Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Just because you have ignored the problem where it has existed, does not mean it doesn't exist. How about the woman in Cincinnati that admitted to voting more than once? I'll bet she didn't vote under the same registration each time. If you make it a requirement to have the ID you will at least eliminate anyone who wouldn't go to the trouble to get fake ID in order to vote. Once someone votes illegally they are unlikely to get caught after leaving the polling place. If they have to carry fake ID with them, there is a better chance they might be found out.
Despite numerous studies and endless, desperate GOP attempts to uncover it, there is no statistically relevant voter fraud. You can keep telling us we have to prove a negative, but that's proof enough for rational people.
since it is extremely hard to track, we don't know
but there are plenty of close elections where just a few votes could make a difference
do you really want to chance it???
just show who you are and that you BELONG to that district, through an id
its not really that hard
So if you say it is extremely hard to track and you don't know, how do you know photo IDs would have any effect on this? You are basically trying to do something without knowing how much of a problem it is, nor knowing how much of an effect it would have....basically it is nothing more than something to give you a false sense of security without knowing if it has any effect on voter fraud or if it is even going after the correct outlet of voter fraud.
Just because you have ignored the problem where it has existed, does not mean it doesn't exist. How about the woman in Cincinnati that admitted to voting more than once? I'll bet she didn't vote under the same registration each time. If you make it a requirement to have the ID you will at least eliminate anyone who wouldn't go to the trouble to get fake ID in order to vote. Once someone votes illegally they are unlikely to get caught after leaving the polling place. If they have to carry fake ID with them, there is a better chance they might be found out.
Was the woman in Cincinnati caught voting more than once? People who illegally vote do get caught, and it sounds like having a digital system where when one votes in one place that they can't vote in other places and if they try it would show up when they tried.
Using the same logic as the argument you are trying to make about this statement when a Democrat says this will take away their votes they are admitting voter fraud.
Using the same logic as the argument you are trying to make about this statement when a Democrat says this will take away their votes they are admitting voter fraud.
Well only if you assume anyone voting for a Democrat is committing voter fraud.
Lets say you make it harder for college students to vote, that is called suppressing the vote, that has nothing to do with voter fraud.
It's not me making the claim this is aimed at Democrat votes, it's Democrats.
Of course it is Democrats saying this because it is clear that Republicans wish to suppress the vote, that doesn't mean Democrats are committing voter fraud.
If there is mass transit in the area there is going to be a license center nearby, as matter of fact the "oppressed minorities" who's populations are centered on urban areas and likely to vote Democrat are the ones with access to mass transit. The "Redneck Republicans" in the rural area are the ones that are going to have the most trouble if they do not have their own transportation which is unlikely. That blows up the argument that Republicans are trying to suppress the Democrat vote, doesn't it?
People that live in rural areas need to travel for anything whether it's the doctor, groceries or anything else. Certainly if they manage to get that done they can spend half a day once every 4 to 10 years to go get an ID. While on the topic I'd be willing to bet most of them support this legislation.
Poor people that vote democratic are not just limited to urban areas and are not necessarily minorities. You can't tell me that access isn't limited with 9 counties without a DOT office. Elderly and people living at that the low end will be restricted.
Answer one question putting everything else aside, do you believe that the republicans primary motive was to correct voter fraud or do they have an ulterior motive. Actually 2nd question why did this suddenly become an issue in 2012 and not in the 80's, 90's, early 2000, why the sudden flurry of voter restrictions limiting polling time, ID's closing polling places.
but the first thing we should be doing is making sure they are WHO they say they are, and WHERE they RESIDE
this is a REPRESENTITIVE REPUBLIC after all
should joe smith of district 1, be voting within district 3...especially after he already voted in district 1???
Fine with me go straighten out the existing voting records particularly in the case of absentee ballots, voter ID's don't solve that problem.
If Joe Smith is voting in 2 districts there is a problem with the county elections board.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
