The GOP war on voting

[TeeDub]

I just love the democratic process.   We vote on a law (which passes - regardless of how you or I voted) requiring ID to vote.

Said law goes into effect and people grumble about it.

How about trying to repeal the law?   Or at least find me some instances in Oklahoma where it has disenfranchised or turned away people who wanted to vote.

[Ed W]

How about trying to repeal the law?   Or at least find me some instances in Oklahoma where it has disenfranchised or turned away people who wanted to vote.

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=19265.msg245337#msg245337

"The last time I voted, an elderly couple were ahead of me in line.  The husband had his driver's license, but the wife did not.  She was not permitted to cast a ballot, not even a provisional ballot, despite the fact that she was personally known by one of the poll workers who could vouch for her identity.  This law is truly asinine."

[Red Arrow]

http://www.tulsanow.org/forum/index.php?topic=19265.msg245337#msg245337

"The last time I voted, an elderly couple were ahead of me in line.  The husband had his driver's license, but the wife did not.  She was not permitted to cast a ballot, not even a provisional ballot, despite the fact that she was personally known by one of the poll workers who could vouch for her identity.  This law is truly asinine."

This law is not a big secret.  Not being able to comply is truly asinine.  We were all advised well ahead of the primary election that ID would be required.  What were the details of the woman not being able to cast a provisional ballot?   

[Red Arrow]

You try getting to Broken Arrow and back on a bus in two hours.

I always vote before going to work or make sure I get off early enough to make it to the poll before it closes at 7 PM.  Doing that avoids the necessity of making a round trip during working hours.

I don't really grasp the problem with allowing people to vote in any precinct (with their home precinct's ballot, of course!).

As a concept, OK.  Oklahoma voting machines still have a paper trail.  In the event of a recount, how would all the paper ballots be found.  Would this compromise the secret ballot if you were the only one to vote at a particular precinct?  You appear not to care about any ID so I guess you should be able to go anywhere (restrict to state, county, city?) ask for a ballot from your home precinct and get the right one with no questions asked probably from poll workers who don't know you.  I think there would be several details to work out.

I'm not sure how you get that.

You probably don't get that because you seem to believe the only responsibility is to somehow get a ballot into the system.  I believe that registering to vote, being prepared to identify yourself as qualified to vote and to vote at particular precinct, getting to the poll or arranging for an absentee ballot,  getting to the early voting place if voting early in person are all reasonable responsibilities to exercise your right to vote.

Obviously I believe they bear the responsibility of casting their ballot if they would like to have their vote counted. I think it should be made easier to do so and not harder. We already have one of the lowest participation rates in the developed world.

I believe that low turnout is mostly due to apathy, but  I'm sure you can find some chart to show that 3 people out of all the registered voters in the USA didn't get to vote because they lost their ID card on the way to the polls.

Also, I'm not sure what responsibility has to do with anything. I take it you've never misplaced your keys? (or been mugged)

I don't get your objection.  If you misplace your keys, should the poll bring a ballot to you? (I am not talking about incapacitated voters who know ahead they cannot get to the poll Hoss.)  If you get to the poll late, should they reopen it for you?  How late?  If you go to the wrong precinct near closing time, should your correct precinct "hold the plane" for you?

Or are you some irresponsible fool who doesn't deserve the franchise?

For someone so adamant about voters rights, why are you trying to take away someone's franchise just for being an irresponsible fool? 

Odd that you'd think I'm limiting my comments to Oklahoma's specific implementation of the law given how I've repeatedly mentioned other states.

I think the emphasis should be on Oklahoma since we live here. 

As far as eligibility is concerned, that's up to the individual states. If Florida wants to allow Cubans to vote in their elections, they are perfectly free to do so. If Oklahoma wants to let any member of an Oklahoma tribe vote no matter where they live, that would also be legal. I don't have a problem with the franchise being restricted to citizens. Nor would I have a problem with it being extended to any legal resident that has reached the age of majority. I'm not really into the idea of opening it up to literally everyone on the planet who wants to have a say but doesn't even live here.

If voter eligibility is up to the individual states, so should voter identification at the polls be up to the states.  I do have a problem with non-citizens, even resident aliens, voting.  If you want to vote, become a US citizen for national election.  Be a citizen of the locality you want to vote in for local elections.

You're right on one count, though. I don't think advance registration is necessary. Plenty of states have same day registration and seem to get along fine.

Advance registration allows the election board to verify your qualifications if they want.  I think a week would be an adequate time with modern communications.  Same day registration is probably not adequate.  With the exception of some school bond elections and other minor local elections, the date of voting day is well publicized.  I consider registering ahead of time to be one of the responsibilities of the voter.  Just because same day registration can be done doesn't mean it should be done.  We will obviously disagree on this. 

