Federal overreach

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Happy Valley Heretic Orem, UT
    Oct. 8, 2013 8:31 a.m.

    There You Go Again @2bits
    I decided to take up your challenge to Google...

    I too took the challenge and found what you did then I took it further and started clicking the links by state. Most were dead and still others went to newspaper articles writing of possible fraud but not prosecution, still others were hearsay at best. Exactly what I've come to expect from conservative radio education, No references required.

  • ronnie sandy, utah
    Oct. 5, 2013 7:23 p.m.

    2 bits
    "Why do YOU oppose voters showing ID???" Here is your answer. Keep in mind currently there are millions of elderly voters that do not have photo ID's. For years they have used other forms of proof of residency such as utility bills, old voter registration cards, etc. With new laws many will be effectively disenfranchised because of the difficulty to get photo ID's and that will be the reality. So why are laws being changed? You tell me. In Texas since 2002 there have been only 18 convictions of voter fraud. The only answer is political advantage.

  • There You Go Again Saint George, UT
    Oct. 5, 2013 11:01 a.m.


    I decided to take up your challenge to Google...

    Your first citation was echoed by 3 pages of right wing blogs, websites, discussion forums,,,

    Your bias appears to be confirmed by your choice of websites...

    Nothing wrong with that except you might indicate that reality the next time you invite readers to confirm the information contained in your comment.

  • Gildas LOGAN, UT
    Oct. 5, 2013 8:36 a.m.

    Let's get good ID to vote and, while we're on it, let's have the same ID to get a job.

    And while we're on it let's take a hard look at, and have some good hard laws, about voter intimidation, and let the states take care of that.

  • Swiss Price, Utah
    Oct. 4, 2013 10:47 p.m.

    You have to have a picture ID for the Affordable Care Act.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    Oct. 4, 2013 10:02 p.m.

    In all honesty, the things 2 bits claims are well short of "documented cases of voter fraud". What's more, part of bearing the Burden of Proof is showing how your solution will solve the problem. From all I can see, better record keeping seems to be most of the answer IF there's a problem, which I don't think there is. Trying to tip the political playing field by reducing the vote - now THAT'S a problem.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 4, 2013 6:49 p.m.


    In the case of the New Black Panther Party and alleged voter intimidation, the decision not to pursue criminal charges was made by the Justice Department's Civil Rights Division PRIOR to the Obama administration. Specifically the Bush DOJ filied a civil suit stating: "The Department seeks an injunction preventing any future deployment of, or display of weapons by, New Black Panther Party members at the entrance to polling locations."

    In other words, the aim (by the Bush DOJ) was to make sure they didn't do something similar again in the future. This section of the law does not subject violators to criminal penalties.
    (More detail is provided by politifact)

    If we are truly concerned about the integrity of our elections why are we still using paperless voting machines? Cyber-security expert, life-long Republican Stephen Spoonamore believes the 2004 presidential election in Ohio and the 2002 Congressional election in Georgia, where Max Cleland lost, was election fraud using paperless voting machines.

  • happy2bhere clearfield, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 5:14 p.m.

    Ultra Bob

    The only problem with your suggestion is that there is no election in America that is a national election. Even for President. All elections are state elections, and therefore each state has the responsibility to conduct and control their election. I wish we had a national election at least for President, but with the electoral college nonsense, even the Presidential election is really about how people of a state vote. Not about how Americans vote. And unless some major change in the Constitution happened, it will stay that way.

    The only people who don't want fraud protection in the most important duty and right an American citizen has, voting, are people who know that illegal voters will benefit their party. And that party today is the Democrats. And what with a Presidential election being decided by something like 325 votes, in 2000, no one can say that a few illegal votes won't matter. ID and citizenship need to be checked. Period.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 4:33 p.m.

    @2 bits
    There's a difference between voter registration fraud (or a lack of updated registry) and voter fraud. The latter is people improperly voting in elections. Only one of the items on your list is an example of voter fraud.

    I actually don't oppose requiring voter IDs. However I oppose systematic biases in how states go about this. For instance, in Texas student IDs are not valid. I think that once someone is registered to vote they should automatically be given an ID to use (mailed to them but if they're homeless or something like that, it should be available at some logical location for them to pick it up at).

