Posted on 10/27/2004 4:11:39 PM PDT by rhema
If anyone's expecting to go to bed early on Nov. 2, they should read "Stealing Elections: How Voter Fraud Threatens Our Democracy," by John Fund. The intrepid Wall Street Journal columnist has done his homework in detailing how partisan politics is undermining our elections.
One problem is that we make voting too easy. Indeed, Mexico has a more secure voter-registration system than we do. Voters there must show a photo ID and be verified with an electronic thumbprint before they can vote.
How well does the Mexican system work? It resulted in the 2000 election of Vicente Fox, "the first opposition party candidate to be elected president in seventy years," Fund notes.
How does the U.S. system compare? Horribly.
The biggest obstacle to any sensible reform is the fundamentally different way in which Democrats and Republicans look at elections.
"Democrats gravitate to the view that the most important value is empowering people to exercise their democratic rights," Fund writes. "Republicans tend to pay more attention to the rule of law and the standards and procedures that govern elections."
While both goals are laudable, Democrats do significant damage by favoring turnout over legitimacy. For instance, a proposal in California argued that illegal aliens should be allowed to vote in school board elections because their children attend public schools. In the 2002 South Dakota Senate race, Democratic Party employee Maka Duta forged signatures on registration forms and absentee ballots.
"If I erred … I erred on the side of angels," she said.
"In other words, doing the devil's work of forging voter signatures is somehow understandable given her angelic goal of increasing voter turnout," Fund rightly notes.
Democrats have also done significant damage by continuing to perpetuate the twin myths that millions of blacks were disenfranchised in the 2000 election and that the election was illegally given to George Bush by the Supreme Court.
Charges of black disenfranchisement in Florida in 2000 "have proved baseless," Fund writes, and Clinton Attorney General Janet Reno agrees with him. But that hasn't stopped even John Kerry from demagoguing on the issue.
As for the Supreme Court "giving" the election to Bush, "Such assertions are simply not supported by the facts," Fund writes. Indeed, an examination of the Florida recount by USA Today, CNN, the Wall Street Journal, the Boston Globe and the New York Times — even using counts most favorable to Gore — all found that George Bush won Florida.
But what's most disturbing is that the Motor Voter Law, which has been widely hailed a success, is widely used to commit voter fraud. Under the law, states must register anyone applying for a driver's license or welfare benefits, offer mail-in registration (with no ID requirement), and it forbids government workers from challenging new registrants.
Registration has soared under Motor Voter, but Fund thinks maybe a little too much. Rolls in many cities now exceed the Census population of those 18 and older. In Philadelphia, the population declined by 13 percent but voter rolls rose by 24 percent. In California, mail-in forms were used to register fictitious people — or pets! — who then voted by absentee ballot.
It's too bad the prospects for voting reform are so dim, because it wouldn't be that hard to do. Simply requiring that voters show ID would go a long way toward stemming voter fraud. Democrats argue that it would intimidate non-English speakers and effectively disenfranchise people — particularly minorities. But as Fund correctly notes, in 1997 the FDA mandated that retailers demand ID for cigarettes, but the same year the Justice Department said Louisiana couldn't ask the same from voters.
Fund isn't in favor of provisional balloting, which is this year's hot topic and basically allows anyone to walk up to the polls and vote, but holds those votes until they can be validated. What would work better is a central registration office in each state. That way, someone from St. Paul walking into a polling place in Bemidji could be quickly verified.
While these are sensible proposals, Fund believes it'll take a debacle bigger than Florida 2000 to push any meaningful reform.
"Should 'anything goes' continue to be ballot bywords, the nation may wake to another crisis even bigger than the 2000 Florida folly," Fund writes. "Perhaps then it will demand to know who subverted the safeguards in its election laws."
In other words, put on an extra pot of coffee next Tuesday. It could be a long night.
Wouldn't require a national ID card. Even a state card would work, as long as it was issued only after checking other ID, ssn, drivers licences, etc.
oh....good thought....I wasn't thinking of it that way.
oh....good thought....I wasn't thinking of it that way.
FYI - In California a bill to require photo ID's for voters did not get out of the Democratic controlled committees. When you say "nothing legitimate", you are right: there is no legitimate reason not to make the required changes. However, as long as the Democrats can control this process there will be no changes made.
