Saturday, July 7, 2012

Analysis of Pennsylvania Voter ID Law Shows Scope of Voter Suppression

Ten days ago The O’Zone pointed out that the true goal of nationwide Republican efforts to enact voter ID laws were not what was claimed.

In that article we ran a video of the Pennsylvania House Majority Leader Mike Turzai (R-Allegheny) proudly proclaiming that the state’s new voter ID law would ensure a victory for Mitt Romney in Pennsylvania.

We immediately received pushback that these were “common sense” laws designed to prevent voter fraud. 

Never mind that we have cited numerous studies by non-partisan groups such as The Brennan Center for Justice at NYU or The League of Women Voters showing that the incidence of voter fraud is miniscule.

Now, however, a report by the Philadelphia Enquirer shows that this law in Pennsylvania amounts to using a tactical nuclear weapon to eliminate a mosquito. And there is strong evidence that the Republican administration deliberately misstated the impact of the law to facilitate its passage.

The article states,

“More than 758,000 registered voters in Pennsylvania do not have photo identification cards from the state Transportation Department, putting their voting rights at risk in the November election, according to data released Tuesday by state election officials.

“The figures - representing 9.2 percent of the state's 8.2 million voters - are significantly higher than prior estimates by the Corbett administration. Secretary of the Commonwealth Carol Aichele has repeatedly said that 99 percent of Pennsylvania's voters already had the photo ID they will need at the polls in November.

“The new numbers, based on a comparison of voter registration rolls with PennDot ID databases, shows the potential problem is much bigger, particularly in Philadelphia, where 186,830 registered voters - 18 percent of the city's total registration - do not have PennDot ID.”


  1. Does Maddy Doust do this check? This happened with a MA voter so she should! Yeah I know everyone is so comfortable saying "but it doesn't happen here" that is until they find out that it does.

    1. Somehow I don't find the uncritical conclusions reached by as partisan a source as Breitbart anywhere near as persuasive as those of recognized nonpartisan observers and professionals with decades of experience such as The Brennan Center.

    2. whew, so glad you didn't include the league of woman voters in that diatribe. How about the observations and and professionalism of Paul Bergeron, the city clerk of Nashua, N.H ?
      In 2004, Bergeron told The Union Leader that he occasionally catches Massachusetts residents using mailbox addresses to avoid higher car taxes and accidentally registering to vote.

      "Most of the time, we find it's just an honest mistake," he told the Union Leader. "We would send a letter to that address, telling them they need to update their voter registration address and provide us with the actual residence. If they fail to do that, we would bring that information to the board of registrars the next time they hold a meeting, and request those names not be put on the checklist."
      That was most of the time what about the least of the time?

      Given how easily Bergeron caught address fraud in Massachusetts. it seems that Bergeron is upset that The Okeefe videos show he was caught not doing his job of purging the voter lists like the good little democrat that Bergeron is.

    3. How many of these anecdotal reports have resulted in legal prosecution?
      Do unproven claims in the tens or even hundreds justify disenfranchising thousands, tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands or potentially millions based on astroturfed paranoia?

    4. wow that response reeks of "Accuse others of what you do." - Karl Marx.

      When a guy like Ed Shultz [an MSNBC host] angrily tells his viewers that if he lived in Massachusetts he'd vote 10 times to keep those bastards [Republicans] from winning and then apologizes and says he meant to say 20 times.

      in November 2008, the New Black Panthers perpetrated voter intimidation with impunity and the Democrat-run U.S. Justice Department failed to investigate those allegations allowing it to go unpunished.

      This is the equivalent of investigations in Southbridge as to leaking executive meeting minutes, grade tampering, food service theft, and rave drug sales.

      Proof positive that Investigations don't always reveal the truth they just reveal the facts that certain authorities only want to be revealed.

    5. discount briebart if you must but this was done by NBC2 in southwest Florida that interviewed some of those 100 noncitizens who have voted.

      It would have been nice if the reporter,Pierrotti, had told viewers what the error rate was, i.e., how many jury excusal forms did it take before they got to nearly 100 ineligible voters. 200? 500? 1,000? It would also be nice to know what percentage of registered voters are called for jury duty in any given year, because the chances that there are non-citizens voting who have never been called for jury duty would appear to be quite high, and might possibly be a multiple of the number who were caught through excusal forms.

    6. @ Anonymous 1:28,

      Democrat-run Judicial system? Are you really basing that on actions of some people and the lack of investigation from the Supreme Court? I'm sure you realize that cases don't automatically rise to the Federal Supreme court.

      Did you forget about the court's Citizens United ruling? Just because your baby John Roberts voted with the liberals doesn't automatically mean the Justice Department is corrupt. If Democrats played that card every time there was a ruling against their favor, you would see 10 times as many cry-babies as you Republicans seem to have. Don't be such a sore loser.

  2. It is staggering the extent to which those who proclaim their devotion to individual liberty foster laws related to citizenship, voting or women's control over their own bodies. It is sadly reminiscent of a time long ago and far away when the expression "show me your papers" was all too familiar.

