The Problem With Voting...

Is There A Problem Houston?

It would seem to me that dead people don't need to vote any longer because over the years they more than likely did their civic duty and deserve to rest in peace. I also think that in this coming election there may be wide spread cases of voter fraud because some people will do anything to hold onto that seat of power and continue to warm those seat cushions with their tired fannies. The perks seem to be marvelous. You can spend the tax payer's money that they don't have to spend and grin your way through life mugging for the cameras as you go. Heck yeah, just ask the organization (whatever their name(s) is now) formerly known as ACORN. I know. Obama used to be affiliated with ACORN but what the hay.

The Pew Center for the States just published a study that found there are more than 1.8 million dead people who are still on the voter registration rolls across this nation. I lived in a place where the mayor's race was decided by one (1) vote so if one dead person is allowed to vote then it can indeed swing an election. The same study also found between 24 million people on the rolls with either an invalid or inaccurate registration. I'm also wondering how many illegal aliens have been allowed to register to vote but that wasn't addressed in this particular study but they are out there.

Do these "little discrepancies" make the process of fair, democratic elections vulnerable? No one would ever consider having dead people vote would they? We're talking about career politicians here so think again. ACORN officials have been convicted, and in some instances remain under indictment. for wide spread cases of voter fraud even though NPR, in an article, claims that the facts here haven't led to wide spread voter fraud. Really? Then why are people being sent to prison to make little rocks out of big rocks? Did I mention Obama's past relationship with ACORN?

Part of the problem is mobility, which dead people usually lack unless they are in a rolling coffin, because the citizenry of this country move around a lot. May I make a suggestion? Good, I was sure you wouldn't mind. If you move, stop by or write the jurisdiction you are leaving to say "Adios" at the Registrar's Office. You need to understand that legally your old voter registration is no longer valid when you register to vote to wherever you end up. I said "legally." No one would vote more than once would they? Even if they were paid to be? Vote buying surely doesn't occur, does it?

NAW! Say it ain't so...

Why isn't there a central point where the states can submit their rolls to cross check and see if a person is registered in multiple locations? There isn't any way to share that information at the present time which is a vulnerability in the one of basics rights of the citizenry. That right should not be abused or misused. The study found one man, who will remain unnamed, who moves so often that he is probably registered in at least half a dozen different registrar's office to vote. Pew went on further to find that about 3 million people are registered to vote in more than one state. That's a lot of votes!

There is a bright side to this story. There is a pilot program that seven (7) states have created to share information, both voter rolls and other databases, to cross reference the information available to nab the perpetrators. Pew is the driving force behind the pilot program and the institute hopes to have it up and running by this November's election cycle.

It appears to be quite a project since the death records at the social security administration, motor vehicle registration data (dead people no longer drive ya know?) and the state's voter registration rolls are collected and slipped into the computer and spit out the results so the rolls can be scrubbed as they should be. Maybe it would be good if the other 47 states and the territories where people are allowed to vote jump on the band wagon.

Hard At Work As An ACORN Trainer

There are the Doubting Thomas's among us who scratch their heads and wonder if this will result in more accurate records being maintained. One thing is for sure though. It sure won't result in more inaccuracies. Those numbers are very, very high. For every dead person that is allowed to vote it cancels out one vote that a person who is alive and kicking casts on election day. If in fact someone is struck from the rolls in error, it should be a simple matter to rectify that situation. But if you are dead, you are dead and your civic responsibility is for evermore absolved.

The other helpful hint is to require some form of government issued photo ID when you step up to the polling place. We need be required to do that just as we do with any other legal transaction we become involved in. Why not to vote?

As Always,

The Frog Prince

More by this Author

  • "Ineptocracy" Is A Word
    18

    Ineptocracy is the new system of government that Obama-Biden ushered in. It is a system of government where the least capable to lead are elected by the least capable of producing, and where the members of society...


Comments 81 comments

deepbrainmedia profile image

deepbrainmedia 4 years ago

Of course, you realize that ACORN is out of business.

Of course, you realize that when someone dies, they remain on the voter registration rolls until someone takes them off.

Of course you realize it is not a crime to be dead and be a registered voter.

Of course you realize that in five years of investigating of voter fraud, only one conviction has been handed down.

You know all that, of course. What you are seeking to do, it would seem, is to create a solution for a problem that does not exist.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

deepbrainmedia - Really? Maybe you need to do a little research on ACORN. They aren't out of business, they just changed their name(s). Sure don't want to confuse you with facts though.

Did I say it was a crime? What is a crime is for a dead person to vote.

Convictions just one huh? Again I suggest you do some research before inserting foot in pie hole.

Lets just be on the safe side and have clean voter rolls. Why make one the most treasured duties of a citizen vulnerable to abuse?

Always a critic in every crowd. You do realize that don't you? Google is so easy to use, ya know?

CYA

The Frog Prince


deepbrainmedia profile image

deepbrainmedia 4 years ago

(sigh...)

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/319678

Don't let me confuse YOU with facts, froggie.

Now, you tell me how many dead people have voted. Go ahead. I'll wait. I have all day.


Jeff Berndt profile image

Jeff Berndt 4 years ago from Southeast Michigan

Can you cite any convictions, Frog? If so, please cite them. If voter fraud is really a problem, as you assert, then you should have no problem proving that there have been many many instances of the dead casting votes, of individuals casting multiple ballots, etc, etc, etc.

I would be more concerned with ensuring that there is a paper trail, with physical ballots, for every election, and that there is no possibility of the election result being changed, either by insiders or by hackers. Electronic voting machines have been shown to be vulnerable to fraud (http://www.foxnews.com/scitech/2011/09/30/research... and yet the powers that be do not act to prevent these machines from being used in our elections: they, like you, are more interested in window-dressing that does no good at all.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Jeff - Do you know how to use Google?

deep brain - Don't worry I won't. I could bombard you with link after link but why bother. Liberals never seem to do anything indepth except run the gums. Lots of indictments still pending. Oh well...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_of_Commun...

Here have another -

http://dailycaller.com/2010/11/23/the-voter-fraud-...

Want more? I'm sure more readers will come along with more FACTS rather than just talk.

Ah what the heck. Have another...

http://rottenacorn.com/activityMap.html

The Frog


breakfastpop profile image

breakfastpop 4 years ago

How anyone can be opposed to cleaning up our voting process is beyond me. Perhaps they need all the fraud to get their guy in. There can be no other explanation. For a nation as advanced as we are to have such loose voting standards is an embarrassment. Up useful, interesting and awesome and shared. It is also factual which is such a relief!


Attikos profile image

Attikos 4 years ago from East Cackalacky

When Lyndon Johnson was a local official and party leader in Texas, before he won his first federal office, he sat on the board of elections. At one of its meetings, another member started talking about cleaning up the voter registration rolls. She brought up an example: "Here's old Mrs. Davis. She's been dead for ten years."

Johnson spoke up: "Now, you just leave old Mrs. Davis's name right where it is. She has as much right to vote as anyone else in that cemetery."

Vote fraud has been widespread for a long time. John Kennedy won the presidential election against Richard Nixon on the basis of the Chicago political machine's ballot theft. The infamous hanging chads in Florida were caused by more than one ballot having been passed to reliable party voters in counties controlled by that political machine, notably Dade.

The methods keep evolving to circumvent advances in technology. There is no denying it exists, if one merely opens his eyes.


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 4 years ago from Rural Arizona

FP - To deny that voter fraud exists would indicate anyone in denial has their head in a place where the brain doesn't function at full capacity. The fact that so many oppose any sort of mandatory ID be shown prior to being allowed to vote tells me there is a problem. If there is no intent of fraud why would anyone object to showing ID? The mere fact that under the current system people can be registered to vote in several states at the same time is an invitation to fraud. With the use of computer data bases sharing data this problem could easily be eliminated. Denial is a strange thing.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Attikos - Read the first few comments. Obviously those of us who are aware a problem exists are mistaken. LBJ was a crook and always was. Thanks for a great story.

The Frog


breakfastpop profile image

breakfastpop 4 years ago

New Mexico Secretary of State Dianna Duran has turned over thousands of cases of possible voter fraud to the state Department of Public Safety for investigation. Duran said that 117 foreign nationals had managed to register to vote and 37 of them actually voted. I think the point is that taking precautions when it comes to something as important as our vote is a no brainer. A simple photo ID and clearing up the registration lists would go along way to cleaning up our act. This is only one incident that I recall but there are many. I think I'll look for some more.


deepbrainmedia profile image

deepbrainmedia 4 years ago

Antikos -- old joke. It's been updated now, changing LBJ to Obama. In other words, no proof that LBJ ever said it, but dumbass conservatives -- as they like to do -- pretend fairy tales are true.


deepbrainmedia profile image

deepbrainmedia 4 years ago

Breakfast Pop -- Link to your source, please?


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Mike - Seems there are people trolling around wanting to attack the writer because they can't face the facts. I can give them link after link to read and they want to attack the source. There are those who sink their heads in MSNBC and The Huffington Post. Both left wing hate sources if they want to call legitimate news reports hate sources. Good grief.

The voter ID laws are a good sign and considering that to do most things in life requires a valid photo ID, what would be the objection? You brought out the truth once again.

The Frog


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

deepbrain - I'm beginning to wonder how deep. You do know how to use Google do you not? GOOGLE IT!

I thought you were leaving. We're trying to have an adult conversation here.

The Frog


breakfastpop profile image

breakfastpop 4 years ago

Here's another one"In Minnesota on August 10th 2011, 113 people have been convicted for voter fraud committed in 2008. These convictions don't include voters who were ineligible to vote but did anyway. Minnesota law requires proof that they did so deliberately. Deepbrainmedia..just google Minnesota voter fraud and you'll find this and do the same for New Mexico. It's easy .


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

BPOP - So easy even a 5th grader can do it! BTW. Did I mention that Obama was a trainer at ACORN. but I suppose that is a lie too?

TFP


Stu 4 years ago

This problem is deep, and we just don't know how far it goes. Since ACORN has been legally forbidden from receiving federal funds, newly named fronts for ACORN have already received almost $1 million from the federal government (seems illegal, in substance anyway). It is estimated that about 1/4 of all people encouraged to vote by ACORN and its myriad subgroups are not legally eligible to do so. I think it is likely that the new funding for the rebranded ACORN groups will lead to more of the same - "community organizing" which is little more than teaching people how to evade voting law.

While I'm no big fan of federal anything, I think we've reached a point where some kind of biometric national ID is necessary. Retinal or fingerprint data on a magnetic strip would prove the card is really your's, and a national database would contain your zip code and citizenship status for immediate feedback at voting, employment, real estate transactions, opening bank or brokerage accounts, etc. The system should have no RFID tracking capability, and by law not store any data requests except (1) voting related data requests until the winner is determined, and (2) positive hits on illegal aliens.

Such a system could eliminate ineligible and duplicate voting, and aid greatly in identifying, punishing, and deporting illegal aliens. It would also keep illegal aliens out of the job market, financial markets, eliminate the possibility of buying homes or getting driver's licenses, be used to deny social benefits and in-state tuition discounts, etc. In other words, far from merely cleaning up voting, it would encourage present illegals to self-migrate back to Mexico, and eliminate the magnet that draws them here in the first place.

I admit there are some abuse risks here. Any data retained in violation of the data destruction rules should be inadmissable in court, and any evidence derived therefrom should also be inadmissable (except where inevitable discovery can be proven). There's no way to make such a system completely safe from federal abuse, but the mass illegal presence, and voting fraud abuses by crazy activists, need a real solution, not just lip service. It has to be a federal system, as the issues involved are nationwide; hundreds of thousands of municipal card systems and databases simply won't provide the robust cross-checking capability necessary.


Josak profile image

Josak 4 years ago from variable

See the problem with voter registration is who pays for it a properly notified, hard to falsify photo id is not cheap it costs plenty, anti counterfeiting experts, thousands of government employees, validity background checks etc, it can end up costing 120 to 300$ per id, who pays for these millions upon millions of photo id's? the allready in debt american public? well maybe the applicant but for a single parent or one of the many underemployed families in the US or people who have been laid off 120 dollars is the difference between putting food on the table that week or not... the regulation would simply rule out many many genuine voters and ultimately prevent few fake votes, I think the treatment is far worse than the disease.


breakfastpop profile image

breakfastpop 4 years ago

Did I mention that a college friend of his said Obama was an avowed Marxist?


Jeff Berndt profile image

Jeff Berndt 4 years ago from Southeast Michigan

"Jeff - Do you know how to use Google?"

Of course I do, but don't expect me to do your homework for you. If you make a claim, it's on you to show that you're not full of hot air.

The links you provided in your comment demonstrate that Acorn employees tried to register the same person more than once, or tried to register people who aren't eligible to vote. Okay. Clearly, those are crimes, and ought to be prosecuted. Of course, most of the incidents listed on those websites are contractors fudging their quotas. The frauds committed were more against Acorn than anything else:

"Here, Boss, look at all of these citizens I've registered to vote! Aren't I a good employee? Now give me my paycheck."

Now let me ask you this: did any of the people who were registered more than once actually cast more than one ballot? Did any of those ineligible people actually cast a ballot? Show me some real incidents where someone voted more than once, or an ineligible person voted, and then you might have a case.

Nobody wants an election to be tainted by fraud, and we should be vigilant. But let's be honestly vigilant, and not conjure chimeras.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Josak - FACTS son. Most states who have ID laws also give that valid ID away for free. At most, there may be a nominal fee. Stick to the FACTS and stop your personal attack BS because when you do that no one will ever read a word you say.

If you continue in that vein no one will ever read anything you say on my Hubs. I hope we understand each other Josak. I moderate my own articles. Stick to the topic and remain courteous. Attacking the writer or a source is both meaningless and discourteous.

The Frog


Gusser 4 years ago

Photo Id is already on most drivers liscense. In this state you can have that same ID FOR FREE for check casking, getting passports etc. Any miniscule cost is worth it. BUT the left will fight any such program. WHY? Because they have many elections to lose if its instituted. The right is generally in support of voter ID, perhaps they have less fake voters in their ranks. Major cities are almost entirely DemoCAN controlled, most voter fraud comes from these areas.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Jeff - Before I write, I research! I don't need , nor require, anyone to do my homework for me. If you doubt anything I say then Google it and then come back to refute with FACTS, not conjecture. Give me a link isn't my motto but it seems to be the motto of many. I never write anything in the blind.

To answer your question, I don't know if they did or they didn't. Read Stu's comment. That's one way to ensure they don't.

The Frog


Jeff Berndt profile image

Jeff Berndt 4 years ago from Southeast Michigan

"To answer your question, I don't know if they did or they didn't."

Exactly: you have no idea if actual elections have been tainted by voter fraud, and couldn't be bothered to find out.

Now go do your homework, and come back when you can demonstrate that the problem you want to solve actually exists.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

I do know that Jeff. I used Google. If all those people that were indicted and convicted of this sort of thing are but choir boys then our justice system is flawed.

There is voter fraud out there. If you desire to stick your head in the sand then do so. I won't. I gave you enough links and won't give you anymore. GOOGLE IT!

The Frog


Josak profile image

Josak 4 years ago from variable

For free... you think id is free... Someone has to pay for it my friend if not the public then the taxpayer... more debt for the country. As for personal attacks there were none there... relax...


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

Why is it that any mention of voter fraud makes liberals so defensive?

Why is it that suspected voter fraud almost always involves Democrats?

And why is it that liberals are so opposed to measures that would prevent voter fraud?

Just askin'.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Josak - Since the state is the one supplying the free ID then take it up with the voters of each state. In South Carolina, the voters determined by referendum that the ID would be supplied for free. Take it up with the citizens of that state, not me. It's called democracy son.

Will - Are those rhetorical questions? Just askin'...

The Frog


tsadjatko profile image

tsadjatko 4 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

Frog - we must remember that liberals only care about their agenda and they lie to protect it - they don't care about the intelligent reasoned voter. They target their comments at the uneducated or apathetic reader who will believe anything if it agrees with his preconceived notion. Therefore to say "a problem ... does not exist" despite the overwhelming facts and implications of it's existence is all they need to do to cater to anyone who is against conservative ideology and give them a lifeline to hold onto their ignorance.They know they will not win you or other reasoned truth seekers over but simply put their propaganda out there for like minded liberals to glum onto.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

tsadjatko - I reckon a few of the glommers decided to make a showing here when voter fraud is mentioned. They like to chew on the obvious and say it ain't so. That doesn't happen in our country. Sure it doesn't.

The Frog


The Frog Princess profile image

The Frog Princess 4 years ago from Florence area of the Great Pee Dee of South Carolina

Voter fraud is so easy. I myself had two voter cards at two different locations to vote under two different names. I ONLY voted once. When I ask why..Its an error at the office. So how many people walk around with errors by the office and know it use it. If you move you do not have to turn your old card in when you change your address...Am I still on the books at my old address...yes I was. The system has errors for the not so honest people to use. My question is ok When will these "errors" be corrected after some nutheads try to put Obamie back in office..Wait did I say that--why yes.

The Frog Princess


Attikos profile image

Attikos 4 years ago from East Cackalacky

You know, some people really ought to get their knees fixed before they hurt themselves. I thought we'd go at two or three rounds before the personal insults started flying, but when people don't have any arguments that's how it goes. Too bad.


tsadjatko profile image

tsadjatko 4 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

"Of course you realize that in five years of investigating of voter fraud, only one conviction has been handed down," says deepbrainmedia. I suppose he doesn't count those who plead guilty

http://www.cbs6albany.com/articles/troy-1289473-pa...

The only thing "deep" about deepbrainmedia is not his brain but the other end.


TheManWithNoPants profile image

TheManWithNoPants 4 years ago from Tucson, Az.

Deep,

Looks like this dead vote thing as you wound up just a little bit. Dumb as conservatives? Let me tell you what is dumb, and I tell the same thing to my conservative brothers and sisters .. Dumb is lumping all conservatives, or all liberals into one pile and insulting the whole pile. It's bad business, and it only galvanizes the opposition. If that floats your boat, go for it.

My second point is this ... What do you care if we piss and moan a little bit about some stiffs voting. We don't care if they vote. It's just that these were conservative stiffs, and they were told they were voting Republican. Taking advantage of stiffs just ain't cool.

Thirdishly ... A lot of Liberals are still in a state of catatonic schizophrenia over Kerry losing to Bush. That put them on a " crying foul bender" and they still haven't sobered up.

Sorry, no links in this comment. Don't need em Ace.

jim


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 4 years ago from Rural Arizona

This is actually quite hilarious. To get a library card I had to show ID. To use my own Credit Card in a store where they don't know me I have to show ID. To get some papers notified at my local bank where they have known me for years, I have to show ID. To test drive a car at a car dealer I have to show ID. But to vote for the President of our country they should just take my word that I am who I say I am?

For anyone to protest this ID requirement so loudly would make me believe they think this requirement just might change the outcome of some elections. What other reason would make them angry enough to start name calling the writer?


geordmc 4 years ago from Beliot, Wisconsin

The use of ID should be law since voter fraud IS so widespread. It doesn't matter if your on the left or right, the issue involves everyone who votes.


Chasuk 4 years ago

I'm on the far left, but I have no problem with requiring IDs, as long as they are distributed equitably, equally, and freely.

