Where in the US Constitution does it say that rights are contingent on responsibilities?

Do 2nd Amendment proponents also blithely accept similar measures on gun owwnership and registration?

And rather than discussing the solution, can we actually see if there really is much of a problem? It seems that people are standing around saying that we have a mighty fine cart, well painted, sturdy frame, good wheels, etc. but are ignoring that it's been put in front of the horse (I love torturing metaphor)

As for your 'laziness' questions, there are hundreds of thousands of Texans, and by all estimates a few million Americans, who do not have the ID that's required by some of these new laws, and may have problems getting it.

not everyone has a State issued birth certificate, for example, even if they are natural born citizens.

Just on the math, Texas is about 37% Hispanic; if you assume that they register in equal numbers to the general population, multiply that by 12.7 million registered voters, and multiply that by 6.3% you get 300,000 who don't have driver licenses. The non-Hispanic # would be 340,000. They may have other i.d. already, and the state is offering other i.d. for free accordingly to the editorial.

Does Texas have a history of disenfranchising Hispanics or is US approval needed because of a history of disenfranchising blacks?

What do you do in Canada and the UK?

Re: 2nd Amendment. I am all for registration, and ID check on guns and ammo. As I recall, I had to show ID to purchase a weapon already. Hmmm, Thanks for making my point.

When DEAD people are voting don't you think that is a problem? (That is unless they are zombies, which is another issue altogether!) Do I really need to get news articles on dead people voting? Can we not agree that is something that happens? OK, here is at least one, for the record...
http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Dead_people_voting

The Texans that choose to not get ID are not required to vote. That is a choice. Dang... There is that word again! I hate it when people have to make their own choices. My son; who is adopted from Texas, has a birth certificate and ID at age 15. It is not that difficult.

I am not making the people without ID vote or not vote, anymore than I am making the people without drivers licenses drive or not drive.

danivon wrote: But the question is really how much, and is it worth the disenfranchising of hundreds of thousands of people to try to reduce it?

My response would be proof those people would vote anyway. I would be willing to bet they don't.

I have worked in the local polling places for the last 6 years both primary and general election. They way our polling places are set up each one covers about 1,750 people. The average turnout per polling district is on average of 230 in a Presidential election year but you are lucky to break 180 in a non-presidential election.

Oh, right, so I have to prove how many people who may lose the ability to vote actually would if they could, but the other side can simply assert that fraud occurs (including bold claims of bribery) with no further evidence...

Usually the burden of proof lies on those proposing action, they should show why it is needed and how it will make a difference. When that has been done, then perhaps we can challenge the evidence.

However, if these people don't vote, and would not vote, doesn't that suggest that they can't be committing fraud either?

Are you refuting the link describing MANY instances of the dead voting? If not, then that portion of the argument is resolved.

I don't care how many people choose not to vote because of having to show ID. I am sure there are people who do not drive because of the lack of a driver's license. That is not my concern.

If ID is wanted, it can be obtained. I don't care how many people vote at a polling station anymore than I care if people do not have the ID (personal choice) to exercise the right to vote. If voting is important, then they will get the ID. The government should not force them to get an ID, but it should make voting based upon showing proper ID.

Does proper ID being required have a benefit? I would think that it would. Can we all agree on that?

Ray Jay wrote:What do you do in Canada and the UK?

in the Uk...

Currently, once a year each local authority sends out a form to each household (including those that it thinks may be empty) for registration. It will show the current details, which you can either verify (by return, by phone, or on line) or update by return. Registration is mandatory (although this is rarely enforced) and also used for jury service picking. Foreign nationals and peers who are entitled to vote in some elections but not others also register with their details. If no reply comes in a few weeks, the council will send out a reminder. I think if you ignore it, they roll over last year's details, but this may change. If you move, you can go to the Town Hall or call them toget a form to notify them of changes and they will pass it on to the area you moved from.

No ID is needed in this process.

Voting - shortly before polling day you are sent a card with your voter ID. Most people think they need the card, but you don't - you can just turn up (but only to your own local polling station) and give your name and address.

No ID is needed in this process.

if you can't make the polling station, you can arrange a proxy or postal vote in advance. For a proxy vote you nominate someone else who can vote on the day for you. I tried to do it once for a mate who was away (in the US) but the form got waylaid, I don't recall needing any ID as the proxy voter though. postal voting involves signing a form to attest you are the voter, and that has to be signed by a witness, but no ID is required.

The penalties for electoral fraud can be quite harsh. The main weak point has been postal votes, where people have been convicted and election results challenged. I've not seen much about cases of 'personation' (pretending to be a voter) or registration-based fraud.

upcoming changes are to alter the registration from a 'by household' basis to individual registration, but that would still be done remotely and not require ID.

bbauska wrote:Are you refuting the link describing MANY instances of the dead voting? If not, then that portion of the argument is resolved.

Most appear to be instances of dead people still being registered, but yes, there are instances of such fraud.

I do not deny that fraud happens, I question the extent. I would also question whether ID requirements would actually fix such fraud as effectively as, oh I don't know, striking off people from the register if they die?

I don't care how many people choose not to vote because of having to show ID. I am sure there are people who do not drive because of the lack of a driver's license. That is not my concern.

If ID is wanted, it can be obtained. I don't care how many people vote at a polling station anymore than I care if people do not have the ID (personal choice) to exercise the right to vote. If voting is important, then they will get the ID. The government should not force them to get an ID, but it should make voting based upon showing proper ID.

Does proper ID being required have a benefit? I would think that it would. Can we all agree on that?

