Slashdot Mirror
Senate Rejects New Money For Election Security (apnews.com)
The Republican-controlled Senate has defeated a push by Democrats to set aside an additional $250 million for states to upgrade their voting systems to protect against hacking and other cyberattacks. From a report: An amendment offered by Vermont Sen. Patrick Leahy received 50 yes votes, 10 short of the 60 needed for approval. Leahy said securing U.S. elections and "safeguarding our democracy" is not a partisan issue. He said the Senate "must send a clear message to Russia and other foreign adversaries that tampering in our elections will not be tolerated. The president will not act. This duty has fallen to us." A similar effort was also rejected in the House.
This problem can be addressed at the state level with it being major talking point at federal level for the elections. Great opportunity to find where lawmakers stand, and yes some Democrats are dirtbags on the issue too, despite what comes out of their mouths.
There is a much bigger threat to our elections that they refuse to do anything about. Gerrymandering. It's legal election fixing.
Do mainstream Democrats actually believe that the election was somehow stolen from them by the Russians either buying some ads on Facebook or hacking into voting machines? Genuinely curious as there is so much shit flying in this storm that the true features of the landscape are obscured. If so then wow, cognitive dissonance is a real bitch.
Vote early and often!!
Seems like the Republicans know there is something with the existing machines, maybe they are counting on it to help in November polls?
This pretty much guarantees that Russia will hack the election, again.
The Republicans are very happy with the situation now. Easy for Vlad to help out keeping them in power. Why risk upsetting the gravy train?
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
The more illegal aliens a state has, the higher the chances are that they will get more representatives after the next census.
... "outside influence", rather than election fraud, then fixing the voting machines is not addressing the problem.
According to many people who are fighting efforts to stop efforts like requiring picture ID to vote, there is no election fraud going on. So what is the $250M supposed to fix, other than contracts for people who sell insecure voting equipment?
Slips of paper and human counters are pretty damn hard to hack - Since we cant seem to get open source hardware and software platforms for voting, the only option is slips of paper and manual counting.
The Republicans are very happy with the situation now. Easy for Vlad to help out keeping them in power. Why risk upsetting the gravy train?
I thought that no voting machines were hacked, and no vote tallys were changed. Is that no longer true?
I'm having trouble keeping up with the narrative here.
Can you help me out? Do you have a link to a recent article or something?
This.
ID's cost money to obtain; voting shouldn't cost $.
that's all this was, and all it was ever intended to be.
Nobody seems to want actually secured voting systems, because that would mean:
1) a federal standard for voter identification (yes, that means you need to be a citizen, and alive to vote, and it all needs to be verifiable)
2) a federal standard for how elections are held, and who can use the state owned equipment ( aka private entities such as political parties should not be allowed to commander state equipment, personnel and resources to handle what amounts to an internal, private election.)
3) a move away from unpatched, editable, un-auditable electronic systems in favor of more robust physical ballots (which means someones not getting that sweet diebold or smartmatic kickback money anymore)
4) actual repercussions (i.e. jail time and invalidated elections) when elections workers and elections boards doing dumb things like destroying ballots, wiping machines, turning away valid voters, etc
Liberal here. Willing to agree to voter ID laws under 3 conditions:
1. Election days are national holidays.
2. Same day registration everywhere.
3. The ID is 100% free.
None of these compromise the security you are looking for. However, no conservative will agree because they do prevent actual voters from being disenfranchised, which is actually what they want.
Prove me wrong.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
Putin is conducting and he don't want no stinkin badges in his way.
TRUMP Powa!
You claim this is a partisan issue yet you sit uncomfortably and stare off in the distance any time someone wants to institute any kind of real voter ID (you know, the kind everywhere in Europe does already)....
Why pay to update failing electronic systems?
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I'm with you on #1 and #3 but it's too time-consuming and expensive to verify same-day registrations. Why not just register to vote when getting your free ID?
Regarding going back to paper ballots, the current interpretation of the Constitution is that each state can implement the mechanics of voting as they see fit. It would be difficult to dictate paper ballots on a Federal level.
Table-ized A.I.
Paper ballots can be "hacked" too. Remember the 2000 election with butteryfly ballots and hanging chads and cancelled recounts all ultimately decided by a Republican-controlled supreme court? The sad truth is that Democrats have to win by a wide margin because the Republicans will always find a way to "hack" any election that is close.
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
Makes unreasonable demands and then blames problems on everyone else. Typical Lib.
The only "upgrade" needed is to go to paper ballots counted by teams of humans!
Well, seeing the state issues the IDs, if the state wanted to require IDs, it seems they'd be perfectly positioned to provide IDs free of charge.
Hey, retard! Guess what?
I don't know if you noticed or not, but all links here show the destination in square brackets next to the link.
Are you too fucking stupid to understand that everyone already knows that is a goatse shot without clicking on it?
I swear, these trolls on Slashdot get stupider by the minute.
This space unintentionally left blank.
Not in my state they don't... you get one from the state at cost to the taxpayers upon registering to vote.. and you take it with you to the polls. Even when the talk includes the cost being paid for by the state, the average Democrat labels it as racist. You need ID to buy cars, cigarettes, alcohol, guns, etc. and it's not racist.. but it's racist to require one to vote?
