The "magic wand" line was a favorite in the Bush rhetorical toolbox from 2002 to 2006.

The most tightly reasoned arguments by the plaintiffs will fall on deaf ears. The same gang (including Uncle Tom Thomas) that unconstitutionally overruled Florida's election law in 2000 will vote to uphold..

the guy who was a GOP operative who has a new book out about his shenanigans, claimed on NPR yesterday that, 'both sides do it' (caging, etc).

God that pissed me off. No, it's exclusively a GOP practice to actively engage in disenfranchising voters of certain ethnic or class groups which are likely Democratic voters.

Heck with the voter fraud -- I'm glad for the laws because they protect me from vampire attacks. Since the DoJ has focused on voter ID laws, I haven't been attacked by a single vampire. Not one. You can't argue with results like that.

The reason the GOP is going after this so hard is because they do it. But clearly they don't do it effectively, so they want to shut the process down.

Voter lists [names, addresses, precincts, and party affiliations] are public record. You can view this lists online, you can buy them from third party vendors [Karl Rove does this].

Stay focused on Rove.

As JMOHR notes above:

"...The real key is that it would take significant organization and numbers to significantly impact an election. It would take an organization that plotted the numbers needed and that transported the willing members willing to vote 3 or 4 times in different precincts to impact the vote..."

Well that organization exists now. Rove and co are experts in microtargeting. He knows details down to the precinct level. And the availability of voter data and the public rolls makes this possible.

Steve at 5117.

Your logic is irrefutable, so they will ignore it. Anyone want to explain how some organiziation wanting to win an election is going to convince hundreds, if not thousands, of people to commit a serious crime in exchange for what?

The simple reality is that in order to fix any election with this kind of subterfuge, it would take so many willing criminals, all of them perfectly content to face fines and jail time?

Identity theft for the purpose of voting is so laughable, go find a crook in the pokey who practiced identity thefdt and ask them if they would consider taking that kind of chance just to cast their single vote.

If it was anywhere nearly as pervasive a problem as these neocons suggest, there would be a long list of criminals already doing time for it.

Identity thieves, though occasionally willing to nickel and dime themselves into prison, typically don't play for small change, the likes of which would accompany a political campaign aattempting to fix the ballot.

So how much would it cost, per ID theft felon, to change the outcome of an election?

Let me state the obvious. This is nothing more or less than an attempt to discourage legitimate voters from voting.

Anyone who argues otherwise is either a total lemming, or a co-conspirator.

There is no middle ground.

I explained this issue in as balanced a fashion as I could to my 7 year old son and he said (without hesitation) "that side (the Democrats) must want to cheat".

This really isn't rocket science, is it?

8-)

I'm more concerned that implementing a voter ID law will prevent a great number of eligible American citizens from being able to exercise their right to vote. Why enact a law that will prevent innocent American citizens who actually "want" to vote from exercising their ability to vote in order to stop the relatively few guilty who "might" wnat to vote fraudulently? Isn't that throwing the baby out with the bath water? Isn't that punishing more innocent than guility voters? Isn't that preventing many more eligible voters from voting than preventing ineligible voters from voting?

JC at 11:22...
Illegal aliens aren't about to show up to an election in the first place...

They avoid any institutional event.

You have confused your ID theft argument with your illegal alien argument, are you suggesting these illegals are all getting other people's ID's then voting in their stead?

Or are you suggesting thousands of illegals are being recruited to go to a very public place, (which the illegals have learned to avoid like the plague) surrounded by local citizens who tend to know their own neighbors?

Or are you suggesting they steal some of those local ID's and go vote with them? So what happend when when someone who looks like Alberto Gonzales shows up to vote under the stolen name of Harley Jenkins?

And what if Harley shows up at the same time?

How utterly illogical. Or do you expect the illegals to only steal the ID's of Hispanic Americans?

But this is how the truth gets buried in the crap. Illogical talking points like yours become standard excuses, and get repeated until they become mutual-compliance mantras.

"The point some one using a stolen identity to vote is a joke. If they have stolen my identity then they can register as me and turn up at a polling station as me with as much identification as i need."

Identity theft is a financial crime, often committed by drug (meth) addicts.

Last I checked, tweekers don't really pay much attention to elections.

Do you have any arguments which don't involve the use of a bale of straw?

the real threat to our election process - one which is fully documented with actual instances of it - is GOP vote caging.

How do you spot a neocon wannabe?

Because they call anyone who disagrees with them, regardless of the issue, a "liberal."

"Well, the fraud exists almost on a daily basis..."

They have elections every day?

As one Judge recently said - less not beat around the bush, this law is to suppress the votes by people who tend to vote democrats. In 2000, Katherine Harris purged the voter rolls of those who wouldvote democrat and GW Bush won Florida. In 2004 Ken Blackwell did almost the same thing until he was caught. Recently in Missouri, they tried the same thing. Lets not beat around the bush here, we know that Republican will lie cheat and steal to win elections. This is just another way to suppress the vote of those who would vote for Democratic candidates.

The House hearings on the topic last year -- with Sen. Obama on the witness panel -- showed the motivation of the GOP, with racist filth like Steve King (R-IA) whining about a purported massive threat of illegal immigrants committing vote fraud, but being forced to admit that there's no evidence of it happening.

Common-sense kicks in. Voter supression -- caging, dubious flyers, changing polling places, inadequate provision of voting machines, creating voter ID laws that disenfranchise sections of the electorate -- delivers big benefits at little risk. Voting illegally delivers tiny benefits (i.e. single additional votes) at the massive risk of a felony.

These people would have you believe that identity theft somehow magically stops or couldn’t be a problem at the polling place door.