    1. In this nation of immigrants we have prejudices against immigrants. I would say about half of this nation are hypocrites.

  3. Excuse me we are talking about the intrigrity of voting and no other distraction because you can no longer say there is no Voter fraud in MA.

    BTW- Bergeron supports same-day registration. One election year, Nashua registered over 3900 new voters in just one day. There were anecdotal reports of voters being bussed in from local states. In Nashua, you can use an out of state voter I.D. when you register to vote and even just citizenship documents. (Mark Hayward, “Thousands in NH Register, Vote at Same Time; Inquiry Reveals Some Weak Leaks in Six-Year-Old System,” The Union Leader, December 13, 2000).

    1. No need to change the subject.
      Show me how many cases of voter fraud conviction you have for MA or anywhere else.
      All you can quote are unproven allegations and vague suspicions.
      Hardly a basis to deprive whole groups of people of a fundamental right - unless you have other motives.

    2. Let me give you a heads up. A survey by the Republican National Lawyers Association found 312 convictions in 46 states between 1998 and November 2011. Their later additions for 2012 are not included because they lump together accusations and indictments as well as convictions.

    3. Not to drift off topic Ken, but I see the same lack of investigation and prosecution around welfare abuse, even though Republicans claim that 43% of food stamp recipients are illegal immigrants.

  4. Ken this will be my first time that I vote in Florida. I have been told to make sure that we bring some type of photo ID. I already showed proof of resident when we first moved. I will let you know the out come. Have a good one

  5. The reason why anyone would be interested in 186k voters in Philadelphia is because Pennsylvania may well be this year's 'Florida,' that is, the state that not only is going to be #1 swing state but also will be just that close, and those 186k voters that may or may not live in Philadelphia the rest of the time are going to be voting about 90% to 100% for Obama, and asking them all to prove they actually live there the rest of the time would probably be good medicine against voter fraud.

    Just sayin...

    1. Or maybe they'd be interested in Philadelphia because the author works for The Philadelphia Enquirer.

  6. Research commissioned by the Pew Center on the States highlights:

    * Approximately 24 million— (1) of every (8)—voter registrations in the U.S. are no longer valid or are significantly inaccurate.

    * More than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters.

    * Approx. 2.75 million people have registrations in more than one state.

    Researchers est. at least 51 million eligible U.S. citizens are unregistered, or more than 24% of the eligible population.

    One reason for these problems is that many of us are unlikely to live in one voting precinct all our lives:

    * About (1) in (8) Americans moved during the 2008 and 2010 election years.

    * Some Americans—including those serving in the military, young people, and those living in communities affected by the economic downturn—are even more transient.

    At a time when government budgets are significantly strained, our antiquated paper-based system remains costly and inefficient:

    * The mistakes are costing taxpayers a pretty penny. Using Oregon as a case study, Pew found that the state spent more than $8.8 million on voter registration, or $4.11 per active voter registered, during the 2008 election.

    * In contrast, Canada, which has adopted digital registration technologies, spends just 35 cents per voter nationwide.

    1. Thanks, but none of that data has any direct bearing on incidents of actual voter fraud.

    2. That’s so true but since “Massive Voter Fraud” is supposed to have been perpetuated by illegal immigrants I found the data & website interesting.

      Needless to say; according to Illegal Immigration Statistics:

      “Only (24) people in the whole of the United States have been convicted of voter fraud from 2002 to 2005. The incidence of voter fraud is roughly the same as that of people dying from lighting strikes.”

    3. I concur wholeheartedly.
      The fact is borne out by the data I cited above from the Republican National Lawyers Association.

    4. People are dying from "lighting strikes"?

    5. Aside from your juvenile criticism of a spelling error, here are the facts.

      The National Weather Service publication Storm Data recorded a total of 449 deaths from lightning strikes between 1998 and 2008. According to the National Weather Service, lightning causes an average of 62 deaths and 300 injuries in the United States each year.

      On the other hand the data from the National Republican Lawyers Association shows an average number of voter fraud convictions between 1998 and 2011 of 24 per year.

    6. It wasn't juvenile criticism: it was just a joke. As they said in Stripes, "lighten up, Francis". Were the 449 deaths all voters who voted after struck? Another shot at humor. Seriously, I would like to know of those 24 per year that are convicted of voter fraud what the total number of fraudulent votes are? Granted, one can argue it doesn't matter, because one fraudulent vote is wrong, but are we talking big numbers, or is it something that is a handful of votes impacted? If the former, it's an issue. If the latter, it's a nuisance, but it goes to show that people do get caught, regardless of the size. The New Black Panther Party, however, is not one of those, and I don't think you would argue that that situation was anything but obvious fraud?

    7. I didn't see you jump in when Anonymous 12:25 misspelled integrity - or maybe that was you?

      It's so hard to keep all you anonymous posters straight!

