Talk Elections

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/politics/presidential/Voter-ID-is-well-IDed.html

WOW!  Just wow!  He finally admitted it.

I'm moving to Canada when I turn 18.

Canada's Americanizing.

And...he's wrong. He's an idiot for thinking so, and he's an even bigger idiot for saying it if he does think so.

It won't help on this topic. Canada has voter ID (http://www.elections.ca/content.aspx?section=vot&dir=ids&document=index&lang=e).

Canada also has better mechanisms in place to administer elections in general.

Canada's only 'Americanizing' in whatever sense Vosem means it because Harper, and even the longest, most glittering reign (which his isn't) must someday come to an end.

He is clearly referring to Philadelphia's history of voter fraud and irregularities.

My thought was that he was referring to voter fraud.  But he worded it really poorly.  And even IF he was referring to voter fraud, the goal shouldn't be to stop Democrat fraudsters.  The goal should be to stop ALL fraudsters, regardless of which way it swings the outcome.

It's Americanizing in the sense that all three parties seem to be moving right -- certainly, the Conservatives of Stephen Harper are more right-wing than Brian Mulroney's PCs; the Liberals of Scott Brison are more right-wing than John Turner's Libs; and former Quebec Liberal Thomas Mulcair's NDs are more right-wing than Ed Broadbent's were.

I may just be getting the wrong impression...but I think in Canada the system is moving right as a whole.

Republicans support this because it will help them win elections.

Democrats support this because it will hurt them win elections.

As do most places. But then again, everywhere else has proper voter registration.

There is little indication of that actually being true in Indiana and Georgia.

Could you define that?

Yes, automatic universal registration to all eligible voters (citizens).

Is it so hard to get registered here, really?

Republicans think it will help them, but in reality it won't, because Democrats winning large cities by large numbers isn't due to voter fraud. It's not like Philadelphia or Pittsburgh will be 50-50 because of voter ID, those places are just very strongly Democratic. I doubt this will even really be enforced, there are so many precincts, it's hard to see all of them checking IDs.

For the vast majority of people, no. But "vast majority" isn't good enough.
Obviously also impossible in the US without some other changes...but would be best in theory :)

Obama won Pennsylvania by 605,820 votes.  Your theory is there were 605,821 fraudulent votes cast in Pennsylvania in 2008?!

I can't speak for krazen, but it speaks volumes that the 'insane quote of the year' in your sig is something at the very least 40% of Americans agree with, and probably a majority.

The "every" is what makes it excessive hyperbole.  That 40% or more of Americans think that as a whole things have gotten worse does not mean that they think every single aspect of life has gotten worse.  Still, there must be better candidates for 'insane quote of the year'.

Oh, sure, but it isn't like it'll hurt Rubio or anyone else electorally at all. And the little attention it gets will probably be positive.

You lost Pres elections since 1988. GET OVER IT!

No, of course not. Turzai clearly believes that Romney will narrow the gap by winning the hearts and minds of voters, and the reduction of fraud and irregularities in Philadelphia will close the remainder.

Voter suppression and voter roll purges technically are 'irregularities', albeit not prima facie fraudulent. Democrats (and the American left in general) are historically more prone to 'vote early, vote often', while the American right is historically more prone to 'keep Certain Folk from voting'.

Well, that is an interesting theory, I suppose, but not one that has been shown to be true by strict photo voter ID laws in recent years. If the theory is to 'keep certain folk from voting', certainly voter ID is not the way to do it. See Georgia.


Ghost voting is a well known phenomenon.

http://archives.citypaper.net/articles/101295/article009.shtml
http://articles.philly.com/1995-03-22/news/25701461_1_election-fraud-absentee-ballots-polling-place
http://articles.philly.com/1994-12-08/news/25856495_1_absentee-ballots-dead-voter-election-code-violations

According to the charges, Fani Papanikolau, who also was an election judge last year in the Feltonville section of the 42d Ward, counterfeited 18 absentee ballots in the Nov. 2, 1993, election and cast eight other bogus votes during the last three years.

Fani Papanikolau, 38, is also accused of allowing someone else to pull a voting machine lever in the name of a dead woman, Catherine Barbakos, in the 1993 primary. Overall, Papanikolau is charged with 104 election-code violations.

First, I think the Pennsylvania law is overly restrictive.

Second, in the last two months, I've:

1.  Been called by (Democratic) DA's Office to verify that I signed the Republican Committee member's nominating petition.  (I did.)

2.  Robocalled by my (Democratic) state rep to see if I had ID to vote.

3.  Been called by some Republicans to see if they could use me as a poll watcher to check ID's.  (I cannot sit 13 hours, so I declined.)

4.  Had an actually nonpartisan flyer on my door telling me that I'd need ID to vote.

The PA voter ID law is certainly more restrictive than Canada's. PA appears to only have one of the three prongs Canada uses to verify, and that is a government-issued photo id. Canada allows for two non-photo options as well.

It is actually easier to get welfare benefits in PA that it is to vote, at least in terms of ID and residency.

There is a need for verification of voter's ID, but this law is too draconian.

It would seem more natural to make a uniform standard for ID whether for voting or state benefits.

How can you tell? You don't even live here.

Easily so. 

Consider this.  I've voted in the same polling station for 13 years.  People there know me, and I them.  There is a record of my signature there.  I will have to show ID this time. 

If I lose my driver's license, I cannot vote, in spite of the fact that I have two signed credit cards, a signed lease and numerous utility bills in my name, a signed bank card, a signed voter registration card, a signed library card, and signed verification of my IQ range.

The law permits you to use a passport, and/or vote on a provisional ballot.

We need voter ID, when I went to vote all I had to do was say my address. You could find that on the White Pages. I'm not for disenfranchising anyone, but fraud is way too easy. Universal registration is also a good idea.

Of course, this assumes everyone voting is a good thing. For the sake of this exercise, let's assume this is true.

Yes, but unlike applying for state benefits, PA voter ID does not let you use two statements such as utility bills with your name and address along with a signature.

I don't have a passport.  :)

What is needed for a provisional ballot?