By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics - Billionaires trying to buy our elections through the supreme court ruling, "corporations are people."

badgenome said:
Mr Khan said:

We've tread this ground before, but in Pennsylvania they're really not making it much easier.

That's a problem for people in Pennsylvania, then. So far the courts don't seem to agree, but I guess we'll see where the Supreme Court comes down.

I don't know how common actual ballot manufacturing and the like is as opposed to voter regsitration fraud, but if it helps to improve the integrity of the vote then it just doesn't seem all that burdensome or unreasonable to me in a society where you need a photo ID to do practically anything. And the fact that a Democratic legislature and independent governor in Rhode Island passed voter ID kind of takes the steam out of the kneejerk "it's bad, because Republicans" argument.

Also doesn't help that nearly 75% of the country is for voter id laws.

Hell, even a clear majority of Democrats are for Voter ID laws... specifically voter ID laws that require government issued photo ids no less!

Different minorities, different ages, NO GROUP is against government photo IDs being needed by a majority.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/08/12/National-Politics/Polling/question_6226.xml?uuid=Nd4PSOTWEeGXOe75nF-yhQ

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-concerns-about-voter-fraud-spur-broad-support-for-voter-id-laws/2012/08/11/40db3aba-e2fb-11e1-ae7f-d2a13e249eb2_story.html

Voter ID laws are just widley popular common sense laws.

Hell, even noncitizens s



Around the Network

Corporations have been people for over 100 years. Keep up.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

Kasz216 said:
badgenome said:
Mr Khan said:

We've tread this ground before, but in Pennsylvania they're really not making it much easier.

That's a problem for people in Pennsylvania, then. So far the courts don't seem to agree, but I guess we'll see where the Supreme Court comes down.

I don't know how common actual ballot manufacturing and the like is as opposed to voter regsitration fraud, but if it helps to improve the integrity of the vote then it just doesn't seem all that burdensome or unreasonable to me in a society where you need a photo ID to do practically anything. And the fact that a Democratic legislature and independent governor in Rhode Island passed voter ID kind of takes the steam out of the kneejerk "it's bad, because Republicans" argument.

Also doesn't help that nearly 75% of the country is for voter id laws.

Hell, even a clear majority of Democrats are for Voter ID laws... specifically voter ID laws that require government issued photo ids no less!

Different minorities, different ages, NO GROUP is against government photo IDs being needed by a majority.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/08/12/National-Politics/Polling/question_6226.xml?uuid=Nd4PSOTWEeGXOe75nF-yhQ

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-concerns-about-voter-fraud-spur-broad-support-for-voter-id-laws/2012/08/11/40db3aba-e2fb-11e1-ae7f-d2a13e249eb2_story.html

Voter ID laws are just widley popular common sense laws.

Hell, even noncitizens s

We don't have or need photo ID laws. What we do have is a voting card mailed out to every registered voter. You take the card to the polling place hand it over and you get your ballot.

The problem with requiring photo ID is that it's a cost on those who don't have photo ID: the poor, because no one provides photo IDs for free. Thus in order to be able to vote you have to pay a fee. That does not meet the definition of "free and fair elections", it amounts to a poll tax. The concept of a photo ID is fine, it's the implementation that can be disenfranchising. Free elections just means you have to be a citizen (or permanent resident in some countries) and not have exceed the criminal threshhold (whereby your right to vote is removed for a specified time. You don't have to have a job, you don't have to have paid taxes (of course if you're convicted of tax evasion then that might cause you to lose the right to vote), you don't have to have a driver's licence or passport or any other form of ID that has a photo. So to require a photo ID for which you must pay is a tax. And it is fundamentally undemocratic to tax people in order for them to be able to carry out what is a basic right in a democracy.

The fact that the vast majority of people already have a photo ID for which they paid for it's primary purpose (drive a car, go overseas, obtain certain social services) is irrelevant. A proportion of people will not have a photo ID and their only reason for getting one is to vote. Ergo it should come at no direct cost to them.

A free photo ID is fine. A paid for photo ID specifically to be able to vote is not.

In my view it's better to let 10 people cast fraudulent votes than to prevent 1 person from casting a vote that is their absolute right in a free and fair democracy (somewhat akin to the better to let 10 guilty people walk free than see one innocent person wrongly convicted)

Besides, there is no evidence of large scale voter fraud. That being the case why are people so hell bent on photo ID? I question people's motives in this context, not the base concept of photo ID.



“The fundamental cause of the trouble is that in the modern world the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt.” - Bertrand Russell

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, the world will know peace."

Jimi Hendrix

 

Sadly, 98% of US citizens and the same % in my country, the UK are stupid and are blindly led without questioning what they are told.

This is frustrating for the rest of us who are screaming out for them to stop accepting what they are fed daily, by the media, global corporations, politicians and religious groups. .

Don't believe what anyone tells you, go out and find out the truth for yourself!



binary solo said:

In my view it's better to let 10 people cast fraudulent votes than to prevent 1 person from casting a vote that is their absolute right in a free and fair democracy (somewhat akin to the better to let 10 guilty people walk free than see one innocent person wrongly convicted)

Do you understand how voting works? Because if 10 fraudulent votes are cast, then 10 legitimate voters have had their votes stolen. Those two situations are not analagous.



Around the Network
binary solo said:
Kasz216 said:
badgenome said:
Mr Khan said:

We've tread this ground before, but in Pennsylvania they're really not making it much easier.