      As regards the size of the votes involved it is insignificant compared to the good people who would be disenfranchised.

      As regards the New Black Panther Party, see my comment below.

  7. Here’s another problem in Mississippi.
    “Here's a bit of a problem for Mississippi voters. If you don't have acceptable photo identification to vote, you have to have your birth certificate to get a voter ID. But you can't get your birth certificate unless you have photo identification. This is apparently a problem that state officials were well aware of, but not really doing anything about.
    Pamela Weaver, spokeswoman of the Mississippi Secretary of State's office, today confirmed the catch-22 problem, which the Jackson Free Press learned about from a complaint posted on Facebook. One of the requirements to get the free voter ID cards is a birth certificate, but in order to receive a certified copy of your birth certificate in Mississippi, you must have a photo ID. Not having the photo ID is why most people need the voter ID in the first place.”

    1. Banks require a Photo ID w/a valid date. An expired License/Passport/ID Card are considered null and void.

    2. Two points:
      First, cashing a check is not a fundamental right in a democracy; and
      Second, that's only been my experience where I don't have an account into which I can deposit the check.

    3. Or a notarial act.

  8. I return to my original point.

    The supporters of these laws are using rumor and unfounded paranoia without basis in fact to justify swatting a mosquito with a tactical nuclear weapon.

    It is entirely about suppressing a class of voters who lean Democratic, not about any demonstrable need to protect the integrity of the voting process.

    1. I just saw this after submitting another reply. I hope that you would agree that this is not limited to just one party, since, the New Black Panther Party's intimidation was, well: let's just say that they weren't quite aligned with the New Republican Party. Would you agree with that?

    2. You're running out of material.

      Now we're down to the "New Black Panther Party" which was shown to consist of less than a half dozen people. Further, not one person came forward willing to testify that they had been prevented from voting by this, another Fox News manufactured scandal.

    3. That's one quarter of your 24 per year. So they don't count because they were backing Obama? Don't be a hypocrite! Talking points from the left are as bad from the right when both can't see that both are doing it--or no one is. Stop being so one dimensional.

    4. "All views are welcome" -- Ken O'Brien.

      Apparently not. Only those of a Left wing Liberal who's thin skinned and a partisan hack. No wonder people say you're losing it. I won't be back. You're slogan is fake like you.

    5. Your views, as unenlightened as they are, were published.
      Because all views are welcome does not mean I'm obligated to agree with them.
      You will not be missed, although we'll never know if you come back since you lack the courage to use a name.

    6. I'm going to also become a former reader today. I assume I will also not be missed, but that's alright. When I first started reading your column, I thought, here's a smart guy who treats people with respect. Watching your thread with this recent anonymous person has soured me. When a person tells you they're joking and you treat them with increasing disrespect you lose credibility. When you turn a blind eye to six people in a group who intimidated, blatantly, voters in the last election, a very fair and logical argument by the way, and call someone unenlightened for stating the obvious, your credibility and respect levels go down. You owe that person and others you've insulted recently, an apology. Either you're better than the way you've treated people recently, or you're not. If not, why not just tell people and get it out in the open. Finally,I wish you were consistent and criticized all who don't use a name. Why don't you just refuse to publish without a name? That would end this particular insult; it would probably end your comments as well. - Dave

    7. How do I owe an apology to someone who can't distinguish between supposed voter intimidation (which was never shown to have actually occurred) and voter fraud?

      Clearly that's unenlightened.

      If my frustration with putting forward verifiable facts in the face of little more than rumor and innuendo without substantiation or illogical non-sequiturs, is not acceptable so be it.

      You're just one more who apparently has had your beliefs challenged and when unable to respond with anything informative responds by putting your fingers in your ears and chanting, while resorting to attempting to discredit the source of information you don't want to hear or believe.

    8. Ken's conduct has been far more restrained than that of many of the comments insulting him.

    9. Cathy, on some of his posts, like the McDonald one I would agree with you, but not on this issue. Myself and someone else have both TRIED, and I mean tried, to offer varying opinions, but apparently if it doesn't attack Republicans he quickly dismisses both of us. I have not insulted him once and your comment seems to be trying to deflect that.

      If Mr. O'Brien refuses to weigh in with an opinion he should run for Town Council, since very few of the people that ran this year would take a stand either, except for one or two people. Why can't he just acknowledge that he agrees or disagrees with the intimidation by the New Black Panther party in Philadelphia during the last presidential election?

      If as a white skinned person I went to the polls in Philadelphia wearing a Klan outfit and carrying a baton would you say that's not voter intimidation? My answer would be of course, that's ludicrous.

      Here's the two videos. You watch and decide. But I would greatly appreciate it if Mr. O'Brien would please comment, either way on the issue, and I'll respect what he says, and go away. That's all I was asking.

      If possible, sir, would you be able to put the actual videos and not the links up? They don't show up as hotlines for me and I know how to copy and paste them, but some others may not:

      I agree that voter fraud is unacceptable--regardless of who does it.

