Wednesday, October 10, 2012
Since last fall's successful referendum requiring Mississippi citizens to show a government-issued photo-identification card, mass confusion has ensued about when and if the law would ever go into effect. For the past year, efforts to explain that no changes to Mississippi election laws can take effect until the U.S. Justice Department says so, which has not happened, have mostly come from the media and civil liberties groups.
One voice that has been curiously silent on explaining the facts to voters, however, has been Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann, where the buck should stop.
As a conservative Republican and one of the chief backers of voter ID, Hosemann can take a certain amount of political satisfaction in helping get the issue on the ballot, through the Legislature and onto Gov. Phil Bryant's desk. Hosemann can even boast to his conservative political cronies of his quietly securing $500,000 in his office's budget appropriation to fight the inevitable legal challenges by the Obama White House.
From the perch of a political spectator, one could argue that Hosemann has been victorious (although from a fiscal responsibility point-of-view, he and his pro-ID brethren should be called out for wasting so much taxpayer money on a plan that was sure to meet legal resistance and has scant evidence to back its need).
But with the DOJ now demanding more evidence that the architects of voter ID did not intend to discriminate against black voters, the feds can basically run out the clock. As a result, even Hosemann himself has admitted voter ID won't be effect for the Nov. 6 general election. Hosemann testified to that effect recently at a legislative hearing at the Capitol.
What Hosemann has irresponsibly failed to do is explicitly tell Mississippi voters--and potential poll workers--that voter ID is not required this election. There is no statement that we can find on the SOS' website nor have we seen a press release alerting people that photo ID is unnecessary this time around. Instead, what we've seen are misleading posters offering help in securing ID, which falsely implies one is needed.
We understand that Hosemann holds a partisan position and believes he needs to tow the party line, but the people of Mississippi elected him to run elections, not perpetually run for office. If he or any other public official believes in his heart of hearts that rampant voter fraud needs to be quelled, then produce the evidence, prosecute the offenders and send them to prison. Otherwise, Secretary Hosemann should stop playing politics and tell Mississippians the truth: You do not need photo ID to vote on Nov. 6.
Read the full story on this issue here.
Comments
notmuch 11 years, 6 months ago
I must admit that I am somewhat confused, because I have never heard Delbert say anything other than voter ID will NOT be required for this election. You mention "misleading posters offering help in securing ID, which falsely implies one is needed". Hmm, I saw a billboard yesterday offering help in declaring bankruptcy, so I am so confused that I think I need to declare bankruptcy. You also mention that Delbert "believes he needs to tow (sic) the party line, but the people of Mississippi elected him to run elections". It seems to me that he wants to run elections; however, he wants the elections to be run honestly, which unfortunately for the opponents of voter ID means that dead people will no longer be allowed to vote.
It is also confusing to me that you complain about "wasting taxpayer money" due to the fact that voter ID is sure to be challenged by those who depend on voter fraud (Hmm, I suppose this is similar to Obama's promise to provide legal assistance to government contractors and suppliers who agree to violate the WARN act by delaying their employees of impending layoffs due to sequestration until after the election--oops, wrong story). However, you later suggest that instead of acting responsibly to prevent voter fraud, the preferred alternative would be to wait for the fraud to occur, then spend millions more to prosecute and incarcerate the offenders. (I wonder if you have thought about that method instead of using gun control to prevent gun crimes--just wait for the shootings to occur, then try to apprehend, prosecute, and incarcerate the shooters--oops, wrong story, wrong party line.)
donnaladd 11 years, 6 months ago
notmuch, no one including you or Mr. Hosemann has demonstrated that voter ID will help stop actual voter fraud in Mississippi. However, it will be expensive, both in legal resources and in ensuring that people have right IDs, etc. It is a poll tax on voting. That's just a fact.
It's interesting, considering that you present yourself as a Republican, that you are calling for expensive unnecessary regulation (of voting, no less!) just in case people start using fake names to vote instead of thttp://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/v...">he actual voter fraud that the Republican Party was caught paying for last month in F lorida and California, which wouldn't be stopped by voter ID.
I suspect you agree with the Pennsylvania lawmaker who said outright that voter ID will get Romney elected, but of course you won't admit that.
Because, no other motive makes sense for an actual conservative.
