5 ms·

To be fair, paper ballots also have their problems, Kennedy likely won the election because of ballot stuffing. However, I think it weird that we oppose electro

To be fair, paper ballots also have their problems, Kennedy likely won the election because of ballot stuffing. However, I think it weird that we oppose electronic voting because of security concerns but similarly aligned groups oppose voter ID. If we cared about election integrity, we’d have a 100% photo ID requirement with facial recognition along with using election ink on a finger, along with tamperproor paper ballots. But I don’t think these groups actually care about election integrity — they simply seek to delegitimize election results for candidates and parties they don’t like. If their guy won, there wouldn’t be any challenge. Donna Curling (and her husband,) the lead plaintiff, has given over $48,000 to Democrat candidates, including contributing the maximum to David Scott — a congressman who, despite running unopposed in 2016, spent almost $1,000,000 in campaign funds on fancy DC restaurants and other nonsense — especially ridiculous since he ran unopposed. He literally just had to sit in a chair doing nothing and he would have won his election. But he managed to spend more money than many candidates in contested races. He may not have broken the law, but any reasonable person might have reason to believe that there is even more nonsense inside his tent. And yes, this is relevant because Scott, throughout his career has engaged in highly questionable and potentially illegal campaign activities. Scott is also a member of the highly corrupt Congressional Black Caucus who has featured a veritable rogue’s gallery of unethical at best, illegal at worst members: Corrine Brown (federal prison for fraud,) Chaka Farrah (convicted of 23 charges of racketeering and fraud,) Eddie Bernice Johnson ethics violations,) Maxine Waters (multiple ethics violations due to involvement with OneBank,) Alcee Hastings (impeached as a judge,) Sheila Jackson-Lee (Medicare fraud,) Charlie Rangel (tax evasion,) Gwen Moore (ethical violations.) David Scott also made the list of 25 most corrupt congressmen. And the lead plaintiff is a major fundraiser for Scott. If this Curling person actually cared about election integrity and ethics, then why would she significantly support one of the most corrupt congressmen in office? David Scott, incidentally opposes voter ID laws and yet one of his biggest supporters is worried about election machine hacking? While I am not a fan of electronic voting, this entire case seems designed to deligitimize the election. People like to cite that voter fraud isn’t a real problem, yet election machine hacking also hasn’t been a proven problem either. So if voter ID is unnecessary because “fraud doesn’t happen,” then hacking an election machine seems even more unlikely — there hasn’t been a single proven case that a voting machine has been hacked but there has been multiple occasions of voter fraud. If we were trying to prevent election irregularities, then a paper ballot along with strict voter ID seems completely reasonable; but the Donna Curlings of the country don’t care about that. They care only that their guy wins.

kss238 8y ago
Voter ID disenfranchises the poor, otherwise I don't think anyone would have an issue with voter id requirements.
- Aeolun 8y ago
  So make ID’s free, and then require voter ID :/ seems the solution is right there. I have a hard time imagining the US can’t bear the cost of printing a few hundred million ID’s.
  - SeanLuke 8y ago
    It's not cost. The US has a long tradition of viewing required national identification documents as a violation of individual liberties.
- briandear 8y ago
  But voter fraud disenfranchises everyone. Every single state has free ID programs. We have campaigns to help people get food stamps (which incidentally require ID,) but we can’t have similar programs to ensure everyone has ID? The idea that we can’t get ID for the poor is just ridiculous. Even illegal immigrants in California can get drivers licenses and they are far more marginalized than poor American citizens in terms of access to services. https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/3/15/14909764/study-voter-id-racism https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/3/15/14909764/study-vote...
  - techsupporter 8y ago
    If you can reliably ensure that every single citizen who is entitled to get an ID can do so with no impediments at all in all fifty states, every territory of the United States, and the District of Columbia, without cost or delay, then fine. As it stands, no one can ensure that. Getting a birth certificate, often a requirement for a "free ID," costs money, time, and administrative overhead. Sometimes it is virtually impossible for someone who was born in an "uncommon" way. Showing up in person, almost always a requirement for a "free ID," costs money, time, and logistical overhead. There are several states who oh-so-conveniently place enrollment centers for these IDs juuuuust outside the convenient reach of population centers whose citizens are more-likely-than-not to vote in the way that the incumbent politicians would prefer. Or the state pleads austerity and closes so many facilities that the wait just to enter one to request an ID is many hours. Or the delay in manufacturing the ID reaches near-infinity around common voting deadlines. And then you have the asinine lists of acceptable IDs. For several years, for example, Texas would not accept a student ID issued by a public college but would accept an expired law enforcement commission card issued by any city or county in the state. So someone may, inaccurately as it turns out, believe he or she has a "government-issued ID" when he or she actually doesn't have one that's acceptable for voting. And then you get into all of the other myriad edge cases that should not disqualify someone from acting as a citizen. Married women who changed their names. Married men who changed their names (because a man changing his name is "suspect"). Children who were adopted but still have old paperwork. Voter fraud is not a sufficiently large problem that it needs to be solved by throwing a 200-pound anvil of paperwork at preventing it. And it's not good enough to say that "most" people have a driver license or state ID or passport or something like that. Every citizen should be entitled to vote.

kss238 8y ago

Voter ID disenfranchises the poor, otherwise I don't think anyone would have an issue with voter id requirements.

Aeolun 8y ago
So make ID’s free, and then require voter ID :/ seems the solution is right there. I have a hard time imagining the US can’t bear the cost of printing a few hundred million ID’s.
- SeanLuke 8y ago
  It's not cost. The US has a long tradition of viewing required national identification documents as a violation of individual liberties.
briandear 8y ago
But voter fraud disenfranchises everyone. Every single state has free ID programs. We have campaigns to help people get food stamps (which incidentally require ID,) but we can’t have similar programs to ensure everyone has ID? The idea that we can’t get ID for the poor is just ridiculous. Even illegal immigrants in California can get drivers licenses and they are far more marginalized than poor American citizens in terms of access to services. https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/3/15/14909764/study-voter-id-racism https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/3/15/14909764/study-vote...
- techsupporter 8y ago
  If you can reliably ensure that every single citizen who is entitled to get an ID can do so with no impediments at all in all fifty states, every territory of the United States, and the District of Columbia, without cost or delay, then fine. As it stands, no one can ensure that. Getting a birth certificate, often a requirement for a "free ID," costs money, time, and administrative overhead. Sometimes it is virtually impossible for someone who was born in an "uncommon" way. Showing up in person, almost always a requirement for a "free ID," costs money, time, and logistical overhead. There are several states who oh-so-conveniently place enrollment centers for these IDs juuuuust outside the convenient reach of population centers whose citizens are more-likely-than-not to vote in the way that the incumbent politicians would prefer. Or the state pleads austerity and closes so many facilities that the wait just to enter one to request an ID is many hours. Or the delay in manufacturing the ID reaches near-infinity around common voting deadlines. And then you have the asinine lists of acceptable IDs. For several years, for example, Texas would not accept a student ID issued by a public college but would accept an expired law enforcement commission card issued by any city or county in the state. So someone may, inaccurately as it turns out, believe he or she has a "government-issued ID" when he or she actually doesn't have one that's acceptable for voting. And then you get into all of the other myriad edge cases that should not disqualify someone from acting as a citizen. Married women who changed their names. Married men who changed their names (because a man changing his name is "suspect"). Children who were adopted but still have old paperwork. Voter fraud is not a sufficiently large problem that it needs to be solved by throwing a 200-pound anvil of paperwork at preventing it. And it's not good enough to say that "most" people have a driver license or state ID or passport or something like that. Every citizen should be entitled to vote.