New Hampshire Voting Problem?

[Shadow Wolf]

If one person committed voter fraud (or blatantly broke any other law in plain sight and without repercussions) shouldn't we be concerned? Have we come to the point where our laws do not matter?

It's called perspective. Yes, those who do it should face the consequences, but oh my god it's no where nearly as bad as those on the right want to say it is. Case in point, a lady who went out to "prove how easy it is" getting a personal visit from the feds, at her job, for doing it. And we must also consider that it takes far more than a person here-and-there to sway the outcome of an election. All the mudslinging, lies, slander, and libel coming from the people we vote, their supporters, cable "news," and PACs/Super Pacs are a far greater taint on the democratic process than a person here-and-there committing voter fraud. Largely and mostly because it takes more than a person here-and-there to unfairly sway an election. Like I said earlier, even in a place with a small population it would take hundreds of counts of voter fraud to sway an election, and there is just no feasible or possible way to get away with it without raising a ton of red flags. Our extremely low voter turn out is a far greater threat to democracy than a handful of cases of voter fraud. The Electorial College is a far greater threat to the democratic election, and that has legitimately and legally thrown a few elections. It's like being concerned about a few mosquitoes when you have a cloud of locusts heading your way. Do remember, we the people elected Al Gore, not George Bush, in 2000 - a fault of the Supreme Court, who with just a few threw an election in a way that 1,000 cases of voter fraud cannot.

 

[LittlePinky82]

It's called perspective. Yes, those who do it should face the consequences, but oh my god it's no where nearly as bad as those on the right want to say it is. Case in point, a lady who went out to "prove how easy it is" getting a personal visit from the feds, at her job, for doing it. And we must also consider that it takes far more than a person here-and-there to sway the outcome of an election. All the mudslinging, lies, slander, and libel coming from the people we vote, their supporters, cable "news," and PACs/Super Pacs are a far greater taint on the democratic process than a person here-and-there committing voter fraud. Largely and mostly because it takes more than a person here-and-there to unfairly sway an election. Like I said earlier, even in a place with a small population it would take hundreds of counts of voter fraud to sway an election, and there is just no feasible or possible way to get away with it without raising a ton of red flags. Our extremely low voter turn out is a far greater threat to democracy than a handful of cases of voter fraud. The Electorial College is a far greater threat to the democratic election, and that has legitimately and legally thrown a few elections. It's like being concerned about a few mosquitoes when you have a cloud of locusts heading your way. Do remember, we the people elected Al Gore, not George Bush, in 2000 - a fault of the Supreme Court, who with just a few threw an election in a way that 1,000 cases of voter fraud cannot.

Here's two good links about it-

http://www.usnews.com/debate-club/is-voter-fraud-a-real-problem

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/11/upshot/vote-fraud-is-rare-but-myth-is-widespread.html?_r=0

 

[Underhill]

So how much voter fraud are you willing to overlook; especially if it is not in favor or your candidate?

How much time and money should we spend combating a problem that doesn't exist?

The entire idea of illegals trying to vote is absurd. They have virtually no reason to and a whole host of reasons not to.

 

[Underhill]

If one person committed voter fraud (or blatantly broke any other law in plain sight and without repercussions) shouldn't we be concerned? Have we come to the point where our laws do not matter?

Who is to say we don't? As someone else pointed out, people have been caught, just in minuscule numbers. Like the women who tried to 'prove' how easy it was to commit fraud and was busted by the feds....

 

[BSM1]

How much time and money should we spend combating a problem that doesn't exist?

The entire idea of illegals trying to vote is absurd. They have virtually no reason to and a whole host of reasons not to.

Who is to say we don't? As someone else pointed out, people have been caught, just in minuscule numbers. Like the women who tried to 'prove' how easy it was to commit fraud and was busted by the feds....

So should we overlook serial killers simply because there aren't that many of them? A law is a law and we are a nation of laws; once we start ignoring law-breakers we all have lost.

 

[Revoltingest]

How much time and money should we spend combating a problem that doesn't exist?