      - Dave

    10. First, I can't put up the videos within comments.
      I have provided the following hot links:



      As intimidating as these videos may appear to be, not one person came forward to testify that they had been intimidated not to vote.

      In addition, what does this have to do in any way with the issue of voter fraud? Voter ID laws would do nothing to affect this issue.

      It is a diversion from the matter under discussion that is intended to be inflammatory but it has no bearing on the merits of voter ID laws.

    11. The video in itself is not proof of a crime.
      Take a look at the case of Andrew Breitbart and Shirley Sherrod.
      Take a look at James O’Keefe’s “pimp” report that subsequently found that one of the ACORN officials who “played along” called the police immediately after O’Keefe left.
      Without someone willing to testify that they were intimidated not to vote all we have is a video that could not stand up in a court of law as a prima facie case.

    12. Fed Up-----
      You say you posted several times before. Clearly that was as “Anonymous” since you only used “Fed Up” recently. How was Ken supposed to know if you were among those who insulted him or not? If anyone is attempting to deflect it’s not Ken.
      P.S. Welcome back after your “absence”!

    13. Sorry Kathy, but today was the first, and last time I have posted and never will.

  9. It only takes one illegal vote to sour a whole election so the ultimate number doesn't matter.
    Locally Chernisky beat Obrien by one vote, Durant vs Alicea was also a close one. Each votes counts but there has to be some way to validate who it is thats voting. Photo ID is best!
    In Denver one can vote with a utility bill as proof of address but they can not get a Denver Public library card with the same utility bill. The right of voting should be given a higher standard than a library card. In Ma we have no standard at all but the honor system with no checks or balances for the dishonest.

    1. First, in neither case was there any proof of voter fraud.

      We're talking about laws that, as a result of an average of 24 cases per year nationwide, would disenfranchise over 86,000 people in one city.

      If you feel that is acceptable then quite bluntly, you need your head examined - or the desperation of your true motives should be exposed.

    2. true no proof of voter fraud but election fraud is suspected by many. Funny both close election had the same box security issues.

    3. You're conflating voter fraud with election fraud. Voter ID's have absolutely no bearing on the latter.

    4. The video isn't proof? Drink your Kool Aid. You are a closed minded jerk.

    5. See my post below, Anonymous 10:20, about Woburn and their annual street address verification.

  10. It's gotten down to the old lawyer's adage.

    If the law is on your side, fight for the law.

    If the facts are on your side, fight for the facts.

    If neither the law nor the facts are on your side, bang on the table and demand "justice".

    Please, quit banging on the table and admit the truth - this is all a scheme to steal another election.

    1. no it's gotten down a democrat defending the democrat platform of standing in the way of voter id. Let me remind you of jimmy carters work with James Baker on the Commission on Federal Election Reform. a section of that report reads The November 2004 elections also showed that irregularities and fraud still occur. In Washington, the elections superintendent of King County testified during a subsequent unsuccessful election challenge that ineligible ex-felons had voted and that votes had been cast in the names of the dead. However, the judge accepted Gregoire’s victory because with the exception of four ex-felons who admitted to voting for Dino Rossi, the authorities could not determine for whom the other illegal votes were cast. In Milwaukee, Wisconsin, investigators said they found clear evidence of fraud, including more than . Moreover, 200 cases of felons voting illegally and more than 100 people who voted twice, used fake names or false addresses, or voted in the name of a dead personthere were 4,500 more votes cast than voters listed.3 One potential source of election fraud arises from inactive or ineligible voters left on voter registration lists. By one estimate, for example, there were over 181,000 dead people listed on the voter rolls in six swing states in the November 2004 elections, including almost 65,000 dead people listed on the voter rolls in Florida.

      24 you say and I Laugh hysterically! read that again president jimmy carter and sec of state James Baker report again - it's alot more than your 24 - 200 cases of felons voting illegally and more than 100 people who voted twice, used fake names or false addresses, or voted in the name of a dead person.
      oh yes the liberal link of support -

    2. So the four provable cases were all for the Republican candidate.
      Do you want to make the logical extension as to for whom the majority of any remaining unproven fraudulent votes were for?

    3. The point is that, if there were any organized attempt at voter fraud how hard would it be to provide participants with passable phony ID's?

      Do you really think that your average poll worker is capable of distinguishing forgeries from the real thing?

      Again, such laws will only discriminate against a large number who simply don't have such ID's and the impediments imposed by requiring them amounts to little more than a hidden poll tax - an archaic and illegal practice.

    4. As regards the supposed incidents of the dead voting, that is more directly a result of authorities' failure to properly maintain records. Why should the public be penalized for such failures?

    5. In 2008 in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board, the US Supreme Court handed down a key decision upholding the photo ID requirement in Indiana. Sure, wrote Justice John Paul Stevens for the majority, the law might have been motivated in part by Republican "partisan interest." But so long as its goals were supported by "valid neutral justifications," it was constitutional.

