The New Virginia Way: More People Voting
Share this article
ADVERTISEMENT
(comments below)
Comments
Comments
67 responses to “The New Virginia Way: More People Voting”
-
“I have heard people more knowledgeable than I am explain that there are a significant number of residents, particularly older Black people, who do not have photo IDs. In order to have some idea of what effect a requirement for a photo ID would have, it would be helpful if the Dept. of Elections could provide data on how many people voted in the last three general elections while showing some ID other than a photo.”
American society, writ large, requires photo IDs to verify identity at critical times. Voting is a critical time. The only effective way to secure an election is before the vote is cast. Poll workers need a quick way to verify that the prospective voter is actually eligible to vote. Comparing the picture on the ID to the face of the person standing in front of them is a time-honored way to do it.
Election security should take precedence over voter access. All states should provide photo IDs for voters who don’t otherwise have them. But, if a state does provide those IDs, and a voter chooses not to get one—then at some point the voter has to take some accountability.
We don’t need to wait for data from any Department of Elections. American citizens have responsibilities. They can’t expect secure elections, if the voters won’t do their part to help secure them.
I reject, and IMO we should all reject, any implication that America owes its citizens a convenient, easy election experience.
If you value your vote, you should take the time before Election Day to get a photo ID. Or give the rest of us a convincing explanation why we shouldn’t expect that of you.-
WTH is wrong with a “convenient, easy election experience”? Photo ID is only one mode of ID. The technology exists to accept fingerprints and retina scans. 330 million folks with millions of ballots cast can be both secure and easy. The goal is to encourage the maximum number of eligible citizens to participate. If I could securely vote from home electronically, I would do so. Voting IS accountability.
-
“WTH is wrong with a ‘convenient, easy election experience’”?
The key word here that you omitted is “secure”. Or “trustworthy,” take your pick.
“The technology exists to accept fingerprints and retina scans. 330 million folks with millions of ballots cast can be both secure and easy.”
Yes, it does exist. But can we deploy it? At a reasonable cost? How do you enable millions of American households to vote securely from home? What are we, as Americans, willing to give up so we can vote from home? More funding for schools? Better healthcare?
“If I could securely vote from home electronically, I would do so.” Oh, bully for you! But, would you mind getting up off your behind and going to the polling place? Is that too much of an inconvenience for you?
-
Would y’all mind refraining from telling folks what and how to do? In one moment you chastise my omission of the word “ secure” and then quote my usage of the term. Do you register your auto online? Driver license? Pay bills, even taxes online? Completing the task and participating are the objectives, not how the task is done.
-
-
“WTH is wrong with a “convenient, easy election experience”?”
Who was it in Virginia’s history that wanted to make voting difficult (at least for some)…?
-
Who is it that wants to make Virginia’s elections more vulnerable to fraud…?
-
Sorry, we are no more vulnerable to fraud than we have ever been so that would be a straw man argument.
-
Sorry, we are no more vulnerable to fraud than we have ever been so that would be a straw man argument.
-
“I don’t believe we are no more vulnerable”
Meaning you think we are more vulnerable and are in agreement with Smith. Yet you characterize that as “a straw man argument”. Curious.
-
Corrected poorly written sentence.
-
-
-
-
-
It’s another Jim McCarthy silly walk.
What makes you think that fingerprinting or retina scans would be any easier to get than photo IDs? People would still have to make a trip and provide proof of identity to get iris scan ID or a fingerprint ID, just like with a photo ID. The issue is the process required to get the ID, not the method of ID, scan, fingerprint or photo.
There might also be some resistance to requiring iris scans or fingerprinting to vote or to do much of anything else. That is pretty intrusive.
A convenient, easy election experience is a laudable goal and is clearly better than the alternative. The voting franchise is a pillar of our democracy and what thousands of military members have given their lives for.
-
“The voting franchise is a pillar of our democracy and what thousands of military members have given their lives for.”
