Advertisement

Lawrence and Douglas County

Lawrence and Douglas county

Voter ID requirement up for consideration in Legislature

March 16, 2009

Advertisement

— Legislation headed for full Senate consideration would require that voters show identification at the polls or when getting an advance ballot. The ID would not have to have a photograph of the person.

The law already requires people new to a county to show ID, but Senate Bill 267 would require voters to show ID every time they voted.

An acceptable identification would be a driver’s license, utility bill, bank statement, paycheck or government document — something that has the voter’s name and address.

Last year, Gov. Kathleen Sebelius vetoed a photo ID bill. She said there was no reason for the bill because there had been no instances of voter fraud in the state. Kansas Republicans have long called for such a requirement.

When SB 267 was in committee last week, several people called for the photo ID requirement.

Paul Degener, of Topeka, president of Citizens Against Illegal Immigration, said anyone could easily get a nonphoto ID. “If you don’t mind Dumpster diving, I think you can find a utility bill,” he said.

He said voters should have to show a photo ID or possibly a birth certificate when they vote.

Degener said he became engaged in the issue when he watched what he said were “illegal aliens” being encouraged to vote at a rally at the Capitol in 2006. “This is the United States of America, not Mexico, and only U.S. citizens should vote,” Degener said.

Tom Stoffors, of Tonganoxie, with November Patriots, said fraud at the ballot box is a problem despite what Sebelius said. “You’d have to be naive or just not willing to look at this to think this is not a problem,” he said.

Michael Byington, with the Kansas Association for the Blind and Visually Impaired, said he believed the identification requirement will result in some legitimate voters being refused the right to vote. But, he said, SB 267 is better than one requiring a photo ID.

“We’re not crazy about this, but if you do one, do this one,” Byington said.

Comments

madmike 5 years, 1 month ago

Bozo is probably a "community organizer". aka: ACORN member/supporter.

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 1 month ago

Thinking_Out_Loud (Anonymous and Moron) :

In the instance of requiring ID to vote, you are not being accused of a crime; merely being required to prove that you are who you say you are.

Whatup?

You an illegal alien who has registered to vote?

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 1 month ago

Besides, Thinking_Out_Loud (Anonymous and Moron) , if a law is passed to require identification to vote, "due process of law" has been fulfilled.

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 1 month ago

Thinking_Out_Loud (Anonymous) says…

Marion wondered “Why should proof of identity not be required for voting?”

To which the answer is “Because I may not be disenfranchised without due process of law,”

Marion writes:

Requiring identification is disenfranchisement without due process of law?

Woo Hoo!

Tell that to the drug store when you try to buy certain OTC medications!

0

Thinking_Out_Loud 5 years, 1 month ago

Marion wondered "Why should proof of identity not be required for voting?"

To which the answer is "Because I may not be disenfranchised without due process of law," of course. Innuendo such as that provided by Pilgrim2 not only involves a logical fallacy, but is blatantly unAmerican. I never have to prove that I am not breaking the law. The government must always make a case, if it has reason to believe I am, that I am indeed breaking the law. But I must be presumed innocent; I must be afforded due process; and I must not be disenfranchised without that due process.

0

Marion Lynn 5 years, 1 month ago

ID required for:

Tobacco purchase.

Alcohol purchase.

Writing a check.

Picking up mail at the Post Office.

Buying a firearm.

Signing a lease with most landlords.

Obtaining a hunting or fishing licence.

Buying many medications; even OTC.

For employment.

Returning goods at some retail stores.

Why should proof of identity not be required for voting?

0

Pilgrim2 5 years, 1 month ago

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…

A seat belt actually prevents (or mitigates) something bad from happening. Voter ID laws don't. But they do have the effect of suppressing turnout of otherwise eligible voters, especially those pesky poor and/or old people who tend to vote the “wrong” way.


Why is that? Are they up to something fraudulent? What are they afraid of? What are YOU afraid of? You trying to pull something shady, bozo?

0

Pilgrim2 5 years, 1 month ago

deathpenaltyliberal (Anonymous) says…

The officials at my polling place have only asked for my ID once, the first time I voted in a new precinct. I don't know why you are always asked for your ID...


We have a misunderstanding. I am not being asked every time. But even if I am, how is that suppressing my vote? It doesn't keep me from cashing checks, and it wouldn't keep me from voting. So I'll try this one more time. If an ID requirement keeps a person from voting, the only logical reason would be that they are attempting something fraudulent and are afraid of getting caught. In that case, bravo! So what's the problem?