      However, the opinion went on to note, "The record contains no evidence of any such fraud actually occurring in Indiana at any time in its history."

    6. IF?? IF there were any organized attempt at voter fraud ?

      it's ok its from CNN and not Fox news so you'll be at least inclined to watch it.

    7. First, you are making a mistake others keep making. You are conflating registration fraud with voter fraud. They are not the same thing. Just because someone turns in a bunch of phony registrations to collect a bounty, it does not mean that any of those fabricated registrants will turn up to vote.
      Second, the courts have subsequently decided that ACORN had not been proven to have violated the law and therefore could not be deprived of Federal funds.

    8. this is beginning to sound like jeopardy -

      Who is : senior ACORN executives Amy Adele Busefink and Christopher Howell Edwards.

      Thats right ANON - Both were convicted of providing cash bonuses to voter-registration canvassers for exceeding daily registration quotas. Resulting in ACORN pleading guilty to unlawful “compensation” for registration of voters, a felony under Nevada law.

      other categories - Racketeering

      In 2011 Last year, ACORN settled a racketeering lawsuit in Ohio out of court and agreed to leave the state.

      When An aggressive organization like acorn settles and agrees to leave a state stopping all of its activity there - YIKES!

      Another Category - Voter FRAUD -AKA the Chicago Way

      In 2008, Indiana poll workers discovered 5000 fake registration forms.

      In 2007, ACORN settled the largest case of voter fraud in the history of Washington State after seven workers were caught submitting about 2,000 fake registration forms.

      simple equations - you control the number allowed to vote and like in Chicago over the decades the dead vote, the newly fake registered vote too.
      the mistake you make is not admitting that registration fraud is a part of voter fraud.

      When you have people like eric holder and BOH (Browser Hijack OBJECT) in Office they will never be deprived of federal funds. That doesn't mean that they shouldn't be!

    9. Again, that wasn't VOTER fraud, it was registration fraud.
      How would a voter ID law have prevented it?

    10. to get through a door you have to open it.

      we all know that if you don't check the credentials of those "utilty" people coming to your home you can let in thieves.
      It is why all real utilty workers carry ID's from there employment. It is why PSA say to check IDs before letting someone into your home and it should be the same for voting.

    11. Hats off to you, Ken, for even having the motivation to try to set these knuckleheads straight.

  11. Until today I thought that these laws made sense, but now I see whats really going on. Thanks Ken. Facts do matter.

  12. In Illinois, you don't need valid photo identification to vote on Election Day. Just show up and provide a signature that remotely resembles the one in the registration book — a system that invites fraud. Only when you vote early must you provide a voter ID in Illinois.

    So if it is reasonable to require a photo ID when voting early, why isn't it reasonable to require one on Election Day?

    At least two dozen states, including Wisconsin and Indiana, require Election Day IDs, and those laws often are enacted with bipartisan support. But not in Illinois, where such legislation (usually introduced by Republicans) doesn't see the light of day, buried in Democratic-controlled committees.

    When it comes down to it, a degrading assumption underlies liberal opposition to voter IDs and the updating of registration rolls. It is the assumption that minorities, the poor and even students are incapable of meeting minimal voting requirements.

    1. "When it comes down to it, a degrading assumption underlies liberal opposition to voter IDs and the updating of registration rolls. It is the assumption that minorities, the poor and even students are incapable of meeting minimal voting requirements."

      It's not a "degrading assumption" - it's a proven fact. It's correlated with levels of disposable income, need or ability to drive, extended residency requirements that deisenfanchise out of state students and, as demonstrated in the Mississippi case cited above, a deliberate catch 22.

    2. It's idiotic to say that if a signature matches a registration book that it invites fraud. What will happen? Is some guy going to learn the names of thousands of people, plus acquire calligraphic skills to forge thousands of signature, then have the energy and enough fake mustaches so he doesn't get caught? To have an impact to swing a election, you would have to forge thousands of signatures, or have thousands of people agree to fraud at the booth, which would inevitably end in someone spilling the beans to the cops.

      Don't be stupid.

  13. There are many ways to steal an election just ask Jesse Jackson because he is still complaining about Florida's contested election. That said, Why are we quiveling about the number of fraudulent votes or worse the ones actual convicted of voting fraudulently? The real question to be asking is:
    How much voter fraud activity is ok in your book?

    Until a solution is created that addresses the prevention of that we will always have the potential for voter fraud by zealous partisan types wanting to vote early and vote often.

    1. "How much voter fraud activity is ok in your book?"

      How many people intentionally deprived of their right to vote is OK in your book?

    2. Voting should be one of the must secure and verifiable processes in the United States of America. Why don't you believe that ?

      Are you afraid your candidate can't win with a secure and verifiable voting process?