That's a problem for people in Pennsylvania, then. So far the courts don't seem to agree, but I guess we'll see where the Supreme Court comes down.

I don't know how common actual ballot manufacturing and the like is as opposed to voter regsitration fraud, but if it helps to improve the integrity of the vote then it just doesn't seem all that burdensome or unreasonable to me in a society where you need a photo ID to do practically anything. And the fact that a Democratic legislature and independent governor in Rhode Island passed voter ID kind of takes the steam out of the kneejerk "it's bad, because Republicans" argument.

Also doesn't help that nearly 75% of the country is for voter id laws.

Hell, even a clear majority of Democrats are for Voter ID laws... specifically voter ID laws that require government issued photo ids no less!

Different minorities, different ages, NO GROUP is against government photo IDs being needed by a majority.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/page/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2012/08/12/National-Politics/Polling/question_6226.xml?uuid=Nd4PSOTWEeGXOe75nF-yhQ

http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/poll-concerns-about-voter-fraud-spur-broad-support-for-voter-id-laws/2012/08/11/40db3aba-e2fb-11e1-ae7f-d2a13e249eb2_story.html

Voter ID laws are just widley popular common sense laws.

Hell, even noncitizens s

We don't have or need photo ID laws. What we do have is a voting card mailed out to every registered voter. You take the card to the polling place hand it over and you get your ballot.

The problem with requiring photo ID is that it's a cost on those who don't have photo ID: the poor, because no one provides photo IDs for free. Thus in order to be able to vote you have to pay a fee. That does not meet the definition of "free and fair elections", it amounts to a poll tax. The concept of a photo ID is fine, it's the implementation that can be disenfranchising. Free elections just means you have to be a citizen (or permanent resident in some countries) and not have exceed the criminal threshhold (whereby your right to vote is removed for a specified time. You don't have to have a job, you don't have to have paid taxes (of course if you're convicted of tax evasion then that might cause you to lose the right to vote), you don't have to have a driver's licence or passport or any other form of ID that has a photo. So to require a photo ID for which you must pay is a tax. And it is fundamentally undemocratic to tax people in order for them to be able to carry out what is a basic right in a democracy.

The fact that the vast majority of people already have a photo ID for which they paid for it's primary purpose (drive a car, go overseas, obtain certain social services) is irrelevant. A proportion of people will not have a photo ID and their only reason for getting one is to vote. Ergo it should come at no direct cost to them.

A free photo ID is fine. A paid for photo ID specifically to be able to vote is not.

In my view it's better to let 10 people cast fraudulent votes than to prevent 1 person from casting a vote that is their absolute right in a free and fair democracy (somewhat akin to the better to let 10 guilty people walk free than see one innocent person wrongly convicted)

Besides, there is no evidence of large scale voter fraud. That being the case why are people so hell bent on photo ID? I question people's motives in this context, not the base concept of photo ID.

There is no proof of large scale voter fraud because... becuase nobody is looking for wide scale voter fraud.

Saying there is no wide scale voter fraud is like saying there is no stealing in a store where nobody does inventory, nobody keeps track of the profits and nobody is watching any of the customers.  Since when people vote, we don't really keep track of how many votes are expected to be cast,  nobody see's if it's the same people voting, and nobody every gets notification that they voted.

 

As for sending voting cards in the mail... well that just increases the chances of both fraud AND voter supression by a factor of 10.

I mean hell, what's to stop people from breaking into mailboxes the day these things are supposed to be sent out and stealing them all.

Now a ton of people have phyiscally had their vote stolen all in one night.

Nevermind, going to areas with low voting records, stealing them, then just using them to vote.  Maybe you'll catch 1 out of every 1000 people?


If anything, if you were particularly concerned by this, what you would do is get Government ID vans to show up in certain areas on certain days.

Though, if you actually look at who votes, and what you need an ID for it doesn't look like an actual problem.

It looks like a problem that may effect a couple dozen people here or there.  Studies that have larger numbers generally inflating numbers by counting every potential voter as a voter, counting people who don't have ids rather then people who can't get Ids and counting anyone who's name is slightly different on their ID and their voting registration.  William on your voting ID, but RIck on your voting registration, despite the fact that you could vote, your counted as if you couldn't.



It should all be electronic, is what should happen. Possibly with fingerprint verification or something: log-in with your fingerprint which is taken when you register to vote.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Mr Khan said:
It should all be electronic, is what should happen. Possibly with fingerprint verification or something: log-in with your fingerprint which is taken when you register to vote.

That disenfranchises people who don't have fingers or prints.



badgenome said:
Mr Khan said:
It should all be electronic, is what should happen. Possibly with fingerprint verification or something: log-in with your fingerprint which is taken when you register to vote.

That disenfranchises people who don't have fingers or prints.

DNA?

Oh. Right. The androids...

this is a puzzler

But seriously, i was just providing an example that would help circumvent all of this. Of course, i've long wondered why our voting system has remained so mired in 19th century techniques and technology.



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Mr Khan said:
It should all be electronic, is what should happen. Possibly with fingerprint verification or something: log-in with your fingerprint which is taken when you register to vote.

Unlike voter ID laws... that wouldn't be constiutional.

You'd be pitting your right to vote against your 5th ammendment right to protect yourself against self incrimination... as the new Voter ID fingerprint database would suddenly be the largest in the world.

Or at least something the ACLU would argue as such anyway.  Makes more sense then photo Ids being unconsitutional anyway.