0

markbr52 5 years, 1 month ago

There is a benefit to insuring that voters are "properly registered". People who are not properly registered probably aren't paying their proper taxes either. Every voter should have their residency verified and insure that they have registered their vehicles IN THE STATE and COUNTY.

Have you ever watched the tags at your polling place? I have. Probably 1 in 10 is out of county or out of state. These are tax dollars that are going the wrong direction or not being paid at all.

Why don't we have an officer at every polling place that observes and records for follow-up the tags that are not in county? Maybe we will be able to decrease taxes if all that should pay them do pay them!

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 1 month ago

A seat belt actually prevents (or mitigates) something bad from happening. Voter ID laws don't. But they do have the effect of suppressing turnout of otherwise eligible voters, especially those pesky poor and/or old people who tend to vote the "wrong" way. It's easy to see why it's such a hot issue for you, Pilgrim.

0

deathpenaltyliberal 5 years, 1 month ago

P2, The officials at my polling place have only asked for my ID once, the first time I voted in a new precinct. I don't know why you are always asked for your ID, maybe you are transient?

You seem to be struggling with these contradictory ideas; 1. Republicans are telling you that there is massive voter fraud and the country needs Voter ID. 2. Voter ID is a Big Government "solution". 3. There is no evidence of massive voter fraud.

0

Pilgrim2 5 years, 1 month ago

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…

“It CAN happen,”

Well, that can apply to all sorts of highly unlikely events.


If you are obeying the laws, it's unlikely you're going to get into a traffic accident, too, but the law still says you have to wear a seat belt as a preventative measure against injury. So answer the question. Why shouldn't Kansas be more preventative against the possibility of voter fraud than a state like Minnesota? What are you afraid of?

0

Pilgrim2 5 years, 1 month ago

deathpenaltyliberal (Anonymous) says…

Only first-time voters are required to show ID, so I don't know why you are being asked for ID.


I am thankful my election officials are more diligent than you want them to be.

The only logical answer to your response is that you are too busy parrotting Republican talking points to think for yourself.


The only logical answer to your response is that you are busy parroting Acorn, La Raza, et al talking points to understand that the same standards that are required for cashing a check should be the minimum requirement for participating in the election of the officials that pass our laws, levy our taxes, and have a hell of a lot more influence over the conduct of our lives than an illegal paper hanger.

But you still haven't answered the question. How does an ID requirement suppress anyone's desire to participate in the election process unless they're trying to do something fraudulent and are afraid of getting caught?

0

Pilgrim2 5 years, 1 month ago

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…

“There has been a swing of less than 500 votes in the Minnesota re-count. Hell, that would be a bad day at the office for an outfit like Acorn.”

Really? Given that there has been no evidence anywhere, ever, that ACORN has been involved in any sort of fraudulent voting, what is the basis for this statement?


http://www.rottenacorn.com/activityMap.html

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 1 month ago

"There has been a swing of less than 500 votes in the Minnesota re-count. Hell, that would be a bad day at the office for an outfit like Acorn."

Really? Given that there has been no evidence anywhere, ever, that ACORN has been involved in any sort of fraudulent voting, what is the basis for this statement?

"It CAN happen,"

Well, that can apply to all sorts of highly unlikely events.

"and you have no idea whether it is happening in Minnesota or not."

But you're the one making wild assumptions about what is going on in Minnesota, not me.

What I believe is happening is an election so close that their (and our) current election system is just plain inadequate to declare a winner with any certainty. Whoever is eventually seated will obtain it by something equivalent to a coin toss.

0

deathpenaltyliberal 5 years, 1 month ago

Pilgrim2 Only first-time voters are required to show ID, so I don't know why you are being asked for ID.

The only logical answer to your response is that you are too busy parrotting Republican talking points to think for yourself.

This Voter ID bill is just another Big Government solution to a problem that does not exist.

0

Bowhunter99 5 years, 1 month ago

bozo says:

"What do you get if you vote in an election you aren't qualified to vote in?"

Answer: you get Obama as president.

0

Pilgrim2 5 years, 1 month ago

deathpenaltyliberal (Anonymous) says…

Requiring voter ID is an example of Republicans using Big Government to suppress voter turnout.