Well, yes there are indeed benefits. But you have just said that you don't care about at least some of the costs, so I question your open-mindedness in relation to balancing both benefits and costs and comparing that to the extent of fraud it would fix.

if people choose not to drive, that has little effect. If people are unable to vote, that can have an effect on who governs you. You don't think that makes a difference?

Here's a report from the Brennan Center that studied the issue of voter fraud. Published in 2007, it shows that amongst the instances of fraud occurring (a very small number), almost all of those cases would not have been prevented via an ID system. Most of them were the result of people voting who were not eliglible and not aware of their status (felons & immigrants).

Around that same time I saw some references to a Justice Department report showing voter fraud to be both hard to find and even harder to prosecute, even though the Bush administration made this a Justice priority. Here's a NY Times article on the issue.

I admittedly don't know anything about the objectivity of the Brennan Center and concede a liberal bias from the NY Times. Nonetheless, it's still better than the rhetoric found in this thread.

ray

They may have other i.d. already, and the state is offering other i.d. for free accordingly to the editorial.
Does Texas have a history of disenfranchising Hispanics or is US approval needed because of a history of disenfranchising blacks?
What do you do in Canada and the UK?

The idea that they can get the Texas voter ID free, changes my perception of the Texas law. If there is no cost to getting the card, I don't see the big deal. Unless there's a difficult procedure involved.
The civil rights law on elections was caused by voter suppression of blacks in 8 states.
In Canada an Electors list is maintained The National Register of Electors is updated with information (name, address, sex and date of birth) supplied by provincial, territorial and federal data sources between electoral events, and by electors themselves during federal electoral events. Elections Canada has signed agreements with data suppliers, including the Canada Revenue Agency, Canada Post Corporation, Citizenship and Immigration Canada, and provincial and territorial registrars of motor vehicles and vital statistics.
You must be registered on the list to vote, but can even register at the poll on election day. You must identify yourself both when you register and when you vote, but there are three ways:
- one piece of valid photo ID
- two pieces of ID that demonstrates you domicile. (water bill for instance)
- swearing an oath as to your identity.
The third is a little time consuming, but ensures that everyone can vote. The vote is not provisional, its dropped in the box. (I saw one last election, a guy had lost his wallet the day before the election.) However since Health Cards are now photo ID and almost ubiqutous, its rare that either option 2 or 3 are used. Usually its a rare set of circumstances...

b
I support your position on ID b. Generally. With the proviso that ID should be free of cost and readily accessible.

But when you quote a source that offers examples of voter fraud, to describe how prevalent voter fraud is, perhaps the second paragraph shouldn't contain this nugget

The extent to which this type of vote fraud occurs is not known

I just got back from the PUBLIC library. This government institution that I went into and asked for a free library card had the audacity to ask me for photo ID. The very nerve! I am outraged!

What is the difference between that and voting?

To answer Danivon, yes it does matter to me who governs me. It matters so much that I am more than willing to go the extra mile to ensure that I can exercise that right. Again, thank you for showing the importance of of why you need to put forth the effort.

Perhaps Ricky and I could agree on National ID cards for citizens?
http://www.wftv.com/news/news/dead-people-voting-throughout-florida/nFCnL/

Voter Fraud does happen.

bbauska wrote:I just got back from the PUBLIC library. This government institution that I went into and asked for a free library card had the audacity to ask me for photo ID. The very nerve! I am outraged!

What is the difference between that and voting?

As much as I support public libraries, I don't recall any talk about a fundamental right to be able to borrow books.

To answer Danivon, yes it does matter to me who governs me. It matters so much that I am more than willing to go the extra mile to ensure that I can exercise that right. Again, thank you for showing the importance of of why you need to put forth the effort.

However, it also matters who else gets to vote, doesn't it? It's not all about what you do, is it? Other people's action or inaction, their ability to vote or their inability, can also affect who governs you.

It ain't all about you, bub.

Voter Fraud does happen.

I KNOW!!

I never denied that it happens. I have already said that it happens. Quit burning up straw men!

The question is actually not 'does it happen'. The question is made up of the four following sub-questions:

1) Does voter fraud happen to the extent that we need to do something to deal with it, over and above existing law and procedures?
2) Is it a bigger problem than people not being able to vote who are entitled to?
3) What would reduce fraud in an effective manner?
4) What are the other consequences of the measures we can put in place?

By the way, I detect a little inconsistency.

You claim that you don't want to force people to show ID to vote. But you have also pinned yourself to supporting mandatory voting, and national ID, as well has having to show ID if you want to vote? The combination of all three suggests a contrary position to your claim.

For a conservative, you seem awfully keen to give the state more powers over individuals...

SLOTerp wrote:Here's a report from the Brennan Center that studied the issue of voter fraud. Published in 2007, it shows that amongst the instances of fraud occurring (a very small number), almost all of those cases would not have been prevented via an ID system. Most of them were the result of people voting who were not eliglible and not aware of their status (felons & immigrants).

Around that same time I saw some references to a Justice Department report showing voter fraud to be both hard to find and even harder to prosecute, even though the Bush administration made this a Justice priority. Here's a NY Times article on the issue.

I admittedly don't know anything about the objectivity of the Brennan Center and concede a liberal bias from the NY Times. Nonetheless, it's still better than the rhetoric found in this thread.

Oh, don't you come here with your 'evidence'!

We need hysteria about fraud, goddamit!

I don't really understand why people are still getting worked up about this issue to the extent that the thread has hit 4 pages. So far nobody has produced any compelling evidence either that voter fraud is a major problem or that a requirement to present ID is a major handicap.