The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

Those nuns were informed they needed a photo id, they just chose not to get one. theyll know better next time. they also could have filed a provisional ballot and gotten someone in the convent to drive them to get an id within 10 days. once again, they chose not to do this. it takes MINIMAL effort to comply with the law, some people are trying to create problems where there arent any.

Gary Daily lives under a rock. Every election in Chicago turns up not a few, but hundreds of "dead people" who vote. In 2000 the number of disputed ballots in Milwaukee (7900) was 50% greater than Al Gore's margin in the state. Nearly 4000 of those were found to be fraudulent votes when investigated. In 2004 the number of ballots cast in Milwaukee was nearly 2000 greater than the number of registered voters.

Voter fraud is a problem, and the only one's who don't like to talk about it are the folks who's candidates benefit from it.

I agree entirely with John P.

The fact that an ID with a photograph has an expiration date certainly does not mean that the person photographed has!

We all know -- and the state of Indiana's own court filings acknowledge -- that requiring a current photo ID is a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. This garbage has never been anything other than a ploy to disenfranchise the poor, the infirm, and the elderly.

Why are people not allowed to vote because of an expired ID? Your identity never expires! An expiration date is often in place because the issuing body (Dept. of State for a passport, DMV for driver's license) wants more money. After the expiration date, you may not be permitted to use your passport for international travel, but it certainly hasn't stopped being useful in putting a name to a face.

"Why is it SO HARD for someone to go to the DMV to get a FREE state ID, but they seem to have no problem getting to the polls to vote in PRIMARY elections???"

Well, first off, because not everyone lives near polling places or DMVs. There are plenty of large, rural counties with older populations throughout the country. And I can tell you through campaign experience that a great deal of senior citizens don't go directly to polling places (a problem in any caucus state), but vote absentee (where there is actual potential for fraud). There are also often systemic problems at the polling place itself: a 2000 study found that over 80% of all American polling places had one or more ADA violations which served as a major obstacle to voters with disabilities. And, as the Georgetown scholar the Post had on chat last week succinctly said, the issue isn't the ID law itself, but the burden it puts on the person attempting to get the ID. See Constitution on poll taxes.

There are many exigent circumstances that aren't ever well explained. Say you're homeless and/or don't have a fixed address. You can't satisfy the requirements for obtaining ID. Or you're a senior citizen or person with a disability who can't actually drive. Now you are reliant on someone to get you to the DMV. Furthermore, no law in this country requires anyone have some form of ID. Why, for instance, would you need one if you're a nun? Or say you live in a large city and only take public transit? I can't remember the exact number, but part of the reason this stuff was dropped from HAVA was the fairly staggering number of eligible voters who did not have a government issued ID. I seem to remember it being something like 8 million people. That could be low-balling, or merely the number of persons with disabilities. Just because you can't imagine it, doesn't mean it isn't a real phenomenon.

"One thing I noticed about the nuns, though. Instead of whining and complaining that the law was unfair, they simply said that they would get the ID's by November."

a) You don't know that.
b) Fat lot of good it did them yesterday.
c) The reason they said November was it was going to take quite a deal of time to actually arrange the trip to get the IDs.

"As for voter fraud actually happening, why don't you talk to the Mob about that. JFK had a little "help" from his Italian friends back in the day."

This was all, I assume, in person voter fraud of the sort the Indiana law attempts to suppress, and not, say, intimidation or tampering with process or systems?

But, in case you were wondering, the State of Indiana was unable in it's Supreme Court brief to cite a single case of in person voter fraud in the history of the state. Not one.

Let's make an analogy, shall we? Do you support hate crime legislation? Let's assume, for the sake of the argument, you don't. The usual reason cited is that there are already laws on the books that deal with the basic crime being committed. The same exists with voter fraud: It's already illegal. That isn't deterrent enough for you? There has to be an additional legislative barrier to jump through?

"oxstu-Last I heard, someone was singing "The times, they are a'changing"-DECADES AGO!"

