User Tag List

First 41213141516 Last

Results 131 to 140 of 168

  1. #131
    Superwoman Red Herring's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    MBTI
    INTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sp/sx
    Posts
    5,646

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mane View Post
    here in israel every adult is expected to have an ID for everything... so its not really a problem.
    Same in most of Europe.
    The good life is one inspired by love and guided by knowledge. Neither love without knowledge, nor knowledge without love can produce a good life. - Bertrand Russell
    A herring's blog
    Johari / Nohari

  2. #132
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,541

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bamboo View Post
    I'm pretty unfamiliar with the topic, but I can't help but wonder: little or no voter fraud has been found, right?

    But in places where you have to have an ID to vote (I'm assuming everywhere), can't this be taken as a sign that the requirement is working?

    Has there been a time/place when you didn't need an ID to vote to compare relative levels of fraud?

    If there isn't a comparison...how do you know if it is or isn't working? It's just a guess, right?
    For a brief history of voter ID laws in the U.S., see Everything You’ve Ever Wanted to Know About Voter ID Laws.

    To pick out highlights (emphasis mine):
    prior to the 2006 election, no state ever required a voter to produce a government-issued photo ID as a condition to voting. Indiana in 2006 became the first state to enact a strict photo ID law, a law that was upheld two years later by the U.S. Supreme Court.
    Just how well-founded are fears of voter fraud?

    There have been only a small number of fraud cases resulting in a conviction. A New York Times analysis from 2007 identified 120 cases filed by the Justice Department over five years. These cases, many of which stemmed from mistakenly filled registration forms or misunderstanding over voter eligibility, resulted in 86 convictions.

    There are "very few documented cases," said UC-Irvine professor and election law specialist Rick Hasen. "When you do see election fraud, it invariably involves election officials taking steps to change election results or it involves absentee ballots which voter ID laws can't prevent," he said.

    An analysis by News21, a national investigative reporting project, identified 10 voter impersonation cases out of 2,068 alleged election fraud cases since 2000 – or one out of every 15 million prospective voters.
    The 5-year period referenced above would then include at least 4 years of voting without ID requirements, and perhaps more, since the period covered by the survey is not specified.

    How many voters might be turned away or dissuaded by the laws, and could they really affect the election?

    It's not clear.

    According to the Brennan Center, about 11 percent of U.S. citizens, or roughly 21 million citizens, don't have government-issued photo ID. This figure doesn't represent all voters likely to vote, just those eligible to vote.
    So, it ends up being a bit like designing the legal system. Is it better to err on the side of letting a guilty man go free, or sending an innocent one to prison or death? Is it better to disenfranchise even 1% (or 0.1%) of eligible voters, or to allow a handful of fradulent votes to sneak through?
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  3. #133
    Senior Member lowtech redneck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    MBTI
    INTP
    Posts
    3,705

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    For a brief history of voter ID laws in the U.S., see Everything You’ve Ever Wanted to Know About Voter ID Laws.
    That source seems to place a lot of weight on the Brennan Center report, which are extrapolations based on a highly suspect 2006 report: http://www.heritage.org/research/rep...identification

    Edit: I may have jumped the gun there, the Brennan Center issued a good rebuttal that I have yet to find a counter-rebuttal for: http://www.brennancenter.org/analysi...-stands-strong

    Be that as it may, there is a huge difference between being unable to vote because one has failed to procure a free ID within a year's time, and being convicted of a crime one didn't commit due to less stringent judicial standards; for me, the benefits of improving the integrity of the vote against the potential of voter fraud with such a minimal security precaution outweigh the rather marginal burdens placed on eligible citizens who currently lack a state-issued ID. A better comparison might be requiring a state license to carry a concealed weapon, which constitutes a basic (and very effective) security precaution while placing a (considerably greater than marginal) burden on vulnerable people seeking the capacity to exercise their fundamental right to self-defense.

  4. #134
    Senior Member Bamboo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    MBTI
    XXFP
    Posts
    2,706

    Default

    @Coriolis and @lowtech redneck

    hmm...thanks for the fact based responses. i find it a bit silly if data is available and nobody refers to it. i'll have to read into it and come up with an opinion.

    As far as philosophy is concerned, is it better to disenfranchise a small number of voters or allow a small amount of fraud? Well, both options effect the credibility of the elections all the same. Emotionally, I find fraud more insidious. But I'm not much of an idealist in either case. I'm willing to accept some amount of screw up. But nothing in the range of (up to) 11%.

