Voter fraud and voter disenfranchisement

A lot of state/local elections are decided by at most a few hundred votes, sometimes not even a hundred. Think about the implications of "a couple of fraudulent votes" at that slim of margin.

That only makes it more important to not effectively force hundreds away from the booth because the only voting locations are miles away and only open on work hours in the middle of the week.

In any case where voter fraud might be a problem, voter disenfranchisement will have worse consequences.

Well, Radical, you got part of it.

Increasingly inefficient attempts to reduce voter fraud—as well as simple failings of system design—drive away people from voting due to inconvenience. Thus, the margin of error is less, and so voter fraud is a bigger issue.

The way we're doing it now just makes the problem worse, because we're making the problem cyclical.

A report on who has an id, performed in 2005

Thread Necro for Article: Media Matters responds to Fox News' defense of SC voter ID law, states that the law would mostly affect minorities and affect them disproportionately.

Eurgh, if these laws had been around when I first started voting, then I never would have gotten the opportunity to vote at all.

I didn't get any state ID until after college (parents didn't want me getting my DL), and it was an uphill battle to get ID after I moved, because the Washington DMV only accepted utility bills as proof of residence, and I had to jump through a ton of hoops to get them to accept a notarized statement from my landlord saying that I did indeed live in Washington.

In all, my first Washington ID probably cost me $75 after all the various fees and problems that came with it, and it took nearly a year to get it.

edited 7th Jan '12 1:48:51 PM by DrunkGirlfriend

Don't remind me. When I renewed my driver's license a little over three months ago the Department of Revenue was looking for a printed address like a utility bill. So much was their bias against handwriting they wouldn't even take a Pueblo City Police Department fingerprint sheet with my address on it. (Part of getting my job required fingerprinting FYI.)

Yeah I can agree that particular little detail is very troublesome. (Especially since 5 years ago when I renewed at 21 there was no such requirement.)

@Wicked (Yes, this is from several months ago, I apologize, but whatever). Different voting methods have different margins of error. Namely from spoiled ballots and the like. Assume that for example in a punch-based system, 5-6 of every 100 ballots placed is not punched correctly due to machine error and at that point is not counted or is counted incorrectly. Or say confusion about the way a ballot is laid out, etc. Generally speaking, at least when I researched this stuff a decade ago (during all the Bush v. Gore hubub) the general spoiled ballot rate varied from 2%-6%,

The problem occurs if votes in one voter pool have different margins of error. Potentially it can impact the results by 1-2%, which of course is enough to swing a close election.

The further research I did showed that generally it was lower-class communities who had worse voting methods than middle-upper class communities. This is a very distinct electoral effect, I think that probably results in a conservative advantage of 1-2% over intended votes, as a conservative estimate.

We do it with a pencil it in scantron thingy here. At least, that's what I remember, then you feed the card into a machine. Seems like we'd have a hell of a lot easier time if we just standardized the voting method across the country with scantrons. Less margin of error problems if we all use the same way.

@Tom: With that in mind, I can see how a lot of young voters are getting upset about all this, especially if they turn 18 a couple months before voting season opens up.

Poor people buy a disproportionate amount of cigarettes. You need an ID for that. These cigarettes carve enough of a hole in your paycheck that - what did that article say? forty-two dollars max? - looks like nothing. Hell, you need a photo ID to get a legitimate job in the first place. Poor people also make a disproportionate amount of pawn shop visits, and have a disproportionate amount of broken tail-lights. Basically, people need photo identification just to function in day-to-day life.

Now, a disproportionate amount of people who do not have an ID are not, in fact, citizens. I would imagine that an even higher percentage don't actually live in the precinct they claim to. And these fraudulent votes have often passed registration. Call statistical noise discrimination if you like, but widespread voter fraud is a far greater injustice.

edited 8th Jan '12 6:49:24 AM by DomaDoma

And do you base that on anything other than personal assumptions?

Doma, all the articles I've read indicates that voter fraud on the part of actual voters isn't nearly as widespread as alarmists would have you believe. It's more on the part of the folks and methods who are used to count the votes.

Well this is just fucking ridiculous, if anyone is conducting unethical voting practices, it's the Republicans.

Not really helping, Zebra.

Anyway, what Ace is saying is mostly true. Wisconsin Supreme court election was a big example of this, as Waukesha too several hours longer to report the votes (They have a history of this) and then a day later "found" several thousand more votes which gave a big lead to the conservative candidate (they also have a history of this).

@Doma: Actually, in most places you don't need ID to buy cigarettes and/or booze if you "look old enough", so that's a bit of a non-argument either.

I've picked up cigarettes for other people before (I don't smoke) and I've never been carded.

Besides, this doesn't cover my argument that this predominantly affects younger voters in the 18-20 age range.

Edit: Also I didn't need a state ID to get a job during college. My college ID worked just fine. I didn't actually get state ID until I was 20, but I held multiple jobs before then.

edited 8th Jan '12 1:59:09 PM by DrunkGirlfriend

State of South Carolina to sue DoJ and Obama administration over the DoJ not allowing a Voter ID law found to disenfranchise tens of thousands of voters.

I will point out that the line about buying sudafed and plane tickets is so specious I don't even have the words for it.

edited 11th Jan '12 8:09:40 PM by Enkufka

There is a reason the DOJ apparently reviews voter laws, South Carolina. You have to live up to standards.

Why don't they pull that on Wisconsin?

Because Wisconsin is going through a recall thingy right now, and any potential lawsuit probably has to wait until they know whether or not Scott Walker stays in office. Also, they kiboshed that whole thing and prevented DM Vs from being shut down and the cutting of hours the offices are open.

If it were up to me, though, I'd have DM Vs open on Sunday afternoons, because for some that's the only free time they have.

Wisconsin is not on the list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voting_Rights_Act#Jurisdictions_requiring_preclearance

states with a history of discriminatory voting practices (so-called "covered jurisdictions") could not implement any change affecting voting without first obtaining the approval of the Department of Justice, a process known as preclearance.

can you clarify, please

You don't have the right to sudafed or a plane ticket. You do to a vote, and it's not a privilege to vote, its how we determine our country.

I'm going to say that I think it is time that the VRA is amended to cover all 50 states, plus any that join in the Future (There's a decent likelihood Puerto Rico votes to become 51 this year).