Yes, voter fraud occurs, though not as frequently as is often claimed. However, that it occurs infrequently -- and that its scale is exaggerated -- does not mean that no efforts should be taken to prevent it. Requiring IDs seems a reasonable precaution.

http://www.theuptake.org/2012/02/15/former-cop-say...

http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/02/07...

http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/trut...


jaybird22 profile image

jaybird22 4 years ago from New York

FP, I give you credit on posting about politics because this can be a touchy subject as everyone has their own political views. It goes to show you that there is always dirt to back-up every opinion or view. The question is, how much weight do the sites backing the view carry? Interesting hub, I enjoyed reading it!


Jeff Berndt profile image

Jeff Berndt 4 years ago from Southeast Michigan

tsadjatko:

The issue here is not that "a problem does not exist." /A/ problem does exist. But it's not the problem that Frog is claiming.

We're being told that elections are being tainted by voter fraud, but nobody has shown any evidence of one person casting multiple ballots, ineligible voters casting ballots that were counted, etc. (We've got old jokes, and stories from the Tammany Hall era, but nothing real.)

What we have been shown is that contract workers with Acorn et all have filled out registration forms improperly. When you get paid according to how many names are on your sheet at the end of the day, the incentive to just fill in names willy-nilly is pretty high. It's not excusable, and the people who did it are guilty of fraud. But they defrauded Acorn, not the election.

The Right is very vocal about the specter of voter fraud on the micro level, but there's no real evidence that it's happening (workers have obviously been lying to Acorn about how many people they've registered, but that's not the same thing). I have to wonder why all of this sturm und drang to call attention to a nonexistent problem?

I'm sure that some of it is genuine concern for the integrity of elections (possibly mixed with an over-eagerness to believe that community organizers are evil). But perhaps it's to distract the public from the serious conflict of interests surrounding Walden O'Dell: the man who promised to deliver Ohio to W being the man in charge of the company that supplied Ohio's electronic voting machines (http://boingboing.net/2004/11/03/quote-of-the-day-...

Concerned citizens at Princeton University (among others) demonstrated that these machines are very easy to corrupt (http://gizmodo.com/200693/how-to-steal-an-election...

Eventually, O'Dell resigned (http://www.informationweek.com/news/175001748), and Diebold sold off its election machine division (http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/09/diebold-s...

So Walden O'Dell, a prominent member of the GOP, promises to deliver Ohio to the GOP candidate. A GOP state official in Ohio buys voting machines O'Dell's company. The machines in question are proven to be insanely easy to corrupt, and conveniently leave no paper trail for verification purposes.

Shouldn't we worry about this conflict of interest, which is indicative of election fraud on a macro level: a fraud that could actually change the outcome of an election by changing or deleting votes cast by eligible voters. Never mind that the people involved had the motivation, the means, and the opportunity to commit the fraud, and that difficulty in proving fraud is an inherent part of the machines involved (whether by accident or design). This is worthy of investigation, wouldn't you agree? Especially given that it may have changed the outcome of the 2004 election?

Did O'Dell conspire to commit voter fraud? Dunno, and it's impossible to tell with the data we have. Is/was there a conflict of interest? Absolutely there was, layers and layers of it, and not only in Ohio (http://www.ctvoterscount.org/dieboldprimier-invest... Certainly it's worthy of investigation. But we don't see calls for investigating Diebold for voter fraud even though "glitches" that favor GOP candidates are common (http://www.thelandesreport.com/VotingMachineCompan...

Instead, the Right points at petty fraud (against Acorn, not the public) by lazy, unscrupulous individuals who have neither the motive, nor the opportunity, nor the means to coordinate actual voter fraud. Are the people criminals? Yes: they claimed to have done work that they didn't do, and took pay for it. They tried to register individuals to vote multiple times, or tried to register ineligible people to vote. Those are crimes, and they're bad. But we haven't been shown that actual /election fraud/ took place there. It's worth investigating, sure, but the people involved had neither the means nor the opportunity to get thousands of nonexistent people to cast ballots.

Remember, you need unobserved access to the ballot box before you can stuff it. Acorn didn't have that, but Diebold did.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Attikos - Anytime voter fraud is mentioned I expect a knee jerk reaction. It wasn't unexpected.

tsadjatko - As soon as I read that statement I knew I was dealing with someone who needs to read a bit more and talk a little less.

jim - Fire for effect! INCOMING!!!

Chasuk - Good to see at least one person over there has some common sense.

jaybird - I'm a political commentary writer and I don't have thin skin because of it. I do find it amusing that when FACTS are presented people want to wade on into them without regard to the truth. I do a lot of reading and research before I ever stroke this keyboard.

Jeff - The problems as presented are right there for you to read. There are 1.8 million dead people on the voter rolls. Why? That's problem #1. There are around 24 million people who are registered to vote in more than one precinct. Why? That's problem #2. ACORN operatives are now sitting in jails across this nation for committing voter fraud. That's not a problem but the fact that ACORN's organizations just changed their name to remain on the federal funding list is Problem #3. Darrell Issa should soon hold hearings on that issue. He's staying a bit busy with Fast & Furious and some other pressing scandals swirling around this administration.

How that is done should be easy. The voter registration rolls are clean and a valid photo ID is presented to the poll worker checking people in to the polling place. I work the polls and have seen some things occur that should never occur.

The last problem is one of the greatest importance and that is a person's right to cast a ballot in a fair election where not even one fraudulent ballot is allowed to be cast.

All the other smoke & mirrors you seem to want to display is insignificant to those who value their right to vote and exercise that civic duty.

The Frog


TheManWithNoPants profile image

TheManWithNoPants 4 years ago from Tucson, Az.

jeff,

Let me give you credit where credit is due. You disagree with out insulting. For me personally, that is monumental. Second, it's obvious that you do quite a bit of research.

But information is like a loaded gun. You can use it for protection and survival, or you can use it to commit murder. (or perhaps like me .. target shooting) With all due respect, you've done a bit of sleight of hand here. "The frauds committed were more against Acorn than anything else" Jeff, fraud by proxy still sucks. ACORN is a very bad thing. Only the tip of the iceberg has been exposed publicly. That's not fact, it's opinion, but they have been caught with both hands in the cookie jar. Organizations and businesses don't reemerge under different names, unless they've done something to destroy the credibility of the original name. In my opinion, you have done the same thing here that you accuse the conservatives are doing. You've swept acorn under the rug, and shined the spotlight on what YOU feel is the bigger issue. It's a good debate tool, unless you're debating a pro.

You've gotten to know your Uncle Google very well, and you have been very civil. But right is right, and wrong is always wrong. If one dead guy voted, he didn't vote alone, O'dell is a dirt bag. I don't like crooks, and I don't care whether they are Democrat, Republican. If you stop by my place, you're going to find out that while I am a conservative, I'll roll on a crooked Republican before you arrive at the scene. Once again, I don't like dirt bags. I wish that some of my liberal brothers and sisters would take ownership of that which is broken on their side, while we do the same. Hard to do. I know.

jim


Jeff Berndt profile image

Jeff Berndt 4 years ago from Southeast Michigan

"Jeff - The problems as presented are right there for you to read. There are 1.8 million dead people on the voter rolls. Why? That's problem #1. There are around 24 million people who are registered to vote in more than one precinct. Why? That's problem #2."

Sure, those are problems, but minor ones. A dead person remaining on the voter rolls by itself is a bookkeeping error, not voter fraud. Someone using a dead person's name to cast a ballot would be voter fraud.

A person being registered to vote in two places is a bookkeeping error. That person actually voting on both places would be voter fraud.

And yes, faking names on voter registration forms counts as voter fraud, and ought to be prosecuted. But unless those fake names actually get registered, and someone actually uses them to cast a ballot, the integrity of the election has not been compromised. And that's the problem we /don't/ have (not because of Acorn, anyway), but which you're trying to convince us that we do have.

"Let me give you credit where credit is due. You disagree with out insulting."

I do my best. Sometimes I fail. :/ But I've learned that rudeness never ever works.

"With all due respect, you've done a bit of sleight of hand here. "The frauds committed were more against Acorn than anything else" Jeff, fraud by proxy still sucks."

No, no. See, I'm not excusing anyone who falsified a voter registration. That's bad, and ought to be prosecuted. My point is that nobody has shown that those false registrations resulted in ballots cast and counted, or a real eligible voter's ballot to be thrown out or changed. This is what election-tampering looks like, and nobody has proven that Acorn has ever accomplished that, or even tried to. As I said before, you need access to the ballot box before you can stuff it.

There's a problem, yes. But it's not the problem Frog is saying we have.

"If one dead guy voted, he didn't vote alone,"

Agreed, but nobody has shown that any 'corpses' have actually cast ballots as a result of Acorn's incompetence.


WillStarr profile image

WillStarr 4 years ago from Phoenix, Arizona

It happens all the time. Illegal votes by felons in Minnesota were enough for Democrat Al Franken to beat Republican candidate Norm Coleman and claim the Senate seat. But once it's done, and the race is over, the results are never changed.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Jeff - The problems remain the problems. I know you're not that naive to think there isn't voter fraud, hasn't been voter fraud and will continue to be voter fraud until the system is fixed. If you are that naive then let the rest of us discuss the issue and you read along.

ACORN wasn't incompetent so I'm not sure where you got that statement from. In fact, the organization was very crafty at what they did. Did I happen to mention that Obama was a trainer for ACORN?

I'm like "jim." When you research make sure you're researching the right data to bring to the debate table. So far, I don't see any logical argument you've presented to NOT fixing the problems as we know they exist. Our voting system should not be made vulnerable to the possibility of fraud and abuse. That is exactly the problem.

You asked for links and I supplied links and then you head off in a totally different direction. That's not debate that's smoke and mirrors and denial.

Will - What you cited happened in Minnesota. It was fraud and no, once an election is over they won't reverse course but the problem has been identified and maybe the fix is now in.

The Frog


cjv123 profile image

cjv123 4 years ago from Michigan

Jeff B. Seriously??!

This isn't JUST ACORN and your bogus assertion that a few employees want to make the boss proud doesn't mean ACORN committed voter fraud is a shockingly clueless thing to say. WTF?! As in Winning our Future of course...

Are you SERIOUS?!

"Guilford County, NC -- A new study released by the non partisan group Pew Center reported that one out of every eight voter registration records across the United States is wrong.

The 24 million records are outdated, duplicated, and in some cases, registered voters are dead."

http://www.digtriad.com/news/article/214408/57/Ele...

Indiana election chief found guilty of voter fraud:

http://news.yahoo.com/indiana-election-chief-found...

This IS ACORN and it's not some employee trying to kiss up to bossy man/woman:

http://www.newser.com/story/40765/acorn-inflated-n...

Here's some of your compadres:

Liberal group files fake voter forms:

http://www.newser.com/story/39618/liberal-group-fi...

Now your demand of Frog is RIDICULOUS. We're not in a freaking court of law here. He doesn't have to PROVE THAT VOTER FRAUD ACTUALLY HAPPENED. I just showed you a tiny, tiny smidgen of all the voter fraud going on - it is common knowledge. Just like it's common knowledge Obama committed voter fraud against Hillary in Chicago. Everyone knows he stole the nomination from her and Chicago did it for him. To demand someone PROVE that voter fraud ACTUALLY HAPPENED is obnoxious. Prove it didn't given just the evidence I posted here. HONESTLY! Seriously? Are you this anal retentive and obnoxious in your every day life or just because you're around conservatives in this Hub???


drbj profile image

drbj 4 years ago from south Florida

It's hard to understand, Frog, why some folks are so opposed to showing a photo ID when they vote. Heck, we need our driver's license with our photo on it when we drive. That ID requirement could do a lot to cut down on fraud. Just sayin'.


poetvix profile image

poetvix 4 years ago from Gone from Texas but still in the south. Surrounded by God's country.

Sir Frog, I think you make some good points. The problem with the dead doesn't end at the voting booths. Their identities are often stolen and used by the living who could and I'm sure have at some point voted. I see it's been brought up that there has yet to be a single conviction. I respectfully submit that while that may be true, it doesn't change the fact that it goes on. Has everyone gotten a ticket every time they ever went over the speed limit? No, but the law was still broken.

To me, there exists an equally alarming trend in voting. That is the software used and the electronic voting system is problematic, and inaccurate at best. Look at the recent things where winners have been announced with less than half of those voting having even done so. There is no way to prove or disprove the electronic data. Anyone that has dealt with software or computers much knows this is not a good thing. I think we need to go back to good old fashioned pieces of paper and every last one of them being counted!

God bless you, Sir Frog and I hope you keep hopping on for a long time to come.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Carol - Good links. I knew when I wrote this that it is a sensitive subject to both sides of the political spectrum. One side sees the need to address the problem and the other side wants to ignore the problem and deny its existence. I encourage anyone to become a poll watcher and see what goes on. I watched some really strange things trying to be pulled in the 2010 election in the precinct where I was on duty.

poetvix - There are enough links along this thread now proving that it has happened and people have been convicted to gag a maggot. Nuff said?

The Frog


Josak profile image

Josak 4 years ago from variable

Fair eneough then, I will do the right thing and say that I agree with your suggestion under the following conditions only, #1 The ID is free #2 The money to make it comes out of the state coffers as decided by their electorate, given both those conditions I am for it.

