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.
It is a small problem - something like a percent or two of the voters. The only reason it is an issue is that the people in that small class happen to be poor and tend to vote democratic.
I don't think so. My Mom and her husband aren't "poor" but do vote D.
I don't think so. My Mom and her husband aren't "poor" but do vote D.
If the Republicans were seriously interested in preventing voter fraud the answer of course is to ban or otherwise strengthen the control of absentee ballots. Got to be 90% of the vote fraud problem.
Yet no one seems interested in fixing that. It is reasonably obvious why.
If the Republicans were seriously interested in preventing voter fraud the answer of course is to ban or otherwise strengthen the control of absentee ballots. Got to be 90% of the vote fraud problem.
Yet no one seems interested in fixing that. It is reasonably obvious why.
If you are going to combat voter fraud you need to positively ID who is voting no matter what the voting method. The obvious place to start is in person voting. Once that is accomplished then you can consider how you are going to implement it for absentee balloting.
One thing yo9u are failing to realize is voter ID also opens a plethora of options to both streamline and improve the process, for example when you walk into the polling place you swipe your ID and your photo shows up on screen. You could even eliminate the poll worker altogether using facial recognition.
This in turn could also drastically reduce the need for absentee ballots, you could be on the other side of the world and vote. As yet another example instant registration could possible with the swipe of your card.
The system we have now is antiquated and prone to fraud, anything you want to do to improve it will require positively identifying the voter.
If you are going to combat voter fraud you need to positively ID who is voting no matter what the voting method. The obvious place to start is in person voting. Once that is accomplished then you can consider how you are going to implement it for absentee balloting.
One thing yo9u are failing to realize is voter ID also opens a plethora of options to both streamline and improve the process, for example when you walk into the polling place you swipe your ID and your photo shows up on screen. You could even eliminate the poll worker altogether using facial recognition.
This in turn could also drastically reduce the need for absentee ballots, you could be on the other side of the world and vote. As yet another example instant registration could possible with the swipe of your card.
The system we have now is antiquated and prone to fraud, anything you want to do to improve it will require positively identifying the voter.
What's ironic is people get up in arms about id for voting but have little concern doing some of the very measures for things such as taxes. Kinda joking but does the irs even take paper returns anymore? Lol
If you are going to combat voter fraud you need to positively ID who is voting no matter what the voting method. The obvious place to start is in person voting. Once that is accomplished then you can consider how you are going to implement it for absentee balloting.
One thing yo9u are failing to realize is voter ID also opens a plethora of options to both streamline and improve the process, for example when you walk into the polling place you swipe your ID and your photo shows up on screen. You could even eliminate the poll worker altogether using facial recognition.
This in turn could also drastically reduce the need for absentee ballots, you could be on the other side of the world and vote. As yet another example instant registration could possible with the swipe of your card.
The system we have now is antiquated and prone to fraud, anything you want to do to improve it will require positively identifying the voter.
Actually that is how the NV system works. But the Republicans reject that everywhere. It is actually quite secure and close to fool proof and at the worst would leave a clear record of anyone who tries to beat it.
Which indicates that voter ID security is not the desired state. That in fact is and remains my thesis throughout these discussions.
I certainly would support we start developing the capability to allow remote and clearly identified voting. That is going to take sophisticated hardware however. There is no way any soft system will ever be able to escape being compromised by another soft system.
The rub to all of course is that in the end we end up with a national ID card...a concept that has been opposed by the right and libertarians since the beginning of time.
The rub to all of course is that in the end we end up with a national ID card...a concept that has been opposed by the right and libertarians since the beginning of time.
It doesn't have to be nationalized, just standardized so you can walk into voting booth in Hawaii and vote in your local election in NY.
The only thing I would suggest that needs to be nationalized is a check for duplicates. They can use facial recognition for that.
In any event none of these things are possible without photo ID.
It doesn't have to be nationalized, just standardized so you can walk into voting booth in Hawaii and vote in your local election in NY.
The only thing I would suggest that needs to be nationalized is a check for duplicates. They can use facial recognition for that.
In any event none of these things are possible without photo ID.
I hope you are kidding. The easiest of all things to fake is a face. And as soon as you establish a common data base of physical identification you have a national ID card.
And Photo ID in no way provides for such a system. No place near tight enough and in lots of places those ineligible to vote have perfectly good photo ID. Remember the big scandal in S. Florida. Everyone involved had good photo ID. You have to have a different and secure form of identification if you really want secure elections. And no one is actually proposing that.
Again the NV system would work reasonably well and could be manipulated to be even better...but the Republicans don't like it as it does not directly block poor voters.
Nevertheless, here in Colorado I am always asked for a photo ID when I pickup a prescription, and they are not for narcotics.
It's like most things, including the banking we were explaining post patriot act. It's not 'law' but policy of most institutions. Granted, medical ID card usually will suffice for most pharmacies.
The ironic part is, at least here (and I'm sure many states) a pic Id is required for pseudo ephedrine to track meth production. For those who are Leary of gov tracking, I'm surprised it hasn't been challenged more in court since its otc. If it has been challenged, it's not caught much media attention (granted I tuned out the last 5 months but that was due to 25 years of over stimulation from paying to close attention to everything).
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.