I will correct this for you as someone who is not a liberal nor a conservative.
1. Election days are national holidays.
2. The ID is 100% free
3. Getting the ID is registration to vote.
Just like the border wall, liberals would love to vote for anything that looks like they are doing something as long as that 'something' doesn't actually prevent voter fraud or keep illegal aliens out.
That third one is a huge sticking point. People have to invest time, money, and effort into getting an ID--especially when they don't have documentation (homeless people don't carry an archive of their birth certificates and whatnot, so it's hard to prove who you are). Issuing an ID is constrained by certain rules, and it can be kind of rough to get one even when you know who you are and you're supposed to have one.
Election holidays are meaningless. My employer gives us four days off each year. There are about two-dozen national holidays. What you do, you make people work holidays you think are bullshit--Columbus Day, MLK's Birthday, etc. aren't holidays at my employer because they only care about Veteran's Day, Christmas, Thanksgiving, and Independence Day. What makes you think they'd give anyone off for Voting Day?
Support my political activism on Patreon.
At first glance I read that, then I read again and it was written "Republican".
Elections are managed by the states.
Not everything is the Federal government's job to fix or manage. God knows they've screwed up enough things already.
The true cost isn't the dollars, it's the time required to obtain an ID card. When the nearest office is 2 hours away, and your boss will fire you if you take an entire day off from work to go there, it becomes pretty much impossible. Statistically, minorities are more likely to be in that situation, but it's really just as much an attempt to discriminate against the poorer working population as it is racial discrimination.
Those benefiting from election fraud would of course be opposed to eliminating election fraud.
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Oh please! How does one function in life without an ID period? Do you know anyone who is eligible for a US ID that doesn't have one or can't find a way to get one? What are we talking about, .0000001% of the population (if that)? No social services that I'm aware of are available to anyone who cannot produce an ID.
I would expand item 3 to be 100% dollar-free and 99% time-free. In many parts of the US, lower-class workers can't afford to take the full day off from work that they would need in order to go to a state office and get the ID. I have one friend from Germany who couldn't understand why anyone would be opposed to requiring ID to vote, but that was because he also didn't understand why it was difficult to get a ID.
Same-day registration usually makes your ballot provisional, so if the vote difference is greater than the number of provisional ballots (which it almost always is), they won't bother verifying it until after the election anyway.
Liberal here. Willing to agree to voter ID laws under 3 conditions:
1. Election days are national holidays.
2. Same day registration everywhere.
3. The ID is 100% free.
None of these compromise the security you are looking for. However, no conservative will agree because they do prevent actual voters from being disenfranchised, which is actually what they want.
Prove me wrong.
I don't think #1 is necessary. Not when you can easily vote by mail.
#2 would be chaos. The better approach is to cast a provisional ballot and then clear up your shit later if you care.
#3 I agree. It should be free or cost a nominal fee that can be waived in certain cases.
The more illegal aliens a state has, the higher the chances are that they will get more representatives after the next census.
The sun will also come up tomorrow. So what's your point?
For those who don't know, the US Constitution is silent on whether illegal aliens count in a census or not, mainly because when the document was written, there was no such thing as an illegal alien. You got on a ship, you came to the USA, they let you in. I'm not a lawyer so I can't cite specific cases, but basically the law is interpreted that you just count bodies in the census and you don't put people into groups of legal or illegal to determine how representatives are spread out in the US House of Representatives. And for those who don't know about that, the number of representatives is fixed at 435 and basically the more people you have living in your state, the more representatives you have for your state. No state can by law have fewer than 1 representative. California, the most populous state at present, currently has 53 representatives. Rhode Island and Vermont have 1 each. There may be a few more states with only one like maybe Wyoming and possibly one or both of the Dakotas.
That's mostly a moot question: other nations tried, and we should not give them a shot at changing the outcome in the future either way. Many Presidential elections have been close.
Table-ized A.I.
Yes, I've met several. In my city, around 5% of the population and 6% of the voting-age population haven't got ID and don't have the cash or time to get one. That's only the ones I can roughly count, and doesn't count things like adults who never got an ID in the first place because they didn't drive and their parents didn't keep records. The same thing happens with many elderly who no longer drive: they lose their social security cards, and have to pay $125 to get a copy of their birth certificates and have licenses printed up and all--often these people are on a fixed income.
You can get SNAP and other welfare by uh...using your voter registration card as an ID. Seriously. You can use just about anything--a school ID, an ID badge from a job, proof that you're receiving or have received some other form of welfare...
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Provisional balloting procedures already exists. The post I was replying to appears to be demanding something entirely different.
In your city 1 in 20 adults do not have an ID? That just isn't believable.
The vast majority of states don't have mail-in voting, so #1 seems necessary in most of the country.
We have #2 in my state. It's not chaotic in the least. No provisional ballots are necessary. You just show the documentation, they look it over and verify you're in the correct precinct, add your name to the rolls, and give you a ballot.
I don't see why we ever moved away from paper ballots? They are cheap, easily counted, and by definition create a reliable paper trail.
moox. for a new generation.