I am agreeing with frog... obviously I need a stiff drink :P


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Josak - The states that have voter ID laws on the books have what you think they should have.

The Frog


Caleb DRC profile image

Caleb DRC 4 years ago

Solid information, Frog. Thanks for doing your homework.


Ghost32 4 years ago

Frog: In Arizona in 2010, we had several close elections in which voter fraud was strongly suspected. The smelliest one of the bunch involved incumbent Raoul Grijalva, U.S. Representative from Tucson. The challenger, Ruth McClung, was ahead in the polls by several percent but still "managed" to lose on Election Day.

Which can happen, but there were specific allegations of fraud (busloads of illegals with cash and meals provided to "go vote for Grijalva", for one). Many pages of evidence were forwarded to the appropriate authorities for investigation...where they sort of...rotted.

Point being, a low conviction rate is NOT prima facie evidence of innocence. If the fix is in at the state level and there is NO INVESTIGATION, convictions are--shall we say--highly unlikely.


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 4 years ago from Rural Arizona

I just keep rolling this subject around in my head, and can't come up with any valid reason why anyone would object to showing ID to vote. I really doubt I personally know very few people who don't carry ID with them in the form of a drivers license. It seems the biggest protest is that those who don't drive would be forced to pay for a state issued picture ID.

Try going to the airport and boarding a plane without a picture ID. Sorry, no ID, no airplane ride. Perhaps the airlines should pay for everyone without ID to get a picture ID in case they ever want to fly?

I think the last time I renewed my passport it cost me $35 but it might have been more. Try telling the government you won a vacation in Greece but don't want to spend any money on a passport so you can leave and re-enter the USA.

I'm sorry but if anyone is really serious about doing their civic duty and voting, should it not be up to them to figure out how to get a picture ID card? To make a picture ID just another entitlement is crazy. Heck, I'll bet if they contacted any candidate running for office with a promise to vote for them in trade for the money for a picture ID, they would get a check in the mail. To turn a voter ID requirement into just another entitlement demand is just plain wrong.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Caleb - You got it and thanks.

Fred - I would bet dollars to donuts Arizona has illegals who vote in every election. They know the system quite well as far as obtaining identification so they can begin bleeding the social services systems.

OP - For the state to issue a state a valid photo ID in Texas I believe it costs $10.00. If a cop stops you then you better be prepared to prove who you are. It can get a bit testy if you don't. The "I don't have an ID and you can't make me have one" is a lame argument. I can't think of anyone I know who doesn't have one.

There is no logical reason that I have ever heard for people not to produce a valid photo ID to vote. But I'm still waiting. But I did say logical and not emotional.

TFP


tsadjatko profile image

tsadjatko 4 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

Frog: The only valid reason for someone not to produce a valid photo ID to vote is that they do not have the mental capacity to enable them to obtain one (in which case why should they be voting?) But now you have heard of a valid reason.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

tsadjatko - You're onto something. I could disqualify a bunch of folks from voting with that rationale though. I understand what you mean though. Mentally incapacitated people can't vote in most jurisdictions.

The Frog


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 4 years ago from Rural Arizona

FP - You got me stuck in a mental loop with this one.

It is interesting that the biggest objection to requiring voter ID is the cost to obtain the ID card. I'm curious what percentage of legal citizens of voting age have no form of picture ID they carry with them? This of course is after the whiners admit there may just be a touch of voter fraud that should be eliminated. Thus the cost of this ID should be passed on to the taxpayers.

I can assure you that if I knew someone with a burning desire to vote but could not do so because they lacked ID, I would provide them transportation and pay for the damn ID myself. I think most Americans would feel the same way.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

OP - I'd even open the passenger doors of my truck so they could pile in since the PEW study found that there are about 54 million people eligible to vote who haven't registered or dropped out of the process because of sheer disgust with the politics they see in Washington DC.

TFP


Jeff Berndt profile image

Jeff Berndt 4 years ago from Southeast Michigan

"You asked for links and I supplied links and then you head off in a totally different direction. That's not debate that's smoke and mirrors and denial."

I asked for links to prove your assertions that Acorn was stealing elections. Your links proved that Acorn workers turned in incomplete voter registrations, registrations with false addresses, registrations with false names, etc. And this is a Bad Thing, and ought to be prosecuted. That far, we agree.

What you have NOT proven (and so far, nobody seems able to prove) is your assertion that any of this actually resulted in a bogus ballot being counted as good, or a valid ballot being discounted as bad.

A dead person remaining on the voter rolls is a relatively minor thing. Someone using that dead person's name to cast a ballot is much more serious. One is a clerical error; the other can taint an election. Our disagreement comes from the fact that you're trying to say that they're exactly the same and we should be freaking out about the minor one (which is happening) as if it were the major one (which is not happening as far as we know).

"I know you're not that naive to think there isn't voter fraud,"

Oh, I'm sure people try. But I'm also sure that in the US we don't presume guilt. And that's another place where we disagree. You seem to be willing to use the "where there's smoke there's fire" argument and assume that the people you don't like are guilty of nefariously (and successfully) manipulating elections.

But there's reasonable doubt about that.

"Jeff B. Seriously??!"

Yes, seriously.

"Now your demand of Frog is RIDICULOUS. We're not in a freaking court of law here. He doesn't have to PROVE THAT VOTER FRAUD ACTUALLY HAPPENED."

Yeah, he does, if he wants to convince reasonable people that it actually happened. "Everyone knows it must be happening" is not proof, as much as you might like it to be.

"it is common knowledge. Just like it's common knowledge Obama committed voter fraud against Hillary in Chicago. Everyone knows he stole the nomination from her and Chicago did it for him. To demand someone PROVE that voter fraud ACTUALLY HAPPENED is obnoxious."

Oh, I dunno about that. We have this thing I like to call "due process" in this country. It means that "everybody knows" doesn't count as evidence.

"Prove it didn't given just the evidence I posted here. HONESTLY!"

Ah, see, "Prove it didn't happen" isn't on the table (or shouldn't be). The burden of proof is on the prosecution, and the accused is presumed innocent until proven otherwise. (And, I remind you, "everybody knows it happened" isn't proof.)

"Are you this anal retentive and obnoxious in your every day life or just because you're around conservatives in this Hub???"

When dealing with issues like the integrity of elections, and making sure nobody is wrongfully disenfranchised, you're d*mn right I'm anal retentive and obnoxious. If you care about the integrity of elections, you want to be sure that everyone who has the right to vote gets to vote, and you don't want to assume someone is guilty of rigging an election without positive proof.

You may not respect the Constitution, but most of the rest of us do.