    (FWIW, I'm skeptical that most - not all, but most - those people who don't have IDs would really care about voting, but, I *am* idealistic enough to support them having at least the option to do so.)
    Don't know how much it'll bend til it breaks.

  5. #135
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,541

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Bamboo View Post
    @Coriolis and @lowtech redneck

    hmm...thanks for the fact based responses. i find it a bit silly if data is available and nobody refers to it. i'll have to read into it and come up with an opinion.

    As far as philosophy is concerned, is it better to disenfranchise a small number of voters or allow a small amount of fraud? Well, both options effect the credibility of the elections all the same. Emotionally, I find fraud more insidious. But I'm not much of an idealist in either case. I'm willing to accept some amount of screw up. But nothing in the range of (up to) 11%.

    (FWIW, I'm skeptical that most - not all, but most - those people who don't have IDs would really care about voting, but, I *am* idealistic enough to support them having at least the option to do so.)
    I appreciate your readiness to examine the facts. Far too many people respond emotionally to such questions. In the interests of brevity, I linked the most concise and comprehensive reference I am aware of. If you google "voter ID history" or "voter ID fraud" you will turn up many more references, many from specific states currently considering voter ID legislation. This should give you an even better sense of the reality of the situation. Some pages back, I linked a page from League of Women Voters. Theirs is some of the most unbiased coverage of this (or any) issue, as they are non-partisan and support neither parties nor candidates.

    For me, the choice of some fraud vs. disenfranchisement is an easy one, just because of the numbers. The reference I linked mentioned 120 cases of fraud over a 5 year period. That is an average of 24 cases per year. The U.S. Census Bureau reports just over 131 million votes cast in the 2012 federal election; just over 146 million registered voters; and just over 206 million citizens eligible to vote. Disenfranchising even 0.01% of the smallest number here, i.e. those who actually voted, would amount to over 13,000 people. Depriving these people of their votes is far more likely to taint the election results (i.e. affect the outcome) than those 24 fradulent ballots, especially since it seems most of the fraud involves cases like absentee ballots where in-person presentation of photo ID doesn't even apply.
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

  6. #136
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Coriolis View Post
    I appreciate your readiness to examine the facts. Far too many people respond emotionally to such questions. In the interests of brevity, I linked the most concise and comprehensive reference I am aware of. If you google "voter ID history" or "voter ID fraud" you will turn up many more references, many from specific states currently considering voter ID legislation. This should give you an even better sense of the reality of the situation. Some pages back, I linked a page from League of Women Voters. Theirs is some of the most unbiased coverage of this (or any) issue, as they are non-partisan and support neither parties nor candidates.

    For me, the choice of some fraud vs. disenfranchisement is an easy one, just because of the numbers. The reference I linked mentioned 120 cases of fraud over a 5 year period. That is an average of 24 cases per year. The U.S. Census Bureau reports just over 131 million votes cast in the 2012 federal election; just over 146 million registered voters; and just over 206 million citizens eligible to vote. Disenfranchising even 0.01% of the smallest number here, i.e. those who actually voted, would amount to over 13,000 people. Depriving these people of their votes is far more likely to taint the election results (i.e. affect the outcome) than those 24 fradulent ballots, especially since it seems most of the fraud involves cases like absentee ballots where in-person presentation of photo ID doesn't even apply.
    i think i should add that here voter fraud happens by the thousands every elections despite the fact we require voter's ID - many of the more inclosed religious communities use the IDs of desist family members to vote multiply times per elections.

  7. #137
    likes this gromit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    6,652

    Default

    Thanks everyone, for all the opinions and information! I had figured there was more to this topic, and the many perspectives you all have provided have been very illuminating.
    Your kisses, sweeter than honey. But guess what, so is my money.

  8. #138
    Theta Male Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    CROW
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    9,037

    Default

    I actually got a Photo ID once, because I didn't drive until I was 22. I don't remember it being that difficult or expensive in Pennsylvania. It was like, 25 dollars. I just had to fill out a form or two, and read the paperwork quickly so I had the right materials. I think all I needed was a social security card and a birth certificate.

    Naturally, given that Obama doesn't actually have a birth certificate due to being a Muslim Atheist from Mars, it makes sense that dumocrats would oppose this.