Can you actually provide any examples of these employers who would fire you for trying to get a state ID? However, again, it seems this would be fairly easily remedied. When you pass the law requiring IDs, have a section making it illegal to punish anyone for going to get one. Beyond that, seriously, I mean, I've needed to provide a state ID to get every job I've ever had. It seems any of these hypothetical people who would be fired for taking time off to get an ID would have had to already have an ID to get a job in the first place. They normally require them to make sure they fill out the tax forms correctly. And if you work a job that isn't concerned about getting the tax forms right, chances are you aren't legal to vote anyway.
Liberal here. Willing to agree to voter ID laws under 3 conditions:
1. Election days are national holidays.
2. Same day registration everywhere.
3. The ID is 100% free.
None of these compromise the security you are looking for. However, no conservative will agree because they do prevent actual voters from being disenfranchised, which is actually what they want.
Prove me wrong.
I'm a conservative in the Libertarian sense, and I think that's exactly how federal elections should function. Sure beats spending millions of dollars on useless "security" programs that do nothing but line someone's pockets with tax dollars.
Congrats, you've been proven wrong.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
If you can take the fucking time to register to vote then you can spend more time getting a fucking id. What a asshole moronic post. Are you really that fucking stupid
The boss is already breaking the law by employing someone without verifying they are legally eligible to be working and filing the proper tax documents. You know, by checking their ID.
Liberal here. Willing to agree to voter ID laws under 3 conditions:
1. Election days are national holidays.
2. Same day registration everywhere.
3. The ID is 100% free.
None of these compromise the security you are looking for. However, no conservative will agree because they do prevent actual voters from being disenfranchised, which is actually what they want.
Prove me wrong.
#1 and #3 are completely reasonable (and a really good idea), but #2 is most likely a no-go. The whole point of voter ID is to vett potential voters (to make sure they are actually eligible to vote, actually live in the district they plan to vote in, etc). Proper vetting is the WHOLE POINT of voter ID, and I just don't see that happening with same-day registration.
How are they legally employed in the first place without having an ID?
(they aren't)
Absentee ballots exist in every state. That's "mail-in voting"
Funny how fucking stupid you are, but not in a HA HA kinda way. Do you have anything other than paranoid alt-right talking points to regurgitate, or have you just had your head up your ass for so long you have nothing more than shit left in that place that used to have a brain (i assume).
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
Exactly. Republicans don't want ID's, they want a poll tax.
Fascism: An authoritarian and nationalistic right-wing system of government and social organization. See also: NAZI's
It's common in places where adults might end up unable to eat or pay rent if they lose $20 and IDs cost some $40 to get. Your parent aren't taking you to the MVA and they're sure as hell not getting you an ID for things they can't afford, like cars or college. 60% of the households in my neighborhood don't have cars.
You often see breakdowns that claim something like 13% of blacks, 10% of hispanics, and 5% of whites in America lack a government ID. Household incomes show no confirmed ID for 12% of those under $25k, 10% in the $30k-$35k range, 9% in the $40k-$50k range, and 2% in the $125k-$150k range. Given the statistics, it's kind of difficult to work out math that would suggest fewer than 1 in 20 American adults lack government ID.
It's also particularly high among the 17-20 and 21-24 age groups (by the by, 17-year-olds who will be 18 on the day of the corresponding general election can vote in a primary election), yet remains in the 5%-7% range for most older age groups.
The issue is largely a statistical one: specific demographics (age, race, income) are over-represented in the no-government-ID distribution, which gives uneven voting power to identifiable subgroups. Such an uneven distribution makes voting non-representative. We can't do much about voluntary voting behavior (lack of desire to vote), but we are responsible for involuntary voting behavior (coercion, disenfranchisement).
If you're thinking the real problem is whatever prohibits these people from obtaining an ID, you're right! This problem causes the others, and one solution is precluded by the other problem. Then comes another question: how do we pay for IDs that poor people get if the poor people don't pay the $85 at the MVA? What about the extra $75 or $150 for people who don't have proper identification papers and need their identities confirmed first? How do you identify a person who doesn't have ID, anyway? Are you sure you're giving that Photo ID to the person whom they claim they are?
This is why elections generally use local polling places, volunteer staff, and public attention: your neighbors should probably recognize you, or recognize that somebody else is using your name. We rely on the neighborhood to confirm your identity.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Would be a wall
250 million? Who was going to get the money? What was the money going to be used for? Just that fact that one side supported it 100% and the other was against it 100% means it was just fodder for ideological hacks to use to attack their opponents.
;)
As for the US Senate, with out 60 votes almost nothing passes in the Senate. To say the Republicans control all 3 branches of government means nothing. And is just political misdirection used for propaganda reasons since most Americans are ignorant about how the Senate works.
If the party in power does not control 60 votes in the Senate very little gets done in Washington.
The last time that happened President Obama was in office and the Democrats had 60 votes in the Senate and controlled the House. And they for the most part completely wasted the power and oppotunities they held for 18 Months (I think it was 18 months?)
Just my 2 cents
Incomplete sentences. Typical Trumpa-loompa. Sad.
Hi Coward, it's me a concerned DNC supporter!
I've been quite concerned that they apparently robbed Bernie of his chance at the 2016 election. I've been quite vocal about it in fact...