The gun lobby would likely reject your narrow view of what constitutes having your right affected. But again, I wasn't restricting my comments solely to Oklahoma.

As far as eligibility is concerned, that's up to the individual states.

http://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php/Oklahoma_Voter_Identification_Measure,_State_Question_746_(2010)

This measure amends statues relating to voting requirements. It requires that each person appearing to vote present a document proving their identity. The document must meet the following requirements. It must have the name and photograph of the voter. It must have been issued by the federal, state or tribal government. It must have an expiration date that is after the date of the election. No expiration date would be required on certain identity cards issued to person 65 years of age or older.
In lieu of such a document, voters could present voter identification cards issued by the County Election Board.
A person who cannot or does not present the required identification may sign a sworn statement and cast a provisional ballot. Swearing to a false statement would be a felony.
These proof of identity requirements also apply to in-person absentee voting. If adopted by the people, the measure would become effective July 1, 2011.
Shall the proposal be approved?
For the proposal
Yes: __________
Against the proposal
No: __________

[Teatownclown]

 Wow The GOP is desperate. Ever since they saw all those folks desend on Washington on Inauguration Day, they've been trying to put us back in our place. Plotting the demise of this president and theyby the demise of this country. We just did not believe how EVIL they were. We trusted that our Democratic process would work, they done EVERYTHING except start a Civil War, I expect that will be next.

Democratic strategist Donna Brazile responded with, "I'm glad that we still have early voting, George, because that means there won't be a lot of congestion on Election Day. We should have more accessibility." Righties look at free elections the same way they do free markets. To them "free" only means having the freedom to rig the game in their favor.

A comment like this from over the hillster Will is deplorable. The more we can do to increase turnout and thus our democratic process is very important. Many voters send their ballots in. Yes, the GOP war on voting is an attempt to once again cheat and steal an election.

[Ed W]

What were the details of the woman not being able to cast a provisional ballot?  

Red, I can't speak to the precise details because this happened last year. The elderly couple were in front of me, and he had his driver's license while she did not.  Despite being personally known to one of the poll workers, she was not permitted to vote, nor was she offered a provisional ballot.

I think she should have been able to cast a provisional ballot at the very least, but I do not know what the law says about it.

In Ben Franklin's day, suffrage was limited to property owners, leading Franklin to ask whether the right to vote existed in the man or his mule.  We can ask whether that right exists in the citizen or his driver's license.

[Red Arrow]

Red, I can't speak to the precise details because this happened last year. The elderly couple were in front of me, and he had his driver's license while she did not.  Despite being personally known to one of the poll workers, she was not permitted to vote, nor was she offered a provisional ballot.  I think she should have been able to cast a provisional ballot at the very least, but I do not know what the law says about it.

On the surface, I would agree that she should have been given a provisional ballot.  That is why I asked if you had any details.

In Ben Franklin's day, suffrage was limited to property owners, leading Franklin to ask whether the right to vote existed in the man or his mule.  We can ask whether that right exists in the citizen or his driver's license.

We can go round and round on this.  We can both quote famous people.  In the long run you do not believe the voter needs to have a positive ID, I do.  I mentioned earlier that I have pretty much always wondered why I didn't need some identification for something as important as voting.

[Red Arrow]

Plotting the demise of this president and theyby the demise of this country.

Actually we are more clever than you think. We put up Romney as a sacrificial lamb to allow Obama to destroy the country.  It will be some tough medicine but it's what we need.

Is that the spin you are looking for?  Enjoy.

(I don't really believe Romney is an intentional sacrificial lamb but I do believe that Obama will destroy the country given the chance.)

[AquaMan]

On the surface, I would agree that she should have been given a provisional ballot.  That is why I asked if you had any details.

We can go round and round on this.  We can both quote famous people.  In the long run you do not believe the voter needs to have a positive ID, I do.  I mentioned earlier that I have pretty much always wondered why I didn't need some identification for something as important as voting.

Heaven forbid he might quote a founding father. Suffice it to say that the right obviously resides within the ID for those on the right.

In my gut I believe it will result in a negative response from voters. Turnnouts will decline for a couple of elections and then rebound when free IDs are provided.

[Red Arrow]

Heaven forbid he might quote a founding father.

I have no problem with him quoting a founding father.  They were a pretty diverse group.  Edit: (Politically diverse)

In my gut I believe it will result in a negative response from voters. Turnnouts will decline for a couple of elections and then rebound when free IDs are provided.

In Oklahoma, a free method is available.  Those states that do not provide a free ID need to do it.  I never said the ID should not be free.  If you want to go to the extreme of having the state pay someone to come to your house to wake you up in time to get your free ID, I would probably say that comes under the category of voter personal responsibility.

