October 21, 2006

NO FRAUD FOR YOU!

Supreme Court upholds Arizona's photo ID law for elections (Amanda Crawford, 20 Oct 2006, AZCentral.com)

Arizona voters will have to present identification at the polls on Nov. 7 after all.

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled Friday that Arizona can go ahead with requiring voters to present a photo ID, starting with next month's general election, as part of the Proposition 200 that voters passed in 2004. The ruling overturns an Oct. 5 decision by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which put the voter ID rules on hold this election cycle.
The Supreme Court on Friday did not decide whether the new voter ID rules are constitutional. That decision is still pending in federal district court.
As the last sentence indicates, a final ruling has yet to occur, but the cat's out of the bag and it's very hard to put angry cats back into bags. Posted by Pepys at October 21, 2006 2:03 PM
Comments

When ID's are the general rule, the Dems will never win another election.

Posted by: erp at October 21, 2006 6:08 PM

EWrp is completely correct about this.

We need to go biometric, and make election fraud a felony with mandatory hard time and loss of future voting privileges. Technology can make it quick and easy.

Better yet, make flipping on the pols who set up the fraud the only way to avoid the mandatory.

Let the brain-dead flat-line libertine and other CINO's who are contemplating selling out this election ponder this issue if they dare contemplate Medizing in the midterms.

Posted by: Lou Gots at October 21, 2006 8:47 PM

While unlikely, if Rendell loses in PA, a voter ID law signed by Governor Swann would probably reduce the vote in Philadelphia County by 15%.

GA and a few other states already have the law - all they need is for the SCOTUS to stop the judges from blocking the people.

Is Doyle going to lose in WI because he vetoed a voter ID law? Milwaukee is one of the worst offenders, after all.

Posted by: jim hamlen at October 21, 2006 9:36 PM

How does this cut down vote fraud in all-mail-in elections?

People are getting all worked up over old style Cook County in-person or electronic fraud (look up "Diebold") and ignoring where the real future is: registration and absentee/mail-in.

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at October 21, 2006 10:17 PM

Raoul, somewhere in our great country there must be someone smart enough to figure out how to make sure those who request an absentee ballot are bona fide registered voters and then keep track of that ballot so the vote isn't duplicated. Perhaps it won't be a perfect system and some nerdy genius will figure out how to beat it, but it'll be a darn sight more perfect than what's going on now especially in your neck of the woods.

Posted by: erp at October 21, 2006 10:35 PM

the cat's out of the bag and it's very hard to put angry cats back into bags

That, friend Pepys, is a lovely turn of phrase.

Posted by: Mike Morley at October 21, 2006 11:42 PM

The problem is our opponents have no problem disposing of cats permanently thereby taking them out of the equation.

Posted by: erp at October 22, 2006 9:31 AM

They aren't our opponents if they're disposng of cats.

Posted by: oj at October 22, 2006 9:44 AM

Leaving cats aside, the fraud battle won't be won until absentee/mail voting is abolished. This should become a cause of sorts for right minded people.

A reasonable compromise would be to have elections take place from Sat-Mon, where every voter has to show up in person, show ID, and get his finger dipped.

Oh yeah, no computers, paper ballots only.

Posted by: Bruno at October 22, 2006 10:51 AM

The fraud battle won't ever be won. Americans would never tolerate the level of seciurity y'all seem to want. And voting certainly isn't important enough for them to do so.

Posted by: oj at October 22, 2006 11:03 AM

For a start, what's needed is to stop treating voting as some sort of incovenience and then proposing solutions to make it "easier": Saturday, longer hours, mail in, etc. Treat it as a civic duty (one less onerous than jury duty, even) and also foster the notion that it is important enough that good, "right-thinking" people don't cheat, and those who do (Dems) are not suddenly good and trustworthy people once they get elected. Someone who will cheat to get elected (or let other cheat for him) can't be trusted once in office, either. And those voters who do, deserve the gov't they get (can you say New Orleans? )

Posted by: Raoul Ortega at October 22, 2006 2:05 PM

Voting shouldn't be made easier, only more tightly controlled.

There are volunteers who will take people to polls, btw - if you won't be in town during the election period, you can go to the country offices and pick up your ballots, fill them out and deposit them into the ballot box right then and there.

Posted by: erp at October 22, 2006 5:44 PM
« DIG THAT LAST SENTENCE: | Main | MORE ADDICTIVE THAN HEROIN, MORE LETHAL THAN AIDS »