Oh, and: "Indiana election chief found guilty of voter fraud"

Did you read that article? A quote: "Republican Secretary of State Charlie White has held on to his office for more than a year despite being accused of lying about his address on voter registration forms.

A Hamilton County jury found White guilty of six of seven felony charges, including false registration, voting in another precinct, submitting a false ballot, theft and two counts of perjury."

That's not Acorn. That's an elected GOP official abusing his power as Secretary of State. You need access to the ballot box before you can stuff it.

Now, as for the more reasonable suggestions, let's start with dead dudes on the voter rolls.

It's a minor problem, but it is true that it's a vulnerability. Removing dead people from the voter rolls isn't a bad idea--as long as they're really dead.

Would you agree that removing a live citizen from the voter rolls (and thus stripping him of his ability to vote) is also a Bad Thing? If you don't, then you lose all credibility as someone who cares about the integrity of our elections. If we're going to purge the dead from the voter rolls, we need to triple check that the person being purged really is dead. That means if you remove John Davidson, RIP, from the roll, you need to check to make sure you're not accidentally removing John Davidson, NDY (Not Dead Yet). Which brings us to duplicate registrations.

How about those duplicate registrations?

One person being registered twice is bad. It opens the door to a single person casting more than one ballot. It's pretty unlikely that there are enough people who are 1)registered multiple times, 2)aware of it, and 3)motivated and able to travel to different locations, stand in line, etc, to cast a second vote on election day to affect the outcome of an election, but I concede that there's a remote possibility of it happening.

But! If you see a person who is registered twice, which name do you strike? Both of them? If you really care about the integrity of the election, you have to be sure which registration is the out-of-date one. I've registered to vote at several addresses over the years. Probably so have most of us. It may be that we're all still on the roll at one or more of our earlier residences. Should the Secretary of State purge /all/ of those registrations? Or should they be required to check first? What happens when you have two people with the same name? Happens all the time, so you can't assume that a name appearing twice (especially relatively common names like James Williams, say) is really a duplicate. It might be two different citizens with the same name. So if we're going to purge duplicate registrations, we have to make sure the Sec of State tracks down each and every duplicate name: we can't assume that any name is bogus and strike it without checking. Not if you really care about the integrity of our elections, anyway.

How about bad addresses?

Okay, someone who claims to live at 2545 Chestnut St, when 2545 Chestnut St is a Burger King, is obviously a fake registration, right? Or it could be a typo. Maybe they actually live at 5245 Chestnut St, a split-level ranch. Or maybe they live at 2545 Chestnut Drive, Lane, Way, or Boulevard. You have to check and make sure before you strike, or you might be wrongly disenfranchising someone, and you'd never want that if you care about the integrity of our elections, would you?

How about the requirement to show a photo ID?

Sure. As long as it's free to get one. Requiring someone to buy something in order to exercise a Constitutional right is, well, unconstitutional. The high court has already struck down poll taxes; making someone pay to obtain a photo ID before they can vote is a de-facto poll tax. Plus, you wouldn't want to strip a citizen of the right to vote simply because they needed the $50 cost of the ID to make rent, would you? No, someone who cares about the integrity of our elections would never want that, and it would be worth the extra government expenditure to ensure that every citizen, regardless of means, is able to exercise their franchise.

In fact, all of the above would cost a lot of money. If you're willing to pay for it all out of the public coffers, I'm right there with you. But in practice, voter registration purges are usually done as cheaply as possible, and often purge the wrong people from the rolls. Duplicate names, even similar names, get cut when they shouldn't be, and the person who was purged doesn't find out until election day, when they try to vote. And then, of course, it's too late to register.

Finally, here's a real-world example of "everybody knows" being a really stupid reason to make a policy decision: http://www.snopes.com/politics/medical/welfare.asp

You'll have to do a little scrolling to get there, but the example is Florida's recent policy of drug-testing welfare recipients. "Everybody knew" that those welf


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Jeff - You just don't get it and never will. Even one vote cast fraudulently is one too many.

TFP


Jeff Berndt profile image

Jeff Berndt 4 years ago from Southeast Michigan

Whoops, got cut off. Basically, my point was that Florida decided to test welfare recipients for drugs on the assumption that a lot of them were users and it would save a bunch of money if we stopped subsidizing their drug habit. So they tested all welfare recipients for illegal drug use, without a warrant, without probable cause, without even reasonable suspicion. But it turns out that less than 2% tested positive for drugs, and Florida had to reimburse the rest of the people they tested to the tune of $30 each, every month.

Total annual savings from not paying drug users? about $80,000. Total annual cost of administering the tests? About $178,000,000. So if you do the math, you'll find that it cost the State of Florida about $177,920,000/year to "solve" a problem that barely existed in the first place, while violating a bunch of people's right to be free from unreasonable search. But it worked out really well for the companies that were contracted to administer the drug tests.

So think about how much money you're willing to waste on solving a nonexistent problem before you decide that "everybody knows" is enough proof to base a policy decision on.


Jeff Berndt profile image

Jeff Berndt 4 years ago from Southeast Michigan

"You just don't get it and never will. Even one vote cast fraudulently is one too many."

How do you feel about even one citizen being wrongfully disenfranchised?

If the answer isn't also "Even one is too many," you have zero credibility as someone who cares about the integrity of our elections.

Get it?


Gusser 4 years ago

The party against voter ID has the most to lose. Their "woe is me" defense is telling. With voter ID they may never win again.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Jeff - Having worked the polls it would be rare if ever. If there was a discrepancy I would send them to the office of the registrar and the problem could be rectified right there on the spot, if it could be fixed it was. They could also cast their ballot there and didn't have to return to the precinct. That office stayed open until at least an hour after the polls closed.

Next excuse please? You sure are a bleeding heat Jeff.

The Frog


Jeff Berndt profile image

Jeff Berndt 4 years ago from Southeast Michigan

"Next excuse please?"

So, you're willing to have the government pay for a careful, systematic, legitimate purging of the voter rolls, double- and triple-checking all questionable entries to make sure that they aren't accidentally deleting someone who shouldn't be deleted? If you're in favor of that, then we don't really disagree.

But if you want to just do a quick purge of anything that looks questionable and hope that it sorts itself out, then we disagree: not on the basics, but on the particulars of how a purge is gone about.

What I'm saying (you may not have noticed, because I didn't come out and explicitly say it) is this: you've convinced me that purging the voter rolls of dead people's names, duplicates of the same person, etc. is a good idea. Well done. I'm admitting that I was wrong and you were right, at least on that point.

