Skip to comments.Photo ID, the Left, And Voter Fraud
Posted on 06/07/2012 10:49:51 AM PDT by Kaslin
A recent business trip got me thinking about those on the Left who oppose the movement by States to increase the security of elections by requiring people to produce photo identification (ID), generally a driver license or government-issued identification card, although there are other forms of permitted ID, before they can vote. As this is an election year, this issue is back in the news.
On this trip, it seemed that every time I turned around I was having to show people my ID: the TSA agent inspected it before I could get through security at the airport; the man at the car rental desk wanted my ID before I could rent a car; the lady at the hotel reception desk asked for my ID before I could check in; the guard at the courthouse asked for my ID before he would let me enter the building; store clerks asked for my ID after I handed them my credit card to buy something; and I had to show another TSA agent my ID before I could get on the plane to come home.
The more I thought about it I realized that, even when you are not traveling, you need an ID in this country for everyday events such as cashing checks, getting a loan from a pawn shop, obtaining a library card, and, depending on how old you are or how young you look, buying cigarettes and alcohol.
Yet, despite the frequent need in everyday life for Americans to display an ID, those on the Left oppose it when it comes to casting a vote. Their main claim is that it disenfranchises the poor, in particular, because obtaining an ID is a burden that discourages voting. In this claim, the Left seems to focus on obtaining driver licenses, rather than government issued photo IDs. Granted, not everyone drives so not everyone wants or needs a driver license, but that is no reason not to obtain a photo ID.
Unlike getting a driver license, you do not need to take a test to get a photo ID. All fifty States and the District of Columbia offer them to their residents who do not have driver licenses. As a general rule, to obtain a photo ID you need to provide proof of residency/citizenship and your Social Security number. There are organizations to help the poor, specifically, with the process.
The documentation required to obtain a photo ID is among the same documentation a person needs to provide to obtain public assistance in the State of Iowa [pdf], or food stamps in the State of Minnesota, or government-provided health care services (Medi-Cal) in the State of California, which also happens to require citizens to show a driver license or photo ID to obtain Medi-Cal, meaning they had to obtain one of those forms of ID first by providing the necessary documentation.
Moreover, obtaining a photo ID is not expensive. For example, the State of Maine charges $5.00, the State of Pennsylvania charges $13.50, and the State of Michigan provides them for free to senior citizens and to the blind.
Thus, the Lefts main reason for opposing voter ID laws is an exaggeration. Obtaining a photo ID is not an undue burden and is actually not something out of reach for those Americans interested in voting. Since voting generally takes place every two years, there is adequate time to obtain a photo ID before it is needed at a polling place. And, if those on the Left are concerned that some have a difficult time obtaining photo IDs, they should help them gather the necessary documentation and help them obtain the ID, just as they assist people in other areas of need.
So whats the real reason behind the Lefts opposition to voter ID laws? Undermining Americas electoral process is something those on the Left know how to do since it advances their agenda. They do not want laws to prevent this activity. Breaking a law has consequences.
For instance, ACORN (a well-known national organization whose efforts primarily benefited Democrats) was convicted last year of voter fraud in Nevada. Two years ago ACORN settled a lawsuit in Ohio, where ACORN had been sued for engaging in a widespread pattern of corruption by submitting false voter registrations. As part of the settlement, ACORN agreed to give up its business licenses in Ohio and cease all activity in that State. Because of its various scandals, ACORN has disbanded nationwide.
Requiring a form of photo ID is a reasonable way to ensure fairer elections. Without it, there is no guarantee of the identity of the voter, and voter fraud becomes easier to accomplish. All you need to do is vote for yourself at your polling place. You then go to a different polling place and vote on behalf of someone who recently died. All the information you need to obtain their ballot (name, address, date of birth) can be found in their obituary and in a phone book. In fact, the State of Florida recently discovered 53,000 dead voters who were still registered to vote. Of course, voter impersonation is a criminal offense; so do not do it. Last year a NAACP leader in Mississippi was convicted of a voter fraud scheme, including voting in the names of dead people.
The ease of voting under someone elses name was recently illustrated in a video of a man who went to the polling place where United States Attorney General Eric Holder is registered to vote. The man, who looks nothing like Holder, gave the poll worker Holders name and address. The man asked whether he needed to show his ID. The poll worker said no and was about to allow the man to vote as Eric Holder when the man left the polling place saying he would feel better if he went and got his ID. (Holder opposes voter ID laws; he claims, as do many on the Left, that there is no problem with voter fraud in this country, despite the evidence to the contrary.)