To imply, as you have done, that men and women have fought and died for a voting experience that is easy but not trustworthy is…well, that is on you.
-
But it can be both easy and trustworthy!
-
Although you touched on one aspect of the Motor Voter Law, you did not cover another very important provision of that law, namely the requirement that states actively maintain their voter rolls by removing those who died, became felons, became mentally incapacitated, or moved away from their voting jurisdiction. Many states have failed to follow the requirements of this law, at least until forced to do so by the Courts. Recent settlements have resulted in the removal of millions of no-longer valid registrations. Some might argue that there is no evidence that inflated voter rolls have led to widespread voter fraud, but that ignores the fact that there is no practical way of detecting or policing such fraud, especially where there is no photo-ID requirement.
-
There existed a project called ERIC that assisted states in such identifications. VA was a founding member in 2012 under a Republican governor. Sadly, the new GOP administration has cancelled that participation.
-
So, James, you’re saying that the Youngkin administration should do more to purge the voter rolls of ineligible voters? GREAT! What do you suggest?
-
Re-joining ERIC!! ERIC offered far more than poll purging to member states than ID of ineligible voters.
-
Unfortunately, Virginia just recently left ERIC. Jim McCarthy is correct. That was a mechanism to detect some fraud. The Youngkin administration took this action despite a Code requirement that the Dept. of Elections cooperate with other states to detect double voting. https://www.npr.org/2023/05/11/1175662382/virginia-eric-withdrawal
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title24.2/chapter4/section24.2-404/
-
You mean thankfully they left ERIC. I was a proponent of that. What about their “researchers” Dick?
-
What about them?
-
-
“What’s wrong with ERIC? Add up the evidence: left-wing sponsors and affiliations, ineffective voter roll cleanup, robust voter registration efforts in swing states, sketchy data sharing practices—a “syndicate founded by leftists to manage voter registration rolls”—JUDICIAL WATCH President Tom Fitton calls it—disingenuous about its true motives and richly deserving of its coming collapse.” There is a reason that ERIC no longer has the trust of many states.
-
You are forgetting their researchers and the fact you couldn’t report illegal voters to them.
-
Sadly, none of what you assert about ERIC has been evidenced, only offered as speculative opinion. VA under a Republican governor founded ERIC.
-
Republicans make mistakes too you know.
“that ignores the fact that there is no practical way of detecting or policing such fraud, especially where there is no photo-ID requirement.”
Agreed. To take the point further, it appears that opponents of a photo ID have decided that significant voter fraud is a risk worth running, in order to allow widespread access to the franchise (of voting).
Just think about all the ways in which that mindset can be exploited.
-
DH-S disagrees as stated in his excellent article. I join his opinion.
-
Thanks for taking a specific, for-the-record position. You are now on record.
-
-
As I explained, I tend to support the requirement of a photo ID, primarily to satisfy skeptics like you. However, I would like to know the prevalence of the use of other forms of ID. If other forms of ID are used in only a handful of cases, obviously widespread fraud is not going on.
Before 2013, there was no absolute requirement in the Code that a voter show a photo ID in order to vote. I do not recall any cases of large scale fraud before that time that would have justified the need for such an ID. I can recall a time when all a voter had to do was to orally identify himself and his address.
https://lis.virginia.gov/cgi-bin/legp604.exe?131+ful+CHAP0703+pdf-
ID is not the only fraud.
-
I remember those days as well. For a long time, I never had to show any ID whatsoever to vote. They never even asked for it. There was no widespread fraud in those days. It is convenient that the demographic most negatively impacted by voter ID laws tends not to vote for the proponents of said voter ID laws… is it not…?
-
“It is convenient that the demographic most negatively impacted by voter ID laws tends not to vote for the proponents of said voter ID laws… is it not…?”
Insinuating that any demographic is unable to procure voter ID is patronizing…is it not? Or, are you willing to assert that certain demographics can’t be expected to procure a free, state-provided photo ID? Personally, I don’t think any such demographics exist in our country.