    "Are you OK with black panthers intimidating voters in Democrat States?"

    1. That was one or two voting precincts in the nation... you make it sound like it's some huge thing.
    2. No, I oppose it.
    3. I also oppose those Republican states passing provisions that allow for "election watchers" to challenge voters at precincts. Or that list of suspected improper voter registrations sent to Florida, where the list was mostly Hispanics and in the end most were properly registered. Not that you care.

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 4:22 p.m.

    For every law passed by government to protect people from criminal actions there are probably thousands, perhaps millions, of people working hard to find ways to get around the law. Voting laws would be high on the list of laws where this applies.

    The key to a well performing law is in the simplicity of its intent and wording. Although the current arguments over what is and what is not Constitutional make us think twice about that. The more complicated and bothersome a law is makes it easier to get around. The reason for getting around voting laws is to deny the people the vote.

    Voting should be Free, easy and accurate. Free of any cost to register, identify or vote, easy by not requiring deviation from the voters daily life, and accurate beyond the capability of fraud.

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    Oct. 4, 2013 4:04 p.m.

    2 bits. Citations please for each of the 8 assertions you have made in response to atl134

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 1:26 p.m.

    Even beyond that list there's
    -attempting to tax parents of out of state college students who try to vote in North Carolina
    -stacking county election boards and then having those boards do things like make 6,000 university students have to go to a place several miles outside campus with next to no public transit and limited parking (Appalachian State) as opposed to their previous on campus site.
    -or the Pasquotank county which denied a student at a historically black college the ability to run for a county position claiming his campus housing isn't proof of residency. Since the rules for running are the same as the rules for voting this could be used to deny students the right to vote. Naturally, they're focused primarily on this mostly black college but hey, I'm sure that's just coincidence rather than systematic racism/targeting of Democratic voters.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 1:17 p.m.

    Mark B,
    Still pretending voter fraud doesn't occur... keep your head in the sand if you want, but it does occur, and I gave the statistics, and I can give you specific examples if you want.

    And don't pretend the poor can't get government ID. They need government ID to get food-stamps, pay taxes, or for get any public assistance. Why should then not need the same ID to vote?

    Seems like many Democrats want it to be easier for people who have no government ID to be able to vote.

    But according to The Washington Post 74% of Americans support Voter ID. PEW Research center says 71% of Americans support Voter ID.

    Democrats claim the will of the people should be respected. The will of the people is quite obvious on this one.

    Why in the world would you NOT want to know if the person voting is who they say they are???

    Truth is... Democrats don't want States knowing who is voting so there can be MORE voter fraud, skewed census data to get them more seats, and MORE people in the country illegally voting for them and their liberal immigration agenda.

  • annes albuquerque, NM
    Oct. 4, 2013 1:07 p.m.

    The SCOTUS ruling against the VRA was very limited. Basically, the DOJ can't use the existing formulas, they have to devise new formulas.

    In the meantime, the DOJ is still responsible for oversight of the VRA, and for making sure that states are still in compliance with the great majority of the act, that is still in effect.

    It is preposterous on the face of it to state that DOJ has over reached by enforcing the VRA.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 1:03 p.m.

    Re: They don't have examples of voter fraud"... Pull your head out of the sand. There are hundreds of thousands of documented cases of voter fraud!!

    Put down the demo-coolaid and Google "how widespread is voter fraud".

    - To date, 46 states have prosecuted and convicted cases of voter fraud.
    - More than 24 Million voter registrations are invalid, yet they remain on the rolls nation-wide.
    - There are over 1.8 million dead voters still eligible on the rolls accross the country.
    - More than 2.75 million Americans are registered to vote in more than one state
    - Maryland has uncovered people registering and voting AFTER their death date.
    - 12 Indiana counties have more registered voters than residents!
    - Ohio Secretary of State admitted multiple Ohio counties have more registered voters than residents.
    - In Florida, the Democratic Party of Florida and the National Council of La Raza are currently under investigation for voter registration fraud.

    Why do YOU oppose voters showing ID???

    Afraid some illegal aliens aren't going to get to vote for Democrats?
    Afraid some felon isn't going to get to vote for Democrats?

    Are you OK with black panthers intimidating voters in Democrat States? Eric Holder is!

