A throwback to only land owners can vote, In Foreclosure = No Vote - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Cynthetiq · 09-11-2008, 02:42 PM

Quote:

View: Lose your house, lose your vote
Source: Michigan Messenger
posted with the TFP thread generator

Lose your house, lose your vote
By Eartha Jane Melzer 9/10/08 6:42 AM
Michigan Republicans plan to foreclose African American voters

The chairman of the Republican Party in Macomb County Michigan, a key swing county in a key swing state, is planning to use a list of foreclosed homes to block people from voting in the upcoming election as part of the state GOP’s effort to challenge some voters on Election Day.

“We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses,” party chairman James Carabelli told Michigan Messenger in a telephone interview earlier this week. He said the local party wanted to make sure that proper electoral procedures were followed.

State election rules allow parties to assign “election challengers” to polls to monitor the election. In addition to observing the poll workers, these volunteers can challenge the eligibility of any voter provided they “have a good reason to believe” that the person is not eligible to vote. One allowable reason is that the person is not a “true resident of the city or township.”

The Michigan Republicans’ planned use of foreclosure lists is apparently an attempt to challenge ineligible voters as not being “true residents.”

One expert questioned the legality of the tactic.

“You can’t challenge people without a factual basis for doing so,” said J. Gerald Hebert, a former voting rights litigator for the U.S. Justice Department who now runs the Campaign Legal Center, a Washington D.C.-based public-interest law firm. “I don’t think a foreclosure notice is sufficient basis for a challenge, because people often remain in their homes after foreclosure begins and sometimes are able to negotiate and refinance.”

As for the practice of challenging the right to vote of foreclosed property owners, Hebert called it, “mean-spirited.”

GOP ties to state’s largest foreclosure law firm

The Macomb GOP’s plans are another indication of how John McCain’s campaign stands to benefit from the burgeoning number of foreclosures in the state. McCain’s regional headquarters are housed in the office building of foreclosure specialists Trott & Trott. The firm’s founder, David A. Trott, has raised between $100,000 and $250,000 for the Republican nominee.

The Macomb County party’s plans to challenge voters who have defaulted on their house payments is likely to disproportionately affect African-Americans who are overwhelmingly Democratic voters. More than 60 percent of all sub-prime loans — the most likely kind of loan to go into default — were made to African-Americans in Michigan, according to a report issued last year by the state’s Department of Labor and Economic Growth.

Challenges to would-be voters

Statewide, the Republican Party is gearing up for a comprehensive voter challenge campaign, according to Denise Graves, party chair for Republicans in Genessee County, which encompasses Flint. The party is creating a spreadsheet of election challenger volunteers and expects to coordinate a training with the regional McCain campaign, Graves said in an interview with Michigan Messenger.

Whether the Republicans will challenge voters with foreclosed homes elsewhere in the state is not known.

Kelly Harrigan, deputy director of the GOP’s voter programs, confirmed that she is coordinating the group’s “election integrity” program. Harrigan said the effort includes putting in place a legal team, as well as training election challengers. She said the challenges to voters were procedural rather than personal. She referred inquiries about the vote challenge program to communications director Bill Nowling who promised information but did not return calls.

Party chairman Carabelli said that the Republican Party is training election challengers to “make sure that [voters] are who they say who they are.”

When asked for further details on how Republicans are compiling challenge lists, he said, “I would rather not tell you all the things we are doing.”

Vote suppression: Not an isolated effort

Carabelli is not the only Republican Party official to suggest the targeting of foreclosed voters. In Ohio, Doug Preisse, director of elections in Franklin County (around the city of Columbus) and the chair of the local GOP, told The Columbus Dispatch that he has not ruled out challenging voters before the election due to foreclosure-related address issues.

Hebert, the voting-rights lawyer, sees a connection between Priesse’s remarks and Carabelli’s plans.

“At a minimum what you are seeing is a fairly comprehensive effort by the Republican Party, a systematic broad-based effort to put up obstacles for people to vote,” he said. “Nobody is contending that these people are not legally registered to vote.

“When you are comprehensively challenging people to vote,” Hebert went on, “your goals are two-fold: One is you are trying to knock people out from casting ballots; the other is to create a slowdown that will discourage others,” who see a long line and realize they can’t afford to stay and wait.

Challenging all voters registered to foreclosed homes could disrupt some polling places, especially in the Detroit metropolitan area. According to the real estate Web site RealtyTrac, one in every 176 households in Wayne County, metropolitan Detroit, received a foreclosure filing during the month of July. In Macomb County, the figure was one household in every 285, meaning that 1,834 homeowners received the bad news in just one month. The Macomb County foreclosure rate puts it in the top three percent of all U.S. counties in the number of distressed homeowners.

Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Kent and Genessee counties were — in that order — the counties with the most homeowners facing foreclosure, according to RealtyTrac. As of July, there were more than 62,000 foreclosure filings in the entire state.

Joe Rozell, director of elections for Oakland County in suburban Detroit, acknowledged that challenges such as those described by Carabelli are allowed by law but said they have the potential to create long lines and disrupt the voting process. With 890,000 potential voters closely divided between Democratic and Republican, Oakland County is a key swing county of this swing state.

