This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.
The RPGPundit's Own Forum Rules
This part of the site is controlled by the RPGPundit. This is where he discusses topics that he finds interesting. You may post here, but understand that there are limits. The RPGPundit can shut down any thread, topic of discussion, or user in a thread at his pleasure. This part of the site is essentially his house, so keep that in mind. Note that this is the only part of the site where political discussion is permitted, but is regulated by the RPGPundit.

Author Topic: Status of 2020 election fraud  (Read 4221 times)

Mistwell

  • Smarter than Arduin
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4783
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #45 on: September 21, 2022, 06:50:29 PM »
There are tons of ways to make the voting process more secure that don't involve adding more hoops for voters to jump through. Funding investigations and observers, reforming voting machines like Georgia did so that there is an accurate paper trail, updating voter rolls with existing information like death certificates and change-of-address, and many others.

ID is not, realistically speaking, a hoop. You basically can't function in legal society without photo ID. The incredibly, incredibly overwhelming majority of people who can legally vote to begin with already have some form of government issued photo ID. Hell, I have two in my wallet. The rounding error of people who don't can get one, it's not that big a deal. I'm even fine with making it free, although I'm aware it currently isn't in most cases.

It is a small minority of people hampered by this - but that number is vastly more than the number in-person fraud cases that might be prevented. There are hundreds of thousands of people who don't have a current valid ID, and they'd have to pay to get one.

It's free in a lot of places and should be free. If nothing else, to end this stupid claim that it's some burden to get an ID when even most of the lowliest nations on the planet can manage to find a way to distribute IDs to everyone.

Quote
I have seen nothing to suggest that in-person fraud (i.e. someone comes in and lies about their identity to vote) is at all significant. One easy way to at least identify when this is happening is to send mail or other update to the legal voter of when and where they voted. If someone lied about being them, they can speak up.

Here is the problem with this kind of claim: in most places, there is no enforcement arm looking to see if there is in-person fraud happening. It's EXTREMELY rare that the Government looks, and I mean actually looks, to see what's going on.

One of the very few rare times the Government REALLY looked at an election was the Bob Dornan/ Loretta Sanchez case. 

A 1996 INS investigation into alleged Motor Voter fraud in California's 46th congressional district, together with a Congressional Task Force and state investigation, discovered that 4,023 illegal voters possibly cast ballots in the disputed election between Republican Robert Dornan and Democrat Loretta Sanchez. After a careful comparison between the Orange County voter registration files and INS databases the Task Force was able to clearly and convincingly document that 624 persons had illegally registered and thus were not eligible to cast ballots in the November 1996 election. In addition, the Task Force discovered 196 instances where there is a circumstantial indication that a voter registered illegally. Further, the Orange County Registrar of voters voided 124 improper absentee ballots. In total, the Task Force found clear and convincing evidence that 748 invalid votes were cast in this election. Dornan lost by 984 votes.

That's actually quite a lot of voter fraud. So what have we changed to prevent that from ever happening again since 1996?

Essentially nothing. We actually made it EASIER to do that sort of thing here in California, not harder. And we DON'T CHECK to see if it's happening. The only real check on the system is if a private citizen files a complaint because they have evidence of fraud - otherwise, they don't even ask for any form of ID in California. You just show up, state your name, and that's it. How would we know if there was fraud going on at the ballot without checking? What check on the system is there to validate someone is allowed to registered to vote?

To me that's like saying nobody is speeding on the freeways, after we pull all highway patrol and no longer look to see if anyone is speeding on the freeways and depend only on another driver calling in a complaint about a speeder.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2022, 06:52:33 PM by Mistwell »

3catcircus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 592
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #46 on: September 21, 2022, 07:32:57 PM »
There are tons of ways to make the voting process more secure that don't involve adding more hoops for voters to jump through. Funding investigations and observers, reforming voting machines like Georgia did so that there is an accurate paper trail, updating voter rolls with existing information like death certificates and change-of-address, and many others.

ID is not, realistically speaking, a hoop. You basically can't function in legal society without photo ID. The incredibly, incredibly overwhelming majority of people who can legally vote to begin with already have some form of government issued photo ID. Hell, I have two in my wallet. The rounding error of people who don't can get one, it's not that big a deal. I'm even fine with making it free, although I'm aware it currently isn't in most cases.