I have to show an ID at the polling place to prove I am who I say I am, just like I have to do in a myriad of other situations in life. How does that suppress my ability or desire to show up at said polling place? The only logical answer is that I'm afraid of getting caught doing something fraudulent/illegal.

0

Pilgrim2 5 years, 1 month ago

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…

I'm not the one claiming that there is fraud, of any kind, involved in the Minnesota elections. I'm merely conjecturing that given that there is a) little to no evidence of fraud by individual voters in recent years and b) little motivation for anyone to do it, that it's much more likely that the sources of any problems in the Minnesota elections are to be found elsewhere.


Well, let's re-visit what started this. Earlier in this thread:

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…

Given that it would be impossible to organize non-citizens to vote illegally in numbers large enough to have any effect on the outcome of an election, this is a non-issue.


"...impossible to organize non-citizens ... in numbers large enough to have any effect on the outcome of an election."

There has been a swing of less than 500 votes in the Minnesota re-count. Hell, that would be a bad day at the office for an outfit like Acorn. So your premise is bogus from the start. It CAN happen, and you have no idea whether it is happening in Minnesota or not. So why not take a step in the direction of assuring that it doesn't happen in Kansas?

0

deathpenaltyliberal 5 years, 1 month ago

Voting is a RIGHT, therefore the government should be working to increase the pool of voters, not decrease.

Driving is a PRIVILEGE, subject to government restriction. Please note the difference.

Requiring voter ID is an example of Republicans using Big Government to suppress voter turnout. The number of voter fraud cases nationwide in the last decade is miniscule. If you do a cost-benefit analysis, this voter ID bill is just wasteful.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 1 month ago

I'm not the one claiming that there is fraud, of any kind, involved in the Minnesota elections. I'm merely conjecturing that given that there is a) little to no evidence of fraud by individual voters in recent years and b) little motivation for anyone to do it, that it's much more likely that the sources of any problems in the Minnesota elections are to be found elsewhere.

So what's the evidence for your claims, Pilgrim? (not holding my breath.)

0

madmike 5 years, 1 month ago

Hmmm...I wonder if bozo in a "community organizer? Maybe a member of ACORN. vote early, vote often, especially if you are dead!

0

Pilgrim2 5 years, 1 month ago

logicsound04 (Anonymous) says…

“Who told you that? Your dog?”

–––––-

A hilarious statement coming from someone whose posts rarely contain any substance.

Perhaps you're projecting?


If my dog were talking to me, which it doesn't, it would make a whole lot more sense than bozo's dog. And it would have the evidence to back it up.

More likely, though, it is bozo who is projecting. A voter fraud practitioner who is afraid of getting caught.

0

Pilgrim2 5 years, 1 month ago

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…

“there were numerous precincts in Minnesota with more votes than there were people registered to vote in the precinct.”

If there is fraud (as opposed to just human or computer error) involved, it's almost certainly on the part of the vote counters, not the vote casters, upon which a voter ID requirement would have zero effect.


Still listening to your dog, we see. If you're so cock sure there is no voter fraud involved in Minnesota, let's see your evidence. Show us where it's the vote counters and not the vote casters who are the fraudulent ones. Back it up, bozo. And your dog doesn't count as a source.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 1 month ago

"there were numerous precincts in Minnesota with more votes than there were people registered to vote in the precinct."

If there is fraud (as opposed to just human or computer error) involved, it's almost certainly on the part of the vote counters, not the vote casters, upon which a voter ID requirement would have zero effect.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 1 month ago

"Who told you that? Your dog?"


A hilarious statement coming from someone whose posts rarely contain any substance.

Perhaps you're projecting?

0

Pilgrim2 5 years, 1 month ago

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…

” Illegal voting is alive and well and will continue to flourish.”

Well, no, it's not. There is zero evidence that's it's happening in any significant way. And the Minnesota election is just too close to call. We'll never know for sure who won that election— illegal voting plays absolutely no part in that.


Who told you that? Your dog?

0

Pilgrim2 5 years, 1 month ago

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says…

Given that it would be impossible to organize non-citizens to vote illegally in numbers large enough to have any effect on the outcome of an election, this is a non-issue.


Really? Tell that to the people of Minnesota.

0

madmike 5 years, 1 month ago

Not to mention that one democratic member of the election "found" votes in his trunk, which were counted. Amazing, isn't it?

0

BigDog 5 years, 1 month ago

Bozo,

In Minnesota you have either incompetency or illegal voting ..... there were numerous precincts in Minnesota with more votes than there were people registered to vote in the precinct.