    3. The question is specious.
      It overlooks the cost of what is being proposed versus the benefit.
      The documented cases of voter fraud are far outweighed by the number of people who would be disenfranchised.
      In the extreme, it would be like arguing that we could eliminate almost all crime if there was a death penalty for every crime.
      The evidence of fraud simply doesn’t justify depriving large numbers of their right to vote.
      In addition, those who were really intent on perpetrating voter fraud could easily circumvent it through phony ID’s.
      The statement by the Pennsylvania House Majority Leader illustrates that the worry is not Obama winning under the current system but rigging the system to favor Romney and other Republicans – not my argument, his.

  14. The way it is now, it is nothing but a quagmire, what with massive redundant paper forms as proof, and people moving more instead of staying put, and multiple places to register to vote, etc., etc. etc.

    We should just pay people $20 to vote. Or better yet, a $20 voucher to a local business. And you know what? All you have to do is go to the polls and register, with any form of ID (including a piece of mail delivered to your local address). You need to allow the citizenry their dignity by appealing to them NOT to vote twice, and if they do it should be a felony. You could check afterwards and find out if anyone did, so you have enforced honesty.

    It would be beautiful. For once people would speak well of a government program instead of finding it obtrusive. It would be a cheap stimulus program. It would pump the local economy, with positive fallout effects. It would get more people out and about, rather than glued like zombies to their stupid computers. Too many good vibrations to even list!!

    I say pay 'em to vote, and let them register right there at the polling place. What's wrong with appealing to greed for a democratic benefit? Nothing I say, since after all this is a capitalistic country we live in, as well as a democracy.

    1. I'm sure the beneficiaries of the Citizens United case (Sheldon Adelson, the Koch Bros., Karl Rove, etc.) would rush to embrace such a program.

    2. Well, you might be right in that they won't rush to embrace.

      I suppose the obvious answer is to pay them more.

    3. I think you misunderstood me. They would rush to embrace it. Why spend hundreds of millions of dollars on hit or miss advertising when you can just go out and buy the votes? Welcome back Tammany Hall.

    4. Hi Ken,

      In my scenario the government is paying you to vote, not some special interest group with a lot of money. You go vote, in private, vote your conscience, and no matter which way you vote (and no one knows cuz it's done in secret) you get paid $20 in gift card to Big Bunny or Big Y.

      No foothold for a replay of Tammany Hall here. I actually thought you were being sarcastic and not literal!

      And BTW, a rich guy gets one vote, just like a welfare recipient. It's hard to talk about buying votes, because, again, a person voting is in the booth by him or herself You can give them $50 cash, but you can't go with them into the booth. They could easily take your money and dork you over, and you would never know. Plus really, a person would have to be awfully damn charming to coax some stranger to accept $50 to vote a certain way. I never understood the actual mechamisn by which some one or thing could purchase votes. I don't know how you do it, I am not certain it can be done, although part of my problem is my lack of a criminal mind perhaps.


  15. Is it simply a case of “ Biased & Hysterical” Media Reporting? Some Media outlets are comparing the Voter ID Laws to the Jim Crow Laws:

    [The 14th Amendment of the U.S. Constitution: A History]

  16. against voter ID — Democrats stymie new and proposed requirements for voters to present photo identification at the polls, they cry rivers over those who would become disenfranchised for lack of ID cards.

    For voter id - If Democrats really cared about these people — of whom there may be millions — Democrats would join Republicans to assure that these individuals receive ID cards for everyday use.

    Instead, leading Democrats use vicious racial rhetoric to hammer those who simply want voters to be who they say they are.

    The underlining issue against voter id laws is that to apply for an ID that would allow one to vote it would require the applicant to provide proof of citizenship. As this blogs first post pointed out in Florida that is clearly happening. NON CITIZENS voting is unacceptable!

    So I now ask this question - What would be acceptable to you to secure the voting process? Something like NH new law or the vast Democratic new voter ID law in RI ? Please tell.

    1. Nobody has succeeded in showing that there is a problem that needs to be fixed. All the real proof shows that the system is working fine.

      If it works you don't fix it.


    You haven't conceded that there is a problem to be fixed and are sticking to the Democratic platform in protecting itself with allowing illegal voting.
    Start being honest with yourself - Its broken and needs fixing!

    1. These kind of reports are not proof. For example In January South Carolina initially reported that over 900 dead people had voted in the 2010 election.

      A subsequent investigation showed that virtually all such cases were reported erroneously.

  18. The end result is that no one has presented any proof of widespread vote fraud. No one has been able to show any proof of voter fraud beyond that supplied by as obviously partisan a group as the National Republican Lawyers Association
    Their data works out to an average of 24 cases per year nationwide.

    In the meantime people have attempted to deflect the discussion into registration fraud, election fraud and voter intimidation. None of these would be addressed by voter ID laws.

    The bottom line is that there is no evidence to support claims of massive voter fraud that have been used to justify voter ID laws and consequently disenfranchise hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of voters.

    Who's drinking the Kool Aid?

  19. Voter fraud sounds like Republican fear mongering, just like terrorist fear mongering, Iran fear mongering, illegal immigrant fear mongering, national debt fear mongering, fox news fear mongering, anti-gay fear mongering, Islamist fear-mongering. Need I go on?