Glad we could clear that up. So you can stop calling BS and start actually replying to forum comments in a constructive and hopefully insightful manner.
Good Day Coward!
The only "upgrade" needed is to go to paper ballots counted by teams of humans!
Oh great.. Back to "hanging chads" in Florida again? Please no...
"File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
You do realize that you have to have an ID to get most jobs and to collect social security requires an ID as well, right?
Most states require the employer to give their employee time off to vote if voting is only done during the employee's shift.
https://aflcio.org/2016/11/5/k...
That said, with the ease of early voting, having voting day a national holiday is not really needed
pushed by Dems but not 100% supported by them. If you look at the bill and not the fluff you'll see that this isn't about money but power and control. More political BS from the Democrap Communist party.
No, most states don't allow same-day registration at all. It doesn't appear to be a partisan issue, either, since it's pretty much a 50-50 split for states that allow it. Map here.
wasn't there a line about the best way to win elections to be the one that counts the votes.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
What you said. And to be specific, Form I-9
https://www.uscis.gov/i-9
US ID ? Something valid to the feds as ID? Then most of Washington is missing one :/
was stuff like telling voters they couldn't vote or had to vote on a Wednesday or any one of a number of common voter suppression techniques that work great during a close election. The $250 would go to counter that misinformation campaign and help states get out the vote.
Of course the people who voted this down don't want that because they don't want the 'wrong' people voting.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Not in my state they don't... you get one from the state at cost to the taxpayers upon registering to vote
Does your state pay the cost of getting all the supporting documentation for that ID? 'Cause a new certified copy of my birth certificate costs $50. Or I can pick one up for free if I travel the 2000 miles to the county where I was born.
Even though I can personally afford that, it took me 9 attempts to get a drivers license when I moved to NY. RealID had been "implemented", but they were still fucking around with what supporting documentation you had to supply, so the rules kept changing each time I attempted to get one. I suspect there was a bit of discrimination involved due to the glee the DMV worker showed crossing off the "Motor-Voter" section of the form where I was registering to vote at the same time.
Anyway, the reason voter ID laws are racist are twofold.
First and primarily, the people who can't afford cost for the ID and the supporting documentation tend to be minorities.
Second, the places where you can obtain the necessary ID tend to do things that restrict the ability for the poor and minorities to get them. For example, only open during limited hours, not located near public transit, placed in the "white" part of town, and so on.
Third, the selection of IDs in most voter ID laws include IDs more commonly obtained by whites and explicitly exclude IDs more commonly obtained by non-whites. For example, Texas allows hunting licenses to act as voter ID (mostly whites), and forbids IDs from state universities (mixed races, but very common only ID for a non-driving minority).
You need ID to buy cars, cigarettes, alcohol, guns, etc. and it's not racist
See the comments above about the selection of valid IDs. There's lots of IDs that count in those situations (ex. student ID) that do not count under voter ID laws.
Also, you have no fundamental right to driving a car on public roads, nor a fundamental right to purchasing cigarettes, or alcohol. Also guns can be bought without ID, you just have fewer places that will sell a gun without ID.
When you pass the law requiring IDs, have a section making it illegal to punish anyone for going to get one.
This is hilarious if you think this would work.
If this passed, the official reason for your firing would be "bad attitude" or "poor attendance". Wanna fight it? What makes you think someone who couldn't afford to take time off to get an ID can afford a lawyer?
Beyond that, seriously, I mean, I've needed to provide a state ID to get every job I've ever had
The I-9 form accepts a lot more IDs than voter ID laws do.
The I-9 form accepts a lot of things that are not accepted as voter ID.
Not all states allow you to vote absentee without a reason.
1) IDs are free- sure.
2) National holidays- not really necessary. People working 12 hour shifts, who have the hardest time getting to the polls, will still be working those 12 hour shifts on holidays. That's how shift work works.
3) same day registration- nah. And since we're casting aspersions here, the only reason you want it is so people can vote multiple times in the same day, in multiple states, and there's no time to validate their eligibility to vote.
As long as we're on the subject, black folks know how to get IDs just fine, thank you.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
I laugh at article like this because we all know dems/repubs poison bills with other garbage. Its not just a security bill it probably contains money for fart machines if ya get my point. so the dems say the repubs don't care about your security or the repubs say the dems dont care about your security for a bill they poison. FN circle jerk in Washington SSDD.
Jack of all trades,master of none
Just have the ballots from #2 be provisional. They won't get counted in most elections (they aren't counted if there are fewer provisional ballots than the spread between the winner and second-place). If the provisional ballots matter, they are vetted before being counted. And they'll be a registered voter for the next election.
1. Election days are national holiday
A suggestion to improve this:
- Elections are on a Saturday and Sunday.
- Employers are required to give their employees at least one of those days off.
> I'm with you on #1 and #3 but it's too time-consuming and expensive to verify same-day registrations
Why? In Canada we do it all the time and nobody has a problem with it:
http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?dir=vote&document=index&lang=e§ion=vot
"To vote on election day: You must be registered to vote; if you aren't, you can register now, or register at your polling place, just before you vote."
Then again we also have a nonpartisan organization whose whole point of existence is running elections efficiently in a practical manner with integrity.