“There was no widespread fraud in those days.”
It doesn’t take a lot of fraud to swing close elections, and we have a lot of close elections. If you make it easier to commit voter fraud, you should expect that more people and groups will try it.
What level of fraud are you OK with?
-
What is true is that it can be difficult to acquire some ID. I had to gather a number of ancillary documents and spend hours at DMV when I was forced to get a new Virginia driver’s license. My old one was perfectly adequate and accurate, btw. It was indeed an onus. It is clear that such an onus tends to depress voter turnout (particularly with some traditionally left-leaning voters) even if only for the reason that they haven’t had a chance to go get the ID they require. I don’t believe in coincidence…
As to fraud, I should have said there was no reduction in fraud due to the new onus put on voters. That is because the law already has pretty hefty consequences for voter fraud and it is enforced. All voter ID laws do is add impediments to voters – they do not reduce fraud.
-
Were you trying to convert your Va driver’s license to “Real ID”?
That set of requirements was onerous.
-
Required to but yes…
-
Virginia’s DMV has a continuous record of where I have lived since 1961 and requiring things like current utility bills to verify my residence for Real ID was silly.
The USG renewed my passport just by showing up at a Post Office, showing them my driver’s license and paying them.
That gets me on a plane just as well as a “Real ID”. Some things are just goofy.
-
The Code requires the Registrar of Vital Statistics to transmit weekly to the Dept. of Elections a list of persons over 17 years old who have died in Virginia subsequent to the transmission of the last list. I don’t know how other states do it, but Virginia actively purges its voting rolls of people who have died.
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title24.2/chapter4/section24.2-408/
The Code requires the Registrar of Vital Statistics to transmit weekly to the Dept. of Elections a list of persons over 17 years old who have died in Virginia subsequent to the transmission of the last list. I don’t know how other states do it, but Virginia actively purges its voting rolls of people who have died.
https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title24.2/chapter4/section24.2-408/
-
Impossible: https://wtop.com/virginia/2023/04/virginia-discovers-nearly-19000-dead-people-on-voter-rolls/
-
I’ve noticed that what’s supposed to happen in Virginia, whether due to a code, regulation, rule, process, or whatever, sometimes does not and the response is “Aww shucks”.
-
That underscores my point–Virginia is actively purging its records of people who have died. I note that the registrar did not say if any of those dead people on the registration records had been recorded as voting after their date of death. If there had been, I am fairly sure she would have reported that.
-
They weren’t doing so. I notified them, 10 days later the news articles came out as they found dead people on the list.
-
“Comparing the picture on the ID to the face of the person standing in front of them is a time-honored way to do it.”
As Dick notes below, in Virginia at least, this is simply not true.
DH-S, TY for the substantial and comprehensive presentation.
-
As I said downthread, thanks for placing yourself on record;
You have to have photo id to drive a car, buy beer, get medical care. You can get a free one so there is no excuse.
2 weeks early voting, that’s it. We don’t need 45 days. Less than 100 ppl voted in the first week in VB. People start voting 2 weeks before. Why bother when you have all the time in the world?
Votes have to be in by voting day. That means mail in votes. Sorry but you have a month and a half, get off your can, go vote.
Yes there is voter fraud. Note the VDoE didn’t get rid of thousands of dead voters. Then ERIC is another security disaster.
When the side believing in easy cheating is confronted with the facts, they shut down. I’ve asked for examples, etc. and they shut down. Tells you all you need to know.
-
Do you need a photo ID to get marijuana at a dispensary in Virginia?
-
The “dispensaries” I’ve been familiar with over the years have not required photo IDs. Some “dispensaries” have had personal front and side views with identifying information. Some of those were featured in Post Offices.
-
Oh…those were the “undocumented” dispensaries
-
Well they were officially “undocumented”, and strived to stay that way, but we all knew who they were.
