Skip to comments.
Editorial: (Wisconsin Governor) Doyle says no to photo ID
The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel ^
| August 6, 2003
| Milwaukee Journal Sentinel Editorial Board
Posted on 08/09/2003 2:49:52 PM PDT by StACase
Editorial: Doyle says no to photo ID
From the Journal Sentinel
Last Updated: Aug. 5, 2003
In remarks to this newspaper, the chief of the state's Republican Party inadvertently illustrated the untruths and illogic on which rests the push to require voters to show a state-issued photo ID card each time they cast ballots. The Legislature approved such a measure, but Gov. Jim Doyle correctly vetoed it on Tuesday.
The diversions from reality:
Untruth No. 1 - "Most states require this sort of thing," averred state GOP Chairman Richard Graber in Tuesday's Journal Sentinel. That's simply not true; what's more, Graber should know it's not true. According to a survey done last year, just 11 states require voters to present some form of identification at the polls. And of those 11, just two - Florida and Louisiana - limit the form to a photo ID card. And even those states give voters an out that the Wisconsin measure lacks: They can sign affidavits attesting to their identity, according to the survey done by the non-partisan Electionline.org and the bipartisan Constitution Project. So the ID bill would have given Wisconsin the most restrictive voter identification requirement in the nation.
Untruth No. 2 -"Minnesota requires voter ID and they had one of the highest - if not the highest - turnout in the last presidential election," Graber said. Only the last part of that sentence is true. Minnesota boasts such a high turnout in part because, as in Wisconsin, voters can register at the polls. In Minnesota, such voters - only such voters - must show a photo ID, election officials there verified Tuesday. Voters already registered need only to show up and sign their names.
The illogic - To justify his stance, Graber cited the "votes for smokes" controversy in 2000, when a backer of Democratic presidential candidate Al Gore allegedly traded cigarettes to homeless people in Milwaukee for votes. Trouble is, that controversy did not involve identification fraud; hence, tightening the ID requirement would not have stopped it.
In short, facts and logic don't make a case for photo ID. Granted, for most people, a photo ID requirement would be no hassle. But it would impede the voting rights of Wisconsin citizens who lack the proper cards - among them, as Doyle noted, 85,000 senior citizens.
The backers of the measure have failed to demonstrate that identification fraud is a significant election problem, worth imperiling the voting rights of thousands. The Legislature should let Doyle's veto stand.
TOPICS: Editorial; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: voterfraud; voterid
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
According to a survey done last year, just 11 states require voters to present some form of identification at the polls.
Do you have to show ID to vote in your state?
Yes or No, and what state.
1
posted on
08/09/2003 2:49:52 PM PDT
by
StACase
To: StACase
FLORIDA ..... Yes
2
posted on
08/09/2003 2:51:12 PM PDT
by
dennisw
(G_d is at war with Amalek for all generations)
To: StACase
3
posted on
08/09/2003 2:51:39 PM PDT
by
MinuteGal
To: StACase
Washington - no.
4
posted on
08/09/2003 2:52:03 PM PDT
by
DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
(Dear IRS: I would like to cancel my subscription. Please remove my name from your mailing list.)
To: StACase
California...Silly Question, of course not.
5
posted on
08/09/2003 2:53:30 PM PDT
by
itsahoot
To: MinuteGal
TEXAS- NO! In fact, you don't even have to prove you truly exist to register. Just fill in a card and drop in a mailbox and in 3 weeks voila! You too are a registered voter.
6
posted on
08/09/2003 2:54:12 PM PDT
by
Lunatic Fringe
(When news breaks, we fix it.)
To: dennisw
We both posted at the same moment. I think it's a sign. We are irrevocably bound to each other for the rest of our lives.
Leni
7
posted on
08/09/2003 2:54:25 PM PDT
by
MinuteGal
To: StACase
North Carolina - no, unless it's changed.
8
posted on
08/09/2003 3:12:16 PM PDT
by
AntiGuv
(™)
To: StACase
Ohio - No. Also they're pretty sloppy about notifying your previous county of residence when you move and register in a new county.
9
posted on
08/09/2003 3:12:57 PM PDT
by
KarlInOhio
(Conservatives see 1984 as a warning. Liberals see it as an instruction manual.)
To: MinuteGal; dennisw
As soon as I saw your two posts back-to-back like that I immediateley thought, "Wow, these two are probably irrevocably bound to eachother for the rest of their lives."
10
posted on
08/09/2003 3:13:52 PM PDT
by
Yeti
To: StACase
Louisiana: Yes. After massive vote fraud allowed Mary Landrieu to steal her Senate seat in 1996, the law was changed so that you are required to show a picture ID when you go to the polls.
To: StACase
Illinois-nope
To: dennisw
NY....no id required
13
posted on
08/09/2003 3:56:02 PM PDT
by
mrtysmm
To: ABG(anybody but Gore)
Thanks for your response, I expect the poll in the paper is correct, and what it illustrates is the need for Republicans to push this issue in all states. I don't want to see a National ID Card, but a state by state Photo ID requirement to vote wouldn't bother me a bit.
When Republicans call me for money I tell them no dice until you really try to get voter ID passed.
I haven't written a check in a whiile.
14
posted on
08/09/2003 3:56:25 PM PDT
by
StACase
To: StACase
it should be something , anything, electric bill, tax bill,
title to car , just something to show your name.
15
posted on
08/09/2003 3:59:14 PM PDT
by
robjna
To: MinuteGal
We both posted at the same moment. I think it's a sign. We are irrevocably bound to each other for the rest of our lives........
Now you tell me? :)
16
posted on
08/09/2003 4:04:19 PM PDT
by
dennisw
(G_d is at war with Amalek for all generations)
To: StACase
Michigan. No.
All I need to do is show up at the right place and say I am Pat DeVos, give the address and I can vote.
17
posted on
08/09/2003 5:40:33 PM PDT
by
Harmless Teddy Bear
(Under advice from my lawyer I will now be known as Mostly Harmless Teddy Bear)
To: StACase
a photo ID requirement would be no hassle. But it would impede the voting rights of Wisconsin citizens who lack the proper cards - among them, as Doyle noted, 85,000 senior citizens. Bet every one of those 85,000 have Medicare cards. But it would be SUCH an imposition to get a state photo ID.
Can't rent a video at blockbuster without an ID but I can vote. Every time I hear how "Gore won the popular vote" my responce is yeah, when you count all the fradulent ones you RATS steal.
18
posted on
08/09/2003 6:07:29 PM PDT
by
Kozak
(" No mans life liberty or property is safe when the legislature is in session." Mark Twain)
To: Kozak
"Every time I hear how "Gore won the popular vote" my responce is yeah, when you count all the fradulent ones you RATS steal."Yes, and rest assured they have every intention of really pulling it off in '04. No one gets caught, and if they do, there's no punishment, so all caution will be thrown to the wind. Potential reward far outweighs potential risk.
To: The Brush; StACase
Caveat to Illinois though: Voter registration closes three weeks before election day. Then when you show up to vote, the ballot sleeve must be signed and witnessed by both D & R precinct judges, and
then an on-file signature is pulled and compared with witnessed one. If they match, you're shown the booth.
It's not as bad as some. I was aghast to learn of these states where they pop a mirror under your nose, and if it fogs up, "Here's your ballot!"
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-31 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson