Ellison’s Corruption Protection Act
By Mitch Berg
Keith Ellison stands up for corruption:
Requiring photo IDs to vote in federal elections would be banned under legislation introduced Wednesday by Rep. Keith Ellison, who said such requirements disenfranchise minorities, the poor, women, elderly and young people.
“While photo IDs seem harmless, they are in fact the modern day poll tax,” Ellison, D-Minn., said in a statement.
While appeals to logic with supporters of someone like Keith “X” Ellison are probably futile, one is bidden to try.
How, precisely, is a photo ID – something that is equally available to everyone regardless of race or economic status – anything like a “poll tax” which was, in fact, designed to keep people from the polls?
How dare Ellison trivialize the ghastliness of the Jim Crow laws like this?
Ellison, who serves on the Judiciary Committee, got an important backer for the bill, as the panel’s chairman, Michigan Democrat John Conyers, signed on a co-sponsor.
Color me “not shocked”.
Ellison noted that people do not need a photo ID to vote in Minnesota.
And we’ve not had (much of) a voting scandal, which shows that Minnesotans are either very lucky, very blind or uncommonly virtuous.
“In Minnesota we go to great lengths to make voting as inclusive as possible,” he said, arguing that has helped with voter turnout.
The mania for “turnout” as a goal in and of itself is absurd.
While I support the right of everyone, no matter how ill-informed or ignorant, to vote, I value “inclusiveness” at the polls less than I do “smart voters”. Dragging busloads of ignorant, uninformed people to the polls – whatever the party – does nothing good for our democracy.
Making elections amenable to the ignorant, the uninformed and the lazy (to say nothing of the many Democrat initiatives to re-enfranchise felons – who, factually, seem to be America’s most solid Democrat constituency) cheapens the franchise for everyone – and, more importantly, means this nation will be run by ever-lower common denominators of people.
Fill in the snark of your choice right here.
Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, the ranking Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, said that requiring a voter ID helps preserve the integrity of the voting process.
“The right to vote is one of the most fundamental liberties we have as Americans,” he said. “And to protect that right, we must ensure that those who vote do so legally.”
But “the integrity of the voting process” is the last thing Keith “X” Ellison would seem to care about.
But what on earth is the big problem with ensuring people are who they say they are?
November 1st, 2007 at 12:38 pm
I heard the comment before that race relations must be pretty good if the biggest problem someone can find is that someone else has a small Confederate flag on a purse (related to a school issue from a couple of years ago).
African-Americans had to have an ID. If that’s the worst thing they had to put up with in the old south, then I guess the whole civil rights movement wasn’t necessary.
November 1st, 2007 at 12:42 pm
Heard a first hand story about the nursing homes in Eau Claire Wisc. Democrats go to the rooms with absentee ballots and tell the residents to vote for the Democrat candidates.
Republicans know about it, but in true Repubican fashion, they sit around and bitch about it but don’t do anything to take care of the issue.
November 1st, 2007 at 1:44 pm
I thought a trip to the DMV was supposed to be the conservative’s paradigm example of a trip to hell. Seems like a heavy barrier to me. Indeed you immediately say you support it because it deters turnout by “ignorant, the uninformed and the lazy”.
If I am registered to vote, why should I have to prove my identity. If you say it is necessary to deter fraud, the utter lack of actual voter fraud proves the rules are not needed.
Personally, I favor a small government that does not pick and choose to whom it will make voting “amenable” .
November 1st, 2007 at 1:54 pm
So we have one vote for “enable fraud”.
Duly noted.
November 1st, 2007 at 1:54 pm
[...] Mitch Berg notes Rep. Keith Ellison’s support for an anti-voter ID bill. As usual, there’s the comparisons to requiring a voter ID to “poll taxes” and the like. Such comparisons are an insult to people’s intelligence. So long as voter ID requirements are uniformly enforced there’s absolutely no reason why such rules should not be in place. You have to have an ID to drive, to get on a plane, and to do many other common tasks. There’s no reason to not have photo IDs for voter registration. [...]
November 1st, 2007 at 1:59 pm
Oh, come on Rick,
Small, don’t fix what aint broke, goverment falls far into second fiddle land when it comes to keeping people so poor that even having the money for an ID, or keeping that ID from being taken, from voting.
I mean, the tens of millions of dollars spent in investigating voting fraud since 2002 has found virtually NO evidence of fraud – and there is no real problem to solve, but keeping people who might forget their ID from voting, NOW THAT’S a cause worth bitching for.
Mitch X Berg, champion of Fraudulent Claims of Corruption wants to know if you’re for spending time needlessly on non-problems, or are you in favor of keeping the ‘idiots’ from voting. That would be Mitch X Berg, champion of not sneering at the huddled masses – ya know, those huddled masses that he recently said don’t have the brains to be voting.
So we have one clear vote for keeping exceedingly poor people from voting, as well as one vote for violating the fundemental principle of not inhibiting voter access unless truly required.
Duly noted.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:01 pm
Let’s see. In most cases, you need a picture ID to use a credit card, pay for groceries with a personal check, and any of a thousand more daily mundane tasks. But to perform one of the most basic and important functions in our republic…which only usually happens once per year…you don’t? Better yet, you can have others say you are who you are and still not have a picture ID to actually PROVE it.
Voter fraud has made the DFL what it is today, so its no surprise when they fight against basic common sense. But at least we have “Poll Watcher” Dougie the Frycook lurking at precincts…
November 1st, 2007 at 2:05 pm
Yeah, peebie…those “exceeding poor” people can’t afford a damned $15.50 to get an ID that lasts for years. That sure is a financial burden. They might have to cut back on cigarettes or beer for a week, huh? That sure is a burden.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:05 pm
“While I support the right of everyone, no matter how ill-informed or ignorant, to vote . . .”
Why do you think stupid people should be allowed to vote? Seriously. How is the governance of this great republic served by allowing idiots to choose our political leaders? This isn’t an ideological rant, there as many dumb republicans as there are dumb democrats.
I propose this party-neutral plan: everyone fills out two ballots. The ballots are identical, but the order of the candidates, referendums & what not is changed. If the choices a voter makes on the two ballots don’t match they are rendered null & void.
Voting should be harder, not easier. People don’t value something they get for free.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:07 pm
Actually Dave, in most cases, you DON’T need a picture ID to use a credit card, as, in most cases, it’s a PIN based debit purchase backed by a credit card.
Past that, your argument is irrelevant. You dont have ANY RIGHT to use a credit card, nor is any proprietor obligated to take your credit card.
Conversely, you have the RIGHT to vote – and that right is implicitly meant to carry the right to do so without any financial intrusion, or unecessary requirements.
When you can prove your claims of voter fraud, which has been exhaustively investigated by the Republicans now through DOJ for nearly 6 years- to nearly NO avail, finding almost NO evidence, well then, maybe, your outrageous (as well as totally, completely, and UTTERLY WRONG) claims could be taken seriously.
Whereas:
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/11/01/60minutes/main3440577.shtml
Mitch X Berg – pro-Iraqi & US Intelligence corruption schill.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:09 pm
Yep, peebie…no voter fraud around here:
-In December 2004, Six volunteers for “Operation Big Vote” entered guilty pleas to dozens of election law violations for filling out the cards with names of the dead and other bogus information at a local McDonalds. Election officials launched an investigation after noticing that among the new voters registered was longtime Alderman Albert “Red” Villa, who died in 1990.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:11 pm
Nope, nope, nope…no voter fraud taking place…
In New Jersey… Dead people cast more than 4,000 votes in 2004, and nearly 11,000 people appear to have voted twice.
In West Virginia At least ten democrats entered guilty pleas for voter fraud in Logan and neighboring Lincoln County. Votes were bought in these West Virginia counties with booze, cash, payment of college tuition, and promises of gravel roads!
November 1st, 2007 at 2:14 pm
You have the right to vote…as long as you can prove WHO YOU ARE.
But that’s no big deal for you.
Nope, nope, nope….ain’t no fraud happenen’ around here!
MN 2004 During a traffic stop, police found more than 300 voter registration cards in the trunk of a former ACORN employee, who had violated a legal requirements that registration cards be submitted to the Secretary of State within 10 days of being filled out and signed.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:14 pm
“the utter lack of actual voter fraud proves the rules are not needed.” -RickDFL
“the tens of millions of dollars spent in investigating voting fraud since 2002 has found virtually NO evidence of fraud” -Peevish
And then we have reality:
“Inquiry finds evidence of fraud in election”
http://www.jsonline.com/story/index.aspx?id=324933
November 1st, 2007 at 2:15 pm
Certainly ain’t no voter fraud a-gonin’ on ’round HERE!
TX 2004 ACORN turned in the voter registration form of David Young, who told reporters “The signature is not my signature. It’s not even close.” His social security number and date of birth were also incorrect.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:16 pm
Voter fraud? We don’t need no stinkin’ voter fraud!
NM 2005 Four ACORN employees submitted as many as 3,000 potentially fraudulent signatures on the group’s Albuquerque ballot initiative. A local sheriff added: “It’s safe to say the forgery was widespread.”
November 1st, 2007 at 2:17 pm
Heck, those people with ACORN are as honest as the day is long. There ain’t no voter fraud a-happening!
CO 2004 An ACORN employee admitted to forging signatures and registering three of her friends to vote 40 times.
CO 2005 Two ex-ACORN employees were convicted in Denver of perjury for submitting false voter registrations.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:19 pm
“I mean, the tens of millions of dollars spent in investigating voting fraud since 2002 has found virtually NO evidence of fraud – and there is no real problem to solve…”
Peebie proves, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that he is the most ignorant clod to be breathing at this time. Or…a boldface liar. Or…both.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:21 pm
Small, don’t fix what aint broke, goverment falls far into second fiddle land when it comes to keeping people so poor that even having the money for an ID, or keeping that ID from being taken, from voting.”
How do they get a job? Open a bank account? Get cable? Cash government checks? Just how many people are we talking about that live so far off the grid that they have no idea and vote? Name 10 of them. Why is it unthinkable to make sure the people voting are eligible to vote? I never understood this.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:29 pm
Peevish,
As usual, you have not just walked into my trap; you walk into it playing a trumpet.
Mitch X Berg, champion of not sneering at the huddled masses – ya know, those huddled masses that he recently said don’t have the brains to be voting.
Bzzzzzzzzzzzzt!
I said nothing about “masses” “not having brains”, because, indeed, I have great faith in the “masses”.
Everyone has the right to vote, as I reiterated in my post (and you disingenuously ignored). I merely said that “turnout” as a goal in and of itself is at the least irrelevant, and at worst a bad idea.
So we have one clear vote for keeping exceedingly poor people from voting,
Wrong again! I said nothing whatsoever about economic class. I favor making photo IDs easily – even freely – available to everyone to which they’re entitled.
American citizens have a right to vote – a right I’ll defend much faster than you will. But the integrity of our electoral system (more below) demands that we make sure that people showing up to vote are entitled to do so.
What IS the problem with that?
as well as one vote for violating the fundemental principle of not inhibiting voter access unless truly required.
Another muff. You’re batting ZERO for this post, Peev.
There’s nothing about *inhibiting* anything. Merely verifying that people are entitled to vote.
As Dave has clearly pointed out, you were utterly wrong in claiming, Renault-like, that there’s no such thing as voter fraud. Could that be why you feel the need to misrepresent what I wrote so clumsily?
November 1st, 2007 at 2:31 pm
buzz:
Its because people like DFL Rick and peebie the wonder-clod need to continue to help their friends to perpetuate voter fraud to ensure their ethically-challenged party maintains its grip on the halls of power.
Hey, peebie-boy, want more examples? Not a problem…I gots more where that came from.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:36 pm
Oh, I really understand why they do it, but to be so blatant about it, and so shameless in comparing it to Jim Crow and such.
November 1st, 2007 at 2:42 pm
Dave:
“Six volunteers for “Operation Big Vote” entered guilty pleas to dozens of election law violations for filling out the cards with names of the dead and other bogus information at a local McDonalds”
How many of those so registered voted illegally?
“In New Jersey… Dead people cast more than 4,000 votes in 2004″
No. The GOP said voter records indicate that 4,000 actual voters have the same first name, last name, and DOB [Note they ran up the score by not including a middle initial] as an actual death certificate. There is no evidence of actual fraud.
“During a traffic stop, police found more than 300 voter registration cards in the trunk of a former ACORN employee”
How many actually voted?
“ACORN turned in the voter registration form of David Young, who told reporters”
Did he vote?
“An ACORN employee admitted to forging signatures and registering three of her friends to vote 40 times.”
How many times did they vote?
November 1st, 2007 at 2:45 pm
How many times did they vote?
What percentage did “we” catch?
November 1st, 2007 at 2:52 pm
Rick, it doesn’t matter. Thanks for bringing up a completely and utterly moronic point. These are all examples of your political buddies trying to defaud the voting system. Period.
November 1st, 2007 at 3:02 pm
Terry:
Here are the final results of the case you cited:
“The US Attorney’s office prosecuted fourteen individuals. Four were indicted on charges of double voting, all of whom were either acquitted or had charges dismissed. Eight felons were indicted for unlawfully voting. Five of these individuals were eventually acquitted; the others were convicted and sentenced to punishments ranging from fines to probation. In addition, two former felons serving as poll workers were prosecuted for unlawfully voting. Both men received short jail sentences. The office of the District Attorney confirmed their successful prosecution of two individuals who falsified registration cards. Finally, the Journal Sentinel has reported that the District Attorney prosecuted two additional cases of illegal voting by felons.”
That is seven illegal votes. None a case of a person voting under a false ID or name. None part of an organized effort. None could have been prevented with an ID law.
Apparently that was not good enough for Karl Rove though who had the U.S. Attorney there put on the list of U.S. Attoneys to be fired. He was able to save he job by obtaining a false conviction of a Democratic staffer though.
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002988.php
November 1st, 2007 at 3:03 pm
From the Milwaukee JS article I linked to above:
RickDFL is, as usual, blind to fraud that favors his ideological comrades.
November 1st, 2007 at 3:17 pm
A symbol of rhetorical desperation:
How many times did they vote?
Even if it’s ZERO, and even IF we caught every one (ask any cop or store security guy what percentage of offenders actually get caught, while you’re up), so what? The fact is, it happens – much as you may plug your ears and scream “Nanananananacan’tyearyou”.
And you’d have to be an industrial-strength pollyanna to believe that it’s zero, and that we catch ‘em all.
Of course, we know you’re no pollyanna. Merely looking out for a key constituency!
November 1st, 2007 at 3:24 pm
Ok, no problem. Easy test. Next election require valid id. If you have no id, have someone standing by to take you name and address. This shouldn’t create a “chilling effect” as this wouldn’t effect illegal aliens, people who have already voted, people from out of state, felons (assuming your state doesn’t allow them to vote) or anyone else as none of those people would even think of voting. Then check and see what the difference was in who turned up to vote this time around. Added benefit, keeps those dirty Republican’s from stealing elections!
November 1st, 2007 at 3:27 pm
Hmm, I’m a right winger who always has liked the DMV. They take a bad picture, but as long as the job gets done. Same with the USPS. Hate their union, but generally get good service from them.
When you look at the win-at-any-cost mentality that we have reached (see Florida 2000 and Washington, 2004 (or was it 2002), or how the Democrats tried to prevent Ralph Nader from running, then fraud would not surpirse me.
November 1st, 2007 at 3:29 pm
Mitch, someone should do a search on the ‘vouching’ thing, were all you need is someone to say “yep, she lives in the neighborhood”. Wasn’t there stories of volunteers for the Democrat party vouching for anyone who would come in and vote for Kerry in 2004?
November 1st, 2007 at 4:02 pm
I talked about this a year and change ago:
http://centrisity.blogspot.com/2006/04/voter-simplicity.html
I don’t have a real issue with Voter ID/Picture ID as long as their is a provisional option for those that for whatever reason simply don’t have one.
If Mitch, et. al. would get behind “making photo IDs easily – even freely – available to everyone to which they’re entitled” would make a lot of the arguments against, moot.
However, people move, lives change, and the DMV/ID folks have a lag. So options need to be addressed in that respect as well.
Flash
November 1st, 2007 at 4:11 pm
Here, let’s put it into a simple case that a pea-brain like Rick can figure out. Let’s use a Hollywood analogy from a Hollywood show: M*A*S*H:
There was an episode where Hawkeye is the OD, and Radar brings in an “indigeness personnel requiring medical attention”. A lady shows her card (no picture)…her name is Kim Luck.
An hour later, another “indigeness personnel requiring medical attention” shows up. The card reads…Kim Luck.
A couple hours later, we have another Kim Luck…at which point Hawkeye remarks “This must be our Kim Lucky day!”
This is EXACTLY what can (and probably does) happen in our elections. We could have a solution where the government scans all our faces and has an optical reader that compares your face to a national database, created when you register to vote and the State matches your address to your personal information (like credit history or police records).
Or…just show your damn picture ID and you’re all set to vote. I can claim to be the Queen of Sheeba and go to the polls…but shouldn’t you have to present SOME kind of documentation to PROVE IT?
Of course, that would cut down on the illegal alien votes and the fraud…something that is against the DFL party platform.
November 1st, 2007 at 4:16 pm
Flush: Last time I checked, election day is the first Tuesday of November every year. If you believe (as I do) that your vote is important…try something called PLANNING AHEAD. If you want to move around more than a gypsy on speed…try being responsible and planning ahead. Its called being an adult.
By the way, with all the new systems that the County and DMV have, you get your new licenses now in about a week or two. Less excuses, Flush…its better that way.
November 1st, 2007 at 4:20 pm
Better yet, Flush: Until you get your new ID, they always give you BACK your old ID with a receipt. If you don’t get your new ID in time, the receipt shows your new address. Show the old card with the receipt at your polling place…YOU’RE ALL SET TO VOTE.