Also, if you have a video of Mr. Hosemann in a press conference or a press release he's sent out ensuring that everyone knows we don't need ID this election, so don't cause mass poll confusion over it, please feel free to post it as well.
scrappy1 11 years, 6 months ago
James O’Keefe’s Project Veritas has verified the intent and preparations to commit voter fraud, catching a DNC paid organizer helping people planning to commit voter fraud. http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/video-obam...">http://www.wnd.com/2012/10/video-obam... Voter ID means , one citizen, one vote as it should be.
brjohn9 11 years, 6 months ago
James O'Keefe is a criminal who has repeatedly doctored video to lie about whatever organization he targets. If he is your only source of evidence, you are making a self-refuting argument.
donnaladd 11 years, 6 months ago
Yeah, that's weird, scrappy. You've got to be able to do better than O'Keefe. Nobody believes him but crazy people.
notmuch 11 years, 6 months ago
Donna, it is common sense that voter ID will help stop "actual" voter fraud (hmm, is that like the "actual" rape mentioned by that idiot a few weeks ago?) in Mississippi (or anywhere else). Yes, there is an expense involved--but nowehere near the expense that will be incurred if the suggestion in the article is followed to wait for the fraud to occur, then prosecute and incarcerate the offenders. Hey, it's expensive to regulate doctors, engineers, etc.; let's just do away with that expense--surely nobody would be dishonest and unethical enough to practice without a license.
I looked back at my post to see where I presented myself as a Republican, but could not find it, so I am assuming it is because I am in favor of moral and ethical behavior rather than allowing dead people to vote.
I thought we were talking about Mississippi voter fraud here, but I did click on your link to the article about fraud elsewhere. That article stated that as soon as the Republican Party was made aware of the fraud perpetrated by the group named, they immediately severed ties to them. Just for the record, had this not been the case, I would be coming down just as hard on the Republicans as I do on the usual perpetrators. I believe that a vote should be an actual indication of the opinion of the electorate, regardless of the parties and issues involved.
I can also send you numerous links to articles about voter fraud perpetuated by Democrats, but I know from past experience how that works--you deny anything in someone else's post that goes against your beliefs and demand a link to prove it (if it's on the internet, it must be true). If a link is provided, it is immediately discredited (see your response to scrappy1).
When I think about it, your suspicion that I agree with the statement by the Pennsylvanian that voter ID will get Romney elected might not be too far off, since it is fairly common knowledge that voter fraud tends to run in Democratic circles. However, your statement that "no other motive makes sense for an actual (there's that word again) conservative" could not be further from the truth. I cannot think of any "actual" conservative person I know who is not in favor of honesty in the polling place.
I will never forget the first time I voted in 1976 (21 was the voting age back then), and I was absolutely shocked when I was not required to show anyone proof of who I was to cast my vote. I could not believe that our country, which was founded on the principle of democracy, actually elected our leaders in such a manner that would allow votes to be stolen so easily. My amazement has continued at this inexcusable situation year after year, and unfortunately it still seems that the powers who benefit from this are determined to keep it that way.
By the way, that first vote I cast was for Jimmy Carter--wish I could take that one back!
donnaladd 11 years, 6 months ago
Ah, but notmuch, people who want more gun regulation use your same argument: It doesn't matter whether "common sense" (or even actual studies) show that more guns mean more deaths; they don't want regulation of a sacred right.
What is common sense to me, and also kind of an American principle, is that we don't regulate voting in any way without actual evidence that it's needed.
Meantime, the attempts to combat "voter fraud" are not focusing on the actual voter fraud. I'm really surprised that doesn't bother you and others more. And it shouldn't matter whether you're a Republican or not.
Meantime, there is evidence on video that Republicans think voter ID will get Republicans elected. See above video. Please don't treat Americans like we're stupid. You can't say you don't want unnecessary and expensive regulation while supporting unnecessary and expensive regulation. It's hypocritical.
As for the links you have about voter fraud: Should I assume they're not about the kinds of voter fraud that voter ID would actually target? I'm guessing you'd post them if not -- unless they're from one of the crazy-people sites that no one on here but scrappy would believe.
I never said Dems wouldn't commit voter fraud. Clearly, there are stupid people in all parties (which is why I don't ascribe to one, choosing people and positions over party platforms). The problem is that Republicans hankering for voter ID cannot, or will not, present evidence that there is a real problem that needs legislation like voter ID instead of better enforcement.
And I'm sure you realize that voter ID presents a whole new level of enforcement (poll delays, etc.) problems, considering the folks who volunteer to run many of the polls. It adds the potential for voter suppression beyond showing the ID itself, as its strongest supporters well know.
notmuch 11 years, 6 months ago
Donna, I wish I had time to stay on top of these responses, but unfortunately I am late, so I will just have to apologize for that. I don't quite understand your first statement, in which you say that people who want more gun regulation don't want regulation, but what I was attempting to do was to compare the much higher cost of waiting for voter fraud to occur so that the perpetrators could be prosecuted and incarcerated, rather than simply preventing it from occurring in the first place by implementing voter ID, with the similar situation regarding gun control. Of course, my comparison was obviously a little dig at the gun control crowd, but I do think my point was valid--if one does believe that there is a correlation between requring more regulation and registration of guns and lower gun crimes, and that it is preferable to spend taxpayers' money on such regulation instead of on prosecution and incarceration of gun criminals, then the same logic should suggest that it is preferable to spend taxpayers' money on prevention of voter fraud perpetration on the front end also. It costs taxpayers to register sex offenders, but I still think that is better than letting them commit sex crimes and then prosecuting and incarcerating them--unless the goal of punishment is considered more important than protecting the victims. Similarly, I would rather not be a victim of having my vote stolen than to have my vote and rest in the assurance that the vote thief is caught.