[nathanm]

I always vote before going to work or make sure I get off early enough to make it to the poll before it closes at 7 PM.  Doing that avoids the necessity of making a round trip during working hours.

The bus leaves Broken Arrow before the polls open. The bus gets back to BA around 6 if you leave work at 5. It would be very easy to miss the chance to vote.

As a concept, OK.  Oklahoma voting machines still have a paper trail.  In the event of a recount, how would all the paper ballots be found.  Would this compromise the secret ballot if you were the only one to vote at a particular precinct?  You appear not to care about any ID so I guess you should be able to go anywhere (restrict to state, county, city?) ask for a ballot from your home precinct and get the right one with no questions asked probably from poll workers who don't know you.  I think there would be several details to work out.

Do the touchscreen machines required by the feds have a voter verified paper ballot? I thought at best they had an internal ticket printer. Regardless, plenty of companies find themselves capable of verifying my identity without a photo ID. For example, UPS asked me some questions about where I'd previously lived. (gotta love the databases) I'm not quite sure why government has a greater need for a magic talisman to prove I am who I say I am.

You probably don't get that because you seem to believe the only responsibility is to somehow get a ballot into the system.  I believe that registering to vote, being prepared to identify yourself as qualified to vote and to vote at particular precinct, getting to the poll or arranging for an absentee ballot,  getting to the early voting place if voting early in person are all reasonable responsibilities to exercise your right to vote.

I'm not sure why it is you think that "responsibility" dictates that we make it harder than absolutely necessary to vote. Do you think the franchise should only extend to those you think are "responsible?"

I don't get your objection.  If you misplace your keys, should the poll bring a ballot to you? (I am not talking about incapacitated voters who know ahead they cannot get to the poll Hoss.)  If you get to the poll late, should they reopen it for you?  How late?  If you go to the wrong precinct near closing time, should your correct precinct "hold the plane" for you?

If I lose my keys, I can walk, take the bus, call a friend, or even call one of the parties and probably get a ride to the polls. If I lose my ID, I'm screwed. I (apparently) can't even vote a provisional ballot and prove my ID later at the election board.

For someone so adamant about voters rights, why are you trying to take away someone's franchise just for being an irresponsible fool? 

I'm not, you're the one who seems to be hung up on everyone proving their responsibility by jumping through some hoops before being allowed to vote.

I think the emphasis should be on Oklahoma since we live here. 

I disagree. The rules that other states choose to use affect the results of the national elections we all participate in.

If voter eligibility is up to the individual states, so should voter identification at the polls be up to the states.  I do have a problem with non-citizens, even resident aliens, voting.  If you want to vote, become a US citizen for national election.  Be a citizen of the locality you want to vote in for local elections.

I don't actually care much about this, so long as all citizens are allowed to vote. My personal opinion is that legal residents have enough of a stake in the goings-on that they should have a say in the goings-on, but I don't expect that to be universal or nearly so. I could see an exception for H1-B and similar visa holders that don't allow a path to citizenship, but it would be easier on the election boards if it were based solely on residence.

Advance registration allows the election board to verify your qualifications if they want.  I think a week would be an adequate time with modern communications.  Same day registration is probably not adequate.  With the exception of some school bond elections and other minor local elections, the date of voting day is well publicized.  I consider registering ahead of time to be one of the responsibilities of the voter.  Just because same day registration can be done doesn't mean it should be done.  We will obviously disagree on this. 

Same day should be fine. They just look you up in a database anyway. It's not as if they're hitting the streets interviewing your neighbors to make sure you actually live where you claim and are a citizen. I would not mind same-day registrants having to vote provisional ballots that will then be counted or not depending on the results of the election board's usual registration process.

All your talk about responsibility has me pretty much convinced that you think that voting is something that a voter should have to prove their dedication before being allowed to do. I disagree with that notion. I think voting, along with other rights, are inherent to the person and do not depend on my perception of their fitness to exercise them. (or some bureaucrat's perception of their fitness) Admittedly there are exceptions. I don't think people who are having active hallucinations should be allowed to possess firearms (at that time, anyway), for example.

[Ed W]

Actually we are more clever than you think. We put up Romney as a sacrificial lamb to allow Obama to destroy the country.  It will be some tough medicine but it's what we need.

Is that the spin you are looking for?  Enjoy.

There's another quote whose author I can't remember, so I'll paraphrase.  He said that success brings with it the seeds of eventual failure.  I take that to mean that in politics, voters will eventually tire of the excesses of any party that remains in power for too long.  Didn't Tip O'Neil lead a Democratic majority in the House for nearly twenty years before being ousted by the Republican 'Contract with America'?  And didn't those same Republicans find themselves out on their ears a decade later?

The pendulum swings both ways.