But it's also vitally important /not/ to purge people who are real citizens with the right to vote, and that's just as important to me (and should be equally important to everyone who cares about the integrity of our elections). If we're trying to preserve the integrity of our elections, then no expense is too great.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Did you actually read what I wrote. Go back up and read it again and see who is leading the seven state initiative. Since the rolls are so screwed up it will take what it takes to insure a fair election. Jesus, stop whining.

Computers do the majority of the work.

The Frog


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 4 years ago from Rural Arizona

It is interesting how this topic changed from requiring voter ID to drug testing welfare recipients in Florida. I understand however that both subjects are about human rights.

I have the right to know that all elections are fair and honest, truly reflecting the will of the voters. So someone objecting to the ID requirement is stepping on my rights.

As far as drug testing welfare recipients goes, I actually wrote a hub on that. The person working and paying the taxes to provide money for welfare may be subject to random drug testing to keep his or her job. But the person receiving this money earned by someone else should be exempt from random drug testing? Sounds like one or the other side in this equation is having their rights stepped on.

I just view voter ID requirements as a very small issue because it affects such a small number of the population who don't have a picture ID.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

OP - It's the old if you aren't winning the debate change the subject strategy. Good grief.

The Frog


Jeff Berndt profile image

Jeff Berndt 4 years ago from Southeast Michigan

"Jesus, stop whining."

Wow, did you read what /I/ wrote? I tell you that you've convinced me, that I was wrong and you were right, and I get nothing but contempt. How depressing.

Poolman, the Florida thing was just an example of how making a decision based on what "everybody knows" is a bad idea. I know that the integrity of our voter rolls and drug-testing welfare recipients in Florida aren't the same thing. We can talk about that issue, too, but Frog would probably prefer it if we did it elsewhere.

"I just view voter ID requirements as a very small issue because it affects such a small number of the population who don't have a picture ID."

And I view it that if one person is denied their right to vote, that's just as much of a crime against the integrity of our elections as one fraudulent ballot cast.

If you are okay with disenfranchising some citizens, you can't really care about the integrity of our elections.


Jeff Berndt profile image

Jeff Berndt 4 years ago from Southeast Michigan

"It's the old if you aren't winning the debate change the subject strategy."

No, silly, it's the old "if you realize you were in the wrong, change your mind" strategy. I like to be right. I like it so much that I change my mind when I'm wrong. And I was wrong, and you were right. The vulnerabilities presented by duplicate registrations are important enough to spend money to fix them.

But it's also equally important not to wrongfully disenfranchise a legitimate voter. Do you disagree?


Gusser 4 years ago

I called 911. The WAAAAAAAMbulance is on the way.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

You have yet to offer any logical explanation to why the problem shouldn't be fixed. I did use the word "logical" and not "liberal emotions." You just want to continue to deny what is obvious. You probably need to run along now as recess is over.

You're debating skills are sorely lacking. I don't respond to nonsense too well.

The Frog


Jeff Berndt profile image

Jeff Berndt 4 years ago from Southeast Michigan

"You have yet to offer any logical explanation to why the problem shouldn't be fixed."

That's because I couldn't come up with one (other than the cost of doing it right), which is why I CHANGED MY MIND.

You seem to be so obsessed with winning the debate that you somehow missed the fact that you've won the debate!

(Gosh, it's almost reached the point where I might have to start disagreeing with you again just so both halves of the conversation make sense....) :P

And you haven't yet answered /my/ very. Reasonable. Question.

Is stopping a legitimate voter from voting as bad as casting a bogus ballot? Yes or no?


tsadjatko profile image

tsadjatko 4 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

A little off topic but for those that think that every vote counts, think again.

In fact, in Maine they are openly saying that they do not.

The lame stream media has been reporting that Mitt Romney won Maine's GOP caucus by a very narrow margin, under two hundred votes, but they've known from the evening of the caucus on, that the caucus was plagued with problems.

Fraud type problems...

Video:http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedd...

Remember Iowa was the caucus that launched Obama in the 2008 election when Hillary was the favorite. I wonder how legit that caucus was.


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

Jeff - Since this is my Hub and not yours then I can choose to who I respond to. As I said, I don't bother to answer nonsense. The thesis here is that a registration problem exists. Do you understand the thesis? You want to dodge and duck, play nip and tuck, go off of and stay off of topic and you're quickly wearing your welcome out with nonsense logic.

tsadjatko - Interesting that when they included the "lost" uncounted ballots that were suddenly found they haven't released the results of the recount. Sure there isn't voter fraud but it occurs across party lines no doubt.

The Frog


Old Poolman profile image

Old Poolman 4 years ago from Rural Arizona

Under our present voting systems, the opportunity for fraud is high. We all remember the hanging chad thing that seemed to go on forever. We read reports of skewed computer data and hackers affecting the outcome of the votes. Mail in ballots could be a huge area of concern regarding multiple votes by the same person, votes getting lost or not counted, and so forth.

Surely there is enough brain power in this country to come up with a standardized and fool proof voting system. The system could even be tied to state data bases to ensure the person voting was still alive. A voter ID like a credit card could be issue to every registered voter with a magnetic strip identifying the voter. Like on simple polls on websites, it could record your vote and not let you vote twice in the same election.

The IRS has computers that check and cross check every penny of reported income on your SS number. This same system then checks your Tax forms to see if you reported that penny of income. The technology is here right now, so why not use it for voting?


The Frog Prince profile image

The Frog Prince 4 years ago from Arlington, TX Author

OP - That's what PEW is setting up with the cooperation of 7 states and the SS Administration. The computers do the majority of the work with minimal staffing once it is up and running.

TFP


dahoglund profile image

dahoglund 4 years ago from Wisconsin Rapids

When the dead person gets his voter ID is his picture taken in or out of the coffin?


Mmargie1966 profile image

Mmargie1966 4 years ago from Gainesville, GA

I don't have any "links" off hand, but I have PERSONAL EXPERIENCE volunteering for the Elections Office. In the State of Florida, you do NOT need photo identification to vote. You sign an affidavit saying that you are who you say you are. REALLY? We are to believe that there is NO voter fraud with a rule like that? I would love to believe that all Americans, dead or alive, are honest, but I'd be a fool to do so.

Also, I know of a woman who registered her DOG...and he got a voter's registration card!

If you don't think there is a tremendous amount of voter fraud going on in this country, I do believe you have your head in the sand.


Attikos profile image

Attikos 4 years ago from East Cackalacky

Mmargie, I too have spent time in politics and with elections, and in my experience it's those who benefit the most from vote fraud who deny it's going on. Human nature is a wonderfully convoluted thing.


tsadjatko profile image

tsadjatko 4 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

So the left says there is no evidence of voter fraud! I guess liberals don't count buying votes!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=trVpHB0XAkI

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working