Interesting.

Post #265,321 by bepatient 8/18/06 5:11:48 PM Reply	Interesting. in that you haven't attempted much beyond the link to explain why we should not expect voters to verify their identity. But my expectation that someone be able to prove they are who they say they are was essentially labeled as a Republican conspiricy. Pretty sad tactics abound. You can sling mud with the best of them...but the followup is somehow lacking. Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}
Post #265,327 by jb4 8/18/06 5:27:46 PM Reply	And you, Red Herring Boy, haven't attempted... ..to address the original assertion; namely, that a voter ID card is sufficient identification to be allowed to vote. You wanna make it hard to get a voter ID card? Fine. We can go round and round about that in another thread. But if I show up at a polling place whose precinct number matches the one on my card, and my name on the card in on the roles, I get a ballot. Plan, simple, and non-exclusionary. jb4 "So don't pay attention to the approval ratings that say 68% of Americans disapprove of the job this man is doing. I ask you this, does that not also logically mean that 68% approve of the job he's not doing? Think about it. I haven't." — Stephen Colbert, at the White House Correspondent's Dinner 29Apr06
Post #265,329 by bepatient 8/18/06 5:35:46 PM Reply	That fishy smell would be you this thread started with an article that railed against requiring ID to get that registration card. Your argument is one step further into the process...at the point where ID has supposedly been verified. If you want to check the definitions...I'd say that makes the herring yours. Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}
Post #265,335 by Ashton 8/18/06 5:55:27 PM Reply	National ID card, you say? Sorry, as always the debbil be in the details. In the name of 'authenticity' you can easily contrive that Poll Tax '00. And set up those magical roadblocks on The Day. Again. We rarely learn; of late, anyway. Wanna see some of the evidence of that, Volume 22? And via analysis to paralysis, I submit that: You (in whatever cladding of the day) cannot PROVE to the casual Stop-randomly-and-Questioner: that you are ABSOLUTELY a certain BeeP. Great Ctulhu! and epecially in this venue - there is NO means of "ID" which cannot be folded, spindled, synthesized, mutilated and otherwise - Gotten Around. Make $15 Fees (Plus.. the related barriers) + delays in long lines during working hours at non-local venues: to obtain your Terrorist-proof ~~National ID~~ BureauMotorVehicles temporary substitute for the Real Thing (an injected RFID, if the corporatocracy mindset prevails.) ?? Why is is that you're such a patsy for the putative.. ever missing the choreography of these dances? Have trouble with metaphors and sleight-of-hand card tricks? Insist on pure Boolean sauce on your bologna sandwich? Sure, it Would be nice to have the people who vote be the people who Vote (be even nicer if the problem were doubled: by the traffic at those booths.) Working out the pseudo-'Proof' is clearly a matter needing 'nice'-distinctions and considerable efforts to avoid the Instantly Promulgated selective-hardships as, the the odious Salon article sets out (with only the occasional smarmy ref. to the rather patently obvious Motivations of the Rovian-programmed.) As to how one achieves uniformity in equal-access to voting booths, without imposing that homogeneity which becomes silly in small towns /VS/ a bureaucratic nightmare in megalopolii: ARE we? smart-enough in '06 to manage anything .. Successfully? (Not a rhetorical question - think Iraq, PATRIOT and confiscating tweezers and drinking baby formula - shall they next do a soft-tissue scan for hidden stuff in breast milk?) Thus far: teh suXx0R IMO Oh You Kid
Post #265,357 by boxley 8/18/06 9:51:20 PM Reply	actually national lottery would work nicely If you vote you have a shot at 10 million tax free dollars and to make it easy send in your proxy to the party of your choice hehehehhe, thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #265,368 by imqwerky 8/18/06 10:45:18 PM Reply	I like that idea! That would really get the vote out! Smile, Amy [link\|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?Amy%20Rathman\|Pics of the Family]
Post #265,369 by admin 8/18/06 10:47:07 PM Reply	And the fraud too... Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #265,370 by imqwerky 8/18/06 10:55:12 PM Reply	Ah yes, Fraud. The New American Way. Smile, Amy [link\|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?Amy%20Rathman\|Pics of the Family]
Post #265,372 by boxley 8/18/06 11:09:24 PM Reply	--new its always been the american way :-) Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #265,375 by imqwerky 8/18/06 11:26:54 PM Reply	Well, its so blatant now. It's been outed. :-) Smile, Amy [link\|http://kevan.org/brain.cgi?Amy%20Rathman\|Pics of the Family]
Post #265,405 by bepatient 8/19/06 1:42:01 PM Reply	Minor points And via analysis to paralysis, I submit that: You (in whatever cladding of the day) cannot PROVE to the casual Stop-randomly-and-Questioner: that you are ABSOLUTELY a certain BeeP. Actually, I could provide such ID when stopped well over 90% of the time (I headge because I don't carry to the corner convenience store.) And yes, it would be nice to have the people who vote be the people they say they are when they vote...why??? mostly because it would end the constant conspiricy theories which always abound from the sore loser side of the fight. Whining makes me cranky. Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}
Post #265,407 by Another Scott 8/19/06 2:01:00 PM Reply	An ID isn't "ABSOLUTE" proof. I think you missed Ashton's point. :-) While there are reasonable reasons for having verified voter roles and ways of verifying that someone who presents themselves at the polls are who they say they are, there are also easy ways of creating unconstitutional barriers to the franchise. Requiring a birth certificate as proof of ID might seem reasonable, and in most cases it might be, as the story indicates it can be a hardship for people who don't have that particular proof handy. IOW, a particular requirement can be onerous or reasonable depending on how flexible it is and it depends on who is enforcing the rules. Uniform, national voter standards would probably be less subject to potential abuse, but the devil's in the details. Finally, I'm sure you realize that just because you have a piece of paper or a card that matches your person biometrically 12 ways to Sunday doesn't mean that it's absolute proof that you're who you say you are. ID cards can have errors (talk to a set of adult twins sometime to find out how easy it is for ID information to be messed up), and ID cards can be faked. :-) Cheers, Scott. (Who thinks that low participation is probably more of a danger to our democractic republic than voter fraud.)