It is a small minority of people hampered by this - but that number is vastly more than the number in-person fraud cases that might be prevented. There are hundreds of thousands of people who don't have a current valid ID, and they'd have to pay to get one.

I have seen nothing to suggest that in-person fraud (i.e. someone comes in and lies about their identity to vote) is at all significant. One easy way to at least identify when this is happening is to send mail or other update to the legal voter of when and where they voted. If someone lied about being them, they can speak up.

Voter suppression is a big issue that goes much more broadly than ID. Voting day should be a national holiday so that people don't have to rush from work. There are often long lines for polls in poorer districts, which is flatly unequal. Waiting over 8 hours in line to vote is a travesty. If people who have a car and easy time off and live in the right districts can trivially get to vote in minutes, while others have to rush from work, take the bus, and wait in line for hours -- that's flatly unequal. Voting isn't a privilege that people should pay for. It's a right that the government should guarantee equal access to.

Yes, there are people like me who are concerned about voter suppression - but I don't agree that this is a sign that I or others support fraud.

I'm fine with making it a paid holiday. I don't know what systemic knobs need to be tweaked to open more voting places in congested areas, but that should be tweaked too. I'm not saying voter suppression can't happen, what I'm saying is that it's telling that any attempt to secure the system is labeled as voter suppression.

But I've already listed out many ways to secure the system that are *not* labeled voter suppression. So your statement is flatly wrong. You're ignoring all attempts to secure the system *except for* voter ID.

Yes, voter ID requirements are labeled as voter suppression - because in the U.S., they do make it more difficult for thousands of legal voters. Even though that's a small minority, they still have their rights. I would support voter ID if the government took on the responsibility of issuing a free ID card to all citizens. That's not how any of the current restriction laws work, though.

How is requiring ID to vote suppression? Would you say the same thing about wanting an ID for anyone desiring to buy a firearm?  The 1st and 2nd amendments are both inherent rights and they can both be used to hurt people.

Three fact of they matter is that those who claim they can't obtain ID are likely in the same lobe of a venn diagram as those who don't want to put forth any effort in any other aspect of their lives. There is no excuse that holds any water. "Well my birth certificate was burned up in a fire, so I can't get an ID." Yeah - you spend $25 to have your state vital records office issue a certified duplicate.
« Last Edit: September 21, 2022, 07:50:02 PM by 3catcircus »

3catcircus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 592
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #47 on: September 21, 2022, 07:46:05 PM »
Why would the burden of proof be on anyone to "prove" voter fraud? The burden of proof should be on the election commissions to prove that fraud did not occur.

At a bare minimum, every single vote should be digitized and published somewhere publicly so independent auditors can validate votes. Voters should all have a unique private key that allows them to compare their vote to the digitized version of the ballot and verify the vote was recorded correctly.

The election commissions *did* prove that fraud did not occur, by validating their votes and presenting their validations to the state governments. The state governments can and did demand additional investigation in some cases, but in the end, they authorized the voting results. If you mean that the election commissions need to prove themselves to 100% of Americans in the court of public opinion, that's flatly impossible.

Regarding your digitization suggestion, I'm concerned about exactly what you mean. It is *required* in a secret ballot that no one - especially government auditors - can see exactly what an individual voter's vote was. That includes the voter themselves. Having a secret key that's given to the voter would mean that if the voter reveals their key to anyone, that anonymity is lost and someone can check out how they voted. For example, there have been problems with bosses requiring that their workers prove they voted correctly, or local governments listing and targeting dissidents based on looking at their votes.

In any case, the percentage of voters who would electronically check their votes is likely to be very small.

In general, the U.S. has a ridiculously messy election system - with different systems for each state and often varying county to county and even by locality. There are dozens of voting machines, hundreds of ballot designs, and different registration systems. Each year there are tens of thousands of part-time volunteers who operate the polling places, and then turn over to local election commissions.

This makes it incredibly difficult to get a top-level security. With only part-time volunteers and local officials, there are always lots of mistakes and possibly local bias, as well as dozens if not hundreds of fraud cases that slip through. On the other hand, it seems also very difficult for there to be a top-down control of it all for the same reason.

EDITED TO ADD: There have been plenty of state and local level reforms to improve election security, but they tend not to get much attention. For example, I thought Georgia did well with its recent reforms to get a simple and robust election machines with a paper trail.