This isn’t rocket science. Although your DFL hack fraud-supporter want to make it seem like it is…
November 1st, 2007 at 5:57 pm
Dave: Election day is on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November. So if November 1st is on a Tuesday, election day will be on the 8th.
Also, other, more competent states, actually print out your license right there at the DMV, you don’t have to wait by the mailbox for 2 weeks. (when I got my last license it took almost a month)
Since all of these polling agencies seem to have almost infinite time to conduct polls, why don’t they just ask people “Do you have a photo ID, and would photo ID being required at the polls prevent you from voting?” I would wager that the answer to the first question would be 99.995% yes, and the second question probably around 99.5% no.
November 1st, 2007 at 6:07 pm
So a bunch of illegal aliens get to vote. Big deal! At least they almost always vote Democrat! Win win, right? We get volume AND the correct result.
November 1st, 2007 at 10:08 pm
Okay, DFL Rick, you’ve continuously asked us to point out voter fraud, pooh-poohing each reply with a wave of your increasingly irritating smug way of typing! I’ll now turn the tables on you. Name one ELIGBLE VOTER who has not been allowed to vote in recent elections. Not some broad instance touted by your wacko lefty MSM, but a name of one ELIGBLE VOTER who was turned away and told that they would not be able to vote. And make sure you’ve got the facts right, cuz this crowd is just itchin’ to shoot your idiot azz down!
November 2nd, 2007 at 8:21 am
Ya know, this is hilarious. I post a comment all but agreeing with Mitch and I still get called names. Is it just instinctive reflex without even bothering to read the comment.
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:10 am
Ya know, this is hilarious.
Yeah, and human nature too.
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:27 am
I still get called names.
Not by me. I actually agree with Mr. Flash on this one. Require ID, but have free ID available, and a method to strictly handle people without proper ID (provisional ballots perhaps). No more vouching for strangers.
This takes away the “poll tax” argument from the pro-voter-fraud crowd on the left.
November 2nd, 2007 at 9:43 am
Master….I agree. I think there should be an easy legit work-around to the ID.
November 2nd, 2007 at 10:02 am
Don’t most states issue non-driving IDs free? I know Vermont did when I was there, and even in that most onerous of fee-imposing states of NY it was pretty cheap at less than $10. I haven’t checked what they run out in this neck of the woods.
But if free will get the lefties on board, go for free. It’s a reasonable compromise.
So, trust but verify. We’ll all be happy then.
November 2nd, 2007 at 10:07 am
in MN…$15.50 if you are under 65, and something like $10 if you are over $65.
seth
November 2nd, 2007 at 1:55 pm
Malcolm:
I do not pooh-pooh voter fraud. I point out the rather obvious case that few to none of the examples cited actually involve people voting fraudentley and none involve by voting under the identity of someone else.
Why do I have to come up with an voter prevented from voting? The lack of such cases is the reason I prefer our current laws.
November 2nd, 2007 at 2:04 pm
I point out the rather obvious case that few to none of the examples cited actually involve people voting fraudentley
Only because they were caught!
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:07 pm
“Only because they were caught!”
No. There is no evidence anyone intended to vote. The purpose was to collect more money for registering the same person several times or by registering non-existent people. There is no evidence of a motive to vote multiple times.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:19 pm
There is no evidence anyone intended to vote.
Nooo, of course not. Before they discovered Sodoku, creating phony registrations was just what people did to kill time.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:23 pm
The purpose was to collect more money for registering the same person several times or by registering non-existent people.
The purpose for which they were charged, sure.
Maybe that’s all that woulda happened. We don’t know; and it’s against the accused’s interests to go into details, now, innit?
Given what we know happened in Milwaukee, and what it appears happened in Washington State, it’s a bit pollyannaish to look at a couple of sordid little court cases and presume they tell us all the answers.
November 2nd, 2007 at 5:41 pm
No. Read the article
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002988.php
The WI U.S. Atty was under tremendous pressure from the highest reaches of the White House to ‘prove’ voter fraud. It did a major investigation, announced a bunch of inflated preliminary findings, and wound up with nothing.
Put another way – the most partisan GOP operatives with the full power of the State and Federal government went looking for voter fraud and found nothing.
End. Of. Story.
November 2nd, 2007 at 10:18 pm
Read “the” article. From “talking points memo”. Wow. Could you back that up with something from Wikipedia?
“End. Of. Story.”
What. Ever.
November 6th, 2007 at 7:00 am
[...] The Democrats don’t want to require voters to prove they are who they say they are… [...]