Skip to main content

View Diary: Scalia, Supremes reject Arizona voter suppression attempt (162 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Clearly, you've never been to Hudson County, NJ (0+ / 0-)
    The question is why the burden should be on the voter to maintain voter lists.  And as our voting laws seem to leave a lot of people who are eligible to vote unable to do so, while having hardly any documented fraud, I'm not sure what your problem is.

    The patellar reflex is a deep tendon reflex which allows one to keep one's balance with little effort or conscious thought.

    by SpamNunn on Mon Jun 17, 2013 at 01:40:46 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  yes, i should specify (0+ / 0-)

      hardly any impersonation, and hardly any intentional voting by non-citizens.  (Colorado, which had a jihad about this, found that a small number of people were incorrectly registered by DMV officials who didn't know what they were doing; for this, the Secretary of State wanted to make everyone who was not a citizen at the time they applied for a drivers license but was voted, which is to say, legal immigrants who wanted to drive places, prove they weren't criminals.)  

      Fraud that requires the cooperation of election administrators is not cured by increasing the documentation requirements if those same administrators are the ones determining whether the documents are adequate.  There is a lot that can and should be done to clean up elections, but the point is the burden of doing so should not fall on the individual voter, because I don't see an actual difference between an ineligible voter committing fraud and a vote not cast because of excessive proof requirements; and the math weighs heavily in favor of the latter being a bigger risk than the former.

      Difficult, difficult, lemon difficult.

      by Loge on Mon Jun 17, 2013 at 02:56:26 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site