    By the way, I just moved to Woburn, MA and registered to vote last week. Every year they mail a street-list verification form that keeps my registration active. Just saying.

    1. Good luck in your new surroundings.

    2. Thank you. Now that I have been a successful, voter fraud championing Democrat in Southbridge, I will make sure thousands of zombies and illegal immigrants vote for Barack Obama in November.

      Sarcasm, by the way, for those who don't get it.


    3. Thanks, Amenlia.

  20. Wow a democratic win is: slinging insults and not even acknowledging the problem because those supporting the problem have made it very difficult to actually prove voter Fraud without voter Id.

    Well cheers to You - Flavor Aid all around for the Democrats. (The man wants facts and it was Flavor Aid at Jamestown not Kool Aid )

    For Everyone else please examine their big three myths regarding election integrity issues.

    There is no evidence of voter fraud – This is simply not true. While it is exceedingly difficult to discover and prove who the perpetrators of fraud are, there is a mountain of evidence that indicates illegal voting is occurring. Prosecutions and convictions of voter fraud are rare because our system makes it nearly impossible to ascertain the identity of fraudulent voters. In Minnesota for example, compiled evidence including thousands of instances that indicate errors or abuse. This evidence has been provided to law enforcement officials for investigation.

    Voter registration fraud isn’t voter fraud – It is if an improper voter registration is used to cast a ballot. Information in the publicly available voter registration rolls suggests that this has been occurring. Voter registration fraud can also be employed to generate thousands of bogus registrations that are used to obscure inconsistencies between vote totals and legitimate registered voters.

    Requiring confirmation of a voter's identity will disenfranchise voters – There is no evidence to support this claim. In fact, the opposite is true. Legitimate voters are being disenfranchised now by a failure to verify the integrity of the system. When improper ballots are commingled with legitimate ballots, there is no way to retract illegitimate ballots from the system. Defending a system that doesn’t take meaningful steps to prevent illegitimate ballots from being introduced into an election undermines the votes of legitimate voters. There are alot fewer citizens that don't have Id than those who have Id. Life simples requires an Id for most every mundane transaction we participate in. Still, most Voter ID bills introduced in the past have included funding to provide free state-issued identification cards to those individuals without one. These ID cards would actually benefit low-income people by helping them better integrate into society. It’s difficult to function in society, let alone get ahead without proper identification. It's the Democrats standing in the way of helping these people once again.

    We deserve to know our election system is of the highest level of integrity and will not be undermined by shortcomings in record keeping practices, lack of controls or inconsistently applied procedures, which create the possibility for errors and abuse. Of note, when Indiana enacted a voter ID requirement they had a record-breaking voter participation in the 2008 election but hey as long as there are Flavor Aid drinkers in MA we will never follow the other bluest state in the union - RI in passing a Voter Id Law
    RI doesn't have Republicans to worry about either but they do appreciate integrity in their voting system. CHEERS!

    1. This becoming so tiresome.

      Now the argument is that since there is no proof of voter fraud, that proves that there must be voter fraud.

      The only substantive evidence of error or abuse is in the investigation of such things as the South Carolina case previously cited that debunked claims of voter fraud.

      Voter registration fraud is somehow related. Again, please show how voter ID laws would prevent voter registration fraud.

      For people who supposedly purport to support individual liberty, who oppose at every turn increased registration for gun ownership, you nevertheless take every opportunity to enact a "papers please" mentality when it suits your political agenda.

      I'm still waiting for facts rather than mere unsubstantiated assertions to support your rationale for these laws.

    2. Georgia increased voter turnout with voter id by 42% in Blacks and 140% in Hispanic populations.

      Again voter registration is voter Fraud Acorn was convicted of it. Further whats a pollworker to do now when someone shows up with a name on the voter registration list but cross them off without an ID to check. Frauduelant Voter registration wouldn't be conducted by Acorn and other spin offs if it wasn't important to winning elections.

      This year there have been investigations, indictments or convictions for vote fraud in California, Texas, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Georgia, North Carolina and Maryland. In all but one case, the alleged fraudsters were Democrats. They may get the equilavent of a parking ticket with our current justice dept. but here is plenty of Voter fraud each and every election. Open your eyes and do your own research.

      If voter ID laws were enacted it is likely that overall voter turnout would be lower, mainly on the Democrat side, of course.

      That is simply the result of all those dead and otherwise illegal voters not being able to cast their lawless Democrat votes.

    3. Registration fraud is not same as voter fraud. Further, you have yet to show how voter ID's would prevent registration fraud. Yor citation for various states includes investigations and indictments as well as convictions. Investigations and indictments are not the same as convictions and therefore prove nothing. Further, the number of cases cited is miniscule and consistent with the earlier data cited providing no evidence of fraud in any numbers that would justify the number disenfranchised.


    This video sums up this whole back and forth debate quite nicely!

    1. Who was the "voter", James O'Keefe?

  22. Your (my) search for:
    did not match with any Web results.

    Any suggestions?