They didn't prove no fraud occurred. Counting the same ballots one more time is not an audit. An audit is when you actually do the following:

1. Confirm that the ballot was cast by someone on the voter rolls who is actually alive, living in the state, and eligible to vote.
2. Rejecting multiple votes from the same voter.
3. Rejecting ballots cast after the deadline.
4. Rejecting illegible ballots.
5. Rejecting unsigned mail ballots.
6. Rejecting ballots whose signatures don't match the signature on the voter rolls.
7. Rejecting registrations from multiple unrelated people living at the same address, and confirming the address isn't a vacant lot or PO box.
8. Rejecting ballots that have been tampered with.
9. Rejecting ballots whose origin and chain of custody are unknown.

You know - actually doing a forensic audit instead of counting every ballot you just counted and declaring "All good; no fraud here!"

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10129
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #48 on: September 21, 2022, 09:09:51 PM »
EDITED TO ADD: There have been plenty of state and local level reforms to improve election security, but they tend not to get much attention. For example, I thought Georgia did well with its recent reforms to get a simple and robust election machines with a paper trail.

They didn't prove no fraud occurred. Counting the same ballots one more time is not an audit.

You're talking about something completely different than I was. I didn't say anything about the audit during 2020. I was talking about improvements in election security. Prior to 2019, Georgia had an all-electronic voting system that everyone criticized as vulnerable - and a judge ordered that it could not be used in the 2020 elections. They then went and replaced their old electronic-only system with new machines that had a clear paper trail, which I thought was a big improvement.

This is all prior to 2020. The 2020 Georgia election used a more secure system than the 2016 election.

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10129
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #49 on: September 21, 2022, 09:34:37 PM »
I have seen nothing to suggest that in-person fraud (i.e. someone comes in and lies about their identity to vote) is at all significant. One easy way to at least identify when this is happening is to send mail or other update to the legal voter of when and where they voted. If someone lied about being them, they can speak up.

Here is the problem with this kind of claim: in most places, there is no enforcement arm looking to see if there is in-person fraud happening. It's EXTREMELY rare that the Government looks, and I mean actually looks, to see what's going on.

One of the very few rare times the Government REALLY looked at an election was the Bob Dornan/ Loretta Sanchez case.
In total, the Task Force found clear and convincing evidence that 748 invalid votes were cast in this election. Dornan lost by 984 votes.

You're switching out the category here. Those 748 votes were *not* from people lying about what their name was, that could be prevented by requiring photo ID. Those 748 votes were from people who *had* legal ID and voted under their legal names. What made them invalid was they were immigrants who didn't have the right to vote.

Yes, that is a category that happens more regularly. It was less than half a percent (0.5%) in this case, but that's significant. It can happen in part because there is a tiny percentage of immigrants can screw up and not understand the right to vote. Anything that depends on people following instructions will get some percent of people screwing up - even if they're citizens fluent in English. There can be intentional illegal voting as well, of course. This is exacerbated by the U.S.'s patchwork ID system, where there is no federal ID, and people change out their IDs as they move from state to state. So apparently there's no easy way to check for citizenship status based on ID. Immigrants are allowed to drive and can get driver's licenses, but the status of their naturalization isn't tied to their driver's license ID.

Yes, I support improving our systems so we can more easily verify whether someone is a citizen legal to vote or not. That doesn't involve any extra effort on the part of the voter.

I also would support a system that distributes free photo ID to all citizens, like what Mexico has done. If we did that, I'd be fine with requiring the ID to vote.

GeekyBugle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5149
  • Now even more Toxic
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #50 on: September 22, 2022, 09:23:47 AM »
I have seen nothing to suggest that in-person fraud (i.e. someone comes in and lies about their identity to vote) is at all significant. One easy way to at least identify when this is happening is to send mail or other update to the legal voter of when and where they voted. If someone lied about being them, they can speak up.

Here is the problem with this kind of claim: in most places, there is no enforcement arm looking to see if there is in-person fraud happening. It's EXTREMELY rare that the Government looks, and I mean actually looks, to see what's going on.

One of the very few rare times the Government REALLY looked at an election was the Bob Dornan/ Loretta Sanchez case.
In total, the Task Force found clear and convincing evidence that 748 invalid votes were cast in this election. Dornan lost by 984 votes.

You're switching out the category here. Those 748 votes were *not* from people lying about what their name was, that could be prevented by requiring photo ID. Those 748 votes were from people who *had* legal ID and voted under their legal names. What made them invalid was they were immigrants who didn't have the right to vote.

Yes, that is a category that happens more regularly. It was less than half a percent (0.5%) in this case, but that's significant. It can happen in part because there is a tiny percentage of immigrants can screw up and not understand the right to vote. Anything that depends on people following instructions will get some percent of people screwing up - even if they're citizens fluent in English. There can be intentional illegal voting as well, of course. This is exacerbated by the U.S.'s patchwork ID system, where there is no federal ID, and people change out their IDs as they move from state to state. So apparently there's no easy way to check for citizenship status based on ID. Immigrants are allowed to drive and can get driver's licenses, but the status of their naturalization isn't tied to their driver's license ID.

Yes, I support improving our systems so we can more easily verify whether someone is a citizen legal to vote or not. That doesn't involve any extra effort on the part of the voter.

I also would support a system that distributes free photo ID to all citizens, like what Mexico has done. If we did that, I'd be fine with requiring the ID to vote.

Is he tho?

Isn't the argument about voter ID?

From my PoV you're conflating ANY legal ID (Drivers License, etc) with a voter ID.

In México we have a voter ID that also works as a legal ID and is required for purchases of alcohol/tobacco/etc. if you look like you're too young to buy them. But it's not our Drivers License, Passport, etc.

IF you guys stoped crying that something even shitholes like México have is raicismism and instituted such an ID people who don't have the right to vote because they're not citizens couldn't vote in any election period.

But no, you cry about voter suppression because in your eyes blacks, latinos, etc are too stooooopid to go get an ID.

You guys also love to conflate (in both sides of the argument) the drivers license with a voter ID. It's not, it shouldn't be, it needs to be a different ID you get in the electoral org's offices once every 10 years, it needs to have a way to punch elecctions per year, a unique number per citizen, and an actual physical address. It has to be "free" so as not to disadvantage the poor (although there's arguments about restricting the vote to those citizens who do pay taxes), it has to be almost impossible to falsify, it has to be how you build the voting lists (these have the voter ID photos in alphabetical order), it has to have your fingerprint, signature, sex, photo, age, place of birth etc.

Quote from: Rhedyn

Here is why this forum tends to be so stupid. Many people here think Joe Biden is "The Left", when he is actually Far Right and every US republican is just an idiot.

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

― George Orwell

Bruwulf

  • Dwarf Fanboy
  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 113
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #51 on: September 22, 2022, 11:43:09 AM »
You guys also love to conflate (in both sides of the argument) the drivers license with a voter ID. It's not, it shouldn't be, it needs to be a different ID you get in the electoral org's offices once every 10 years, it needs to have a way to punch elecctions per year, a unique number per citizen, and an actual physical address. It has to be "free" so as not to disadvantage the poor (although there's arguments about restricting the vote to those citizens who do pay taxes), it has to be almost impossible to falsify, it has to be how you build the voting lists (these have the voter ID photos in alphabetical order), it has to have your fingerprint, signature, sex, photo, age, place of birth etc.

Driver's licence is (admittedly lazy) verbal shorthand. There is a generic government photo ID you can get that is applicable in any situation you need photo ID for, if you don't otherwise need a driver's licence or can't get one for some reason. It's unfortunately not free... I think it's 25 dollars? But I agree it should be. It doesn't have fingerprints, or place of birth, but it's enough.

Again, it's virtually impossible to function in legal society without some form of government photo ID. Without it, you can't buy alcohol or tobacco, open a bank account, apply for government aid (food stamps, etc), get a lot of other government licences, buy a gun, go to a lot of doctors, buy houses or rent apartments, and the list goes on. Or even get most jobs. Yeah, it's possible to find workarounds for some of those (go the emergency room, for example, and there are unscrupulous landlords), but generally speaking without an ID you're kinda fucked already, so I question how many "hundreds of thousands" of legal voters are going to get disenfranchised if we require ID.

GeekyBugle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5149
  • Now even more Toxic
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #52 on: September 22, 2022, 01:38:59 PM »
You guys also love to conflate (in both sides of the argument) the drivers license with a voter ID. It's not, it shouldn't be, it needs to be a different ID you get in the electoral org's offices once every 10 years, it needs to have a way to punch elecctions per year, a unique number per citizen, and an actual physical address. It has to be "free" so as not to disadvantage the poor (although there's arguments about restricting the vote to those citizens who do pay taxes), it has to be almost impossible to falsify, it has to be how you build the voting lists (these have the voter ID photos in alphabetical order), it has to have your fingerprint, signature, sex, photo, age, place of birth etc.