Yeah, but the Constitution, it a'ain't -- and it was written two centuries ago.

trenehoosier-Agreed! There needs to be a little common sense!

I totally agree with requiring voters to show proof of identity. However, in Indiana the ID has to have an expiration date and the expiration date has to be before the last general election (Nov 2006). I worked the polls yesterday and had to turn away an elderly man in a wheelchair because his drivers license expired in 2004. His wife was so mad she refused to vote. He had a photo ID and like his wife yelled in my face,"He's right there! It's him! On one hand I think well, you have a point but I also think-come on people bring what you need so you can vote!! How hard is it. The ID requirments are posted when you come in to vote, and the newpapers (at least in my city) had an article about this on their front page. FREE state issued ID card from the BMV were offered as well. I don't agree with the expiraton date thing but come on - the state did a lot to help people get what they needed to vote.

Why no one has the gut to expose the real Obama. Please go to Larrysinclair0926.wordpress.com

oxstu-Last I heard, someone was singing "The times, they are a'changing"-DECADES AGO!

As a Catholic, allow ME to assure YOU and everyone else, there are THOUSANDS of Foreign Nationals all through the Church here in the US-Many of which are as Illegal as the more than 50% of the total number of Immigrants in this Country!

Repeat-MORE than 50% of the IMMIGRANTS here, are ILLEGALLY HERE!

Now, WaPo-THAT is MY Biggest ISSUE-and FYI-It is WHY our ECONOMY SUCKS!

Why is it SO HARD for someone to go to the DMV to get a FREE state ID, but they seem to have no problem getting to the polls to vote in PRIMARY elections???

One thing I noticed about the nuns, though. Instead of whining and complaining that the law was unfair, they simply said that they would get the ID's by November. You probably can't say that about a bunch of other people turned away.

As for voter fraud actually happening, why don't you talk to the Mob about that. JFK had a little "help" from his Italian friends back in the day.

"HEY WHINING, CRYING BRAIN-DEAD LIBERALS: Take up your complaints with noted LIBERAL justice John Paul Stevens who was vote number SIX in the 6-3 no-brainer ruling. Got it liberal whining, pricks? 8-)"

Posted by: JC | May 7, 2008 9:43 AM

Sigh. Before you go about impugning the intelligence of others, you might want to look up the definition of "plurality decision." And then go read the four separate opinions. Which leave open the opportunity to revisit this issue when it becomes clear that said laws present a burden.

"There is NO Constitutional right to vote in a Federal election. Article II, section 1,clause III."

Posted by: dionysis | May 7, 2008 8:24 AM

Calling bull. You might want to read Amendments 12, 14, 15, 17, 19, 23, 24 and 26 before making such patently stupid statements. While you're at it, read the Voting Rights Act. Then consider the meaning of the phrase "All men are created equally" in terms of a self-evident truth.

"It should be a FEDERAL REQUIREMENT.

Cross Referenced with Social Security Numbers!"

Posted by: RAT-The | May 6, 2008 8:42 PM

Bull, again. Not just for the Constitutional issues stated above

a) The Constitution leaves voter laws to the individual States, only insuring the right and conditions of voting.

The original drafts of HAVA attempted to do something similar: Mandate states correct voter roles by cross-checking them with Social Security records. Turns out there is zero chance of ensuring the accuracy of said roles before 1982. It was the first thing thrown out in conference discussion.

But at least you've convinced yourself of a use for Social Security and the Federal Government: To deny American citizens the basic freedoms and rights enjoyed by holding that status.

There is minimal, at best, record of in person voter fraud. And it's been researched pretty damn extensively. This is an entirely made up issue. The possible problem is fraud by use of absentee ballot, yet no one seems to require an ID there. How odd. Beyond that, it is already a crime to commit voter fraud. So what exactly do ID laws do?

Oh yeah, they disenfranchise nuns and other poor, older or disabled persons unable to obtain official ID. Pathetic that can be called a "mild" consequence in any way. Until everyone's vote counts, no one's does.