So? Why do old slave states still get to count 3/5 of their slave populations? Why does one brown person get to affect election stats not but not a different brown person? That's simply racist.
In the UK registering to vote is very simple, ID is not required to vote, fraud is very low (mostly postal votes, so not addressed by ID), voting machines are not used but votes are counted quickly. I am surprised it's such a problem in the USA.
4. The Id can be obtained at the polls so that people working 2 jobs don't have to take time off the don't get paid for to get the Id before the national holiday.
You know what else sounds different? An old Republican talking point, recast into this situation:
Republicans are soft on crime. And that's what this is. A crime that Republicans benefitted from.
The true cost isn't the dollars, it's the time required to obtain an ID card. When the nearest office is 2 hours away, and your boss will fire you if you take an entire day off from work to go there, it becomes pretty much impossible. Statistically, minorities are more likely to be in that situation, but it's really just as much an attempt to discriminate against the poorer working population as it is racial discrimination.
Bullshit
Peace is easy to achieve, just surrender. Liberty is much harder get/keep.
Trump doing anything and claiming national security when it doesn't apply - /. loves it
Any Democrat or left wing individual - screw that
You people are despicable
I wouldn't rule that out, yet. You're probably the first person to report that a lib told you that voter fraud got Trump elected. Most likely, you didn't understand whatever the lib was really saying. That doesn't mean you're a fuckwit; the lib might have been the fuckwit, unable to describe a problem. (And let's face it: people who can't describe problems totally suck and are bad people and should be tortured. We all agree on that, right?) But yeah, the indicators lean toward you being dumb.
So let's see...Congress doesn't recycle money back to the states to prevent fraud and the progressives say that's how we get Trump. States try to enact voter ID laws to prevent fraud and the progressives say it's a dog-whistle that doesn't exist. Weird.
Same-day voter registration and provisional balloting are two entirely different things. Every state has provisional ballot policies. How hard is it to register to vote before the deadline? Are deadlines racist now too?
Canada also requires ID to register and has much stricter immigration controls to ensure non-citizens aren't voting.
BlueFoxLucid has a good point
Although one in 20 may seem like a stretch for the whole country, but I would not be surprised that some localities have that many. In any case, I'm sure that the USA has a significant number of people who don't have a government ID and cannot easily get one.
And the point is that in a country where we keep having local elections decided with 49%-51% of the vote or even closer, the number of people who could not vote because a government ID would be required is more than enough to decide that election.
And there's that a huge number of women, especially older ones, in the USA have never had a job or owned a car and thus don't need a government ID.
Something like 40% of females don't have a job, and a large number have never held a job, especially among early baby boomers.
As for lost ID, I once got robbed when I was young and unemployed. I happened to have my draft card, birth certificate, driver's license, and everything else on me, and it all got stolen. I had to get money from a friend so I could go back to my hometown to get my birth certificate, which was required at that place and time. To get a replacement at the state archives required a drivers license, and to get a replacement DL required, guess what?
It took days to get everything restored, and many people would have given up. I was lucky to not have a job and to have available parents who could fund me.
You know who else has a huge problem with proving their identities? Women who have been married, divorced and remarried. Those records are required for restoring identity and in most places can only be found in the court of the locality that granted the marriage and divorce. In these modern times, that may require traveling to multiple states. And if the local courthouse had lost the records, or burnt down, you basically have to hire a lawyer to intervene for you.
Also, it's a huge pain for children born abroad of a Dad who was in the Army and married a foreigner. Or didn't marry her but just got her back to the USA somehow with the kid.
You do realize that you have to have an ID to get most jobs and to collect social security requires an ID as well, right?
You are mistaken about social security requiring a government ID. I'm collecting and did at all online.
There are about 170 million people in the USA that don't have a job right now and thus don't need an ID.
Fix that, it's clearly not working.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Yes, and somehow neither of those causes any significant heartburn during voting, but for some reason the US loses their minds at the mere thought of it. We also still use paper ballots and have our counts out nationally within a couple of hours after polls close. This isn't a hard thing to do, but for some reason the US makes it seem like it's a moonshot each time. Perhaps certain parties benefit from the current status quo enough that they don't want to risk change?
Liberal here. Willing to agree to voter ID laws under 3 conditions:
1. Election days are national holidays.
2. Same day registration everywhere.
3. The ID is 100% free.
None of these compromise the security you are looking for. However, no conservative will agree because they do prevent actual voters from being disenfranchised, which is actually what they want.
Prove me wrong.
#1 Election days are national holidays.
I think that would be a good idea, but the problem with this is that in reality the elections are decided in the party primaries which vary wildly from state to state. There's no way to have national holidays for those.
And secondly, IMHO local elections are more important than the federal ones.
#2 Same day registration everywhere
Same day registration is also a good idea because then you would be registered for subsequent elections, and thanks to computers, the state's voting records, your place of residency, etc could be instantly updated. And because you're showing an approved government ID that's all that is needed for registration at any other time.
#3 The ID is 100% free.
The cost of the ID is a red herring and you should stop talking about it. The real problem is that a great many Americans cannot reasonably provide or obtain all the documentation required to get a modern government-approved ID. These people are the disenfranchised ones that TPTB don't want to allow to vote.