Driver's licence is (admittedly lazy) verbal shorthand. There is a generic government photo ID you can get that is applicable in any situation you need photo ID for, if you don't otherwise need a driver's licence or can't get one for some reason. It's unfortunately not free... I think it's 25 dollars? But I agree it should be. It doesn't have fingerprints, or place of birth, but it's enough.

Again, it's virtually impossible to function in legal society without some form of government photo ID. Without it, you can't buy alcohol or tobacco, open a bank account, apply for government aid (food stamps, etc), get a lot of other government licences, buy a gun, go to a lot of doctors, buy houses or rent apartments, and the list goes on. Or even get most jobs. Yeah, it's possible to find workarounds for some of those (go the emergency room, for example, and there are unscrupulous landlords), but generally speaking without an ID you're kinda fucked already, so I question how many "hundreds of thousands" of legal voters are going to get disenfranchised if we require ID.

Again, if the aim is to stop voter fraud/increase confidence in the system, you need a special ID, I shared the Mexican one for a reason, our system has been praised the world over. Granted it doesn't stop at the ID but it starts there.

Your whole electoral system needs to be overhauled to bring it into the 21st century, and that doesn't mean electronic fraud machines, paper ballots, clear ballot boxes where the voter places his ballot, voter ID, inked thumbs, electoral lists revised and updated constantly, representatives of all parties supervising each voting station, granting access to observers from outside the parties if they wish to, each polling station counts AND publishes their count outside after closing, recountings/audits of any polling station happen if any party demands it.

That's how we do it and it takes at most 24 hours to know the winner in very constested elections, usually we know the same day or early morning the next day.
Quote from: Rhedyn

Here is why this forum tends to be so stupid. Many people here think Joe Biden is "The Left", when he is actually Far Right and every US republican is just an idiot.

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

― George Orwell

3catcircus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • ?
  • Posts: 592
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #53 on: September 22, 2022, 03:47:33 PM »
You guys also love to conflate (in both sides of the argument) the drivers license with a voter ID. It's not, it shouldn't be, it needs to be a different ID you get in the electoral org's offices once every 10 years, it needs to have a way to punch elecctions per year, a unique number per citizen, and an actual physical address. It has to be "free" so as not to disadvantage the poor (although there's arguments about restricting the vote to those citizens who do pay taxes), it has to be almost impossible to falsify, it has to be how you build the voting lists (these have the voter ID photos in alphabetical order), it has to have your fingerprint, signature, sex, photo, age, place of birth etc.

Driver's licence is (admittedly lazy) verbal shorthand. There is a generic government photo ID you can get that is applicable in any situation you need photo ID for, if you don't otherwise need a driver's licence or can't get one for some reason. It's unfortunately not free... I think it's 25 dollars? But I agree it should be. It doesn't have fingerprints, or place of birth, but it's enough.

Again, it's virtually impossible to function in legal society without some form of government photo ID. Without it, you can't buy alcohol or tobacco, open a bank account, apply for government aid (food stamps, etc), get a lot of other government licences, buy a gun, go to a lot of doctors, buy houses or rent apartments, and the list goes on. Or even get most jobs. Yeah, it's possible to find workarounds for some of those (go the emergency room, for example, and there are unscrupulous landlords), but generally speaking without an ID you're kinda fucked already, so I question how many "hundreds of thousands" of legal voters are going to get disenfranchised if we require ID.

Wai wai wait. Let me stop you right there. You mean the same people who the left claims shouldn't *need* an ID to vote are the same people who *have* an ID (that could be used to vote) to buy booze and smokes and government aid?!???

Shocking.

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10129
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #54 on: September 22, 2022, 04:27:55 PM »
You guys also love to conflate (in both sides of the argument) the drivers license with a voter ID. It's not, it shouldn't be, it needs to be a different ID you get in the electoral org's offices once every 10 years, it needs to have a way to punch elecctions per year, a unique number per citizen, and an actual physical address. It has to be "free" so as not to disadvantage the poor (although there's arguments about restricting the vote to those citizens who do pay taxes), it has to be almost impossible to falsify, it has to be how you build the voting lists (these have the voter ID photos in alphabetical order), it has to have your fingerprint, signature, sex, photo, age, place of birth etc.

