list where is your proof of a
harm of not limiting access to voting? why do you keep trying to bring erroneous
activities into the conversation instead of providing evidence to support your
claim that there is a harm? DO you have no proof? is that why?
Supreme court has approved it. It's needed. Prove that an
election has not been affected by voter fraud. Start in Chicago.
Re: : IIt [sic] is incumbent on those that seek to limit rights to prove there
is some valid reason to do so."So, you agree we shouldn't
require concealed-carry permits [right to keep/bear arms]? Or driver licenses
[right to travel]? Or attorney licensing [right to counsel]? Etc. Etc. Etc.Funny how a liberal can feign such great interest in one constitutional
right -- the one that imposes almost no burden on valid voters, but which would
permit his party and candidate to cheat in the upcoming election -- while being
absolutely unconcerned about the serious burdens imposed by regulation of all
the rest.It was observed at least as early as 1775 that,
"Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel." That would certainly
apply to liberal appeals to oppose voter-ID laws, crying ageist, racist, elitist
crocodile tears for people, the vast majority of whom disagree with the
transparent liberal scam to affect this election through cheating.
@j thomas If you have facts to support your claims then present them as
others have done to refute your claims. You claim they are so readily available
then surely you can provide one credible reference to support your claim that
voter fraud is a significant problem that justifies placing restrictions on
peoples right to access voting.
@j thomas So you do realize you just made George's point right? your
comment about where the burden of proof falls has already been addressed in
tolstoys post right before your first one and making erroneous comments about
the police and fire department to try to place george on the defensive do not
help your claims. one more question to add to your list of questions
and comments you are avoiding, if the evidence is as clear and factual as you
claim they are why are you or anyone else associated with pushing these laws
unable to provide one credible reference that supports the claim of this being a
wide spread issue.
George,I'm going to leave it to you to prove that crime would
not increase if all policemen were fired and criminals had no obstacle to
committing crime.Your claim that voter fraud did not take place is
refuted by the facts. It is history. People can check it. They can see the
images of "dead people" voting alphabetically and all using the exact
same handwriting. You can deny voter fraud as long as you want, but people who
honestly look can see for for themselves. People know that photo
I.D. is required for using a check at the grocery store, even when they've
lived their all their lives. Why would they think that photo I.D. would not be
required to keep them honest when voting.
@j thomas You can ignore all the previous comments that have already
addressed your claims or you could actually try to refute those comments by
providing some facts to support your wild conspiracy theories of there being a
voter fraud that would be solved by having voter ID laws. If you want EVERYONE
to be as concerned as you then maybe you should present some cold hard facts to
support your claims instead of beating the same old conspiracy theory mantras.
Why aren't there equal numbers of conservatives and liberals complaining
about photo I.D.s?Today, about 47% of the voters say that they will
vote for Obama and about 47% say that they will vote for Romney. Are
Republicans just more law abiding, or do they know something about voting that
Democrats have not yet learned? Do only "live" Republicans vote? Have
Republicans not yet learned how to "raise the dead" and get them to vote
alphabetically like they did in 1960 in highly contested precincts where
Democrats narrowly won, after ballot counting was "mysteriously"
prolonged? It seems to me that EVERYONE should be concerned that
EVERYONE play fair. Of course that won't work for Obama. He wants a
guaranteed win. With voter photo I.D., a guaranteed win is something that only
Richard Daley and his Chicago buddies could have guaranteed.
@cmbennett1actually it is the governments fault if they impose
restrictions on peoples right to vote without providing a clear and compelling
state interest in doing so. So far all we have gotten to justify such laws is
wild conspiracy theories.
@procuradorfiscalliberals oppose it because it places an undo burden on
peoples right to vote. IIt is incumbent on those that seek to limit rights to
prove there is some valid reason to do so. So far all the far right have been
able to produce is wild conspiracy theories backed up by an antidotal story from
12 years ago that this law would not have effected since the man in the story
never actually tried to vote in person. then on the other side we have the
indiana primary alone in which 100's of valid votes where not counted
because of their voter ID law.
@peanut gallerySo you admit there is nothing to support your
conspiracy theories but we are all the ones that do not understand or have
We definitely need to prevent voter fraud, but what will we do to stop the
shenanigans by which local GOP's fixed some of their own primaries this
If you choose not to have the required ID that is not the government's
fault. If the government were preventing people from getting the ID that would
be one thing, but it is not. I choose not to have a passport, but I don't
blame the government for not allowing me to travel internationally.
@Peanut Gallery"Photo ID laws are absolutely ESSENTIAL in
protecting the integrity of the vote...When society makes voting and registering
more and more "convenient," we also make it easier to commit voter
fraud, which is a very serious blow against our constitutional republic."===============So, do you propose doing away with absentee
ballots? They cannot show ID. If not, why would someone going to the
physical polling place be required to show it?If so, are Servicemembers
not entitled to vote while they are serving their country outside of her
borders?You can't have it both ways.If voter fraud
is really the issue, the precincts would be small enough that the judges could
know everyone, and thus catch a potential fraudster. Why don't we do that?
Is it money? For the big concern that everyone has over voter fraud, cost
shouldn't count.Again, you can't have it both ways.
Voting is an unalienable right in a democracy. If PhotoID is required, the
State must provide me with one, free of charge, otherwise it is a poll tax (my
DL cost $25 for 5 years, or roughly $25 to vote for President.)
Great column, Senator. Photo ID laws are absolutely ESSENTIAL in protecting the
integrity of the vote. Those who disagree either don't understand the
seriousness of voter fraud, or have ulterior motives.When society
makes voting and registering more and more "convenient," we also make it
easier to commit voter fraud, which is a very serious blow against our
constitutional republic.Also, it's very misleading to cite the
small number of cases prosecuted as "proof" that voter fraud is a
non-problem. Even when voter fraud is obvious or rampant, it's often hard
to prosecute and prove in court. It's also politically UNPOPULAR to
prosecute, because of likely (but phony) counter-accusations of "voter
suppression" or "racism" or "disenfranchisement."
Re: "It's pure and simple voter suppression."Sure it is
-- suppression of those who shouldn't be voting anyway.It's simply ageist, racist, elitist blather to suggest that validly
registered and qualified voters who want to vote will somehow be prevented from
doing so because they are old, infirm, or naturalized.The is only
one reason to oppose voter ID -- to enable cheating.And Democratts
have made it crystal clear -- we intend to do so.
@RRB"Florida received the federal database of illegal aliens so
they can remove them from the rolls." =======If that
were the case, I would have no problem at all. They were comparing voting
records to driver license records, and that is the rub. Citizens being removed
from the voting rolls simply because of a potential address mismatch, where is
the due process in that?
@RRB"Utah in 2005 did a study and found 383 foreign nationals with
ITIN numbers registered to vote here."Based on population that
would be about 3,000 Pennsylvanians with 140 actually voting, so why throw off
8% of the states' population from the voter roles? Oh right, to let Romney
win, as their house majority leader said.
@RRB"if they had not caught them in time, thousands could of voted,
and we would never of known"Oh my heavens 1000''s of
legitimate voters may have gotten to vote that where shut out because of delays
at the polling station caused by poll sitters incompetence that slowed down the
voting process. we would have known because the reason the polls would have been
allowed to stay open would have been because of the court order which is a
@RRBThis “study” you site was conducted by comparing the
name and birthdate of voters to the name and birthdate of individuals with a
taxpayer ID number investigated by immigration authorities, but this method has
been proven to yield errors: the voters in question may not be the noncitizens
identified. Moreover, the source stated that 14 of these individuals had
actually voted; even if the 14 were in fact noncitizens, there is no allegation
in the cited source that any of the individuals voted at the polls or in the
name of another meaning voter ID laws would not have prevented them from voting.
sources Michael McDonald & Justin Levitt, Seeing Double Voting (2007),
Letter from John M. Schaff, Utah Auditor General, to John L. Valentine, Utah
State Senate President (Feb. 8, 2005)
@RRBwhat we are getting is more and more conspiracy theories from the far
right as reality increasingly elude them.
Florida received the federal database of illegal aliens so they can remove them
from the rolls. I get a feeling sometimes that posting robots are
fighting this. They get proof and just ignore it, and keep saying the same
thing. Utah in 2005 did a study and found 383 foreign nationals with ITIN
numbers registered to vote here. Only 14 did vote, but Utah refused to prosecute
(Shurtleff?) because they could not determine citizenship. (the ITIN is not for
citizens) more dead carpLike not prosecuting illegal aliens for
perjury when filling out I-9 forms, or felonies for id theft, social security
numbers, etc, yet prosecuting Americans for felonies, we know we are not getting
the entire story. Bob tells the inside story, if they had not caught
them in time, thousands could of voted, and we would never of known. They would
of never found out, and if they did, they would of kept it quiet to "protect
our countries reputation".
nice antidotal story Robert but it does not change the fact following a massive
investigations across the country into voter fraud in 2008 there where only 7
cases of voter fraud that where prosecutable in the entire country. When there
is fraud it should be aggressively prosecuted but antidotal stories do not
translate to wide spread fraud and the voter ID laws have already caused
100's of legitimate votes to not be counted in the primary elections alone.
ID laws have nothing to do with "voter fraud" and everything to do with
SUPPRESSING the vote among the marginalized people who have no car! Millions of
voters don't have driver licenses because they can't afford them or
they are too old or disabled to need one. The Republicans know full well that
marginalized people tend to vote Democratic--because the Democrats CARE about
If absentee ballots, or mail in ballots, do not require ID; why do votes in
person? What is inherently different in how I cast my vote that requires ID or
A solution looking for a problem. The suppression of Democratic
votes is just a side benefit.Laws like this will, without question,
reduce far more legitimate votes than fraudulent ones.Can anyone
nice one Bob.
Bob cites one case, 12 years ago? There is no voter fraud problem. There may be
shenanigans from time to time, but the GOP is actually suppressing the vote and
they know it.
Photo IDs may be inconvenient, but they help prevent voter fraudorPreventing voter fraud by means other than photo id's may
be inconvient but ...Other means should be used so that the
inconvience doesn't fall mainly on the poor.
And once again those calling for making voting more difficult can't
actually cite evidence of any remotely significant voter fraud.They
want the elderly, the poor and students to have a harder time voting because it
is those voters who are more likely to vote for Democrats.It's
pure and simple voter suppression.