Well - WE the PEOPLE - would still be the PEOPLE
State or federal -
Honestly - I'm talking about having the rules the same for all states. As it stands now - some states make it very easy for "Fraud" to take place. If you ask me - that impacts on the voters in the other states -
Without some kind of national identification,
one could obtain cards from multiple states.
The national identification is what stops someone
from voting an absentee ballot in New York
and then showing up at a poll in person in Florida.
(2) Any network announcing any results or calling any election before 9 PM Sunday night will have its FCC Licence revoked as of Monday morning at 9 AM.
All you need do is have Florida and New York cross check the ID used to apply for voter cards. (All done electroniclly of course).
If I apply for a Driver's license in Colorado, I have to surrender my New York License. Same could be true for voter cards.
Take heart! You are not alone! However, I do feel that we are perhaps a minority but with ever increasing numbers. One observation I have made among my right winger friends is that many of them, while disdaining vote fraud, don't want the government knowing too much information about them and how they vote. I think they misunderstand our intent. I think having a secure voter registration which clearly identifies you as a legal, alive, American citizen, is a good thing. The process would be aimed at controlling the registration. You could then vote with total anonymity.
My dream case scenario is that once your national voter registration has been completed you are a registered voter. If you do not complete the national voter registration at least 60 days prior to the day of voting, then you don't vote. Your voter registration ID would be valid as long as you are alive and maintain your legal status as an American voter. Upon presenting your ID at the ENTRANCE to the polling place it would be recorded into a database. You would then ENTER the polling place and follow your state's guidelines for voting with total secrecy.
No voter I.D., not gonna vote today! More votes than registered voters..... check the database!
.... and that's why I'll never be elected!
The purpose of the provisional ballot system was to allow a voter
to show up at a polling place and if his name did not appear on
the official registered voters list, he could go ahead and vote 'provisionally'
and that ballot would be held and not counted until such time as the validity
of the voters eligibility to vote could be verified.
My opinion is that in the hypothetical case given,
the voter from St. Paul would (should) be found inelligible to vote in Bimidji.
Actually.....the voter fraud legal PENALTY is what would convince people to NOT commit voter fraud. All lawmakers have to do is make it financially (and otherwise) inconvenient to commit voter fraud.....as such criminals would find themselves in prison (and not a federal prison as Martha Stewart's cellmate) and paying for their crime....just like REAL criminals!
The question is, why hasn't Bush acted on this? In four years he has done next to nothing, as far as I can see.
Please correct me if I am wrong.
My bad, you are right, it's all Bush's fault.
There are two of us!
" It might be ISSUED by the state of residence,
but it must be VERIFIED on a national level.
And THAT, my friend, is what one typically calls a NATIONAL ID."
Think so?
My Credit card gets verified on a national level.
Last time I heard, Visa was not a Nation. Yet any podunk bank in the smallest of towns can issue me a card I can use virtually anywhere in the world, and which can be verified virtually anywhere. Yes it can be stolen, but even stolen it can't be long used.
You vastly overstate the scope of the problem, and you
spread FUD by running around crying National ID National ID.
If the penalties for committing voter fraud were increased (or enforced), people would think twice (or at least once) BEFORE committing voter fraud. As it is, they never even fear getting caught. Again...whose fault is that? Bush has had FOUR YEARS to fix it and it ain't fixed.
"...can issue me a card I can use virtually anywhere in the world...
- - -
Now you seem to be coming up with counter-arguments to your own point.
No matter where you go with that card, the bank, or electronic machine or whatever recognizes it as being "you".
I am not "...running around crying National ID National ID..." as you claim.
I simply do not see any other method to stop the fraud,
and I was explaining what such a card would have to do.
You have run out of logic, out of ideas, and turned to insults.
End of discussion.
Peace, out.
The Republicans have had full control for the last TWO years. Are you in disagreement with that fact?
Don't get me wrong....I have already voted against Kerry by voting FOR Bush, but I sure as hell will NOT blindly follow Bush if he does something I don't agree with (like this particular issue and like not controlling our borders). My question 'still' is....why HASN'T this problem been fixed by now?
This one is way tooooooo easy: CORRUPT POLITICIANS
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.