Wednesday, July 25, 2012

Voter Fraud on Fox and Those Liberals

Fox ran a piece on voter fraud in Kentucky, home of Sen. McConnell today.  Seems to be well-authenticated and widespread.  So much for those liberals who oppose voter Id laws by claiming there's no such thing as voter fraud, right?

One small problem: it seems that Kentuckians are people of honor, which means if you buy their vote they stay bought, so the "voter fraud" Fox is flogging is really "vote buying" ($25 a vote apparently).  As far as I can see requiring a photo id to vote would not have changed anything.

[I'm really going to have to stop blogging until after the election, or my partisan sympathies are going to run away with me.]


Ellie K said...

I followed you back to your blog home from the V Conspiracy website ~;o)

Seems like everyone objects to carrying identification. Liberal people don't like it because they think it will prevent non-citizens from voting... I guess? The "anti-statist" Livertarians don't like it because they think that it is an intrusion on privacy, or too much "big gov't" interference... I guess?

Anyone who actually lives in a state with lots of naturalized citizens or non-citizen residents (legal or not) e.g. Florida and Arizona, where I am, or has served as a poll worker, is likely more realistic. Having identification, such as a voter registration card, is useful and convenient. It does NOT prevent vote buying, as you described! I'm sure there are other forms of electoral fraud it doesn't have any impact on either.

If people want to break the rules, they'll find a way. "People" refers to legislators as well as everyone else. Similarly, if the powers that be want to use the ID system for purposes of disenfranchising poor (or other) people, they'll figure out a way. But that doesn't mean we should throw out voter registration and ID with no replacement. Identification documents, like censuses, are basic to civilization and society.

Other countries don't have so much complaining and strife about these things! Why do we, do you think?

Bill Harshaw said...

Not sure I agree with your last paragraph--it may be that other countries have complaining that we don't see. After all, it's not a topic likely to attract attention of mass media.

But assume you're right, my impression is that many other countries have implemented universal ID's. I think Britain a while back had some controversy over the idea, but that's more tied to national databases than electoral fraud.

Personally, if we were really worried about the sort of fraud which ID's prevent, we could just use the Iraqi solution: each voter gets a purple finger. Eliminates duplicate voting and I don't particularly worry about people voting in the wrong precinct. Of course, if you throw mail balloting into the picture, it's another issue.

As long as you have poll watchers from both parties I don't worry much about fraud. I think it's where you have one party domination where you can corrupt the other party's official that you could really affect elections.

As to why so much heat around the issue, it seems a good way to rally the faithful, cast doubt on the integrity of the opposition and the process, and convince your fellows you're unjustly victimized.