'Level Headed' is right on the money.

How many people simply didn't bother to show up because they didn't have the required ID. Or, still worse, had acceptable ID but didn't realize it was acceptable?

On another note, the image of elderly nuns barred from voting should be the only image you need for why this measure is WRONG. It doesn't matter which 'liberal" justices voted in favor of it.

Is One Vote Too Many. Impeach Roberts.

HEY WHINING, CRYING BRAIN-DEAD LIBERALS: Take up your complaints with noted LIBERAL justice John Paul Stevens who was vote number SIX in the 6-3 no-brainer ruling. Got it liberal whining, pricks? 8-)

"The fact is that AMERICAN CITIZENS WERE DISENFRANCHISED OF THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE."

Fraudulent voting ALSO disenfranchises Americans. Each fraudulent vote cancels out a legitimate one. As it is, there are still possibilities for fraud through absentee ballots, such as those "cast" by some residents of nursing homes, but that are really filled out by their care givers.

I live in Indiana, and I think there can be no other way to vote than to show an ID. I don't care who you are or how old you are, there is no way you can function in today's world without a valid ID, plain and simple. Yes, it's a shame the nuns were turned away, but people in Indiana have known about this for a long time. There's no excuse for not having proper ID.

How many THOUSANDS heard all the media reports about required picture IDs they did not have and simply stayed away from their voting places? Until someone provides a reliable measure of THAT number, I can't believe these "little impact of Voter ID" stories. It's COMMON SENSE!

I continue to be offended that this is a solution to a problem that hasn't been shown to exist. Now, it looks like it may have actually caused disenfranchisement in the way it was applied - something that should give pause to all Hoosiers.

Since the 1836 internal improvements fiasco (and maybe before), the state DNA has been strongly infused with the conservative "we're not going to rush into anything until we're convinced the status quo isn't working" bent (also known as the 'wraps? we don't need no stinkin' wraps; sandwiches are working out just fine' attitude). It's arguably kept the state from being able to react to big structural changes (e.g. loss of blue collar manufacturing), but it's also prevented the wild swings other governments get themselves into (isn't it time for Orange County to be bankrupt again?). It's also a key to understand the strong emotions that the current governor stirs up, why Hoosiers still talk about time zones (oh, for the days of slow time...), and probably why the polls still close so early in Indiana.

At best, this should be viewed as a case of a nativist mentality overcoming the State's general worldview (it happens - remember the strengh of the old KKK in the state in the early part of the 20th Century?) - which makes it twice as bad.

So, as noted above, I'm offended by the actions of my home state on this.

There is NO Constitutional right to vote in a Federal election. Article II, section 1,clause III.

Overall I do not object to the idea of people proving who they are to vote. I do suspect, however, that the whole idea is to discourage certain kinds of people from registering. If states are serious that the purpose is to avoid fraud, then they can create the laws in such a way that the ID card is free and employers are required, by law, to give people time off to register to vote. If there is a cost to get the card and/or, if employers are not supportive, it is poor people who will be less likely able to comply with the law.

Regarding the nuns...please, in their wheelchairs and walkers they crashed several precincts in order to cast fraudulent votes--unlikely, to say the least.

Joe Brennan's hate-filled, self centered comment above shows everything that's wrong with the Republican party, and sadly every that's wrong with our Republic.

People fought and died for the right to vote, marched and suffered for it, and now "Americans" like Joe want to take this right away from anyone THEY don't believe is "good enough" to vote??

If Joe ever gets down on his luck and can't afford his taxes, goes blind or gets another disability, etc. will HE be turning in HIS voter card??

Somehow I think not.

And, sadly, even with his lousy mean-spirtied attitude, even Joe Brennan's lousy right to vote should be protected.

This is not a "mild" problem, WAPO.

THE INCREDIBLE DISAPPEARING/ALTERED INDIANA VOTER ROLLS:

http://www.blackboxvoting.org/

I suppose if they are too dumb to aquire a ID then the Democrats want their vote, if it was up to me if you don't pay taxes you dont vote, can't read? no vote, Can't speak English? No Vote etc etc. Why that would just about stop voting for Democrats!