Post #265,409 by bepatient 8/19/06 3:06:38 PM Reply	And we try to create these extremes to validate someone's position that since "we can never be sure" that "we shouldn't even try"...or that trying somehow becomes partisan politics. Sorry, my BS-o-meter is way off the charts on this topic. Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}
Post #265,411 by Another Scott 8/19/06 3:51:04 PM Reply	Sure. "Where you stand depends on where you sit." - Miles' Law. My position isn't that it's too tough a problem. My position is that voting restrictions can be used by the unscrupulous to restrict voter participation. History shows that it has been. If one goes to the organization pointed to in the Salon story, [link\|http://www.projectvote.org\|Project Vote] one can find things like [link\|http://projectvote.org/fileadmin/ProjectVote/pdfs/Project_Vote_Key_Election_Administration_Policy_Recommendations.pdf\|Key Recommendations to Improve Election Administration] (3 page .pdf): Voter ID Requirements for Voting Project Vote opposes ID requirements for voting because they raise barriers to voting while failing to solve any existing problem. While the Help America Vote Act (HAVA) requires first-time registrants who register by mail to show ID before voting, several states now require all registered voters to show ID before voting. Some even require photo ID. While typically the stated motivation is to prevent voter fraud, the reality is that voter fraud is exceedingly rare. Cases of individuals impersonating a registered voter in order to vote at the polls\ufffdthe only kind of fraud that an ID requirement would help to prevent\ufffdare unheard of in recent times. The arguments against ID requirements are straightforward: 1. They are not needed. ID requirements do not solve any real voter fraud problem. 2. They can be prohibitively expensive for low-income people, especially strict photo ID requirements, which may amount to a poll tax, as was the recent case in Georgia. 3. Voter ID discriminates against minorities, rural voters, the homeless, Native Americans, low income people, the elderly, people with disabilities and persons in large ouseholds, all of whom are less likely than white or affluent voters to have ID. All of those sound like good arguments to me. Those who want to require additional IDs and so forth need to present evidence of why its needed and address the cited problems. [link\|http://projectvote.org/fileadmin/ProjectVote/pdfs/Our_Vote__Our_Voices.pdf\|Our Vote, Our Voices] (30 page .pdf): Yet every vote was not counted, nor was every eligible citizen able to vote. In 2004, thousands of eligible Americans were denied their right to register and vote in local, state, and federal elections. In Ohio, party officials unfairly attempted to have the state purge 37,000 voters from the rolls. In Pennsylvania, polling places ran out of provisional ballots before noon. In Louisiana and Michigan, poll workers turned away voters with legal forms of identification that the workers had not been trained to accept. In Washington, officials refused to register applicants who failed to check one box. In Arkansas, election officials rejected applications from seventeen-year-olds who would be eighteen on or before November 2nd. In Iowa and Florida, elections officials refused to open early voting sites in locations easily accessible to all voters. Violations of this sort were not confined to one or two states and, collectively, disenfranchised thousands of Americans. Some violations were intentional, political moves to curb voter power, but many were the result of insufficient resources, inefficient practices or ignorance. Intention aside, these barriers were civil rights violations. Whatever the reasons, the problems should be fixed - especially when the country is apparently so divided. If the people don't have confidence that all votes are treated equally, then our whole system of government is at risk. Cheers, Scott.