How do we know this?
Voter fraud has been a problem before.
Chicago voters become quite active after death.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1960

The entire idea of illegals trying to vote is absurd. They have virtually no reason to and a whole host of reasons not to.

Wouldn't illegals have as much reason to vote as I do?
After all, they live here too, & would like to see government reflect their wishes.

Btw, I speculate that it's not a big problem.
But neither should it be swept under the rug.

 

[Underhill]

So should we overlook serial killers simply because there aren't that many of them? A law is a law and we are a nation of laws; once we start ignoring law-breakers we all have lost.

That's stupid. Serial killer vs a person voting illegally. Clearly they should be treated the same. *rolls eyes.

We have a system in place that works. Spending tens of millions on a problem that is so small as to have no impact on anything... it's pointless.

"There have been only a small number of fraud cases resulting in a conviction. A New York Times analysis from 2007 identified 120 cases filed by the Justice Department over five years. These cases, many of which stemmed from mistakenly filled registration forms or misunderstanding over voter eligibility, resulted in 86 convictions.

There are “very few documented cases,” said UC-Irvine professor and election law specialist Rick Hasen. “When you do see election fraud, it invariably involves election officials taking steps to change election results or it involves absentee ballots which voter ID laws can’t prevent,” he said."

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-kno...ver-wanted-to-know-about-voter-id-laws/14358/

And all of this ignores the bigger problem created by such laws.

 

[Underhill]

How do we know this?
Voter fraud has been a problem before.
Chicago voters become quite active after death.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1960

Wouldn't illegals have as much reason to vote as I do?
After all, they live here too, & would like to see government reflect their wishes.

Btw, I speculate that it's not a big problem.
But neither should it be swept under the rug.

So you agree it isn't a big problem but think we should spend money and time on it.

It's a simple matter of cost and benefit. The cost, voters kept from the polls, slow downs at the polls, the monetary cost of making sure every polling place has the staff to enforce the law. The benefit, eliminate a problem that statistically makes no difference.

Add in the fact that the last 3 studies done on voter fraud found that most fraud happens among either absentee voters or the volunteer staff working the polls. Neither of which would be helped by ID laws. So dontcha think, if fraud prevention was the real goal, that we would be dealing with those two areas?

 

[Revoltingest]

So you agree it isn't a big problem but think we should spend money and time on it.

Yes.
The only voter fraud can be prevented from becoming a big problem is to quash it wherever it appears.

It's a simple matter of cost and benefit. The cost, voters kept from the polls, slow downs at the polls, the monetary cost of making sure every polling place has the staff to enforce the law. The benefit, eliminate a problem that statistically makes no difference.

You're introducing quantitative issues, but without numbers.
The questions.....
1) What steps to take?
2) How much money to spend?

Add in the fact that the last 3 studies done on voter fraud found that most fraud happens among either absentee voters or the volunteer staff working the polls. Neither of which would be helped by ID laws. So dontcha think, if fraud prevention was the real goal, that we would be dealing with those two areas?

It's so simple.
Address all areas of fraud.
This has been done in the past.
Why stop with the singular aspect of illegal alien voter fraud?

 

[BSM1]

That's stupid. Serial killer vs a person voting illegally. Clearly they should be treated the same. *rolls eyes.

We have a system in place that works. Spending tens of millions on a problem that is so small as to have no impact on anything... it's pointless.

"There have been only a small number of fraud cases resulting in a conviction. A New York Times analysis from 2007 identified 120 cases filed by the Justice Department over five years. These cases, many of which stemmed from mistakenly filled registration forms or misunderstanding over voter eligibility, resulted in 86 convictions.

There are “very few documented cases,” said UC-Irvine professor and election law specialist Rick Hasen. “When you do see election fraud, it invariably involves election officials taking steps to change election results or it involves absentee ballots which voter ID laws can’t prevent,” he said."

http://www.pbs.org/wnet/need-to-kno...ver-wanted-to-know-about-voter-id-laws/14358/

And all of this ignores the bigger problem created by such laws.