    1. I just tried it again and it works.
      Copy the item (without brackets), paste it into your browser address bar and hit enter.
      It's a self-manufactured cartoon.

    2. Once again I got:

      No results found for
      Showing results for youtube watch v 5jbod1v6k0 feature related.

      Originally, I copied the item w/o Brackets.

  23. At this point I am tired of responding to repetition of the same arguments and allegations that are unsubstantiated by any real data.
    Unless there is something new or meaningful, I'm through wasting my time on trying to change closed minds.

    1. As I said, it worked for me. I can't explain the discrepancy. Try this hot link:

      New Hampshire Welcomes Voter Fraud!

  24. This is what disenfranchised hypocrisy looks like -

    Requiring photo Id to enter the 2012 Democratic Convention voting at Mass Mutual but rallying against it for regular Voting elections.

    pg 14

    Call to Convention 2012
    Registration and Credentials



    1. Maybe it's because it's a private function? The Republicans do the same.

    2. Besides, it's nothing compared to the Republican Party removing 17 of 27 delegates elected by their own convention because they wouldn't sign a pledge to vote for Mitt Romney on all ballots as opposed to the party's own rules requirement that they were only bound to do so on the first ballot.

    3. touche both parties have their quirks but clearly the Republicans keep their parties members in line when they stray. The democrats don't an accept such pathetic things as not having "sexual relations with that woman" as to hold onto a seat. Just like with Voter ID - DO AS I SAY , NOT AS I DO PARTY.

    4. Do you really think requiring an ID (which both Republicans and Democrats required)for a private function and changing the rules and disqualifying over 50% of the elected delegates are comparable?

      Once again, who's drinking the Kool Aid?

    5. Once again it's the democrats crying about disenfranchising voters not Republicans. Republicans will gladly show their id's to vote.
      Democrats don't want Voter Id unless it is to keep out all those people that they say - but can't prove - are being disenfranchised.
      Private function or not if they are going to piss and moan against Voter ID and then require it to vote at their own convention they aren't serious about their reasons for opposing it. They also aren't living by the sword but they are hypocritically dying by it.
      If you can't see that then I guess what has been said about your biases are true.

    6. Can't prove what? You've got the DOT in Pennsylvania proving almost 10% of the voters in that state don't have photo ID, but the National Republican Lawyers Association can't prove more than an average of 24 cases of voter fraud per year nationwide.
      The Republicans in MA disenfranchised more than half of their own elected convention delegates. That's not bias on my part, it's willful blindness on your part.

    7. You totally ignore the absurdity of the case in Mississippi where you can't vote without a photo ID, but if you don't have a photo ID you need a birth certificate to get it. But you can't get a birth certificate in Mississippi without a photo ID.

    8. Re: Photo ID/Birth Certificate dilemma

      Theoretically speaking, I sense the creation of a new “Class" of People into American Society. For lack of a better word...why not use "Outcast".

    9. Maybe they would have supported Obamacare if it required all Americans to have an identifying bar code tatooed on their foreheads!

    10. I’m thinking in terms of smaller yet bigger. How about moolah maker...micro “CHIP”!

    11. But think how much that would cost them. They'd have to buy much more tinfoil than what they buy now to just make their hats.

    12. Those are both great ideas!!!

    13. Tinfoil must be the secret hair growth - who knew!
      Chew on this fact - but don't choke on it, :>)

      Voter IDs Are Not the Problem:

      A Survey of Three States

      Center for Democracy and Election Management

      American University

      Washington, D.C.

    14. First, thanks for providing real data.
      The study you cite is interesting, but far from conclusive.
      They indicate that, overall, 1.2% of registered voters lack photo ID.
      This study sampled 667 registered voters in three states (MD, IN and MS).
      The margin of error in each state was +/-6.7% for Indiana, +/-10% for Mississippi, and +/-6.4% for Maryland.
      They contrast their study with that of Barreto et. al. conducted a year earlier. That study found that 13% of registered voters and 22% of non-registered citizens lack a current driver’s license or state ID card. The Barreto study was limited to Indiana and surveyed 1,000 registered voters and 500 non-registered citizens, with a margin of error of +/- 3.1%.

      As I say, it is interesting but inconclusive in light of the earlier study that they cite.

    15. The Barreto paper was done by Matt A. Barreto, Ph.D.-University of Washington, Stephen A. Nuño, M.A.-University of California, Irvine and Gabriel R. Sanchez, Ph.D.- University of New Mexico for The Washington Institutes for the Study of Ethnicity and Race. It can be found at

    16. Gee Ken, no choking?

    17. When I was Director of Research for the American Stock Exchange I used to hire academics to do statistical research studies and evaluated their methodologies and results.


All comments subject to moderation. All commenters must use their own name or a screen name. No comments labelled as "Anonymous" will be published. To use your name or a screen name select "Name/URL" from the drop down menu. Insert you name in the "Name" space and leave the "URL" space blank.