Post #265,414 by bepatient 8/19/06 4:48:47 PM Reply	And perhaps the only.. ..group I can agree with in the "discimination" category is the homeless...or maybe with the addition of the >extreme< rural. And in order to solve one problem, you leave the process wide open to other abuse. I disagree with the need to show a mass of id at the poll, the voter registation should be enough. To get registered, ID of some description should be required and verified..and it should be standard between the states what that requirement is. Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry._{Adrian Belew}
Post #265,416 by boxley 8/19/06 5:50:34 PM Reply	call bs on these points "In Washington, officials refused to register applicants who failed to check one box." check the box, you are in "In Arkansas, election officials rejected applications from seventeen-year-olds who would be eighteen on or before November 2nd." Come back when you are 18 and entitled to vote "In Iowa and Florida, elections officials refused to open early voting sites in locations easily accessible to all voters." Dunno about Iowa but early voting sites in florida were at the county seat. These are generally in a downtown location therefore easy to get to by alternate transportation. thanx, bill Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #265,419 by Another Scott 8/19/06 6:14:11 PM Reply	Hmmm. On #2. [link\|http://www.sos.arkansas.gov/elections_voter_arkansas_absentee.html\|Arkansas voting rules]: To Apply to Register to Vote in Arkansas : * You must be a U.S. citizen and an Arkansas resident 30 days prior to an election. * You must be age 18 before the next election within the county. * You must not presently be adjudged mentally incompetent by a court of competent jurisdiction. * You must not have been convicted of a felony without your sentence having been discharged or pardoned. * You must not claim the right to vote in another county or state. Someone who is 17 but will be 18 the day of the election is entitled to register to vote (assuming they meet the other requirements), and entitled to vote on election day. [link\|http://projectvote.org/fileadmin/ProjectVote/pdfs/States_of_Disarray1.pdf\|States of Disarray] (10 page .pdf): Challenges for Future Elections [in Arkansas] Election administration offices rejected the applications of new voters who would turn 18 by the Presidential Election, but after an intervening local election. Some of these rejected voters received blank applications with their rejection notices, instructing the voters to submit the application after their 18th birthday, but federal law requires only that people be 18 on election day. Requiring young voters to submit duplicate applications leaves more room for error and is an additional administrative barrier to maximizing their opportunity to vote. Proper administrative systems should be able to remedy these problems so that new voters aren\ufffdt required to submit duplicate applications. If people were told they had to be 18 to register, they were given incorrect information. Mistakes like this shouldn't happen. They should have been told that they needed to register after the local election day if they would turn 18 after that day. Even if there's no possibility of two forms causing errors or confusion, the election officials should always give people correct information. One of the purposes of the national HAVA act was to minimize problems like these. There doesn't have to be nefarious intent for there to be problems that should be remedied. The PDF goes into more details on the problems they found in other states. It's not simply a matter of "do the right thing and you're OK". Some people apparently were never told the proper way to fill out the forms or were never given the opportunity to correct the forms and thus were later denied their right to vote. Of course, there will always be problems. But we should be able to come up with ways to give everyone the legal franchise and not have 10s of thousands of people excluded for reasons like these. Cheers, Scott.
Post #265,447 by Simon_Jester 8/20/06 9:46:11 AM Reply	You know...I have to call BS on this as well... "In Washington, officials refused to register applicants who failed to check one box." check the box, you are in Frankly, I don't give a damn. I seem to recall that I have to produce my drivers license and voters registration when I go to vote. But if we're going to follow the rules about filling in a stupid box, shouldn't we follow the rules on abstenee ballots and postmarks?
Post #265,539 by jb4 8/21/06 1:46:09 PM Reply	I call BS on your BS Uhhh, Box- You entitled to vote if you have become 18 at the time of the election, not at the time of registration. If you are denied registration for the reason you are not 18 when registered but will be 18 when the first election for which the registration is valid is held. It is a violation of Federal law and one's civil rights. Period. jb4 "So don't pay attention to the approval ratings that say 68% of Americans disapprove of the job this man is doing. I ask you this, does that not also logically mean that 68% approve of the job he's not doing? Think about it. I haven't." — Stephen Colbert, at the White House Correspondent's Dinner 29Apr06
Post #265,542 by a6l6e6x 8/21/06 1:56:57 PM Reply	But, what if one can vote before official Election Day? There would be a possibility of someone "early voting" before they are of age. Of course, the votes would not be counted until election day. Alex When fascism comes to America, it'll be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross. -- Sinclair Lewis
Post #265,547 by jb4 8/21/06 2:05:45 PM Reply	Doesn't matter. The vote isn't official until election day Besides, we all know what happens to votes that are cast absentee.... jb4 "So don't pay attention to the approval ratings that say 68% of Americans disapprove of the job this man is doing. I ask you this, does that not also logically mean that 68% approve of the job he's not doing? Think about it. I haven't." — Stephen Colbert, at the White House Correspondent's Dinner 29Apr06

Welcome to IWETHEY!