"Mild" Consequence? MILD?

Tell that to the 98 year-old nun who was denied her chance to come to the poll yesterday and cast her ballot like any other American. So now at age 98 she's gotta run around to some office 12 miles away and get a photo ID?

Todd Rokita -- STEP DOWN. Your racist remarks last month and now a campaign to deny nuns the right to vote. SHAME ON YOU.

Does the Republican party just hate nuns, or is it that they hate ALL voters who may not agree with their agenda?

This is a modern-day poll tax. Once again the "Supreme" Court at its most.... supreme. Thanks, Scalia.

Relying on MacGillis' or any one reporter's "analysis" of the effects of Real ID's real consequences is laughable.
It's a transparent voter suppression law, and the GOP loves it because big turnouts favor Democrats.

The new definition of "difficult"

Mapquest results for traveling from Saint Mary's College to the South Bend office of the Indiana Bureau of Motor Vehicles:

Estimated Time: 14 minutes
Estimated Distance: 11.61 miles

(sorry if it's a double post)

This is voter suppression, pure and simple.

A single case is a travesty. More than a dozen cases is horrific.

Shame on the Roberts Court.

Impeach the Lilly Ledbetter Five!

was told today that my military ID was not acceptable form of identification to vote. Indiana is unable to follow the ID law it has established. The poll workers are unable to understand which ID's are accepted. If the ID is not a drivers license, the poll workers are confused.
Call to IN Secretary of State office resulted in the official informing me that I could also use drivers license or passport instead of military ID and that IN won case in Supreme Court so could require ID to vote. There are serious problems with the ID law in Indiana and the accurate administration of the requirements at polling locations. The attitude of the IN Secretary of State office is unacceptable and without any regard to voter rights.

There's a whole convent of nuns who can't vote because they don't have ID, and only need it to vote. They didn't turn up because they had no way to get ID in time - the convent even said they'd try to get them ID for November. That's 6 months away. It's such a logistical trial for these nuns to get ID that it takes 6 months! No tell me that's not an unreasonable barrier to voting. Nuns! Seriously, we can do better with our elections.

Voter suppression is underreported because we don't know who didn't try to vote because the barriers are so high.

Mr. MacGillis, you've obviously been drinking from the same Kool-Aid well as the rest of the MSM. The fact is that AMERICAN CITIZENS WERE DISENFRANCHISED OF THEIR RIGHT TO VOTE. This back-door poll tax is doing exactly what its Rethuglican sponsors intended. Calling it "mild" is giving tacit approval to the constitutional violaton created by this onerous law. Imagine applying the "mild" standard to other violations, such as warrantless spying. Would you still be so cavalier if it were your phone they tapped, your ability to vote denied? Shame on you, shame on the Rethuglicans running Indiana. The only blessing is that now there are actual plaintiffs who can file suit. Let's see how the Scalito five rule then.

propaganda.

Mr. Macgillis how can you claim at 8:53 pm that the consequences of the new voter ID law were mild? You might want to wait until you have more information other than your agenda.

It is impossible to quantify your claim at the time you are making it.

A silly anti-democratic piece of legislation and court decision. Can you actually believe someone attempting to alter the results of an election would go through the following, necessary steps?

1. Study voting district to find person of voting age on vacation or dead.

2. Make certain this voter is registered and on voting rolls.

3. Get to polls early enough to make certain voter whose vote you are stealing is not back from vacation or the dead and has already voted.

4. Sign voter roll, hoping poll worker does not know vacationing or dead voter.

5. Cast illegal vote which is a crime and punishable by _____ (Fill in the blank. I don' t know because this kind of vote stealing never takes place.)

6. Repeat steps 1 through 5 several hundred or several thousand times to be certain the candidate you are committing voter fraud for has a chance of winning.

It should be a FEDERAL REQUIREMENT.

Cross Referenced with Social Security Numbers!