Uh, could it be that impersonating someone in full public view at the frickin' polling place is a different kind of identity theft to, say, stealing someone's SSN or credit card number and using to order stuff off the internets?

Again, common-sense kicks in, and the risk/reward ratio just isn't there. Wow, you added an extra vote to the total by committing a felony: that might mean your preferred candidate for county dog catcher gets elected, but it won't mean much in a quarter-million vote congressional election.

So if I say some sort of fraud is happening (which I have no actual proof of) and I propose a law to prevent that imagined fraud (which has the effect of preventing some people from voteing) and you oppose my law, you must therefore support that imagined fraud, are using said fraud to cheat in elections and also want amnesty for all illegal immigrants.

Only a 7 year old would fall for that (or someone with the mentality of a 7 year old.)

How about Census fraud, then?

Illegal immigrants are counted during the US national census. And then those totals are used to apportion Congressional seats.

Just how many Congressional seats are misapportioned because of illegal immigrants? [Texas, I'm looking at you.]

Amazing and disgusting. I see the path the GOP is building. Their goal is the Jim Crow days of the Poll Tax and/or landowner status to vote. If their policies and character won't win elections, then change the rules so they will.

Artemus

It has worked since the inception of the nation. Why is it ridiculous? When I vote, I sign in the register book. There is a copy of my signature there. It works, and neither party has a complaint.
Election fraud at a retail level(people voting more than once) is inefficient. As the GOP has proven time and time again, if you want to steal elections don't play small ball.

Woah. Terrible grammar. I guess I changed plans in mid-sentence. Obviously, "are" doesn't belong.

The firehouse analogy would hold only if there were no negative consequences to the proposed law. There's no downside to building the firehouse in advance; there is certainly a downside to enacting this legislation.

>> I have a hard time believing that there are people who can do these things yet cannot figure out how to get a photo ID. <<

It's not a matter of "figuring it out." It's a matter of procedural and financial barriers. For instance, a story on NPR this morning mentioned the case of a mother of seven in Indiana who wanted to get an ID so that she could vote. But the Indiana law requires a certified birth certificate in order to be issued an ID. (Do they require a birth certificate for people to get a driver's license?) She had been born out of state; to get a certified copy of her birth certificate from another state involved a $50 fee. Her husband is a janitor; they don't have $50 over and above what they have to spend on household bills.

There was another case in which a woman made three unsuccessful trips to the motor vehicle bureau to obtain her ID. She had a birth certificate, but they refused to accept it because it was not in her married name. (How many people are born with a married name, I'd like to know?)

All this to prevent something that nobody has yet been able to prove is actually a problem.

I am in favor of voter ID...under the following circumstances: in order to vote, you must obtain a special ID. The office to obtain this ID is open on Sunday mornings. and only Sunday mornings, between the hours or ten and noon.

We build firehouses because we're all aware of the evidence that fires sometimes burn down houses.

I could imagine that houses also face the risk of being demolished by gigantic blocks of ice. I could insist that public money be directed toward equipping Gigantic Blocks of Ice Deflection Teams and stationing one in every neighborhood.

But others might then ask for proof that falling gigantic blocks of ice pose a real problem.

Would you build a firehouse if there was no fire?

JoshBlows blows. And I have a sense that his idea of "balanced" blows, too.

He justifies his beliefs based upon what 7-year-olds think, so he must be right.

There are times being from Indiana makes me cringe! Rokita is obviously out of his depth. If you're going to try to snow someone, at least have better analogies at hand - IDs are to voter fraud as firehouses are to house fires?
And, hopefully, someone at the SC hearing will bring up the closure of the BMV offices. And the documentary requirements. And the untrained staff. But, no, there's no attempt to prevent people from voting!
(another) Doug

Woops!

It was Warren Olney who interviewed Rokita. Tom Ashbrook was banned by NASA, however.

Dilutes my point that Rokita should have realized his danger but not my point that these guys should avoid anyone who won't just swallow their spoon feeding.

Under these proposed rules, I would have been deprived of my right to vote. Some years ago, I moved into a new apartment in November. It takes six weeks (at least) for a new ID to arrive by mail, so even if I had gone down to the courthouse the very day I signed the lease, I would not have had a state-issued photo ID to present at the polls on November 4. I didn't even have a utility bill yet; who would four days after moving in? I had someone who was registered vouch for me at the polls, which would not be allowed under these new laws.

Of course, I could have travelled back to my old state and voted illegally under false pretenses with my state-issued photo ID. So how does this prevent fraud again? I would have been allowed to vote in a state I didn't even live in, but not allowed to vote where I did live because an ID couldn't arrive in time.

I'm not saying this is stupid, just that it's ridiculous. A photo ID does not prove citizenship, and neither does it prove the lack of a felonious criminal record. It does not even prove that you live at the address shown on the ID, only that you did at some point in time. And with identity theft as prevalent as it is, a photo ID doesn't even prove that you are you.

So it proves nothing except that you can keep citizens who moved in November from voting if you really want to. Hooray!

Rokita is articulating the "one percent doctrine", which Ron Suskind analyzed in full detail in his latest book: http://www.ronsuskind.com/theonepercentdoctrine/

Disenfranchisement is **dead people voting**. It would be impossible to catch the person that does this unless there was a camera in the polling place, OR if one of the poll workers just happens to notice that the person on the poll list is dead and stops and holds the perpetrator until police show up. Otherwise, if you catch it after the fact, the perpetrator is long gone... it's not that hard to understand. Dems KNOW they cheat this way and want to remain in a state of denial. What is so hard about getting a "free" ID through the BMV anyway? I mean seriously, are you pathetic losers that freaking lazy?!