Driver's licence is (admittedly lazy) verbal shorthand. There is a generic government photo ID you can get that is applicable in any situation you need photo ID for, if you don't otherwise need a driver's licence or can't get one for some reason. It's unfortunately not free... I think it's 25 dollars? But I agree it should be. It doesn't have fingerprints, or place of birth, but it's enough.

To GeekyBugle - the reason why we talk about driver's licenses is because the debate is over the currently-enforced state laws that require photo ID under the current ID system. Over 30 states are now enforcing photo ID requirements without revising their ID system. Currently, a driver's license is the only government-issued photo ID that most Americans have, and as I said, a significant percentage of legal voters do not have that.

As I said earlier, *if* the government took responsibility to issue a free photo ID to everyone who is legal to vote - as Mexico does, then that would be a very different case.


Again, it's virtually impossible to function in legal society without some form of government photo ID. Without it, you can't buy alcohol or tobacco, open a bank account, apply for government aid (food stamps, etc), get a lot of other government licences, buy a gun, go to a lot of doctors, buy houses or rent apartments, and the list goes on. Or even get most jobs. Yeah, it's possible to find workarounds for some of those (go the emergency room, for example, and there are unscrupulous landlords), but generally speaking without an ID you're kinda fucked already, so I question how many "hundreds of thousands" of legal voters are going to get disenfranchised if we require ID.

You claim this, but all the studies I've read have shown that there are indeed many people who don't have a current ID. They're not completely disenfranchised. The vast majority *can* get a valid photo ID, but it can involve a number of hurdles. It isn't just the fee. It's getting to the right office, getting the right paperwork, and waiting in line for hours as well as the fee. Some people don't have their original birth certificate or marriage certificate which can be required, and replacing those takes money and effort. That added effort creates a disincentive to vote, just like a poll tax which has long been ruled illegal.

A common case includes poorer elderly people whose driver's license has expired, and they have not needed the photo id again. The American Association of Retired People (AARP) documented the impact on older Americans.

https://www.aarp.org/politics-society/government-elections/info-01-2012/voter-id-laws-impact-older-americans.html

This references a 2006 survey of 987 Americans which found that 18% (!!) of American citizens age 65 and above do not have current government-issued photo ID.

https://www.brennancenter.org/media/6697/download

There was a study about the average cost of replacement IDs, even in states which supposedly offered a free option for photo ID. This was one example from Pennsylvania,

Quote
According to a September 13, 2012 letter to The Morning Call in Scranton, a Pennsylvania resident seeking a “free” voter ID had incurred costs of $94.61 so far, which were likely to eventually reach $133.61. The potential voter traveled 34 miles round trip to and from the PennDOT agency in Bethlehem, an estimated hour of travel time. After a 75-minute wait, she was advised that she needed to present a raised-seal birth certificate from her home state of New York and an updated Social Security card. Subsequently, she requested a birth certificate from New York State. She then traveled to a local Social Security office and was informed that a raised-seal marriage certificate was also required to obtain the updated Social Security card. She then requested a marriage certificate from New York State. She now needs to return to the Social Security office with the marriage certificate to get an updated Social Security card. Then, she needs to return to PennDOT to provide the birth certificate and updated Social Security card to get a voter ID.

cf. http://charleshamiltonhouston.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/FullReportVoterIDJune2014.pdf

It's not just the $133 - it's that it's unequal time and effort to get this in order to vote. Voting should be just as easy for everyone, not selectively harder for elderly and/or poor people.

GeekyBugle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5149
  • Now even more Toxic
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #55 on: September 22, 2022, 05:11:46 PM »
You guys also love to conflate (in both sides of the argument) the drivers license with a voter ID. It's not, it shouldn't be, it needs to be a different ID you get in the electoral org's offices once every 10 years, it needs to have a way to punch elecctions per year, a unique number per citizen, and an actual physical address. It has to be "free" so as not to disadvantage the poor (although there's arguments about restricting the vote to those citizens who do pay taxes), it has to be almost impossible to falsify, it has to be how you build the voting lists (these have the voter ID photos in alphabetical order), it has to have your fingerprint, signature, sex, photo, age, place of birth etc.