You might be right, that may be stupid. But on the other hand I've never had a serial killer directly effect my life or the lives on anyone I know, so why should my taxes be wasted on prosecuting these types?

 

[Underhill]

How do we know this?
Voter fraud has been a problem before.
Chicago voters become quite active after death.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1960

Wouldn't illegals have as much reason to vote as I do?
After all, they live here too, & would like to see government reflect their wishes.

Btw, I speculate that it's not a big problem.
But neither should it be swept under the rug.

Yes.
The only voter fraud can be prevented from becoming a big problem is to quash it wherever it appears.

You're introducing quantitative issues, but without numbers.

I actually have introduced numbers (with a link), just not directed at you. One of the best studies I found said they found 120 cases of voter fraud from 2002-2007 and that most of these involved absentee ballots and volunteers working the polls.

The questions.....
1) What steps to take?
2) How much money to spend?

It's so simple.
Address all areas of fraud.
This has been done in the past.
Why stop with the singular aspect of illegal alien voter fraud?

I'm not saying stop. I'm saying I have found no evidence of the problem existing.

Has it ever happened? Probably. It's a big country. But when the number of confirmed cases can be counted on one hand, I think it is fair to say the problem does not exist.

As for the other aspects, I think those are relatively small numbers too, but larger than the "illegal" issue. But they get no press by the same people up in arms over the illegal voter 'problem'.

That tells me their motives are less about legitimizing the vote and more about tailoring the vote.

 

[Revoltingest]

I actually have introduced numbers (with a link), just not directed at you. One of the best studies I found said they found 120 cases of voter fraud from 2002-2007 and that most of these involved absentee ballots and volunteers working the polls.

We should note that this is just what was found.

I'm not saying stop. I'm saying I have found no evidence of the problem existing.
Has it ever happened? Probably. It's a big country. But when the number of confirmed cases can be counted on one hand, I think it is fair to say the problem does not exist.
As for the other aspects, I think those are relatively small numbers too, but larger than the "illegal" issue. But they get no press by the same people up in arms over the illegal voter 'problem'.

I also see people getting "up in arms" in opposing even basic identification.
All I advocate is doing what is reasonable.

That tells me their motives are less about legitimizing the vote and more about tailoring the vote.

I can see that Dems would want illegal votes, & Pubs wouldn't.
It makes sense that each takes the side which benefits them.

 

[esmith]

Ok, the question of time and money being spent of curtailing voter fraud has be brought forward. Very simple solution, make everyone voting abide by the same identification rules for boarding an airline. All states must comply with the new federal guidelines, It is called Real ID and it went into effect this year.. What's your excuses now?

 

[Underhill]

Ok, the question of time and money being spent of curtailing voter fraud has be brought forward. Very simple solution, make everyone voting abide by the same identification rules for boarding an airline. All states must comply with the new federal guidelines, It is called Real ID and it went into effect this year.. What's your excuses now?

The same article I posted earlier said 10% of people don't have ID. They could get some. But why should a person in their retirement years have to go out and get an ID to vote to allay fears about something we have no evidence is even happening?

 

[Underhill]

We should note that this is just what was found.

I also see people getting "up in arms" in opposing even basic identification.
All I advocate is doing what is reasonable.

I can see that Dems would want illegal votes, & Pubs wouldn't.
It makes sense that each takes the side which benefits them.

Why would democrats want illegal votes more than republicans? And why would illegals vote for them? You are quick to forget that it wasn't that long ago that Republicans were talking about amnesty for illegals.

You also fail to recognize that if the majority of voter fraud is committed with absentee ballots, there is no reason to suspect democrats are any more culpable than republicans.

I think there is a shred of truth in what you are saying. Republicans want to keep the low wage people who can't afford to run out and get an ID, who often don't own a car and have no reason to get a license, from voting. But that isn't a very American view for them to acknowledge in public.

 

[Revoltingest]

Why would democrats want illegal votes more than republicans? And why would illegals vote for them? You are quick to forget that it wasn't that long ago that Republicans were talking about amnesty for illegals.

Each party guestimates how this demographic will vote.
The Dems promise more than the Pubs (generally).