Has Virginia actually opened legal dispensaries? I haven’t been paying much attention, but thought they were indefinitely off somewhere in the future.
-
Yes, and of course they opened one up in Manassas, lots of potential clientele around there:
Manassas, VA Cannabis Dispensary
Beyond Hello
BEYOND / HELLO™ Manassas, which is conveniently located in Northern Virginia at 8100 Albertstone Cir, Manassas, VA 20109. -
BEYOND / HELLO
Far out, cosmic man, I can dig it. Is there any doubt they were stoned when they came up with the name?
It’s close to the Clerk of the Court’s office. Convenient for those who have business both places.
-
-
-
As I noted before, I don’t think requiring a photo ID is unreasonable. I don’t think it is needed, however. Before 2013, there was no such absolute requirement and the Commonwealth did not have widespread election fraud. There are no records to back me up, but I suspect that non-photo ID is not used very often. If it would satisfy election-deniers, I would not be opposed to requiring photo ID. By the way, your side won in 2021, even with no photo ID required.
I also agree with you that 45 days of early voting is not needed. The Dept of Elections has some data on the number of early voters by date, but it is not complete and I could not use it. I would cut the time in half–21 days, three weeks.
It is unfortunate that the registration rolls still had a significant number of people who had died. However, DOE did not indicate that any of those dead registrants had been recorded as voting after their death.
Now, I ask you for examples of cheating.
-
One of the points you and I disagree on, Dick. There is absolutely nothing wrong with keeping the absentee voting period at 45 days. I, for one, appreciate being able to exit election season as early as possible. It also lessens the ability of the media to sway voters (for solely partisan purposes or worse advertiser interests) which is one of the biggest threats to our democracy we currently face. It is really not good to have dramatic swings in the electorate in closing days of an election. Too many opportunities for abuse exist at that point. Think FBI and Clinton emails…
-
One of the points you and I disagree on, Dick. There is absolutely nothing wrong with keeping the absentee voting period at 45 days. I, for one, appreciate being able to exit election season as early as possible. It also lessens the ability of the media to sway voters (for solely partisan purposes or worse advertiser interests) which is one of the biggest threats to our democracy we currently face. It is really not good to have dramatic swings in the electorate in closing days of an election. Too many opportunities for abuse exist at that point. Think FBI and Clinton emails…
-
I don’t think 45 days is wrong, per se. I just think that long a period is not necessary. I just wonder how many people vote in the first 2-3 weeks of that 45-day period. If it is only a handful, that’s a lot of money and manpower spent to accommodate a few voters who could have waited a week or so. Once reliable data is available, the picture will be clearer.
What I find amusing are all the conservatives complaining about provision when it was Republicans who sponsored it. I notice that they have all avoided that fact.
-
“What I find amusing are all the conservatives complaining about provision when it was Republicans who sponsored it. I notice that they have all avoided that fact.”
The problem with your argument is that you assign a political party to conservatism. It is and of itself merely an idea, that is untethered to a political party.
-
-
-
Do you have authority under the current rules to see voter data? If not, all I can do is point you to getting approved for that. I can show examples … more than 50 highly suspect ones in my own city.
The faith in institutions has been eroding in our country for years, and voting is but one example. Things seemed to have ramped up with the “hanging chads” in the 2000 presidential election. I heard a lot of rhetoric of a stolen election in both the 2016 and 2020 election cycles from both sides of the aisle.
https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/trumps-denial-second-big-lie-ask-hillary-clinton-rcna55764
It seems to me that if we were smart, we would lock Democrats and Republicans in a room and not let them out until they came up with a bipartisan plan to ensure that folks on either side would be more satisfied with the outcomes of each election. Losing faith in the electoral process will not end well for us.
Interesting that the rise in turnout coincides with the increase in absentee voting. It was a surprise to me that absentee voting is about 1/3 of all votes in Virginia. Also interesting is the partisan difference in absentee voting with Democratic absentee voting being roughly twice that of Republican, and the dramatic split between in person absentee voting and mail/drop off voting.