    In all seriousness, this is one of those things where I can see both sides having valid points, and thus cannot get passionate about it either way.

    People tend to need photo IDs, so they're probably likely to have them anyway (with the possible exception of lazy college students). And people usually carry them in their wallet, which they carry whenever they go out. I think the impact of these voter ID laws is probably going to be minimal. Which is another reason why I can't get worked up about this.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mane
    i think i should add that here voter fraud happens by the thousands every elections despite the fact we require voter's ID - many of the more inclosed religious communities use the IDs of desist family members to vote multiply times per elections.
    If so, that's a shame, because it seems to me that, with an electronic database to "check IDs" against, it would be easy to stop. Simply make sure that, upon a person's death, the names are removed from the database. If this kind of thing is not done, what is the point of issuing and recording deaths at all? I suppose doing this would require large bureaucracies to work efficiently, which is a rarity in both public and private manifestations.
    [Trump's] rhetoric is not an abuse of power. In the same way that it's also not against the law to do a backflip off of the roof of your house onto your concrete driveway. It's just mind-numbingly stupid and, to say the least, counterproductive. - Bush did 9-11


    This is not going to go the way you think....

    Visit my Johari:
    http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78

  9. #139
    Society
    Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    If so, that's a shame, because it seems to me that, with an electronic database to "check IDs" against, it would be easy to stop. Simply make sure that, upon a person's death, the names are removed from the database. If this kind of thing is not done, what is the point of issuing and recording deaths at all? I suppose doing this would require large bureaucracies to work efficiently, which is a rarity in both public and private manifestations.

    you seem to be assuming a man dying a modern death (in a hospital, on a police/army report, etc). within a lot of the tighter religious communities here this isn't quite the case - they like to keep their affairs internally, and keeping the government in the loop isn't always on the agenda.

  10. #140
    Analytical Dreamer Coriolis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    MBTI
    INTJ
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/sx
    Posts
    17,541

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    People tend to need photo IDs, so they're probably likely to have them anyway (with the possible exception of lazy college students). And people usually carry them in their wallet, which they carry whenever they go out. I think the impact of these voter ID laws is probably going to be minimal. Which is another reason why I can't get worked up about this.

    If so, that's a shame, because it seems to me that, with an electronic database to "check IDs" against, it would be easy to stop. Simply make sure that, upon a person's death, the names are removed from the database. If this kind of thing is not done, what is the point of issuing and recording deaths at all? I suppose doing this would require large bureaucracies to work efficiently, which is a rarity in both public and private manifestations.
    As Cafe has pointed out, the chronically poor often lack ID, or have significant trouble and delays updating it when moving to a new state. Another significant population without are the elderly, especially women who may never have had a paid job, and some of whom never learned to drive (I have a couple aunts in this situation).

    My biggest complaint with voter ID laws is that they are justified by the need to combat voter fraud, but fraud is almost nonexistent, and most of those few incidents would not be prevented by an ID requirement. So, it is a big red herring (no offense to our member by the same name). Not coincidentally, voter ID requirements are most strongly supported by those political groups who do not share the concerns of those groups most likely to have trouble getting acceptable ID. Yes, there are many other reasons to have an ID, and these will continue to bring more and more people into the fold of having one. Until then, I would prefer those handfuls of poor, elderly, handicapped, etc. to have one less thing to worry about.
    Last edited by Coriolis; 07-22-2013 at 09:57 AM. Reason: typo
    I've been called a criminal, a terrorist, and a threat to the known universe. But everything you were told is a lie. The truth is, they've taken our freedom, our home, and our future. The time has come for all humanity to take a stand...

Similar Threads

  1. I AM THE ALPHA THE OMEGA,or an ENFJ for short
    By Kungpowish in forum Welcomes and Introductions
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 05-11-2009, 07:35 PM
  2. Post an Idea for a business or a way to make money
    By ygolo in forum Academics and Careers
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 04-29-2009, 06:35 PM
  3. [MBTItm] The Official: If You Were An NF For A Day........
    By Lasting_Pain in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 68
    Last Post: 04-04-2009, 11:34 PM
  4. Personality type as an excuse for bad habits.
    By G-Virus in forum Myers-Briggs and Jungian Cognitive Functions
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: 11-10-2008, 01:51 PM
  5. An altar for adulation, preferably obseravtions
    By Thursday in forum The Bonfire
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-08-2008, 05:40 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO