He introduced a federal voter photo ID bill in June and again in September called the Federal Election Integrity Act of 2012, which – if passed into law – would have required voters to present a government-issued photo ID to vote in federal elections. The bill died in committee both times.
“[Democrats] believe everybody should vote; it should be so easy for people to vote,” Walsh said. “I shouldn’t say this, and this will cost me votes – if and when I run next time. It should be tough to vote. I don’t like this whole early-voting stuff. I think you should have to swim a mile, walk five miles, find a bus – I’m exaggerating for everyone who is filming me – and it should take you three hours to get to the ballot box.
“It should be that important. It shouldn’t be easy to vote. This is probably one of the most sacred privileges you’ve earned, you have to earn to live in this country.”
• To order DVDs of videos by the Daily Chronicle, call the Northwest Herald office at 815-459-4040 •
Discuss.
93 Comments
- Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 10:48 am:
I’m sure it was extremely tough for some old school conservatives to vote for this clown.
- Chicago Cynic - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 10:51 am:
Joe Walsh - PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE run for governor in 2014. I’m not sure the Shock/Rauner contest will be entertaining enough without you. Afterall, who would take the Dan Proft role if you’re not there.
Why don’t we impose severe restrictions on voters and require draconian processes like voter identification requirements, enact a poll-tax, impose literacy and comprehension tests, and residency and record-keeping requirements for some voters. We could call it, umm, “Jim Crow Laws” or better yet, “Joe Walsh Laws”. That will fix ‘em.
- Former Downstater - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:01 am:
So, it should be extremely difficult to vote, but extremely easy to buy a gun. Makes sense. One is much more dangerous than the other.
Pinker, the difference is that not one of the things you listed is a basic, fundamental and absolutely crucial right of a free society.
Imagine telling Thomas Jefferson that he couldn’t vote because he didn’t have the proper ID with him, even though his name is on the registered voter list.
Exactly. Let’s disenfranchise the working class in this country because their robber-baron employers certainly won’t give them the day off to stand in Walsh’s 3-hour voting booth utopia. Makes perfect sense.
One of the lines that appeals to populists about the process of drawing legislative districts is that voters should choose the politicians instead of the politicians choosing the districts.
Republicans and the “Conservative” movement want to choose the voters. The less Blacks, immigrants, women and poor people who vote, the better the electorate.
Apparently Republicans have come to the conclusion they have a better chance of disenfranchising people from groups that tend to vote Democrat than they do of appealing to them with “Conservative” arguments.
Republicans are immoral.
And somebody will probably say, Joe Walsh isn’t all Republicans.
OK. Show me the most prominent Republican official who has denounced the various schemes Republicans have attempted and implemented to disenfranchise people from groups that traditionally vote Democrat.
But seriously, why are wingnuts like Joe Walsh talking about armed insurrection? Do they really think they have to destroy America by force in order to protect it? This is the part that scares me the most. If he wants to use civil disobedience to make a point, so be it, that’s a well used American tradition. But armed insurrection? That’s treason and/or sedition, depending on your definition.
–”This is probably one of the most sacred privileges you’ve earned, you have to earn to live in this country.”–
What is true or makes sense in that sentence — “earn to live in this country?”
Voting is a fundamental right. Those who seek to disenfranchise voters under the phoney-baloney pretext of “fraud” are no better than old Jim Crow.
The GOP needs to take the party back from guys like Walsh.
Compare with Gen. Powell:
“Should we really have gone after reducing the turnout of voters in those places where we thought it would make a difference? The Republican Party should be a party that says, ‘We want everybody to vote,’ and make it easier to vote and give them a reason to vote for the party, [whereas] not to find ways to keep them from voting at all,” Powell said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”
@Pinker: If you will read his quote above, Walsh wasn’t talking about a photo ID requirement.
He says it should generally be harder to vote for everyone. Longer lines, fewer days and hours, distant locations, etc. That’s supposed to sift out the chaff, who don’t want or deserve it enough.
He says he’s exaggerating, but who would even begin to think along those lines?
Does anyone deny that there is some amount of voter fraud? If you don’t believe in photo ID at the polls, which may indeed not be the best way possible to minimize fraud, what is your alternative? Don’t forget that each fraudulent vote dilutes a properly cast one.
“Does anyone deny that there is some amount of people who are found not guilty because of constitutional protections?”
- Joe Bidenopoulous - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:20 am:
Joe Walsh isn’t an enigma in the Republican party when it comes to this. WI Gov. Scott Walker and OH Gov John Kasich and others want to change the electoral college to votes by Congressional District. If every state in the union did that, Mitt Romney would’ve won the presidency with 5 million fewer votes than Obama. Republicans aren’t interested in fair and honest elections, they’re interesting in getting and maintaining power through any means necessary. I don’t know that Democratic power brokers are much more enlightened, but at least they don’t talk about actively disenfranchising voters.
==Does anyone deny that there is some amount of voter fraud?==
While, like you, I don’t have the answer to that queastion, I would like to ask you one in return: Would disenfranchising and preventing a whole slew of eligible voters from voting worth it to keep what has been reported to be a few fraudulent votes from being cast?
- Joe Bidenopoulous - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:21 am:
I also remember many a screed from the esteemed Bill Black on the floor whenever early voting bills came up in the early 2000s. He said much the same thing. Look it up.
- Joe Bidenopoulous - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:24 am:
Finally, you “earn” privileges, such as obtaining a drivers license. You don’t “earn” the right to vote any more than you “earn” the right to free speech, or any other Constitutionally-given right.
“Does anyone deny that there is some amount of people who are found not guilty because of constitutional protections?”
All those people have been fingerprinted and photographed….. and in 17 states, DNA taken upon arrest.
- Johnny Q. Suburban - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:24 am:
I don’t understand what Joe Walsh wants to do next. I know he’s been full of bluster about running for something again, but with the comments he’s been making he is either heading for a career as a pundit or planning on running for some office in Indiana because he has no shot at winning in Illinois anymore.
“OK. Show me the most prominent Republican official who has denounced the various schemes Republicans have attempted and implemented to disenfranchise people from groups that traditionally vote Democrat.”
—————
The only one I can think of is Charlie Crist, who was driven out of the Republican Party. Walsh is simply stating the Republican viewpoint on this issue.
- John A Logan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:27 am:
it remains laughable that you don’t have to identify who you are to vote. The Jefferson reference above is one of the funnier things I have seen written in a while. There should be a snare drum and symbol sound effect that plays after that post.
==
I’m sure it was extremely tough for some old school conservatives to vote for this clown.
==
It was. Although I don’t live in the 8th CD (thankfully), I know for a fact it was hard for a lot of old school conservatives to vote for this guy.
This “it should be extremely hard to vote” strain of thought is an odd vein that goes through both the conservative and progressive base. I’m good friends with a progressive and his sentiment is pretty elitist as well. He even wants to go to unconstitutional IQ tests, etc. Presumably it’s because it’ll weed out the “knuckle draggers” that he assumes are all conservatives. Of course, my buddy’s also a closet totalitarian (although he’d never admit it, even to himself). FWIW I think ignorance is pretty well representated on both sides of the aisle.
The “only the bright/upstanding/wise people should vote” concept I think is very unhealthy and should be shut down at every opportunity. Not only is it ripe for abuse (who gets to decide who’s “worthy”?), but it’s totally un-democratic (little d).
That being said, having a photo ID to prevent voter fraud I don’t think is too high of a bar. The answer isn’t to have no photo ID’s. It’s to ensure that the government provides every single adult eligible to vote with a free and easily accessible state ID. We’re talking zero acquisition fees, free delivery, house calls to senior centers, etc. Nobody who is a natural born or a naturalized citizen should have either a financial or procedural barrier to getting an ID. Nobody.
But the state DOES have a legitimate interest in preventing voter fraud. Even one illegal vote necessarily negates and therefore disenfranchises one legitimate vote.
=== I think you should have to swim a mile, walk five miles, find a bus – I’m exaggerating for everyone who is filming me – and it should take you three hours to get to the ballot box. ===
He’s rapidly becoming an Ann Coulter - a shock jock of punditry. When you don’t have anything interesting or thoughtful to offer, you step up your extremity with each breath to keep people paying attention.
===I think you should have to swim a mile, walk five miles, find a bus====
My guess is that if there was anyone who had to go through the above in the last election, they probably voted democrat. Not too many repubs take a bus to the polling place unlike many dems. So go ahead and put in more restrictions. Your result might not end up what you really hope for.
Keep running Joe!!! You will make sure that we do not forget what the lunatic firnge in the Republican party is all about. Thank you for continuing to stay in the public eye. Maybe Glenn Beck has a place for you in his conservative wonderland.
“Does anyone deny that there is some amount of voter fraud?”
Perhaps, but it has been shown to be very little…
But using that same logic, we could take strong action to prevent any sort of corner case with things in life…
Does anyone deny that people steal books from the public library, so a full pat down of everyone leaving including checking their bags would be a good idea…
Does anyone deny drunk driving occurs, then DNA checking interlocks on all cars would help solve that problem.