Voter purging of those still paying taxes (obviously not dead) and the cost of IDs are the moral high ground, and your help here would be better appreciated.
Enact VoterID.
We already need identification for all sorts of things in society: buying alcohol, tobacco, registering a car, getting a job... Proving who you are to vote is not difficult at all.
In a growing number of states, Real ID standards are mandated. Without a RealID-compliant license, for example, one cannot do something as routine as getting through airport security.
For certain political parties to claim it is "racist" to require ID to vote because certain minorities cannot get an ID is, in itself, racist.
The problems VoterID would solve would far surpass the crap ideas floated by the Democrats in the Senate.
When politicians are involved, everyone loses.
What's really needed is for most of the electronics to be trashed and a law enacted requiring machines' hardware and software to be publicly documented. No proprietary crap, elections are too important.
But bosses don't get going after nearly as much. We've seen this in over and over.
Turning on management. Ya, you'll get to keep your job for a short while.
Again works out great for Republicans, just like the electoral college.
If you are just going to allow illegals to vote anyway. Stupid is as stupid does.
Caution: Contents under pressure
Not really. To get a job, you just need good enough ID to prove that you're legally employable. To vote, that ID has to exactly match the voters role.
For example, here under the last government, which was advised by the Republicans, they made the voting ID requirements very strict. My wife, whose ID is in her maiden name and has always voted under her maiden name, checked online that she was correctly registered (the government also got rid of the local registration lists so the only way to check was online) and as of the day before the election, she was correctly registered. On voting day, she was suddenly registered under my last name, and since she didn't have ID under that name.
My son was dis-enfranchised even easier. It was just too hard to update his ID, what with the 50 mile trip during working hours and the $75 fee.
Both have plenty of ID to get a job.
It's really easy to dis-enfranchise people if that is the aim of ID laws. Besides the above examples, there's just the simple typo on the voters registration. John A. Smith is actually registered as Johnn A. Smith.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Yet it is so easy to make a typo on the voters list so the ID doesn't quite match.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
Last Federal election, my wives registered name mysteriously changed from her maiden name, which her ID is in, to my name. Government web site said she was registered in the name she has always used to vote, voters list at the polling station had her under my name.
ID laws are good until a government comes in that wants to use them to screw certain people, such as my wife who is native.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
You still have the problem of intentional typos on the voters list, along with the requirement that the ID exactly match.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
I guess the trillion plus debt California has is a sign of the economic genius of Democrats over the past 30+ years
If states do an inadequate job holding an election (by being hackable, by gerrymandering, by voter suppression fraud, ...) just don't accept their representatives until they win an election. They'll figure out how to print out and count ballots like everyone else, or they won't. No need for money.
MAGA = Moscow Agent Governing America
Table-ized A.I.
If you don't drive, drink or smoke, what reason would you have for keeping your driver's license current?
What doesn't make sense? That some states have cut down on the number of DMV offices so getting an ID can require travel, particularly for those in rural areas?
Unless you don't have a copy of your birth certificate on hand, in which case you will be out time and money to get one, just so you can get a "free" ID. To address a problem that is so rare it may as well not exist (vote fraud).
You mean some dipshit wingnut on Fox News? Sure, that's persuasive....
Are you? Vote fraud is so rare as to be functionally non-existent, so you have no business telling people to get ID's when you don't have a use case for it.
You are not seriously suggesting that Libertarians represent mainstream Conservatism in the United States in 2018, are you?
However, I won't look a gift horse in the mouth. If you agree, then great. Start convincing your fellows on the right and I'll push mine to accept the compromise. But I think (IMHO) you will have a harder time than me.
Considering every other response is either someone weakening one of the 3 provisions (or a fellow Liberal making the demands stronger or clarifying them better than I did)... I don't really feel proven wrong at all. You're the only self-described Conservative to take the offer on the table as it is.
You're an anomaly, I'm sorry to say.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
3) same day registration- nah. And since we're casting aspersions here, the only reason you want it is so people can vote multiple times in the same day, in multiple states, and there's no time to validate their eligibility to vote.
As many others have said, you can use provisional ballots, so the eligibility can be validated later. But I'm sure you didn't suggest that because it completely invalidates your argument.
And if the other 2 don't matter, then you have no reason not to take the deal. But you didn't.
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
How does having a "nominal" fee prevent fraudsters? Won't Soros just give them the money to pay the fee anyway?
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
Meh. Your demand for Voter ID without these things is also unreasonable. So we are at an impasse. Thanks for playing. :D
Only crack the nuts that crack. You don't put the ones that don't crack in the sack.
Based on what you are saying, how can claims of voters fraud be low then? 1 in 20 voting with no proof (not American)
In my country we have our nation id, require to sign up with our address 6-9 months before the election, and have that indelible indian fingernail colour dip ink.
I arrive at the poll station, get a slip againts my id card, line up at the right polling line, the first table confirms my id, face n (if disputed, fingerprints), reads it out loud(unsure why but ok), i dip my finger (no going back now) and take my paper voting slip.
Usa election seems so easily played on the physical side, digital doesn't matter.
If you can't identify yourself you can't register to vote. If you can't register to vote you should not be able to vote. Simple.