The strength of our republic rests on an electoral system that is free from fraud and corruption. An ID requirement is a simple and necessary measure to achieving that strength. Those on the Left, however, oppose it, despite the ease with which people can obtain photo IDs, the frequent need to show identification, and the recent examples of voter fraud. As with many things in life, when someone opposes a commonsense solution to a problem the reason is because the problem benefits their interests. Luckily, there are those who are working to ensure fair elections, despite the opposition from the Left. That is a good thing for voter fraud ultimately redounds to no ones benefit, no matter ones political preference or persuasion.
How can one be considered poor without ID? If one’s identity is not known their fiscal situation would be less unknown [not sure less & unknown really go together].
I think that we should leave the dead people on the voter rolls but with a big D next to the name. (D is for Dead, not Democrat). If somebody shows up to vote for that person, they must prove that they are dead or they are then arrested.
We would have that problem solved in one election.
Ask these protesters, why, if they are SO upset about the cost/inconvenience to the poor, they do not take some of their substantial donations and provide a bus trip to the nearest station for them. Problem solved.
The Lefts main reason for opposing voter ID laws is because to obtain a photo ID you need to provide proof of residency/citizenship and your Social Security number.
They KNOW that this would cut off a huge stream of votes for Dem candidates.
Res ipsa loquitur.
I could be taking the whole thing out of context. Maybe they’re referring to poor Democrats who only want to cheat. How callous of us, attempting to deny them that basic human right.
The left’s main [real] reason for opposing photo ID is that they depend on fraudulent voters for a substantial portion of their voter total.
The author, and we also, for that matter, need to start referring to any argument that the left uses as “their surface argument” instead of giving actual legitimacy to their excuses for their real, underlying reasons.
Send Gov Scott an email showing your support
If the effect of the NVRA (Motor Voter) is to force a state to allow never-eligible non-citizens the opportunity to vote, he wrote, then the statute might violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution, which guarantees that the right to vote cannot be denied by a dilution of the weight of a citizens vote.
As for the Voting Rights Act claim, Detzner wrote, Florida already received federal permission to remove noncitizens, which is clearly spelled out in Florida law.
Whats more, the Voting Rights Act applies to only five Florida counties Monroe, Hillsborough, Collier, Hardee and Hendry and not the other 62 in Florida, including Miami-Dade, where about 1,600 of the 2,700 potential noncitizens were initially identified by the state in a database created by the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles.
About 500 people in Miami-Dade have been found to be lawful citizens and voters, and 13 noncitizens have been found. Two of them might have voted and could face prosecution. The county has been unable to verify the citizenship of more than 1,100 others.
Assuming the purge halts, those people could vote this year even if some are noncitizens.
"Not a single eligible voter as far, as I know, has been removed from the voter rolls," Scott said Wednesday on WNDB radio in Daytona Beach, according to a News Service of Florida transcript. "Not one. And were working to keep it that way."
"Their vote should not be diluted by people who dont have the right to vote," Scott said. "We need to be reviewing our voter rolls and making sure only those individuals who have the right to vote are voting."
This hardly seems like an approach earnestly designed to protect the integrity of elections and to ensure that eligible voters have their votes counted, said the letter, written by Scotts hand-picked secretary of state, Ken Detzner, a fellow Republican.
Detzner also submitted a list of four questions that he wants the DOJ to answer:
Some underclass men probably do not want the government to have their picture associated with their real name and social security number. With advances in facial recognition technology, and increased resolution of security cameras, it will be easier and easier to match a face from a security photo against a picture in the DMV database. And once they have that match, then they can look up relatives and their addresses, etc.
it’s also more difficult to get to a polling place if you don’t own a car than if you do own a car.
do rats believe we should buy everyone a car to vote,too?(of course not, we’ll build them all a train to get there!)
it’d be a real shame if liberals in those states went to vote... only to find someone had already voted for them early in the morning (and voted a straight conservative ticket)
maybe then the left would demand id checks
Rats? Oh I see, you mean Demonic rats. Is it considered an insult to shorten their real name like that?
You need id to register to vote. Why is it hard to show it again when you vote?
IMHO, that's the real agenda behind promoting voter fraud.
You need id to register to vote.
But do you need Photo ID or some other form of ID.