0

madmike 5 years, 1 month ago

How do you know that, bozo? Were you one of the vote counters?

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 1 month ago

" Illegal voting is alive and well and will continue to flourish."

Well, no, it's not. There is zero evidence that's it's happening in any significant way. And the Minnesota election is just too close to call. We'll never know for sure who won that election-- illegal voting plays absolutely no part in that.

0

ljreader 5 years, 1 month ago

A very few single votes CAN count- re: the Al Franken debaucle. Possessing a picture ID means nothing anyway. Illegal aliens are accomplished ID theives. They have forged birth certificates,and stolen SS #s and cards so they can steal jobs, medical and welfare benefits. Probably 99% have a forged driver's license with their picture. Even experts have trouble distinguishing these forgeries from the real McCoy- So don't get your panties in a wad or fret- Illegal voting is alive and well and will continue to flourish.

0

madmike 5 years, 1 month ago

Fortunately, the legislature isn't run by Larryville leftists. This measure will pass.

0

deskboy04 5 years, 1 month ago

There must have been a lot of voter fraud in the last election...that's the only way that my candidates could have lost. It couldn't have been because a majority of the people disagreed with their policies.

0

feeble 5 years, 1 month ago

Degener said he became engaged in the issue when he watched what he said were “illegal aliens” being encouraged to vote at a rally at the Capitol in 2006. “This is the United States of America, not Mexico, and only U.S. citizens should vote,” Degener said.

How did Degener know their immigration status? Why didn't he call ICE?

Sounds like someone angry at some people speaking "mexican" in the heartland of 'merica to me.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 1 month ago

"Someone who went diving for identification would have to A) pick someone who was registered to vote and B) figure out at which polling station they are eligible to vote."

The fraudulent voter would also have to make sure to be the first in line to vote that day, since the odds are high that the real voter would eventually show up. If the fraudulent voter wasn't there first, polling officials would not only not allow them to vote, but would likely call law enforcement for the attempt to cast a fraudulent vote.

But heck, if you're a demagogue trying to whip up hysteria, you're not going to bother taking the 30 seconds required to think the above scenario through.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 1 month ago

"Remember a time, about 10 years ago, when we couldn't fathom anyone flying a jetliner into a skyscraper?"

Yea, someday they will fly an airliner into a polling station.

"It's easy to discount the possibilities as “nothing,” today—but what about 5 years from now? 10 years from now?"

Given that it would be impossible to organize non-citizens to vote illegally in numbers large enough to have any effect on the outcome of an election, this is a non-issue. There are many other issues that actually deserve our attention. This is just a distraction from people who would prefer that truly important issues not be addressed.

0

logicsound04 5 years, 1 month ago

"You have to show ID to cash a check, but you don't have to produce any to vote?"


A false comparison.

From an individual's perspective, forging a check if IDs were not required would have an exceptionally high benefit-to-risk ratio. Forging a check would almost certainly net some cash, and would be hard to catch after the fact. The ID must be required as a failsafe to prevent abuse because the benefit is enticing.

Voting, on the other hand, has a very low benefit-to-reward ratio. A person could falsify a vote without too much trouble, but to what end? Sure, they may feel good about having cast a vote, but in the grand scheme, one (or even 100) falsified votes is not a threat to our electoral process. The kind of fraud that requiring individual voter IDs would prevent would be nearly impossible to orchestrate on the scale that would be necessary to affect the election outcome. An individual runs the risk of being caught for no reward other than their own satisfaction of having cast a single vote.

Lastly, I must say that Degener's comment about dumster diving is just ignorant. As far as I can tell, you can't walk up to just any polling place, say any name you might find on a bill in a dumpster and be allowed to vote. Someone who went diving for identification would have to A) pick someone who was registered to vote and B) figure out at which polling station they are eligible to vote. The likelihood of that being used at all is very small; the likelihood that it could be used to swing an election is about as close to zero as you can imagine.

0

Agnostick 5 years, 1 month ago

bozo...

Remember a time, about 10 years ago, when we couldn't fathom anyone flying a jetliner into a skyscraper?

It's easy to discount the possibilities as "nothing," today--but what about 5 years from now? 10 years from now?

I have to side with common sense on this one--mainly because the ubiquitousness of digital photography, ID cards, etc.

I would support paying for this system, via a small tax increase. I would agree to providing photo ID cards to those that do not have some other form of photo ID, such as a state driver's license, a college student ID, or a military ID.