Driver's licence is (admittedly lazy) verbal shorthand. There is a generic government photo ID you can get that is applicable in any situation you need photo ID for, if you don't otherwise need a driver's licence or can't get one for some reason. It's unfortunately not free... I think it's 25 dollars? But I agree it should be. It doesn't have fingerprints, or place of birth, but it's enough.

To GeekyBugle - the reason why we talk about driver's licenses is because the debate is over the currently-enforced state laws that require photo ID under the current ID system. Over 30 states are now enforcing photo ID requirements without revising their ID system. Currently, a driver's license is the only government-issued photo ID that most Americans have, and as I said, a significant percentage of legal voters do not have that.

As I said earlier, *if* the government took responsibility to issue a free photo ID to everyone who is legal to vote - as Mexico does, then that would be a very different case.


Again, it's virtually impossible to function in legal society without some form of government photo ID. Without it, you can't buy alcohol or tobacco, open a bank account, apply for government aid (food stamps, etc), get a lot of other government licences, buy a gun, go to a lot of doctors, buy houses or rent apartments, and the list goes on. Or even get most jobs. Yeah, it's possible to find workarounds for some of those (go the emergency room, for example, and there are unscrupulous landlords), but generally speaking without an ID you're kinda fucked already, so I question how many "hundreds of thousands" of legal voters are going to get disenfranchised if we require ID.

You claim this, but all the studies I've read have shown that there are indeed many people who don't have a current ID. They're not completely disenfranchised. The vast majority *can* get a valid photo ID, but it can involve a number of hurdles. It isn't just the fee. It's getting to the right office, getting the right paperwork, and waiting in line for hours as well as the fee. Some people don't have their original birth certificate or marriage certificate which can be required, and replacing those takes money and effort. That added effort creates a disincentive to vote, just like a poll tax which has long been ruled illegal.

A common case includes poorer elderly people whose driver's license has expired, and they have not needed the photo id again. The American Association of Retired People (AARP) documented the impact on older Americans.

https://www.aarp.org/politics-society/government-elections/info-01-2012/voter-id-laws-impact-older-americans.html

This references a 2006 survey of 987 Americans which found that 18% (!!) of American citizens age 65 and above do not have current government-issued photo ID.

https://www.brennancenter.org/media/6697/download

There was a study about the average cost of replacement IDs, even in states which supposedly offered a free option for photo ID. This was one example from Pennsylvania,

Quote
According to a September 13, 2012 letter to The Morning Call in Scranton, a Pennsylvania resident seeking a “free” voter ID had incurred costs of $94.61 so far, which were likely to eventually reach $133.61. The potential voter traveled 34 miles round trip to and from the PennDOT agency in Bethlehem, an estimated hour of travel time. After a 75-minute wait, she was advised that she needed to present a raised-seal birth certificate from her home state of New York and an updated Social Security card. Subsequently, she requested a birth certificate from New York State. She then traveled to a local Social Security office and was informed that a raised-seal marriage certificate was also required to obtain the updated Social Security card. She then requested a marriage certificate from New York State. She now needs to return to the Social Security office with the marriage certificate to get an updated Social Security card. Then, she needs to return to PennDOT to provide the birth certificate and updated Social Security card to get a voter ID.

cf. http://charleshamiltonhouston.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/01/FullReportVoterIDJune2014.pdf

It's not just the $133 - it's that it's unequal time and effort to get this in order to vote. Voting should be just as easy for everyone, not selectively harder for elderly and/or poor people.

It's the same effort and time and cost for everybody, unless you are claiming that rich people get exmptions for those requirements.

And those requirements are also present in México and the world over, and yes, you also need your birth certificate, because it's for citizens, you also need a physical address (copy of your power/phone receit) and if you don't have another ID 2 persons to testify you are who you claim you are.

And guess what? In the most remote locations people have their voter ID, people who some times have to invest lots of time travelling to a town/city to get their papers.

Only people that don't have it are those who don't care enough to get it.

It's not like you have to get a new one every month or something dude, you get it once every 10 years for fucks sake!

It doesn't disenfranchise nobody, those are just leftoid pretexts to not make the system more secure.

Given what the PRI used to do here before, I can make an educated guess why they are so against having a secure system: They are commiting fraud.
Quote from: Rhedyn

Here is why this forum tends to be so stupid. Many people here think Joe Biden is "The Left", when he is actually Far Right and every US republican is just an idiot.