What does not pass the common sense test to me is that citizens are required to show proof of identity in order to register to vote, but if these same citizens are required to show proof of identity to cast a vote, it is somehow considered discriminatory--but only against certain groups. And yes, it does bother me that all forms of voter fraud are not attacked with more effort.
Again, I probably agree that most people believe that voter ID will tend to help Republicans--as bubba Clinton said, it's arithmetic--when dead people can't vote, Democrats receive fewer votes. I don't quite understand how my agreement with that equates to treating Americans like we are stupid.
I will try to find time to send you a few links regarding evidence of voter fraud; here is one just for starters; http://www.exposeobama.com/2012/02/18...">http://www.exposeobama.com/2012/02/18... I will await your discrediting of this link.
notmuch 11 years, 6 months ago
Sorry--I had a typo. The last sentence of my first paragraph should read in part "have my vote stolen".
notmuch 11 years, 6 months ago
Okay, I am cheating here--I was not aware of the limitation on characters for posting (hmm, I suppose I am actually considered a character on this site), so I am continuing my response:
Yes, there are many stupid people in all parties, which is understandable since the parties are cross-sections of the American populace--oops, looks like we both agree there is some stupidity out there. I will talk to Delbert about presenting evidence of the type of fraud that voter ID will prevent; although I doubt that will lessen the partisan objection, at least it should eliminate the excuse that it is unnecessary.
I'm not sure I understand your statement that "Republicans hankering for voter ID cannot, or will not, present evidence that there is a real problem that needs legislation like voter ID instead of better enforcement". Can you define what kind of enforcement you are talking about? Without a requirement for ID, how can anything be enforced?
Yes, enforcement will be required; however, I don't see that this will cause poll delays. I typically stand in line for several minutes to vote, so the few seconds required for a poll worker to check an ID while we are all standing around should not impact the time required. Can you also please clarify how voter ID "adds the potential for voter suppression"?
goldeneagle97 11 years, 6 months ago
I can tell you just by looking at the name of the site on the link, such a website isn't a credible source. I would say the same if there was a site called exposeromney.com.
brjohn9 11 years, 6 months ago
Notmuch, the link you offered provides absolutely no evidence of voter fraud. All it really does--apart from linking to whackadoodle screeds about how an "army" of Obama "thugs" stole the 2008 election--is cite a study from the Pew Center that found significant errors in voter registration records. The Pew study did not find a single case of voter fraud. Indeed, that was not the point of the study. It also did not call for imposing voter ID requirements, which would do nothing to improve registration records. Instead, it called for common sense steps to make voter registration records more accurate and up-to-date. The main problem appears to be that the records are not updated frequently enough, so they don't always reflect deaths or changes of address. That has nothing to do with fraud.
Please provide a study that actually supports your claim. You claimed you had evidence of voter fraud. We're still waiting for you to share it with us.
notmuch 11 years, 6 months ago
goldeneagle97, I stand in awe of your perceptive powers.
brjohn9, the point was not so much the "whackadoodle" info provided by the Democrats mentioned, but rather the (whackadoodle, I'm sure) study by the Pew Center finding 1.8 million dead people still registered to vote, and another 24 million registrations that are either invalid or inaccurate. Again, the common sense test would indicate that voter ID would prevent votes from being cast in the names of these "registered voters". Yes, I agree that accurate updating of records would be a huge improvement, and one that is long overdue--but a much cheaper and more definitive method would be to implement voter ID. Your statement that the lack of updated records has nothing to do with fraud is incomprehensible.
goldeneagle97 11 years, 6 months ago
You may be in awe of my "perceptive powers", but please enlighten me on the amount of voter fraud actually takes place to even justify voter ID.
brjohn9 11 years, 6 months ago
Notmuch, you claimed to have evidence of fraud. You provided none.
Maintaining accurate voter registration records is distinct from voter fraud. If you can't see that, you may need to study how voting works, or possibly consult a dictionary.
Here's an analogy, to alleviate your incomprehension. The IRS maintains a database of taxpayers identified by Social Security numbers. Let's suppose that errors in the database mean that certain voters are not matched with the right Social Security numbers. Your claim is that this shows people are cheating on their taxes. See the difference? To extend the analogy the rest of the way, you suggest that requiring people to show photo ID when they file their taxes will fix problems with the IRS database. Do you see how nonsensical that claim is?
Sign in to comment
Or login with:
OpenID