When the ridiculous notion that new, photographic Voter IDs were needed in every state of our nation, the most cursory examinations of voting records clearly indicated such laws and IDs were totally unnecessary, that no large scale fraud existed.
Now - as legislatures across the nation have made the decision to require these IDs - we get a formal, comprehensive study which plainly reveals what we already knew ... there just isn't any fraud to combat at all:
"News21, a part of the Carnegie-Knight Initiative on the Future of
Journalism Education focused on investigative reporting, analyzed 2,608
alleged election-fraud cases, going back to 2000, mined from thousands
of public records requests, in all 50 states. (You can peruse the resulting database here.)
In all, they found just 10 cases of voter impersonation, or, "one out
of about every 15 million prospective voters" during that time."
"In Tennessee, the study turned up 14 total cases of reported fraud since
2000, none of which were cases of voter impersonation. The city of
Memphis filed a lawsuit last week, challenging the state's voter ID law on constitutional grounds."
Imagine that one person, let's say his name was Bob, and back in 2002, Bob ate a chicken salad sandwich that was rotten and it killed him, and every state in the nation voted to outlaw chicken salad sandwiches, even though no one can find anyone named Bob who died after eating a rotten chicken salad sandwich - that's pretty much what the bogus Voter ID law is built on - mindless fear.
In Pennsylvania, just as a case against the implementation of the law, the state has agreed the law is utterly without merit or necessity and is likely illegal:
"... state officials conceded that they had no evidence of prior in-person
voter fraud, or even any reason to believe that such crimes would occur
with more frequency if a voter ID law wasn't in effect.
"There have been no investigations or prosecutions of in-person voter
fraud in Pennsylvania; and the parties do not have direct personal
knowledge of any such investigations or prosecutions in other states,”
the statement reads."
The goal of the law, sadly, has been achieved - it will stop many from voting and will confuse the rest of us. It is not about fraud - it is a rollback to the days of when only white, adult males with property are allowed to vote. And that is not American at all. Shame on every legislator who approved these laws.
How can you say "it will stop many from voting"? In Tennessee you may be asked to show your ID to purchase alcohol, tobacco products, go to a bar, purchase rated R movie tickets, or sometimes even use a credit card. More people do all of these things everyday that the number of people that show up for even Presidential Elections. No one is crying foul that a cashier can refuse your credit card without a photo ID, but it is somehow unconstitutional to ask for it when they show up to vote.
ReplyDeleteI dont think that Voter Fraud is rampant or a major concern, and am not sure that the law was absolutely necessary, but I dont think that it is a bad idea to require ID to vote.
Also, why do leftward thinking people think so little of their base? First the TNDP Chairman comes out and says that Democrats elected Mark Clayton because his name was at the top of the ballot, then they think that simply asking someone for ID to vote will "confuse" them so much that they wont show up to the polls.
If it serves no anti-fraud purpose, what purpose could it serve?
ReplyDeleteThe references you make to other items requiring an ID are all to deter certain groups of people from obtaining those items.
So the IDs are a means of deterence, by their nature. This state (and all others) already had voter registration cards to insure no fraud ... a New ID, in my view, is meant only to prevent people from voting or confuse them as to whether they are eligible or not. I see no other reason for it's existence.
Buying an R rated movie ticket, (needing and ID for this is stupid), getting into a bar and voting is NOT the same thing. Voting is a right and responsibility of citizenship. Getting into a bar or movie is a choice of diversions.
ReplyDeleteEquating those activities is a media meme, nothing more.
I never compared "going to a bar" and voting, I am making the point that you would almost have to live in a cave with no contact with the outside world to get by today without a Photo ID...therefore, why is it such an abomination that we require it to vote?
ReplyDeletePersonally I don't really see the point with the law, and realize that it wont add a single job to the economy, but I don't see the need to call it racist or ageist or elitist. And the argument that asking someone, who already shows their ID an average of 3-4 times per week, to show their ID at the polls will somehow "confuse" them just doesn't make sense either.
Adam, it's a way to prevent some folks from voting - and that's the only function it serves. It is not a matter of Right or Left politics to me, it presents problems for the elderly who don't drive, and that alone makes it a bad idea which needs to be repealed. And it is likely an illegal requirement for voting anyway - so it must go.
ReplyDeleteThe state of Tennessee just indicted Christina Ayala with 19 counts of voter fraud, and Jo Ann Cronan with 3 counts of voter fraud also from Tennessee. Voter fraud exists and it happens rampantly too.
ReplyDeleteTry telling the truth, Katie. Christina Ayala is a State Senator from New Hampshire not Tennessee. She is accused of voting in a district she did not live in. The Cronan case is a woman in Tennessee, true, but her fraud attempt is buying votes and bribing voters, not in-person at the polls fraud the laws in this blog post refers to. The laws about IDs prevent thousands from voting legally. Truth, Katie, truth.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.nhregister.com/government-and-politics/20140926/bridgeport-state-rep-christina-ayala-arrested-on-19-voting-fraud-charges
http://www.wrcbtv.com/story/26841703/polk-county-woman-indicted-on-6-counts-of-voter-fraud