I lost my wallet when i was young, while having a job. Guess what i did? I took the time off work (1 day a week for 3 weeks) and i got my fucking ID.
The vendors should be implementing secure voting systems to begin with. You can't just throw millions of dollars at a problem if you don't understand its origin. The thing is that they could spend less money and be more secure (eg using Linux and open source, encrypted and verifiable voting systems)
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
Yes, generally two hours with pay, although public transportation can make a one-way 20 minute trip into a 3-hour bus ride here (seriously). It's easy to end up in a situation where you simply can't vote on election day.
Employers generally don't follow national holidays. They're discretionary.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
What happens when you don't have your wallet, social security card, or birth certificate? Do you just walk into the MVA and declare you're Joe Schmidt, address 777 Poppyseed Lane, and walk out with a photo ID?
Maybe you could go to several and get 25 different photo IDs under 25 different names.
Support my political activism on Patreon.
Is it really such a stretch of the imagination for you that a country that looks to see their favored US presidential candidate elected through social media influence and hacking for dirt wouldn't be happy about lax voting security?
Or maybe you're just being willfully naive?
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
Why are we building up the military if the Republicans allow foreign entities to hack the USA? We need better politicians, vote for Independent party this November. Oh! If that fails, then vote for Democrats this November......................
You are not seriously suggesting that Libertarians represent mainstream Conservatism in the United States in 2018, are you?
Nope, I was just responding to your generalization.
An enigma, wrapped in a riddle, shrouded in bacon and cheese
That was my point. I had none of those. I did what adults do.. I handled what I needed to be able to be a functioning member of society.
That was my point. I had none of those. I did what adults do.. I handled what I needed to be able to be a functioning member of society.
We already know that the system works for most people in typical circumstances, so your "I got mine" anecdote was pointless and uninformative.
Both parties have neglected the issue, but for different reasons. Democrats tend to ignore it because illegals are more likely to give birth to future Democrat voters.
And GOP has ignored it because business likes the cheap labor illegals bring, and business funds GOP campaigns.
Sorry, but the Orange Guy is doing it wrong. Rather than obsessing on a wall, focus on hiring more border guards, and auditing business hiring practices. He seems reluctant to do the second because he's a "pro business" politician, and doesn't want Mar-a-Lago etc. audited.
Democrats once offered a bill to hire more border guards, but GOP turned it down, in part over alleged debt concerns.
Table-ized A.I.
I'll as you the same question:
If I care about immigration reform, which party is more likely to get me there? The one that wants no reform and blanket amnesty, or the one somewhat divided on the issue? Which party is calling for the abolition of ICE? Which party creates "sanctuary" cities/states? Which party runs cities that won't even convict a cold-blooded killer of manslaughter?
clovis apparently had to be a functional member of society who could physically travel to other states, take days off work, spend hundreds of dollars, and get lawyers involved. What about the poors who are barely able to make rent?
Support my political activism on Patreon.
We don't need a voters list. We can validate the ID. If the ID is unable to be validated as an official government ID we have bigger issues than voter fraud.
I think you need to establish that it is not working first. There were 4 confirmed cases of voter fraud in 2016 out of ~130 million votes.
"Widespread voter fraud" is a myth. But it sure keeps you tuned in and buying.
How do you validate the citizenship part? Lots of government ID such as drivers licenses just takes residency I believe.
Then there's the people who may have valid ID under different names such as the newly married woman with some ID in her maiden name and some in her married name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
GOP is not "divided" on the issue: they've had at least 2 chances for reform and border guard increases, and flaked both times. They only give it lip service because GOP voters want to hear it, but flake because their biz funders DONT want it. Legalized bribery works.
(You are spinning the Kate Steinle story. It's more nuanced.)
Table-ized A.I.
they've had at least 2 chances for reform and border guard increases, and flaked both times
Are you saying Democrats were going to allow an end to chain migration and enact a merit-based system in exchange for amnesty? No, you're not. What you mean is Democrats were offering the same shit deal Reagan pushed through. No real change except for another block of Democrat voters.
(You are spinning the Kate Steinle story. It's more nuanced.)
Oh, really? Please explain then. Also see how you didn't touch the abolition issue.
hundreds of dollars? costed me $54 bucks from milwaukee county to get my birth certificate. I never left vegas. btw what do you consider poor? i made $12/hr at the time.
The gun handler claimed it was an accident. Just because you don't like the Jury's decision does not make the reason related to amnesty. Did you dissect the jurors' neurons or something?
Table-ized A.I.
The gun handler claimed it was an accident.
His story was inconsistent. Regardless, at the minimum it should have been manslaughter. If you pick up a gun that doesn't belong to you, and you "accidentally" shoot it, and kill somebody, that qualifies as manslaughter.
Did you dissect the jurors' neurons or something?
Considering that San Francisco is the capital of Libtardia, it's a reasonable assumption that his immigration status had something to do with it.
And I'll note again you still have nothing to say about the abolition of ICE.
So, you have NO real evidence, you are just guessing out of your FoxHole. I wasted my time debating you.
Table-ized A.I.
You have no explanation for why it wasn't at least manslaughter. I applied Occam's Razor. What did you do except bury your head in the sand? Why did you, again, ignore the abolition of ICE demands? Democrats have become the party of illegal immigrants.