You also fail to recognize that if the majority of voter fraud is committed with absentee ballots, there is no reason to suspect democrats are any more culpable than republicans.

The fact that I didn't bring up that aspect doesn't mean I'm unaware.
But there's a problem with voter fraud, ie, what is easiest to measure isn't necessarily what is significant.
Voter fraud is extremely difficult to accurately measure.....because it's fraudulent & hidden, of course.

I think there is a shred of truth in what you are saying. Republicans want to keep the low wage people who can't afford to run out and get an ID, who often don't own a car and have no reason to get a license, from voting. But that isn't a very American view for them to acknowledge in public.

The speculation about Pub motives is no more valid than saying the Dems want illegals to commit fraud.

 

[esmith]

The same article I posted earlier said 10% of people don't have ID. They could get some. But why should a person in their retirement years have to go out and get an ID to vote to allay fears about something we have no evidence is even happening?

Do they have to get a picture ID to cash a check? If they are retired, do they get Social Security? If they did they had to have valid ID to apply. Do, they cash their Social Security Check? If they do, they have to have picture ID. Do they have it direct deposited? If they do how do they get their money out of the bank without picture ID. Are they on Welfare? If they are how do they cash their Welfare Check? What is your problem with requiring picture ID, other than the liberal rhetoric that it is too hard for the poor to get ID. I throwing the bull**** card on this on. If they can go vote then they can go get the correct ID.

 

[Underhill]

Each party guestimates how this demographic will vote.
The Dems promise more than the Pubs (generally).

Right, and absentee voters tend to be older and white. So want to hazard a guess as to why Republicans focus on voter ID at the polls?

The fact that I didn't bring up that aspect doesn't mean I'm unaware.
But there's a problem with voter fraud, ie, what is easiest to measure isn't necessarily what is significant.
Voter fraud is extremely difficult to accurately measure.....because it's fraudulent & hidden, of course.

Sure, except that for it to be effective, it has to happen a lot in a single district. If it was widespread we would find example of that. Instead we see a pattern of very small numbers of people acting alone in their home districts.

The speculation about Pub motives is no more valid than saying the Dems want illegals to commit fraud.

Sure it is. And I am not even close to the only one to say so.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/article/why-voter-id-laws-arent-really-about-fraud/

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct...sfUIIy9Vg&sig2=UCZ6Jj2N_h5v6cbXohqPJA&cad=rja

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...onnect-between-voter-id-laws-and-voter-fraud/

PBS, Columbia Law Review and the Washington Post. I'm in pretty good company.

 

[Underhill]

Do they have to get a picture ID to cash a check? If they are retired, do they get Social Security? If they did they had to have valid ID to apply. Do, they cash their Social Security Check? If they do, they have to have picture ID. Do they have it direct deposited? If they do how do they get their money out of the bank without picture ID. Are they on Welfare? If they are how do they cash their Welfare Check? What is your problem with requiring picture ID, other than the liberal rhetoric that it is too hard for the poor to get ID. I throwing the bull**** card on this on. If they can go vote then they can go get the correct ID.

Okay, then explain to me why republicans talk the talk when it comes to voter ID at the polls but when it comes to absentee ballots, where everyone who knows anything says the majority of the problem is, they do nothing.

 

[freethinker44]

So should we overlook serial killers simply because there aren't that many of them? A law is a law and we are a nation of laws; once we start ignoring law-breakers we all have lost.

We ignore laws all the time. Laws are important to a society functioning well, but so is discretion in enforcing those laws. You, know, jaywalking is a crime, but should we station a police officer at every crosswalk in the US 24/7? No, that's ridiculous. Because the effect that breaking the law has on society isn't enough to warrant that kind of enforcement. And there are some situations where enforcing certain laws cause more harm than breaking them.

So we have to ask ourselves, while it is wrong and should be prosectued, is voter fraud a big enough problem that the damage created by policing it is more acceptable than the damage it creates itself? And I don't believe it is. We should prosecute those found committing voter fraud, but I don't think it's a big enough problem to actively police.