Of course, if we're going to follow through on this, then we also have to ensure that our state drivers licenses are only given to legal citizens, and legal immigrants.

Showing my drivers license at my polling place is not a hardship for me... or for any other reasonable person.

Agnostick agnostick@excite.com

0

ljreader 5 years, 1 month ago

What do you get if you vote in an election you aren't qualified to vote in? Change-pocket change.That would be for the rest of us- until Obama lets La Raza figure out a way to redistribute that to illegals. Illegals will also get amnesty under this administration and all the goodies that come with it, at our expense. Even without amnesty, they are expected to receive no fewer than 300,000 jobs of the ones we were promised in the stimulus bill

0

Pilgrim2 5 years, 1 month ago

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus (Anonymous) says… “You have to show ID to cash a check, but you don't have to produce any to vote?”

What do you get if you forge a check? Money for nothing.


And a nice stiff jail sentence, with any luck.

What do you get if you vote in an election you aren't qualified to vote in? Nothing.


Should be at least equal to forging a check. Minimum.

0

ljreader 5 years, 1 month ago

What do you get if you vote in an election you aren't qualified to vote in? Change-pocket change.

0

SettingTheRecordStraight 5 years, 1 month ago

bozo,

If you consider fraud to be "nothing," then you are correct.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 1 month ago

"You have to show ID to cash a check, but you don't have to produce any to vote?"

What do you get if you forge a check? Money for nothing.

What do you get if you vote in an election you aren't qualified to vote in? Nothing.

0

Pilgrim2 5 years, 1 month ago

You have to show ID to cash a check, but you don't have to produce any to vote? Everybody but bozo and the rest of the looney left knows EXACTLY what's wrong with this picture.

Yes, legislature, pass it!

0

madmike 5 years, 1 month ago

If you can't provide an ID, then you shouldn't be able to vote, period!

0

logicsound04 5 years, 1 month ago

"It's time to appeal to commonsense. It's time for reasonable voter ID laws."


I agree. Good thing we already have "reasonable" voter ID laws.

This bill is anything but. What, exactly, is the point of requiring John Q. Voter to prove he is the same John Q. Voter that voted in the same district the last 5 years?

Because that's all this bill does.

And for those of you demanding photo IDs, there is a simple solution to the problem--have the government provide them, free of charge, and you will see the opposition to voter ID laws all but disappear. The fact that the same people who are rabble rousing about the need for photo ID laws are also the ones who refuse to pay taxes for anything that doesn't directly benefit themselves somewhat undermines their position.

If you are worried that this would prevent a widespread abuse of the electoral system, then why the reluctance to pay for it?

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 1 month ago

"Thanks to ACORN & a lack of voter ID laws in this country, a record number of imaginary-Americans voted in 2008."

Only in your imagination.

0

Hoots 5 years, 1 month ago

Your vote is important. I think you should have to prove you are who you say you are.

0

Flap Doodle 5 years, 1 month ago

Thanks to ACORN & a lack of voter ID laws in this country, a record number of imaginary-Americans voted in 2008.

0

SettingTheRecordStraight 5 years, 1 month ago

just another bozo on this emp-T supports the status quo because he knows that the Far Left, such as those who support ACORN, are much more likely to abuse our lax voter ID laws than any conservative.

It's time to appeal to commonsense. It's time for reasonable voter ID laws.

0

Larry_The_Moocher 5 years, 1 month ago

You should be required to have a job and be in a tax paying status to vote.

0

fairplay 5 years, 1 month ago

It's Bush's fault.

Thought I would get it out there before someone else beats me to the punch.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 5 years, 1 month ago

"Paul Degener, of Topeka, president of Citizens Against Illegal Immigration, said anyone could easily get a nonphoto ID. “If you don’t mind Dumpster diving, I think you can find a utility bill,” he said."

Only problem with your little "theory," Paul, is that there is absolutely no reason for anybody to want to go to all that trouble to commit a felony that would most likely have zero effect on the outcome of an election.

“Tom Stoffors, of Tonganoxie, with November Patriots, said fraud at the ballot box is a problem despite what Sebelius said. “You’d have to be naive or just not willing to look at this to think this is not a problem,” he said.”

Tom, there is zero evidence that this happens in any significant way, and it would be easily detected if it were done in the systematic way that would be required to change the outcome of an election.

This is nothing but demagoguery.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.