You cannot accuse a jury of being biased for a specific motivation based on Occam's Razor. You were not on the jury and were not privy to the discussion. You have no specific details to suggest the jury "did it wrong". They too should be considered innocent until proven guilty.
If you use Occam's Razor to form an internal personal guess, that's fine, but you implied it was definitive conclusion. Don't open your trap unless you have reasonably solid evidence, NOT personal guesses using very indirect means. This is Slashdot; we expect more logic and details, not stream of conscientiousness chatter. If we wanted the latter, we'd tune into the President.
And to me, Occam's Razor says there are too many alternative possibilities to select a specific one as a solid or most-likely guess. In other words, Occam's Razor produces no answer in this case because there's too many possibilities and insufficient information to select among them for a top guess(es).
Man up and admit you made a mistake.
Table-ized A.I.
You cannot accuse a jury of being biased for a specific motivation based on Occam's Razor.
Yes I can. The facts of the case were public.
If you use Occam's Razor to form an internal personal guess, that's fine, but you implied it was definitive conclusion.
It fits a pattern of libshit cities like San Francisco. He shouldn't have even been in the country, but San Francisco, being a "sanctuary" city, let him go from jail.
Man up and admit you made a mistake.
Why do you refuse to talk about the abolition of ICE? Why do you hold the Democrats and Republicans equally accountable for immigration policies, when the Democrats support "sanctuary" city/states, created the "DACA" amnesty, want a "clean" DACA amnesty, and oppose all immigration reform, including an end to chain migration, the "diversity" lottery, and national e-verify?
Go on, man up. Address the issues.
But the reasoning of the jury is not. QED.
I could play the same game and say most red-state Fox/Rush media consumers are brainwashed such that they automatically assume that a vast majority of San Franciscans are heavily biased toward pro-illegal-immigration such that the jurors cannot make fair jury decisions.
Using this brainwash assumption, I could state that your automatic bias makes you unfit to apply Occam's Razor. QED2.
If you had statistical evidence that X do Y at Z% of the time, you may have a case. But "Hannity said so" is not statistical evidence.
After you admit you screwed up the first topic. Finish your plate before get you desert, young lady.
Your logic sucks eggs.
Table-ized A.I.
After you admit you screwed up the first topic.
Oh, so you're allowed to flail around and ignore my arguments, while you fixate on the most inconsequential and debatable of mine? How convenient for you.
I just find it better to focus on one topic at a time if it looks like it will be a long, drawn-out discussion. Otherwise, one is dealing with 2+ long drawn-out interweaving discussions.
Table-ized A.I.
You chose to fixate on this minor topic after flailing at the major ones. It's a tactic of weakness by somebody arguing from a losing position, because they are arguing against reality itself:
Democrats are the party of illegal immigration. They own the "sanctuary" city/states, they call for the abolition of ICE, they are the ones against immigration reform. It was their "sanctuary" city policy that resulted in the death of Kate Steinle. They are the ones living in tent cities full of shit. It was their libshit Capital that couldn't even muster a manslaughter murder. And here you are, defending them.
May I see your Mind-Reader Certificate, please?
Again, both parties are, based on their history. I will agree that GOP's voting base is less likely to support it, but GOP politicians support it and ignore voters because business pays them Yuuuge bucks to allow illegals in. GOP can pull this off because they give it lip service while they are ignoring voters.
Table-ized A.I.
May I see your Mind-Reader Certificate, please?
I don't need to mind read. It's in the post history. Do you have another explanation for your hypocrisy?
Again, both parties are, based on their history.
False equivalence. Republicans don't run "sanctuary" cities/states. Republicans don't call for the abolition of ice. Obama created DACA amnesty out of thin air. Democrats accept no immigration reform. If there is any hope for immigration reform, it has to come from Republicans. The Democrats have jumped on the open borders train, and there's no turning back.
You mean your hallucinations. Take some courses in debate and logic, Your mind works improperly.
After dropping the ball 7 times they'll finally get it?
Table-ized A.I.
You mean your hallucinations.
I didn't hallucinate you flailing around, failing to address my arguments, and then deciding to single-focus like a laser on the most minor and debatable of my arguments. When pushed, you reverted back to your "both parties" line, ignoring the facts on the ground.
After dropping the ball 7 times they'll finally get it?
Any reform in a positive direction is coming from Republicans. But maybe you're cool with "sanctuary" cities/states, calls for the abolition of ICE, and calls for open borders.
Your biggest sin is accusing the jury AND me of various motivations using very poor evidence, that comes across as "your type always does/thinks X, therefore you are probably doing/thinking X here."
I not going to continue to debate somebody who fails at the basics. I shouldn't have let it get this far. I prefer logical rational people with clear lines of evidence. You are NOT one.
Most people who claim to be good at guessing motivations out loud are usually bozos.
By the way, the main purpose of "sanctuary cities" is so that illegal immigrants corporate with local law enforcement. If cops rat them out, they have no incentive to cooperate, and crime goes up. You should know that. You've probably heard that argument, but will say something like, "That's just an excuse to hide their REAL motivation of kissing up to illegals." Am I right?
Table-ized A.I.