The ’solution’ is out of proportion to the problem when it comes to voter id..
Lets not kid ourselves, regardless of the horror stories told in suburban meetings of hordes of Chicago democrats coming out to the burbs to vote multiple times, it isn’t happening.
===But the state DOES have a legitimate interest in preventing voter fraud. Even one illegal vote necessarily negates and therefore disenfranchises one legitimate vote.===
Yes, it does, but disenfranchising tens of thousands of qualified voters is not the way to fix that problem of one voter.
“But the state DOES have a legitimate interest in preventing people from shooting other people. Even one dead person necessarily requires us to take rights away from tens of thousands of legal gun owners.”
===
Walsh is simply stating the Republican viewpoint on this issue.
===
No he isn’t. He’s stating his own viewpoint. It’s been a GOP held house the entire duration of his tenure, and his bill still died in committee.
However, people keep equating an anti-voter fraud ID requirement with disenfranchisement. It’s not the same thing. Not even close. So long as a voter ID requirement includes strong provisions eliminating financial and logistical barriers to obtaining an ID, it is most certainly NOT an effort to disenfranchise. In fact, as I described above, implicitly allowing some voter fraud to take place is in-and-of-itself a form of voter disenfranchisement because it negates legally cast votes. The right to vote should be universal. But that right is universal for people **who are legally eligible to vote**.
As for needing ID to do other things, Rich is right. Enter a building or driving a car are certain priviledges. However, I believe you do need an ID to claim federal entitlement benefits such as Medicare, Social Security, etc.
A requirement to have a state issued ID is entirely reasonable.
This past election cycle, we saw states attempt to limit/eliminate early voting in urban areas, while allowing early voting in rural areas. I still haven’t quite figured out how exactly that helped deal with “voter fraud.”
==Does anyone deny that there is some amount of voter fraud?==
Prove your point.
There’s also the opposite side of the argument. Allowing Republicans to disenfranchise citizens entitled to vote in the name of “protecting elections” leads to large numbers of people not voting.
This practice has affected the outcome of elections. Specifically, Al Gore would have won Florida in 2000 had Jeb Bush, Katherine Harris and their GOP allies not purged the voter roles of thousands of African-Americans.
So, if the “Conservative” movement (which many of us suspect is a tent of “White” bigots) is going to claim that Republicans should be empowered to disenfranchise large numbers of Blacks, women, immigrants and poor people–and that is what the GOP is asking to happen–then it seems reasonable to expect the GOP to provide proof that election fraud has tipped the results of specific elections.
A radio talk show host can be fat and happy with 3% market share. A candidate for office cannot. But if pretending to be a candidate is part of the plan to reach that radio show, they I’d expect Walsh to keep pretending, until the radio plan falls through. Then maybe we’ll be rid of his antics.
===
Yes, it does, but disenfranchising tens of thousands of qualified voters is not the way to fix that problem of one voter.
===
Rich, perhaps you’re not reading the entire context of my posts. A voter ID law that disenfranchises tens of thousands of people would not be a good law. Nor, in your example, would a gun control law be a good one that disenfranchises tens of thousands of otherwise law abiding citizens of their 2nd Amendment rights.
The answer is to make state issued IDs widely available to every single eligible voter. I’m talking nearly comical efforts to proactively deliver state issued ID’s to those who qualify. Surely when it comes to government entitlement programs, you support anti-fraud (i.e. recipient verification) measures of some sort to help with the long-term solvency of those programs. Why not the same efforts to help ensure the long-term integrity of the voting process?
===you support anti-fraud (i.e. recipient verification) measures of some sort to help with the long-term solvency of those programs. Why not the same efforts to help ensure the long-term integrity of the voting process? ===
First of all, that’s a specious argument. The right to vote is clearly a sacred right that’s specifically and repeatedly protected by the Constitution.
Second, you have to show me how today’s voter fraud is so much worse than in decades when there were no regulations. You can’t do that.
Bob Dold is a perpetrator of voter fraud. He voted in Kennilworth when he lived at the home he owned in Roscoe Village. Dold’s wife voted at the Roscoe Village address.
How many Republicans held in against Dold that he repeatedly perpetrated vote fraud?
Republicans aren’t opposed to vote fraud. Republicans are opposed to people from groups that vote Democrat casting too many votes, meaning enough votes to beat Republicans.
== The answer is to make state issued IDs widely available to every single eligible voter. I’m talking nearly comical efforts to proactively deliver state issued ID’s to those who qualify. Surely when it comes to government entitlement programs, you support anti-fraud (i.e. recipient verification) measures of some sort to help with the long-term solvency of those programs. Why not the same efforts to help ensure the long-term integrity of the voting process? ==
But why spend that kind of money (comedy does not come cheap) to put IDs in everyone’s hands to solve a very, very, very small problem at best?
I can think of better ways to spend that money than to make sure some 95 year old in a nursing home has a state issued photo ID.
The other thing is, if you wanted to commit voter fraud (that is take illegal action to change the result of an election) having people go and vote in multiple locations or just vote in jurisdictions outside their own is a very inefficient way of getting the job done.
- Boone's Is Back - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:52 am:
Is he trying to make it as humanly possible to get elected? He seriously will say anything.
In-person voter fraud is virtually non-existent. BTW by grandmother is 94. Her ID expired long ago and I am not going to make her to stand in line for a new one. Should she be denied a right to vote (republican) because she has no ID? After her husband fought hand-to-hand at Iwo Jima? I have a term for anyone who says yes, but its pretty vulgar.
I would add to Carl’s point, lets not think that the changes over the last few years to expand where people can and when people can vote was all just driven by good government.
Does anyone deny that there hasn’t been a calculated, nationwide effort by the right wing to disenfranchise voters of color?
Try this: Google “Republican admits voter suppression.”
–”I don’t want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of the people. They never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.”==
Paul Weyrich, co-founder of The Heritage Foundation and the American Legislative Exchange Council, the driving force behind Voter ID laws.
–A new Florida law that contributed to long voter lines and caused some to abandon voting altogether was intentionally designed by Florida GOP staff and consultants to inhibit Democratic voters, former GOP officials and current GOP consultants have told The Palm Beach Post.–
–VIDEO – Republican Pennsylvania House Majority Leader Mike Turzai brags at the Republican State Committee meeting that their recently passed voter ID law will “allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania”–
- Endangered Moderate Species - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:00 pm:
The ILGOP will have problems as long as Joe Walsh’s views are not challenged by other Republicans.
Yes, they do need a big tent of ideas and Walsh should be allowed to speak, but others must come forward and challenge, if not the party is seen as agreeing with Walsh.
Unfortunately for the party, Walsh has views that are historically consistent with fascism and that is not an ideology that will be accepted by Americans any time in the near future.
==The answer is to make state issued IDs widely available to every single eligible voter.==
John Galt, I’d be curious if you took any action when Gov. Walker made it much harder to get a photo ID in Democratic parts of Wisconsin.
Did you take any action when Gov. Walker directed state employees to try to collect money for the photo IDs unless they knew this was illegal and adamant they weren’t going to pay it?
I’m sorry, but Republicans are trying to violate the law all the time. And I have seen no evidence that there are decent Republicans who take action against Republicans who violate the rights of young people, minorities, the poor, immigrants and women.
Having a photo ID requirement will lead to Republicans manipulating access to photo IDs. This isn’t some theoretical thing. This is exactly what Republicans did in Wisconsin.
And Republican activists either cheered Gov. Walker on or stood silently as evil was being perpetrated.
Okay, so here’s the thing. The ultimate government end with regards to elections is to provide free, fair, and competitive elections (by competitive, we mean that parties have access to the ballot and that elections are not just shills where votes don’t count. This is the academic definition of “competitive elections”).
The government is vested with the power to protect and preserve that end, so long as it has rational basis for such. In other words the means must justify the ends. Restrictions free and open elections may be put in place, if they guarantee the vote.
Turning to ID’s to vote. First, is there a problem of voter fraud anywhere? The answer is a resounding no. Nearly all documented cases of voting irregularities were found to be a result of operator error, usually due to underqualified poll workers. Furthermore, there are already multiple checks in place that do not impede ballot access.
As Rich pointed out before. To register to vote, you need to forms of ID, including one with a current address. Should it be done through a canvassing effort, first time voters are required to document at the polling place.
Once at the polling place, there are at least four poll workers employed by the state, two from each party, who check off on the ballot and name. If there is a conspiracy to rig elections through voter fraud, the judges would clearly have to be in on it. But the opposition party has no utility to gain from helping the other side win. Furthermore, any member of the general public is allowed to be a poll watcher. They also have the right to challenge any voter’s ballot. This has happened on several occasions where an overly-friendly relative helps their elder relative with the ballot.
Finally, committing fraud one voter at a time, where it is assumed that fraud occurs, is a pointless exercise. In order to jump through the previous hurdles, you need to recruit a mass of people to pose as someone else and vote under a different identity. The Australian ballot prevents free-riding in this case. Take SEA for example, one party offers $5 to someone to vote for their candidate, the opposition offers $3 and says, “vote for our guy, tell them you voted for their guy, and you’ll earn $8.” In the end, the actual ballot cast is still a mystery. It needs to also be mentioned that this canvass-style ballot-box stuffing does not work in practice, because the results and turnout of an election are unknowns. Even if someone can get 500 voters to pose as dead people and vote, it does not guarantee the outcome.
Field-based voter fraud simply does not exist. So-called “evidence” in favor of the opposite only points out irregularities, which are caused by poll worker ignorance, and not grand conspiracies.
But let’s assume that it’s not field-based fraud, but something in the vote-counting (which is the most vunerable part of the electoral process). To steal anything above a municipal election. Multiple counting places need to be simultaneously accessed at once. Elections are conducted by independent authorities, who feed information up the line, like a pyramid. If one section of the process is corrupted, say by accessing the Diebold counting software (which can be hacked by anyone with reasonable training in coding, and wireless connection.) That is only a single municipality. And even the municipalities are separated. One would need to access mutliple machines feeding information in order to steal the election. The voting and counting process is so decentralized that an all-out coordinated assault on the BoE would need to occur. In that case, it’s easier to put up a solid candidate and mount a good campaign. Because in that case, all you need to to is pay for a campaign (5-6 full-time staff plus materials), instead of hackers and armies of fraudulent voters)
Seriously, it is impossible to steal any major election. Fraud simply does not occur.
Don’t forget that each fraudulent vote dilutes a properly cast one.
You’re concerned with some unknown degree of dilution of proper votes but unconcerned about an unknown degree of suppression of proper votes?
A diluted vote imperfectly reflects the citizen’s intent. The citizen is represented less than she should be but is still represented to some non-zero extent.*
By contrast, a suppressed vote doesn’t reflect the citizen’s intent at all. The citizen is shut out of the voting process entirely.
Therefore, a person sincerely concerned with vote dilution would logically be even more concerned with vote suppression.
Unless the actual motivating concern is partisan advantage. (Not that I would ever suggest such a thing!)
– MrJM
*(legitimate votes cast)/(all ballots cast)
An example: In the last election, 25,943 ballots were cast in Whiteside County. If 10 of those ballots were illegitimate, each legitimate vote would still retain 99.96% of it’s value — even after dilution. By contrast, if 10 legitimate voters were turned away from the polls, each of those citizens would get ZERO representation at the ballot.
I think it’s interesting to note that Canada has a voter ID law and does fine by its minority and aboriginal populations. The primary requirement in Canada is a state-issued photo ID such as a drivers license or provincial-issued photo ID. What they do to protect voters franchise is provide two failsafe ways for voters without a photo ID to accurately identify themselves. One way is to show two non-photo authorized IDs that include a name and address (eg a health card and a utility bill). The final failsafe is to take an oath and be vouched for by a voter who has shown a photo ID and is from the same precinct. It’s like a stronger form of the provisional ballots used here, and the voucher can only vouch for one person for that election.
- LincolnLounger - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:42 pm:
“Fraud simply does not occur.”
Give me a break. Of course, fraud occurs. Say that it’s not enough to warrant additional voting restrictions if you want. Say that fraud is difficult and won’t make a difference in significant elections. But DO NOT say that fraud “simply does not occur.”
===I think it’s interesting to note that Canada has a voter ID law===
They also have universal health care.
- 3rd Generation Chicago Native - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:51 pm:
MrJM and Obama’s Puppy’s comments make me wonder why the GOP in Illinois has not had a nice sit down serious talk with this guy. But he is also good advertising for the Democrats in Illinois.
I am not a fan of Joe Walsh’s by any means. However I would also not be offended if I was asked for a photo ID at my polling place. A person has to have a photo ID to drive, to cash a check, to get into a bar, to buy cigarettes, to buy some cold medicines, and I believe a Law Enforcement Officer can ask you to produce a photo ID at almost anytime. I understand that a person is preregistered and all to vote but how would one verify, if they were an election judge in the area where they live, which George Foreman was standing in front of you?
===if they were an election judge in the area where they live, which George Foreman was standing in front of you? ===
This shows ignorance. The state has a provisional ballot law. If the identification of a voter is in question, their votes go into a separate pile, to be dealt with later.
If Joe really wants to make sure the right person is voting an easy solution is as you are born part of the pediatric exam would be the implantation of an identity chip that can be scanned every time you vote, fly, etc. Guess what for some that won’t be enough. It is interesting that Joe who proudly declares he wants the government out of their lives and less regulation, actually on this issue wants more government involvement. Maybe there is a hidden agenda.
===MrJM and Obama’s Puppy’s comments make me wonder why the GOP in Illinois has not had a nice sit down serious talk with this guy.===
How can you talk to him rationally about anything? Look at the quote above;
“It should be that important. It shouldn’t be easy to vote. This is probably one of the most sacred privileges you’ve earned, you have to earn to live in this country.”
and;
““I shouldn’t say this, and this will cost me votes – if and when I run next time. It should be tough to vote. I don’t like this whole early-voting stuff. I think you should have to swim a mile, walk five miles, find a bus – I’m exaggerating for everyone who is filming me – and it should take you three hours to get to the ballot box.”
How do you have a rational conversation on strategy, on Party, on agenda, when Joe Walsh is all about “the crazy”, meaning, “the crazy” of saying anything, knowing that what he is saying is damaging, and willing to make everything about Joe Walsh and not about the betterment of all citizens.
That is why no one can talk to Joe Walsh and Joe likes it that way, and likes the idea that the Tea Party likes it that way too.
It’s one thing to have a minority view, its another to be divisive, and using that minorty view to stifle workable solutions for his Party, his State or his Country.
That is who Joe Walsh is. This issue is one among many that Joe uses, be it immigration, budget, or voter ID, Joe Walsh plays to the least, to disrupt the chances for us all.
This is in reference to the Jefferson post earlier as to wheater he should be allowed to vote without an ID. So, if am the Voter Registrar on election day and someone tells me ‘my name is Jefferson’ and my name is on the voters’ binder but have no ID to prove it. How is the Registrar to know your are indeed Jefferson in this instance and be allowed to vote without any ID to prove it? I guess any one can vote under the guise of being Jefferson.
Nice to see Joe Walsh owning the pro-Klan viewpoint on voting rights in 2013. That should do wonders for him if he somehow gets on the ballot for a general election ever again.
===I think it’s interesting to note that Canada has a voter ID law===
They also have Tim Horton’s and more curling clubs, make both of those happen and we can talk…
- RetiredStateEmployee - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 1:47 pm:
This discussion is really old school. It would be difficult to recruit enough voters to participate and then all of them would have to keep a secret. Not too easy these days with Facebook and all the other social media. The easy was is to sabotage the software and machines used. You can change the results with minimal number of individuals involved. Real fraud these days is accomplished with computers.
“So, if am the Voter Registrar on election day and someone tells me ‘my name is Jefferson’ and my name is on the voters’ binder but have no ID to prove it.” In Sangamon county at least, the voter has to sign a form, and if the signature in person does not match the signature on the registration he/she is not allowed to vote (as that person.) I.e., the signature *is* the identification. I don’t know about you, but I’d have more confidence deciding the authenticity of a signature than a utility bill. Or a Driver’s license.
===This is in reference to the Jefferson post earlier as to wheater he should be allowed to vote without an ID. So, if am the Voter Registrar on election day and someone tells me ‘my name is Jefferson’ and my name is on the voters’ binder but have no ID to prove it. How is the Registrar to know your are indeed Jefferson in this instance and be allowed to vote without any ID to prove it?===
Andy Raucci, Bert Odelson, Tom Cullen, or Tom Jaconetty might be better versed in adding information on your hypothetical, as with most posts here.
The big picture here is not on ONE specific day, or ONE specific voter. Otherwise, we will be trying to interpret the law in every possible specific nuance that our imaginations may come up with in FAVOR or what Joe Walsh is saying and OPPOSED to what Joe Walsh is saying, but never answering the broader scope of what is needed, or not needed, to be done, in today’s world, to give all the voters a fair shake.
Otherwise, we all look like “Ballot Box Chasers” with neck braces and crutches, and demanding recounts and fraud when the votes do not go in our favor.
“I have an Aunt, she has a crooked big toe, and dyes her hair a dishwater blonde, and refuses to wear pants on Sunday, because Sundays are for skirts or dresses, went to Early Vote between 8:17 and 8:21 am, on a Wednesday, when the Moon was beginning a new cycle that night, and was asked her name!!
Am I understanding this right, but a female, on a Wednesday, that begins a new Moon cycle is required to give HER name to fulfill the right to vote, even if its between 8:17 and 8:21, and it is in the morning … she is still required … to give her name, and how does Joe Walsh answer to her, with her crooked toe and all?”
An LEO can ask for your ID, but only with reasonable suspicion you are involved in illegal activity.
I highly recommend this website to everyone, it’s good to remind yourself that your rights are FAR more likely to be infringed in casual interaction with police than they ever will be by “Washington Fat Cats”.
“Joe Walsh has no interest in the Republican Party, or governing for that matter.
He is interested in building the Joe Walsh brand to make money in the right-wing infotainment sector, a la Beck or Rush.
There’s a lot of money to be made there.”
It’s interesting how you purport to know the mind of Joe Walsh, or anyone else for that manner. Do you have the corner on the Ouija board market.
- RetiredStateEmployee - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 2:26 pm:
Oneman …
You have never heard of hackers (sometimes it only takes one) — I don’t want to give too much away, but we are more at risk than most want to admit. Security is generally only an afterthought in modern software development. And then only after it has been shown to be vulnerable. And remember, the government always goes after the low bid contractor. Something has got to be left out and it’s generally the security. And if you expect to get high quality IT people to work for the state, you have to treat them well and that’s not happening.
- Original Rambler - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 2:36 pm:
Heard from a voter last November in Wisconsin how he insisted on showing his photo ID to the election judge, but then talked about how adamantly opposed he was to doing likewise to buy a gun or ammo.
–It’s interesting how you purport to know the mind of Joe Walsh, or anyone else for that manner. Do you have the corner on the Ouija board market.–
No, Cincy, Walsh and I are not goombata.
My comments on Walsh are based on my own observation of his words and actions.
I always speak for myself and no one else.
But you raise an interesting question: when, on numerous occasions, you’ve purported to inform us of the thinking of Sen. Dillard, are you in contact with him before you post?
Does that include your other past posts, including those where you reference the alleged sexual orientation of possible GOP rivals to Sen. Dillard?
The context of the question about sexual orientation was a question to the readership of this blog. I asked if the recent allegations and media stories made by others re: sexual orientation were something the electorate would be able to deal with during an election. A fair question since the commenters on this blog know the political landscape better than I. You, of course, and as aways, read into other’s comments any meaning convenient to you to make yourself look like the brightest penny in the roll.
This discussion reminds me of when Florida started drug testing on public aid recipients. The theory being most were drug users and the checks were going to support their habit. It was a no brainer, the project would fund itself through the savings. After one year it was stopped because fewer than 1% of recipients failed the test so the program was too expensive to administer, and was rightly labeled a disaster.
=== ===I think it’s interesting to note that Canada has a voter ID law=== ===
===They also have universal health care. ===
My post was in response to the assumption that voter ID results in disenfranchisement. Canada shows that there are ways to do voter ID that provide adequate mechanisms to protect the right to vote for all citizens.
Yeah I have, work in the technology industry. Also have overseen counts for the party at my local (larger) election authority.
Here is the problem with a hack…
You still have the paper and the paper does not make it’s way into the building until much later. So you may ‘hack’ so it gives Bill Smith two votes per pct, but you still have the paper.
The state circles back with you and has you recount a pct or two and the numbers have to match. If they don’t you fail audit and you have a problem.
With the punch cards, since they had to be brought in centrally to be counted (at least in my neck of the woods) and were not validated at the polling place (like the scan sheets are) it would have been easier to over-vote some punch cards IMHO.
to pull it off by us, not only would you have to at least hack a whole host of scanners and possibly the machine they then process the scanner pcma cards with.
It is still more efficient than getting a bunch of people to commit voter fraud, but it would be expensive and challenging…
- Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 3:26 pm:
Hey Cinci, the award isn’t named for wordslinger just because Rich likes him. If you’re of the opinion that word makes unfair attacks and uses twisted logic, perhaps you should work on your reading comprehension.
Who commits voter fraud? Presumably a person commits voter fraud if they believe they have something to gain or if they are mentally unstable.
So lets say I believe I will get a job for casting a fraudulent vote. If a voter ID law is in place, wouldn’t I secure a fake ID?
Or lets say I am fundamentalist who believes in armed insurgency and I decide to participate in voter fraud as a last ditch effort to avoid me from having to wage war against American soldiers. Wouldn’t I secure a fake ID?
In both examples the person is willing to commit a felony to achieve their desired result.
So the question becomes do we need ID laws and technology capable of identifying fake ids (at every precinct)? And can we trust our election judges? See how this can become very ridiculous very quickly?
And lets be clear, an armed insurgency that acted would be acting upon American soldiers. You cannot deny this. The American armed forces fight armed insurgencies in countries that America has a vested interest in. Those militia groups we have already are clubs for big kids, not armed insurgencies.
We already have laws against voter fraud. If someone is going to vote illegally, they are by definition not going to follow any of these so-called “laws”, so why don’t we work on just enforcing the ones we have on the books already?
Knee jerk, feel good legislation will only lead us down the path where law abiding voters are denied the ability to exercise their right to vote because of the actions of a few bad apples.
The only way to stop a bad guy with a vote is with a good guy with a vote.
The USA already has one of the world’s lowest voting rates, yet Walsh thinks what we need to is make it much harder to vote?!
In the election this April 9th, for instance, turnout will be about 15% in the Chicago area, even though the local officials elected are the ones who set property tax levies and otherwise impact the quality of life.
to one man and retire state employee…..interesting day after election Annonymous posted they stopped a hack by Rove to steal the election. They claim that his meltdown was due to his advance knowledge that he had the fix in….http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/17/1162678/-Anonymous-claims-it-stopped-Karl-Rove-from-hacking-the-vote#. Who knows the accuracy on either side of the issue. The scary thought is many states do not back up electronic voting with paper ballots so when you vote there is no secondary method to ensure voting accuracy. Maybe for federal elections there should be a national standard.
Joe…please, please, please run for Governor! That would be quality entertainment. Better than clowns!
Regarding civil disobedience, wonder if he felt/feels the same way about practices during the Civil Rights movement, both past and present? The logic is the same.
Pinker AND Rich Miller…… in Illinois you MUST provide identification in order to vote; the identification is to be provided to a judge of election in the following manner: correctly providing your name and your current address AND signing your name in the same way you signed it when you registered.
- Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 10:48 am:
I’m sure it was extremely tough for some old school conservatives to vote for this clown.
- Chicago Cynic - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 10:51 am:
Joe Walsh - PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE run for governor in 2014. I’m not sure the Shock/Rauner contest will be entertaining enough without you. Afterall, who would take the Dan Proft role if you’re not there.
- Pinker - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 10:55 am:
Things I need a photo id for:
1. Getting into a bar
2. Getting into buildings in Chicago
3. Buying a violent video game
Things I don’t need a photo id for:
1. Voting
That is all.
- Casual Observer - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:00 am:
“it should take you three hours to get to the ballot box”
“this will cost me votes ”
enuf said.
- UISer - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:01 am:
Things that are fundamental Constitutional rights, that the 24th Amendment speicificly outlaws any type of poll tax (or money in order to do.)
1. Voting
That is all.
- Knome Sane - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:01 am:
Why don’t we impose severe restrictions on voters and require draconian processes like voter identification requirements, enact a poll-tax, impose literacy and comprehension tests, and residency and record-keeping requirements for some voters. We could call it, umm, “Jim Crow Laws” or better yet, “Joe Walsh Laws”. That will fix ‘em.
- Former Downstater - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:01 am:
So, it should be extremely difficult to vote, but extremely easy to buy a gun. Makes sense. One is much more dangerous than the other.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:02 am:
Pinker, the difference is that not one of the things you listed is a basic, fundamental and absolutely crucial right of a free society.
Imagine telling Thomas Jefferson that he couldn’t vote because he didn’t have the proper ID with him, even though his name is on the registered voter list.
- OneMan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:04 am:
Perhaps he and the pawnbroker can form a third party…
But to his point…
If you illustrate why it should be hard to vote it might make the why a bit clearer.
FYI, making it hard to vote so it is hard for people who will not vote for you is not a reason…
Looking forward to what the next thing he will say “for the cameras”
- Montrose - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:06 am:
= Things I need a photo id for:
1. Getting into a bar
2. Getting into buildings in Chicago
3. Buying a violent video game
Things I don’t need a photo id for:
1. Voting
That is all. =
Which of those activities has a registration process that requires two form of identification before you ever show up?
- iThink - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:07 am:
Exactly. Let’s disenfranchise the working class in this country because their robber-baron employers certainly won’t give them the day off to stand in Walsh’s 3-hour voting booth utopia. Makes perfect sense.
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:08 am:
One of the lines that appeals to populists about the process of drawing legislative districts is that voters should choose the politicians instead of the politicians choosing the districts.
Republicans and the “Conservative” movement want to choose the voters. The less Blacks, immigrants, women and poor people who vote, the better the electorate.
Apparently Republicans have come to the conclusion they have a better chance of disenfranchising people from groups that tend to vote Democrat than they do of appealing to them with “Conservative” arguments.
Republicans are immoral.
And somebody will probably say, Joe Walsh isn’t all Republicans.
OK. Show me the most prominent Republican official who has denounced the various schemes Republicans have attempted and implemented to disenfranchise people from groups that traditionally vote Democrat.
- anon sequitor - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:08 am:
A “Joe Walsh Law” can’t make stupidity illegal.
But seriously, why are wingnuts like Joe Walsh talking about armed insurrection? Do they really think they have to destroy America by force in order to protect it? This is the part that scares me the most. If he wants to use civil disobedience to make a point, so be it, that’s a well used American tradition. But armed insurrection? That’s treason and/or sedition, depending on your definition.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:10 am:
–”This is probably one of the most sacred privileges you’ve earned, you have to earn to live in this country.”–
What is true or makes sense in that sentence — “earn to live in this country?”
Voting is a fundamental right. Those who seek to disenfranchise voters under the phoney-baloney pretext of “fraud” are no better than old Jim Crow.
The GOP needs to take the party back from guys like Walsh.
Compare with Gen. Powell:
“Should we really have gone after reducing the turnout of voters in those places where we thought it would make a difference? The Republican Party should be a party that says, ‘We want everybody to vote,’ and make it easier to vote and give them a reason to vote for the party, [whereas] not to find ways to keep them from voting at all,” Powell said on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe.”
Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/01/colin-powell-republicans-voter-id-86488.html#ixzz2IoqVyoVP
- walkinfool - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:12 am:
@Pinker: If you will read his quote above, Walsh wasn’t talking about a photo ID requirement.
He says it should generally be harder to vote for everyone. Longer lines, fewer days and hours, distant locations, etc. That’s supposed to sift out the chaff, who don’t want or deserve it enough.
He says he’s exaggerating, but who would even begin to think along those lines?
I doubt he’ll think like that when he’s eighty.
- OneMan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:15 am:
== This is probably one of the most sacred privileges you’ve earned, you have to earn to live in this country. ==
Joe, you and I didn’t earn it, we were lucky enough to have been born here. We got it by default at 18.
- MrJM - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:15 am:
Until Republicans recognize Joe Walsh’s leadership, the Illinois GOP will remain a laughing stock.
This message brought to you by the Committee for a Permanent Republican Minority.
- Cincinnatus - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:17 am:
Does anyone deny that there is some amount of voter fraud? If you don’t believe in photo ID at the polls, which may indeed not be the best way possible to minimize fraud, what is your alternative? Don’t forget that each fraudulent vote dilutes a properly cast one.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:19 am:
Cincinnatus, let me extend your logic…
“Does anyone deny that there is some amount of people who are found not guilty because of constitutional protections?”
- Joe Bidenopoulous - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:20 am:
Joe Walsh isn’t an enigma in the Republican party when it comes to this. WI Gov. Scott Walker and OH Gov John Kasich and others want to change the electoral college to votes by Congressional District. If every state in the union did that, Mitt Romney would’ve won the presidency with 5 million fewer votes than Obama. Republicans aren’t interested in fair and honest elections, they’re interesting in getting and maintaining power through any means necessary. I don’t know that Democratic power brokers are much more enlightened, but at least they don’t talk about actively disenfranchising voters.
- Knome Sane - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:20 am:
==Does anyone deny that there is some amount of voter fraud?==
While, like you, I don’t have the answer to that queastion, I would like to ask you one in return: Would disenfranchising and preventing a whole slew of eligible voters from voting worth it to keep what has been reported to be a few fraudulent votes from being cast?
- Joe Bidenopoulous - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:21 am:
I also remember many a screed from the esteemed Bill Black on the floor whenever early voting bills came up in the early 2000s. He said much the same thing. Look it up.
- Joe Bidenopoulous - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:24 am:
Finally, you “earn” privileges, such as obtaining a drivers license. You don’t “earn” the right to vote any more than you “earn” the right to free speech, or any other Constitutionally-given right.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:24 am:
Cincinnatus, let me extend your logic…
“Does anyone deny that there is some amount of people who are found not guilty because of constitutional protections?”
All those people have been fingerprinted and photographed….. and in 17 states, DNA taken upon arrest.
- Johnny Q. Suburban - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:24 am:
I don’t understand what Joe Walsh wants to do next. I know he’s been full of bluster about running for something again, but with the comments he’s been making he is either heading for a career as a pundit or planning on running for some office in Indiana because he has no shot at winning in Illinois anymore.
- Lobo y Olla - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:25 am:
Sorry, that’s me above.
- Lobo y Olla - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:25 am:
Cincinnatus, let me extend your logic…
“Does anyone deny that there is some amount of people who are found not guilty because of constitutional protections?”
All those people have been fingerprinted and photographed….. and in 17 states, DNA taken upon arrest.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:26 am:
“OK. Show me the most prominent Republican official who has denounced the various schemes Republicans have attempted and implemented to disenfranchise people from groups that traditionally vote Democrat.”
—————
The only one I can think of is Charlie Crist, who was driven out of the Republican Party. Walsh is simply stating the Republican viewpoint on this issue.
- John A Logan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:27 am:
it remains laughable that you don’t have to identify who you are to vote. The Jefferson reference above is one of the funnier things I have seen written in a while. There should be a snare drum and symbol sound effect that plays after that post.
- John Galt - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:28 am:
==
I’m sure it was extremely tough for some old school conservatives to vote for this clown.
==
It was. Although I don’t live in the 8th CD (thankfully), I know for a fact it was hard for a lot of old school conservatives to vote for this guy.
This “it should be extremely hard to vote” strain of thought is an odd vein that goes through both the conservative and progressive base. I’m good friends with a progressive and his sentiment is pretty elitist as well. He even wants to go to unconstitutional IQ tests, etc. Presumably it’s because it’ll weed out the “knuckle draggers” that he assumes are all conservatives. Of course, my buddy’s also a closet totalitarian (although he’d never admit it, even to himself). FWIW I think ignorance is pretty well representated on both sides of the aisle.
The “only the bright/upstanding/wise people should vote” concept I think is very unhealthy and should be shut down at every opportunity. Not only is it ripe for abuse (who gets to decide who’s “worthy”?), but it’s totally un-democratic (little d).
That being said, having a photo ID to prevent voter fraud I don’t think is too high of a bar. The answer isn’t to have no photo ID’s. It’s to ensure that the government provides every single adult eligible to vote with a free and easily accessible state ID. We’re talking zero acquisition fees, free delivery, house calls to senior centers, etc. Nobody who is a natural born or a naturalized citizen should have either a financial or procedural barrier to getting an ID. Nobody.
But the state DOES have a legitimate interest in preventing voter fraud. Even one illegal vote necessarily negates and therefore disenfranchises one legitimate vote.
- Coach - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:30 am:
=== I think you should have to swim a mile, walk five miles, find a bus – I’m exaggerating for everyone who is filming me – and it should take you three hours to get to the ballot box. ===
He’s rapidly becoming an Ann Coulter - a shock jock of punditry. When you don’t have anything interesting or thoughtful to offer, you step up your extremity with each breath to keep people paying attention.
- Been There - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:31 am:
===I think you should have to swim a mile, walk five miles, find a bus====
My guess is that if there was anyone who had to go through the above in the last election, they probably voted democrat. Not too many repubs take a bus to the polling place unlike many dems. So go ahead and put in more restrictions. Your result might not end up what you really hope for.
- Obamas Puppy - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:32 am:
Keep running Joe!!! You will make sure that we do not forget what the lunatic firnge in the Republican party is all about. Thank you for continuing to stay in the public eye. Maybe Glenn Beck has a place for you in his conservative wonderland.
- OneMan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:35 am:
“Does anyone deny that there is some amount of voter fraud?”
Perhaps, but it has been shown to be very little…
But using that same logic, we could take strong action to prevent any sort of corner case with things in life…
Does anyone deny that people steal books from the public library, so a full pat down of everyone leaving including checking their bags would be a good idea…
Does anyone deny drunk driving occurs, then DNA checking interlocks on all cars would help solve that problem.
The ’solution’ is out of proportion to the problem when it comes to voter id..
Lets not kid ourselves, regardless of the horror stories told in suburban meetings of hordes of Chicago democrats coming out to the burbs to vote multiple times, it isn’t happening.
This isn’t about voter fraud.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:35 am:
===But the state DOES have a legitimate interest in preventing voter fraud. Even one illegal vote necessarily negates and therefore disenfranchises one legitimate vote.===
Yes, it does, but disenfranchising tens of thousands of qualified voters is not the way to fix that problem of one voter.
“But the state DOES have a legitimate interest in preventing people from shooting other people. Even one dead person necessarily requires us to take rights away from tens of thousands of legal gun owners.”
- John Galt - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:37 am:
===
Walsh is simply stating the Republican viewpoint on this issue.
===
No he isn’t. He’s stating his own viewpoint. It’s been a GOP held house the entire duration of his tenure, and his bill still died in committee.
However, people keep equating an anti-voter fraud ID requirement with disenfranchisement. It’s not the same thing. Not even close. So long as a voter ID requirement includes strong provisions eliminating financial and logistical barriers to obtaining an ID, it is most certainly NOT an effort to disenfranchise. In fact, as I described above, implicitly allowing some voter fraud to take place is in-and-of-itself a form of voter disenfranchisement because it negates legally cast votes. The right to vote should be universal. But that right is universal for people **who are legally eligible to vote**.
As for needing ID to do other things, Rich is right. Enter a building or driving a car are certain priviledges. However, I believe you do need an ID to claim federal entitlement benefits such as Medicare, Social Security, etc.
A requirement to have a state issued ID is entirely reasonable.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:38 am:
This past election cycle, we saw states attempt to limit/eliminate early voting in urban areas, while allowing early voting in rural areas. I still haven’t quite figured out how exactly that helped deal with “voter fraud.”
- OneMan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:38 am:
== Until Republicans recognize Joe Walsh’s leadership, the Illinois GOP will remain a laughing stock. ==
In all seriousness, if Joe Walsh is the answer…
He isn’t, a political party, nor a government, should be based on the concept
“It sucks to be you”
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:44 am:
==Does anyone deny that there is some amount of voter fraud?==
Prove your point.
There’s also the opposite side of the argument. Allowing Republicans to disenfranchise citizens entitled to vote in the name of “protecting elections” leads to large numbers of people not voting.
This practice has affected the outcome of elections. Specifically, Al Gore would have won Florida in 2000 had Jeb Bush, Katherine Harris and their GOP allies not purged the voter roles of thousands of African-Americans.
So, if the “Conservative” movement (which many of us suspect is a tent of “White” bigots) is going to claim that Republicans should be empowered to disenfranchise large numbers of Blacks, women, immigrants and poor people–and that is what the GOP is asking to happen–then it seems reasonable to expect the GOP to provide proof that election fraud has tipped the results of specific elections.
- Darienite - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:44 am:
Or what he’s worried about his we will be able to vote online without ever having to go to a polling place.
- Elo Kiddies - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:45 am:
A radio talk show host can be fat and happy with 3% market share. A candidate for office cannot. But if pretending to be a candidate is part of the plan to reach that radio show, they I’d expect Walsh to keep pretending, until the radio plan falls through. Then maybe we’ll be rid of his antics.
Unless he gets a book deal…
- John Galt - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:45 am:
===
Yes, it does, but disenfranchising tens of thousands of qualified voters is not the way to fix that problem of one voter.
===
Rich, perhaps you’re not reading the entire context of my posts. A voter ID law that disenfranchises tens of thousands of people would not be a good law. Nor, in your example, would a gun control law be a good one that disenfranchises tens of thousands of otherwise law abiding citizens of their 2nd Amendment rights.
The answer is to make state issued IDs widely available to every single eligible voter. I’m talking nearly comical efforts to proactively deliver state issued ID’s to those who qualify. Surely when it comes to government entitlement programs, you support anti-fraud (i.e. recipient verification) measures of some sort to help with the long-term solvency of those programs. Why not the same efforts to help ensure the long-term integrity of the voting process?
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:49 am:
===you support anti-fraud (i.e. recipient verification) measures of some sort to help with the long-term solvency of those programs. Why not the same efforts to help ensure the long-term integrity of the voting process? ===
First of all, that’s a specious argument. The right to vote is clearly a sacred right that’s specifically and repeatedly protected by the Constitution.
Second, you have to show me how today’s voter fraud is so much worse than in decades when there were no regulations. You can’t do that.
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:50 am:
Bob Dold is a perpetrator of voter fraud. He voted in Kennilworth when he lived at the home he owned in Roscoe Village. Dold’s wife voted at the Roscoe Village address.
How many Republicans held in against Dold that he repeatedly perpetrated vote fraud?
Republicans aren’t opposed to vote fraud. Republicans are opposed to people from groups that vote Democrat casting too many votes, meaning enough votes to beat Republicans.
- OneMan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:51 am:
== The answer is to make state issued IDs widely available to every single eligible voter. I’m talking nearly comical efforts to proactively deliver state issued ID’s to those who qualify. Surely when it comes to government entitlement programs, you support anti-fraud (i.e. recipient verification) measures of some sort to help with the long-term solvency of those programs. Why not the same efforts to help ensure the long-term integrity of the voting process? ==
But why spend that kind of money (comedy does not come cheap) to put IDs in everyone’s hands to solve a very, very, very small problem at best?
I can think of better ways to spend that money than to make sure some 95 year old in a nursing home has a state issued photo ID.
The other thing is, if you wanted to commit voter fraud (that is take illegal action to change the result of an election) having people go and vote in multiple locations or just vote in jurisdictions outside their own is a very inefficient way of getting the job done.
- Boone's Is Back - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:52 am:
Is he trying to make it as humanly possible to get elected? He seriously will say anything.
- Nice Kid - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:52 am:
In-person voter fraud is virtually non-existent. BTW by grandmother is 94. Her ID expired long ago and I am not going to make her to stand in line for a new one. Should she be denied a right to vote (republican) because she has no ID? After her husband fought hand-to-hand at Iwo Jima? I have a term for anyone who says yes, but its pretty vulgar.
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:53 am:
Republicans want to take a problem that doesn’t affect the outcome of elections and implement a solution that will affect the outcome of elections.
Of course, the GOP “solution” will tip close elections from Democrat to Republican.
- OneMan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:53 am:
I would add to Carl’s point, lets not think that the changes over the last few years to expand where people can and when people can vote was all just driven by good government.
- OneMan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:55 am:
Nice Kid…
Sometimes Rich allows a commenter to say Bite Me
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 11:59 am:
Does anyone deny that there hasn’t been a calculated, nationwide effort by the right wing to disenfranchise voters of color?
Try this: Google “Republican admits voter suppression.”
–”I don’t want everybody to vote. Elections are not won by a majority of the people. They never have been from the beginning of our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.”==
Paul Weyrich, co-founder of The Heritage Foundation and the American Legislative Exchange Council, the driving force behind Voter ID laws.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Weyrich#Quotes
–A new Florida law that contributed to long voter lines and caused some to abandon voting altogether was intentionally designed by Florida GOP staff and consultants to inhibit Democratic voters, former GOP officials and current GOP consultants have told The Palm Beach Post.–
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/early-voting-curbs-called-power-play/nTFDy/
–VIDEO – Republican Pennsylvania House Majority Leader Mike Turzai brags at the Republican State Committee meeting that their recently passed voter ID law will “allow Governor Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania”–
http://buyingourfuture.com/pennsylvania-gop-admits-voter-id-is-about-suppressing-democrats-votes/
Much more on the google.
- Endangered Moderate Species - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:00 pm:
The ILGOP will have problems as long as Joe Walsh’s views are not challenged by other Republicans.
Yes, they do need a big tent of ideas and Walsh should be allowed to speak, but others must come forward and challenge, if not the party is seen as agreeing with Walsh.
Unfortunately for the party, Walsh has views that are historically consistent with fascism and that is not an ideology that will be accepted by Americans any time in the near future.
- Skeptic - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:02 pm:
I have to laugh about relying on photo IDs to solve voter fraud. No one here has ever used or had a friend use a fake ID to buy liquor?
- Carl Nyberg - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:03 pm:
==The answer is to make state issued IDs widely available to every single eligible voter.==
John Galt, I’d be curious if you took any action when Gov. Walker made it much harder to get a photo ID in Democratic parts of Wisconsin.
Did you take any action when Gov. Walker directed state employees to try to collect money for the photo IDs unless they knew this was illegal and adamant they weren’t going to pay it?
I’m sorry, but Republicans are trying to violate the law all the time. And I have seen no evidence that there are decent Republicans who take action against Republicans who violate the rights of young people, minorities, the poor, immigrants and women.
Having a photo ID requirement will lead to Republicans manipulating access to photo IDs. This isn’t some theoretical thing. This is exactly what Republicans did in Wisconsin.
And Republican activists either cheered Gov. Walker on or stood silently as evil was being perpetrated.
- Joe M. - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:16 pm:
Joe Walsh, just keep on talking - the more you talk, the less chance we will have of ever see you in public office again.
- OneMan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:16 pm:
Good to see that both Republicans and Democrats can blame election losses on the process/rules/fraud/the man…
- NIref - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:20 pm:
Okay, so here’s the thing. The ultimate government end with regards to elections is to provide free, fair, and competitive elections (by competitive, we mean that parties have access to the ballot and that elections are not just shills where votes don’t count. This is the academic definition of “competitive elections”).
The government is vested with the power to protect and preserve that end, so long as it has rational basis for such. In other words the means must justify the ends. Restrictions free and open elections may be put in place, if they guarantee the vote.
Turning to ID’s to vote. First, is there a problem of voter fraud anywhere? The answer is a resounding no. Nearly all documented cases of voting irregularities were found to be a result of operator error, usually due to underqualified poll workers. Furthermore, there are already multiple checks in place that do not impede ballot access.
As Rich pointed out before. To register to vote, you need to forms of ID, including one with a current address. Should it be done through a canvassing effort, first time voters are required to document at the polling place.
Once at the polling place, there are at least four poll workers employed by the state, two from each party, who check off on the ballot and name. If there is a conspiracy to rig elections through voter fraud, the judges would clearly have to be in on it. But the opposition party has no utility to gain from helping the other side win. Furthermore, any member of the general public is allowed to be a poll watcher. They also have the right to challenge any voter’s ballot. This has happened on several occasions where an overly-friendly relative helps their elder relative with the ballot.
Finally, committing fraud one voter at a time, where it is assumed that fraud occurs, is a pointless exercise. In order to jump through the previous hurdles, you need to recruit a mass of people to pose as someone else and vote under a different identity. The Australian ballot prevents free-riding in this case. Take SEA for example, one party offers $5 to someone to vote for their candidate, the opposition offers $3 and says, “vote for our guy, tell them you voted for their guy, and you’ll earn $8.” In the end, the actual ballot cast is still a mystery. It needs to also be mentioned that this canvass-style ballot-box stuffing does not work in practice, because the results and turnout of an election are unknowns. Even if someone can get 500 voters to pose as dead people and vote, it does not guarantee the outcome.
Field-based voter fraud simply does not exist. So-called “evidence” in favor of the opposite only points out irregularities, which are caused by poll worker ignorance, and not grand conspiracies.
But let’s assume that it’s not field-based fraud, but something in the vote-counting (which is the most vunerable part of the electoral process). To steal anything above a municipal election. Multiple counting places need to be simultaneously accessed at once. Elections are conducted by independent authorities, who feed information up the line, like a pyramid. If one section of the process is corrupted, say by accessing the Diebold counting software (which can be hacked by anyone with reasonable training in coding, and wireless connection.) That is only a single municipality. And even the municipalities are separated. One would need to access mutliple machines feeding information in order to steal the election. The voting and counting process is so decentralized that an all-out coordinated assault on the BoE would need to occur. In that case, it’s easier to put up a solid candidate and mount a good campaign. Because in that case, all you need to to is pay for a campaign (5-6 full-time staff plus materials), instead of hackers and armies of fraudulent voters)
Seriously, it is impossible to steal any major election. Fraud simply does not occur.
- MrJM - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:21 pm:
You’re concerned with some unknown degree of dilution of proper votes but unconcerned about an unknown degree of suppression of proper votes?
A diluted vote imperfectly reflects the citizen’s intent. The citizen is represented less than she should be but is still represented to some non-zero extent.*
By contrast, a suppressed vote doesn’t reflect the citizen’s intent at all. The citizen is shut out of the voting process entirely.
Therefore, a person sincerely concerned with vote dilution would logically be even more concerned with vote suppression.
Unless the actual motivating concern is partisan advantage. (Not that I would ever suggest such a thing!)
– MrJM
*(legitimate votes cast)/(all ballots cast)
An example: In the last election, 25,943 ballots were cast in Whiteside County. If 10 of those ballots were illegitimate, each legitimate vote would still retain 99.96% of it’s value — even after dilution. By contrast, if 10 legitimate voters were turned away from the polls, each of those citizens would get ZERO representation at the ballot.
- muon - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:35 pm:
I think it’s interesting to note that Canada has a voter ID law and does fine by its minority and aboriginal populations. The primary requirement in Canada is a state-issued photo ID such as a drivers license or provincial-issued photo ID. What they do to protect voters franchise is provide two failsafe ways for voters without a photo ID to accurately identify themselves. One way is to show two non-photo authorized IDs that include a name and address (eg a health card and a utility bill). The final failsafe is to take an oath and be vouched for by a voter who has shown a photo ID and is from the same precinct. It’s like a stronger form of the provisional ballots used here, and the voucher can only vouch for one person for that election.
- LincolnLounger - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:42 pm:
“Fraud simply does not occur.”
Give me a break. Of course, fraud occurs. Say that it’s not enough to warrant additional voting restrictions if you want. Say that fraud is difficult and won’t make a difference in significant elections. But DO NOT say that fraud “simply does not occur.”
Ridiculous.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:44 pm:
===I think it’s interesting to note that Canada has a voter ID law===
They also have universal health care.
- 3rd Generation Chicago Native - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:51 pm:
MrJM and Obama’s Puppy’s comments make me wonder why the GOP in Illinois has not had a nice sit down serious talk with this guy. But he is also good advertising for the Democrats in Illinois.
- Irish - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 12:55 pm:
I am not a fan of Joe Walsh’s by any means. However I would also not be offended if I was asked for a photo ID at my polling place. A person has to have a photo ID to drive, to cash a check, to get into a bar, to buy cigarettes, to buy some cold medicines, and I believe a Law Enforcement Officer can ask you to produce a photo ID at almost anytime. I understand that a person is preregistered and all to vote but how would one verify, if they were an election judge in the area where they live, which George Foreman was standing in front of you?
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 1:09 pm:
===if they were an election judge in the area where they live, which George Foreman was standing in front of you? ===
This shows ignorance. The state has a provisional ballot law. If the identification of a voter is in question, their votes go into a separate pile, to be dealt with later.
- illinifan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 1:10 pm:
If Joe really wants to make sure the right person is voting an easy solution is as you are born part of the pediatric exam would be the implantation of an identity chip that can be scanned every time you vote, fly, etc. Guess what for some that won’t be enough. It is interesting that Joe who proudly declares he wants the government out of their lives and less regulation, actually on this issue wants more government involvement. Maybe there is a hidden agenda.
- Cheryl44 - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 1:18 pm:
Why does Walsh randomly spew his nonsense on video–I thought he had a radio gig to do that.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 1:22 pm:
===MrJM and Obama’s Puppy’s comments make me wonder why the GOP in Illinois has not had a nice sit down serious talk with this guy.===
How can you talk to him rationally about anything? Look at the quote above;
“It should be that important. It shouldn’t be easy to vote. This is probably one of the most sacred privileges you’ve earned, you have to earn to live in this country.”
and;
““I shouldn’t say this, and this will cost me votes – if and when I run next time. It should be tough to vote. I don’t like this whole early-voting stuff. I think you should have to swim a mile, walk five miles, find a bus – I’m exaggerating for everyone who is filming me – and it should take you three hours to get to the ballot box.”
How do you have a rational conversation on strategy, on Party, on agenda, when Joe Walsh is all about “the crazy”, meaning, “the crazy” of saying anything, knowing that what he is saying is damaging, and willing to make everything about Joe Walsh and not about the betterment of all citizens.
That is why no one can talk to Joe Walsh and Joe likes it that way, and likes the idea that the Tea Party likes it that way too.
It’s one thing to have a minority view, its another to be divisive, and using that minorty view to stifle workable solutions for his Party, his State or his Country.
That is who Joe Walsh is. This issue is one among many that Joe uses, be it immigration, budget, or voter ID, Joe Walsh plays to the least, to disrupt the chances for us all.
Talking to him … it ain’t gonna help.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 1:33 pm:
===MrJM and Obama’s Puppy’s comments make me wonder why the GOP in Illinois has not had a nice sit down serious talk with this guy.===
Joe Walsh has no interest in the Republican Party, or governing for that matter.
He is interested in building the Joe Walsh brand to make money in the right-wing infotainment sector, a la Beck or Rush.
There’s a lot of money to be made there.
- Anonymous - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 1:35 pm:
This is in reference to the Jefferson post earlier as to wheater he should be allowed to vote without an ID. So, if am the Voter Registrar on election day and someone tells me ‘my name is Jefferson’ and my name is on the voters’ binder but have no ID to prove it. How is the Registrar to know your are indeed Jefferson in this instance and be allowed to vote without any ID to prove it? I guess any one can vote under the guise of being Jefferson.
- Boone Logan Square - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 1:36 pm:
Nice to see Joe Walsh owning the pro-Klan viewpoint on voting rights in 2013. That should do wonders for him if he somehow gets on the ballot for a general election ever again.
- OneMan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 1:36 pm:
===I think it’s interesting to note that Canada has a voter ID law===
They also have Tim Horton’s and more curling clubs, make both of those happen and we can talk…
- RetiredStateEmployee - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 1:47 pm:
This discussion is really old school. It would be difficult to recruit enough voters to participate and then all of them would have to keep a secret. Not too easy these days with Facebook and all the other social media. The easy was is to sabotage the software and machines used. You can change the results with minimal number of individuals involved. Real fraud these days is accomplished with computers.
- Skeptic - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 1:47 pm:
“So, if am the Voter Registrar on election day and someone tells me ‘my name is Jefferson’ and my name is on the voters’ binder but have no ID to prove it.” In Sangamon county at least, the voter has to sign a form, and if the signature in person does not match the signature on the registration he/she is not allowed to vote (as that person.) I.e., the signature *is* the identification. I don’t know about you, but I’d have more confidence deciding the authenticity of a signature than a utility bill. Or a Driver’s license.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 1:50 pm:
===This is in reference to the Jefferson post earlier as to wheater he should be allowed to vote without an ID. So, if am the Voter Registrar on election day and someone tells me ‘my name is Jefferson’ and my name is on the voters’ binder but have no ID to prove it. How is the Registrar to know your are indeed Jefferson in this instance and be allowed to vote without any ID to prove it?===
Andy Raucci, Bert Odelson, Tom Cullen, or Tom Jaconetty might be better versed in adding information on your hypothetical, as with most posts here.
The big picture here is not on ONE specific day, or ONE specific voter. Otherwise, we will be trying to interpret the law in every possible specific nuance that our imaginations may come up with in FAVOR or what Joe Walsh is saying and OPPOSED to what Joe Walsh is saying, but never answering the broader scope of what is needed, or not needed, to be done, in today’s world, to give all the voters a fair shake.
Otherwise, we all look like “Ballot Box Chasers” with neck braces and crutches, and demanding recounts and fraud when the votes do not go in our favor.
- Oswego Willy - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 1:59 pm:
“I have an Aunt, she has a crooked big toe, and dyes her hair a dishwater blonde, and refuses to wear pants on Sunday, because Sundays are for skirts or dresses, went to Early Vote between 8:17 and 8:21 am, on a Wednesday, when the Moon was beginning a new cycle that night, and was asked her name!!
Am I understanding this right, but a female, on a Wednesday, that begins a new Moon cycle is required to give HER name to fulfill the right to vote, even if its between 8:17 and 8:21, and it is in the morning … she is still required … to give her name, and how does Joe Walsh answer to her, with her crooked toe and all?”
Or should we look at this in a Big Picture way?
- OneMan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 2:00 pm:
RetiredStateEmployee for the win…
Would argue it was easier to do back in in the punch card days…
- Colossus - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 2:07 pm:
Irish -
An LEO can ask for your ID, but only with reasonable suspicion you are involved in illegal activity.
I highly recommend this website to everyone, it’s good to remind yourself that your rights are FAR more likely to be infringed in casual interaction with police than they ever will be by “Washington Fat Cats”.
http://www.flexyourrights.org/faqs/when-can-police-ask-for-id/
- Cincinnatus - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 2:14 pm:
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 1:33 pm:
“Joe Walsh has no interest in the Republican Party, or governing for that matter.
He is interested in building the Joe Walsh brand to make money in the right-wing infotainment sector, a la Beck or Rush.
There’s a lot of money to be made there.”
It’s interesting how you purport to know the mind of Joe Walsh, or anyone else for that manner. Do you have the corner on the Ouija board market.
- RetiredStateEmployee - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 2:26 pm:
Oneman …
You have never heard of hackers (sometimes it only takes one) — I don’t want to give too much away, but we are more at risk than most want to admit. Security is generally only an afterthought in modern software development. And then only after it has been shown to be vulnerable. And remember, the government always goes after the low bid contractor. Something has got to be left out and it’s generally the security. And if you expect to get high quality IT people to work for the state, you have to treat them well and that’s not happening.
- Original Rambler - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 2:36 pm:
Heard from a voter last November in Wisconsin how he insisted on showing his photo ID to the election judge, but then talked about how adamantly opposed he was to doing likewise to buy a gun or ammo.
- wordslinger - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 2:37 pm:
–It’s interesting how you purport to know the mind of Joe Walsh, or anyone else for that manner. Do you have the corner on the Ouija board market.–
No, Cincy, Walsh and I are not goombata.
My comments on Walsh are based on my own observation of his words and actions.
I always speak for myself and no one else.
But you raise an interesting question: when, on numerous occasions, you’ve purported to inform us of the thinking of Sen. Dillard, are you in contact with him before you post?
Does that include your other past posts, including those where you reference the alleged sexual orientation of possible GOP rivals to Sen. Dillard?
- Cincinnatus - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 2:57 pm:
On this blog, I speak for myself, too.
The context of the question about sexual orientation was a question to the readership of this blog. I asked if the recent allegations and media stories made by others re: sexual orientation were something the electorate would be able to deal with during an election. A fair question since the commenters on this blog know the political landscape better than I. You, of course, and as aways, read into other’s comments any meaning convenient to you to make yourself look like the brightest penny in the roll.
- Casual Observer - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 3:05 pm:
This discussion reminds me of when Florida started drug testing on public aid recipients. The theory being most were drug users and the checks were going to support their habit. It was a no brainer, the project would fund itself through the savings. After one year it was stopped because fewer than 1% of recipients failed the test so the program was too expensive to administer, and was rightly labeled a disaster.
- muon - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 3:10 pm:
=== ===I think it’s interesting to note that Canada has a voter ID law=== ===
===They also have universal health care. ===
My post was in response to the assumption that voter ID results in disenfranchisement. Canada shows that there are ways to do voter ID that provide adequate mechanisms to protect the right to vote for all citizens.
- OneMan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 3:13 pm:
RetiredStateEmployee,
Yeah I have, work in the technology industry. Also have overseen counts for the party at my local (larger) election authority.
Here is the problem with a hack…
You still have the paper and the paper does not make it’s way into the building until much later. So you may ‘hack’ so it gives Bill Smith two votes per pct, but you still have the paper.
The state circles back with you and has you recount a pct or two and the numbers have to match. If they don’t you fail audit and you have a problem.
With the punch cards, since they had to be brought in centrally to be counted (at least in my neck of the woods) and were not validated at the polling place (like the scan sheets are) it would have been easier to over-vote some punch cards IMHO.
to pull it off by us, not only would you have to at least hack a whole host of scanners and possibly the machine they then process the scanner pcma cards with.
It is still more efficient than getting a bunch of people to commit voter fraud, but it would be expensive and challenging…
- Small Town Liberal - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 3:26 pm:
Hey Cinci, the award isn’t named for wordslinger just because Rich likes him. If you’re of the opinion that word makes unfair attacks and uses twisted logic, perhaps you should work on your reading comprehension.
- Lil Squeezy - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 3:40 pm:
Who commits voter fraud? Presumably a person commits voter fraud if they believe they have something to gain or if they are mentally unstable.
So lets say I believe I will get a job for casting a fraudulent vote. If a voter ID law is in place, wouldn’t I secure a fake ID?
Or lets say I am fundamentalist who believes in armed insurgency and I decide to participate in voter fraud as a last ditch effort to avoid me from having to wage war against American soldiers. Wouldn’t I secure a fake ID?
In both examples the person is willing to commit a felony to achieve their desired result.
So the question becomes do we need ID laws and technology capable of identifying fake ids (at every precinct)? And can we trust our election judges? See how this can become very ridiculous very quickly?
And lets be clear, an armed insurgency that acted would be acting upon American soldiers. You cannot deny this. The American armed forces fight armed insurgencies in countries that America has a vested interest in. Those militia groups we have already are clubs for big kids, not armed insurgencies.
- Colossus - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 3:52 pm:
We already have laws against voter fraud. If someone is going to vote illegally, they are by definition not going to follow any of these so-called “laws”, so why don’t we work on just enforcing the ones we have on the books already?
Knee jerk, feel good legislation will only lead us down the path where law abiding voters are denied the ability to exercise their right to vote because of the actions of a few bad apples.
The only way to stop a bad guy with a vote is with a good guy with a vote.
- reformer - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 4:36 pm:
The USA already has one of the world’s lowest voting rates, yet Walsh thinks what we need to is make it much harder to vote?!
In the election this April 9th, for instance, turnout will be about 15% in the Chicago area, even though the local officials elected are the ones who set property tax levies and otherwise impact the quality of life.
- illinifan - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 5:52 pm:
to one man and retire state employee…..interesting day after election Annonymous posted they stopped a hack by Rove to steal the election. They claim that his meltdown was due to his advance knowledge that he had the fix in….http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/17/1162678/-Anonymous-claims-it-stopped-Karl-Rove-from-hacking-the-vote#. Who knows the accuracy on either side of the issue. The scary thought is many states do not back up electronic voting with paper ballots so when you vote there is no secondary method to ensure voting accuracy. Maybe for federal elections there should be a national standard.
- Left Leaner - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 7:14 pm:
Joe…please, please, please run for Governor! That would be quality entertainment. Better than clowns!
Regarding civil disobedience, wonder if he felt/feels the same way about practices during the Civil Rights movement, both past and present? The logic is the same.
What do you say Joe?
- Nice Kid - Wednesday, Jan 23, 13 @ 8:26 pm:
Joe Walsh: Mr. Sad Clown
- Steve D - Thursday, Jan 24, 13 @ 12:15 am:
Pinker AND Rich Miller…… in Illinois you MUST provide identification in order to vote; the identification is to be provided to a judge of election in the following manner: correctly providing your name and your current address AND signing your name in the same way you signed it when you registered.