[Red Arrow]

The bus leaves Broken Arrow before the polls open. The bus gets back to BA around 6 if you leave work at 5. It would be very easy to miss the chance to vote.

Especially if you stop by the pub for a beer before trying to vote.

Do the touchscreen machines required by the feds have a voter verified paper ballot? I thought at best they had an internal ticket printer. Regardless, plenty of companies find themselves capable of verifying my identity without a photo ID. For example, UPS asked me some questions about where I'd previously lived. (gotta love the databases) I'm not quite sure why government has a greater need for a magic talisman to prove I am who I say I am.

Most of the places I go have required a photo ID and more. I'll agree that I don't expect to have to show a photo ID at McDonalds.
We are never going to agree on even the principle of this so we might as well just agree to disagree on this issue.

I'm not sure why it is you think that "responsibility" dictates that we make it harder than absolutely necessary to vote. Do you think the franchise should only extend to those you think are "responsible?"

I don't understand why you think a little personal responsibility is such a hinderance to voting.

If I lose my keys, I can walk, take the bus, call a friend, or even call one of the parties and probably get a ride to the polls. If I lose my ID, I'm screwed. I (apparently) can't even vote a provisional ballot and prove my ID later at the election board.

If you lose your keys too close to closing time, your friends will not be able to get you there in time.  In the one instance noted by Ed W, I'll agree that the provisional ballot appeared to be a problem.  How do you feel about the person who just plain shows up late?

I'm not, you're the one who seems to be hung up on everyone proving their responsibility by jumping through some hoops before being allowed to vote.

Or are you some irresponsible fool who doesn't deserve the franchise?

It sure sounds like you are ready to take away someone's rights just for being an irresponsible fool.  Shame on you.
You see hoops.  I don't.

I disagree. The rules that other states choose to use affect the results of the national elections we all participate in.

Then how do you justify:

As far as eligibility is concerned, that's up to the individual states.

I don't actually care much about this, so long as all citizens are allowed to vote.

Agreed on being allowed to vote.   I don't see providing ID as a hinderance to voting.

My personal opinion is that legal residents have enough of a stake in the goings-on that they should have a say in the goings-on,

Disagree

Same day should be fine.

People should care enough about voting to register before election day.  What you want reminds me of why liquor stores must be closed on election day.

All your talk about responsibility has me pretty much convinced that you think that voting is something that a voter should have to prove their dedication before being allowed to do. I disagree with that notion. I think voting, along with other rights, are inherent to the person and do not depend on my perception of their fitness to exercise them.

I am not asking for a level of education, IQ, property ownership, race, creed, or whatever other diversion you can think of.  I truly don't understand your aversion to showing that you meet the qualifications for voting as determined by the state (of the USA, not psychological) that you live in as long as it is free.

[Red Arrow]

The pendulum swings both ways.

Yep, and I'm trying to swing it away from the left but believe it or not, not to the extreme right.  Just more right than the present administration and Senate.  I'll even agree that some of the US House is a bit kooky but given a choice, I'll still lean right rather than left.  It's called damage control.

Your results may vary.

[nathanm]

Then how do you justify:

That's in the Constitution, bucko. It's not up to me, it's up to the several states to make their own decisions, so long as those decisions don't violate anyone's Constitutional rights. It doesn't mean I can or can't disagree with making possession of a photo ID a requirement to vote, but it does mean I don't get a say, beyond whatever meager persuasive powers I may have, absent moving there.

Agreed on being allowed to vote.   I don't see providing ID as a hinderance to voting.

OK. I do. I believe voting should have as few prerequisites as is compatible with the avoidance of election fraud. If there were some evidence of election fraud on a scale significant enough to tip the results of elections and that is combated by an ID requirement, and several states have had ID requirements for multiple election cycles now so there should be some evidence, you could convince me otherwise. As it stands, most of the fraud is either related to absentee ballots or Secretaries of State illegitimately purging voters and failing to notify them of that. (see Florida in 2000 or Ohio in 2004, I'm sure there have been others that don't come to mind at the moment)

People should care enough about voting to register before election day.  What you want reminds me of why liquor stores must be closed on election day.

People should do a lot of things. People should have an education, but they get the right to free speech regardless of how educated or uneducated they are. People should obey the law, but they still get their Constitutionally-protected rights even when they don't.

I'm not sure what liquor stores have to do with it. Oklahoma's asinine liquor controls seem irrelevant.

I am not asking for a level of education, IQ, property ownership, race, creed, or whatever other diversion you can think of.  I truly don't understand your aversion to showing that you meet the qualifications for voting as determined by the state (of the USA, not psychological) that you live in as long as it is free.

My aversion is that it is an unnecessary abridgement of one of the most fundamental rights we have in our system of government.