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 4, 2013 1:01 p.m.

    In order to register to vote in NC, (and most states) one merely has to fill out the voter registration form.

    In order to get No. Carolina state ID, one has to submit documents proving:
    Age and Identity
    Social Security Number

    People may have picture ID-and be able to use it for welfare offices, grocery stores etc., but that picture ID may not fulfill the requirements some states have for voter ID. For example, someone having a govt. issued Veteran ID would not have been allowed to vote because the ID did not list an address on it. A student would not be able to use a university issued ID. A senior citizen who no longer drives would not be able to use an expired driver's license.

    I can't remember the last time I was asked for ID at a bank or grocery store. I can deposit checks into my bank acct without picture ID. I can use my debit card for purchases without picture ID.

    Why no articles in DN about the voter ID or state-issued ID requirements in other states?
    Why no articles about the rate/incidence of voter impersonation?

    Oct. 4, 2013 12:35 p.m.

    2 bits,

    People do not have to show ID to register to vote. They show ID to actually vote. There is no evidence anywhere that any of those registered under false names ever even attempted to vote.

    That was a problem that was caused by offering pay or incentives based on the number of registrations. Unscrupulous people took adavantage of that. My bet is that system is no longer used.

    This is not voter fraud.

  • gmlewis Houston, TX
    Oct. 4, 2013 12:24 p.m.

    @Truth Seeker: Citizenship requirements are established when a voter is registered. The State ID just confirms that the person at the voting booth is the same person who registered. The picture is worth a thousand words.

    As far as logistics to get a State ID, somehow poor people get to the welfare offices, grocery stores, etc. As I said, everyone should have one, for many reasons beyond just voting,

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    Oct. 4, 2013 11:47 a.m.

    Get serious DMN, it is clear that the door has been sprung wide open to permit states to enact voter laws to limit voting by certain constituents. It is a bald face attempt to return voting to the days of Jim Crow. I am sure that would just be fine for your owners, but its hardly American. The AG is right on, and within his legal rights to challenge these anti democratic new voter suppression laws.

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    Oct. 4, 2013 11:41 a.m.

    The Burden of Proof is on those who want to make changes, large or small, in the laws. Changing laws just because something could possibly happen isn't enough to prevent people from doing what the Constitution allows. What's more, nothing big enough to change an election could happen without being discovered. So, I ask again. Please give a real example of voter fraud that was big enough to change an election. If you know one, that puts you ahead of the entire Bush DOJ.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 11:12 a.m.

    @2 bits
    If voter fraud happened to any large degree, state legislators in North Carolina and Pennsylvania would've been able to come up with examples but they couldn't.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 10:52 a.m.

    So... it's a Conservative Conspiracy if States want voter ID laws.

    It's not a Conservative conspiracy. It's motivated more by groups like ACORN going out and registering thousands of people like Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck to vote.

    What problem could ANYONE have (even a Democrat) with making sure the voter is who they say they are?

    The only person who would have an issue with requiring voter ID would be a person who WANTS voter fraud, and WANTS to make it easier for people who aren't citizens to vote, Felons to vote, people who aren't who they say they are to vote... oh ya... that would be a "Democrat".

    Why would you WANT people to be able to vote without ID? Then you have no idea if they are who they say they are. They could commit all kinds of voter fraud. Is that what you WANT?

    And if requiring voter ID (which is already law) is a conservative conspiracy... why no complaint about Black Panthers intimidating voters at the polls (which is against the law but the AG refuses to prosecute)?

    Do Democrats really want to enable voter fraud??

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 4, 2013 10:52 a.m.


    But what would be the requirements for getting a "free" ID?

    Certified birth certificate? What if you don't have one? Marriage license? What if you don't have one?
    Original Social Security Card? What if you don't have one?

    Where would people be required to go for the "free" ID?
    Is there public transportation available?

  • Mark B Eureka, CA
    Oct. 4, 2013 10:41 a.m.

    I don't think it's asking too much of EPJ or Mohokat to cite some ACTUAL instances of huge voter fraud which make it necessary to revise voting eligibility in certain GOP-controlled states. This has the net effect of reducing both total voters and voter turnout. The accusation is huge, but still unproven, as Truthseeker points out. Are EPJ and Mohokat absolutely sure they aren't just endorsing something that happens to aid GOP candidates?

  • Steve Cottrell Centerville, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 10:38 a.m.

    I would like to see Utah eliminate straight ticket voting. To vote, one should need to consider candidates for each office.

  • gmlewis Houston, TX
    Oct. 4, 2013 10:29 a.m.

    @Ultra Bob: I really have no problems with showing my Driver's License at the polls. For those who do not have a Driver's License, State ID's should be free. Everyone should be able to get one for many good reasons, including voting privilege.

    I think that the application form for Federal candidates should have an IQ/Self Esteem test included. It would consist of a single question "Are you smarter than most voters?" If you answer yes, then your registration would be rejected. That would have saved us untold grief with the current administration.

  • Truthseeker SLO, CA
    Oct. 4, 2013 10:01 a.m.

    It is notable that Republican controlled states felt the sudden need to enact stricter voter ID laws preceding the re-election of a black president, when there is NO evidence of significant or wide-spread voter impersonation. Let us not forget the DOJ under Bush, federal prosecutors, were specifically tasked with uncovering and prosecuting voter fraud. They found but a scant few cases.

    In addition to voter ID requirements, some North Carolina law changes:

    Eliminate pre-registration for 16- and 17-year-olds, who currently can register to vote before they turn 18.
    Outlaw paid voter registration drives.
    Eliminate straight-ticket voting.
    Eliminate provisional voting if someone shows up at the wrong precinct.
    Prohibit counties from extending poll hours by one hour on Election Day in extraordinary circumstances, such as in response to long lines.
    Allow any registered voter of a county to challenge the eligibility of a voter rather than just a voter of the precinct in which the suspect voter is registered.

  • 2 bits Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 9:05 a.m.

    The Administration seems to be getting more and more worried about keeping the States under their thumb. Especially when it comes to elections in the States (which decide the balance of power in Washington). It's almost like the Capitol keeping the Districts in line to keep them subservient to the people in the capitol.

    Senator Obama was right. The Constitution IS a document of negative liberties (for the Feds). It tells the Fed Gov what they can NOT do to the people, and tells the people what RIGHTS can't be taken away from them by their Government.

    They wanted a Federal Government, but they wanted it to focus on issues between the States (not hovering over the States and telling each State what they must do). They were supposed to be the referee when there were issues between states, and keep States from abusing each other, and defending ALL the States from aggression from foreign nations... but they thought it should be rare when the Feds needed to pass laws on the States or meddle in their day-to-day affairs, redistricting, local legislation, etc.

  • mohokat Ogden, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 8:56 a.m.

    The Obama Administration is the epitomy of overreach

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 8:56 a.m.

    It is sad that states have been able to thwart the Constitution by denying to ability to vote for their citizens.

    While there might be logic to a state controlling the voting for state and local governments, there should be no state created impedimental restrictions on voting for representation in our national government.

    Any and every adult wishing to vote in the national election should be allowed to do so simply by showing up at the voting place. The only restriction being that a person is not allowed to vote more than once. Perhaps, something like the “purple finger” to prevent multiple voting.

    While only actual citizens should vote, it is impossible to determine this and so every adult on American soil and subject to American laws should be allowed to vote in the national election.

    In any case, the states must not be allowed to control the voting for our national government.

  • EPJ Grantsville, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 8:21 a.m.

    This administration must rely on voter fraud to win elections. If every voter has to produce a valid ID, that puts a damper on their style! Hence the lawsuits to impede transparency at the polls.

  • happy2bhere clearfield, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 7:25 a.m.

    On top of this, the California government, Jerry Brown and the legislature are saying that they will not cooperate with federal officials, ICE in helping them with illegal aliens. And at this time, Holder has not made any move to sue California for breaking federal regulations. And I used to think Janet Reno was the worst AG in American history.

  • george of the jungle goshen, UT
    Oct. 4, 2013 4:39 a.m.

    Good people give good gifts. There are three gifts that people can give and still keep. They are, their smile, their heart and their word. In my opinion this government is lacking in all three.

  • Mainly Me Werribee, 00
    Oct. 4, 2013 12:31 a.m.

    Yeah, so what else is new?