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

― George Orwell

moonsweeper

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #56 on: September 22, 2022, 05:56:08 PM »
Actually if you bother to read the pdf the costs are outrageously overcalculated.  The portions that you cite validate this.
What is even funnier is how much blame gets cast on the inefficiency of the government offices.


anecdote:  As someone whos has had to replace most of those documents in real life, I'll call bullshit.



edit:  I'd like to see some actual numbers for how many of these supposed 'eligible voters' do not have an actual vote allowable photo ID...

You know, all the ones who can't drive vehicles, use a bank, buy alcohol or tobacco, etc.
« Last Edit: September 22, 2022, 06:30:12 PM by moonsweeper »
"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

Ratman_tf

  • Alt-Reich Shitlord
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7385
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #57 on: September 22, 2022, 06:24:39 PM »
Actually if you bother to read the pdf the costs are outrageously overcalculated.  The portions that you cite validate this.
What is even funnier is how much blame gets cast of the inefficiency of the government offices.


anecdote:  As someone whos has had to replace most of those documents in real life, I'll call bullshit.



edit:  I'd like to see some actual numbers for how many of these supposed 'eligible voters' do not have an actual vote allowable photo ID...

You know, all the ones who can't drive vehicles, use a bank, buy alcohol or tobacco, etc.

Even when I was dirt poor, I was able to scrabble together the money and time to get an ID. (Not a driver's license)

Most of the talk about voter supression comes across as ignorant white people thinking black people are too stupid and poor to get an ID.

I would support a free or cheap voter ID card and more support for voting early, more places to vote, stuff like that. But then I support mail in ballots because with the proper security in place, that would reduce the cost and time of setting up voting booths, taking time off work, etc, etc.
The notion of an exclusionary and hostile RPG community is a fever dream of zealots who view all social dynamics through a narrow keyhole of structural oppression.
-Haffrung

moonsweeper

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 937
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #58 on: September 22, 2022, 06:29:20 PM »
Actually if you bother to read the pdf the costs are outrageously overcalculated.  The portions that you cite validate this.
What is even funnier is how much blame gets cast of the inefficiency of the government offices.


anecdote:  As someone whos has had to replace most of those documents in real life, I'll call bullshit.



edit:  I'd like to see some actual numbers for how many of these supposed 'eligible voters' do not have an actual vote allowable photo ID...

You know, all the ones who can't drive vehicles, use a bank, buy alcohol or tobacco, etc.

Even when I was dirt poor, I was able to scrabble together the money and time to get an ID. (Not a driver's license)

Most of the talk about voter supression comes across as ignorant white people thinking black people are too stupid and poor to get an ID.

I would support a free or cheap voter ID card and more support for voting early, more places to vote, stuff like that. But then I support mail in ballots because with the proper security in place, that would reduce the cost and time of setting up voting booths, taking time off work, etc, etc.

States should definitely issue a free photo ID to citizens of the state.  The time costs are actually pretty negligible.
"I have a very hard time taking seriously someone who has the time and resources to protest capitalism, while walking around in Nike shoes and drinking Starbucks, while filming it on their iPhone."  --  Alderaan Crumbs

"Just, can you make it The Ramones at least? I only listen to Abba when I want to fuck a stripper." -- Jeff37923

"Government is the only entity that relies on its failures to justify the expansion of its powers." -- David Freiheit (Viva Frei)

jhkim

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10129
Re: Status of 2020 election fraud
« Reply #59 on: September 22, 2022, 08:03:56 PM »
anecdote:  As someone whos has had to replace most of those documents in real life, I'll call bullshit.

edit:  I'd like to see some actual numbers for how many of these supposed 'eligible voters' do not have an actual vote allowable photo ID...

Even when I was dirt poor, I was able to scrabble together the money and time to get an ID. (Not a driver's license)

Most of the talk about voter supression comes across as ignorant white people thinking black people are too stupid and poor to get an ID.

I already linked to a survey showing how many Americans don't have a current valid photo ID. I'm open to seeing some other survey or study that show it is wrong.

But it seems like you're putting your own anecdotes over data. Like those who say it's racist to claim that black people are arrested and jailed more than white people. All of the data I have seen show that is clearly the case. That's what reality is. We can vary in how we explain it, but it is the truth that it is.

Likewise, elderly, poor, and black people all have a higher rate of lacking valid photo ID. I don't think that black people are stupider, or that people lacking photo ID are all stupid. It's just a question of circumstance.