What is not clear is the impact, if any, on election results with the mixed success of Democratic and Republican candidates in elections with increased absentee voting.
To the extent that absentee ballots are a technique for get out the vote efforts it would seem to behoove the Republicans to get on the bandwagon. OTOH efforts to restrict absentee voting, if successful, might have a similar impact on voting.
Interesting that the rise in turnout coincides with the increase in absentee voting. It was a surprise to me that absentee voting is about 1/3 of all votes in Virginia. Also interesting is the partisan difference in absentee voting with Democratic absentee voting being roughly twice that of Republican, and the dramatic split between in person absentee voting and mail/drop off voting.
What is not clear is the impact, if any, on election results with the mixed success of Democratic and Republican candidates in elections with increased absentee voting.
To the extent that absentee ballots are a technique for get out the vote efforts it would seem to behoove the Republicans to get on the bandwagon. OTOH efforts to restrict absentee voting, if successful, might have a similar impact on voting.
There has never been evidence of widespread in person voter fraud. There have been isolated reports of individual frauds, but in all it is very rare. The old political machine practice of voting tombstones appears to be pretty much in the past too.
It is hard these days to have a rational discussion of the vulnerability of our voting systems, but it is a discussion we need to have. Electronic voting machines/systems have been hugely insecure from their first implementation to the present. They have not gotten better in the last couple of decades. The advent of widespread absentee voting has increased the potential for voting irregularities too. That voting is a local process in the US adds yet another set of variables.
Developing and implementing a set of voting system best practices that is adopted nationwide would seem a doable and worthwhile exercise. We won’t get there as long as people are screaming at each other, and our elections will remain vulnerable to several different kinds of fraud.
-
Wonder if the people who design and implement and configure electronic voting machines have any idea what Nessus and CIS benchmarks are.
I’m all for increased voter engagement.
What concerns me is ballot harvesting. Of course it’s incredibly difficult to prove (even more difficult than fraud. . .which like financial fraud, can be very well hidden).
If I was a political machine engaged in ballot harvesting in the 2020 presidential election, here’s how I’d do it:
1. I’d focus on the districts and precincts that historically vote in my favor. Hide it under the guise of “increased voter turnout.” An anomalic blue turnout in a red district or vice versa would raise red flags. Hide it in plain site.
So how do we know if this happened? Look at the voter turnout data–especially new voters–in swing states precinct-by-precinct. Does the trend in increase in turnout (especially new voters) hold constant across the board, or is there a discrepancy?
2. If I’m harvesting ballots for the presidential race, I’m not going to care too much about down ballot races. So I’m just going to fill out the races at the top of the ticket.
How do we know if this happened? Looking at the same swing states, compare the ballots cast over time: does the percentage of full ballots completed remain roughly the same (especially in the precincts with large numbers of new voters), or is there significant variation in the 2020 election?
Great research, Dick.
My impression from these numbers and other evidence is that both political parties are prone to hyperbole. Democrats cry voter suppression and Republicans howl about voter fraud. Both phenomena are greatly exaggerated.
Regarding voter ID (which I support), if Dems worry that thousands of elderly or minority voters don’t have IDs, why can’t they devote a fraction of the money devoted to fighting voter ID to identifying and helping voters who need help getting an ID? Methinks they prefer having an issue to inflame the base.
-
I strongly suspect they do both, JAB.
Bt and large, the same people who tell me there was/is no provable election fraud are the same ones who told me that the Steele Dossier was true, the pee tape was true, and lockdowns were necessary.
They also tell me that requiring photo ID to vote is racist and an attack on democracy, but that showing photo ID, paying a fee (tax) for a background check, and a waiting period to exercise my constitutionally proteceted right to own a firearm is just common sense gun control and not a violation of “shall not be infringed”.
To which I reply: Oh, really?
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.