According to voter challenge directives handed down by Republican Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land, voter challenges need only be “based on information obtained through a reliable source or means.”

“But poll workers are not allowed to ask the reason” for the challenges, Rozell said. In other words, Republican vote challengers are free to use foreclosure lists as a basis for disqualifying otherwise eligible voters.

David Lagstein, head organizer with the Michigan Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN), described the plans of the Macomb GOP as “crazy.”

“You would think they would think, ‘This is going to look too heartless,’” said Lagstein, whose group has registered 200,000 new voters statewide this year and also runs a foreclosure avoidance program. “The Republican-led state Senate has not moved on the anti-predatory lending bill for over a year and yet [Republicans] have time to prey on those who have fallen victim to foreclosure to suppress the vote.”

What a conundrum this is for me. I don't like the idea that there isn't a way to ensure that one person only votes once. I see many times in my own voting precinct in NYC the ability for people to cheat the system and vote multiple times.

I don't get why people don't want any checks of state issued id. I can't travel without hassles for documentation or extended background checks.

I believe that there should be some sort of rudimentary way of vetting out voters for precincts and identity, after that, I don't think it matters.

Of course people will extend it to a "voter tax" if one is compelled to get some sort of government id. The same kinds of thing you need to cash checks or get jobs, so I'm not really sure what they are talking about.

In this OP, I don't agree that they should be using a list to wholesale block voters, but there should be some manner of making sure that someone isn't voting in two different precints twice.

inBOIL · 09-11-2008, 03:25 PM

Can't precincts cross-reference their registered voter lists to make sure there aren't any voters who show up in multiple precincts?

jewels · 09-11-2008, 03:26 PM

Wow, that's insane. What if the (previous) owner doesn't have a permanent address or is now homeless?

It's sad that we've come to this.

jorgelito · 09-11-2008, 04:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by inBOIL

Can't precincts cross-reference their registered voter lists to make sure there aren't any voters who show up in multiple precincts?

Maybe some can but certainly not all. We are incredibly inefficent and chaotic when it comes to our voting process. I changed voting districts and had my paperwork submitted well before last years election. But when I showed up to vote, they had no record of me. It was big hassle trying to sort out my voting district. In the end I did get to vote but not without a big fuss. The whole time, everything was done with paper and big notebooks. there were no computers no way to check any database.

Charlatan · 09-11-2008, 04:09 PM

How about showing a state issued form of ID?

(you could also dip people's fingers in ink once they have voted)

guyy · 09-12-2008, 09:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Charlatan

How about showing a state issued form of ID?

(you could also dip people's fingers in ink once they have voted)

They want to have people use drivers licenses. Well, guess who doesn't have drivers licenses? Here in Wisconsin, 1/2 of Milwaukee county's African-American population. And if you don't have a drivers license, it's hard to get to the DMV at the mall to get your official state ID.

Yes, you could dip people's fingers in ink, which is a pretty easy solution, but it's more important to keep them from voting in the first place. This is part of the Republican campaign to suppress the vote.

GonadWarrior · 09-13-2008, 02:06 PM

After reflecting upon the many who died in order to ensure our right to vote, I have zero sympathy for anyone who claims it's "too hard" to get a fucking state ID. Apparently, voter fraud via Diebold is terrible, but voter fraud by those who use other methods is acceptable.

When our country was founded, only property holders could vote. It should still be that way in regard to votes on property taxes.

dc_dux · 09-13-2008, 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonadWarrior

When our country was founded, only property holders could vote. It should still be that way in regard to votes on property taxes.

Yeah.....lets just let white men vote!

WTF!

Cynthetiq · 09-13-2008, 02:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Yeah.....lets just let white men vote!

WTF!

I know many property owners who are not white including myself. My wife is also a property owner.

seems a sweeping generalization there...

dc_dux · 09-13-2008, 02:22 PM

The basis for the action in the article....

Quote:

“We will have a list of foreclosed homes and will make sure people aren’t voting from those addresses,” party chairman James Carabelli told Michigan Messenger in a telephone interview earlier this week. He said the local party wanted to make sure that proper electoral procedures were followed.

.....sounds very much like voter caging, which is illegal.
-----Added 13/9/2008 at 06 : 23 : 17-----

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

I know many property owners who are not white including myself. My wife is also a property owner.

seems a sweeping generalization there...

Cyn.,,,I was referring to "when the country was founded" reference.

Cynthetiq · 09-13-2008, 02:26 PM

ah, fair enough.

I don't disagree with the caging accussation, but I don't find an easy or compromised way to allow for voters to be counted only once in one precinct only.

dc_dux · 09-13-2008, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

I don't disagree with the caging accussation, but I don't find an easy or compromised way to allow for voters to be counted only once in one precinct only.

I might be more concerned if there was evidence of such practices on a wide spread basis....hell, even on a limited basis....and there isn't.

IMO, this is an attempt at selective voter repression.

Cynthetiq · 09-13-2008, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

I might be more concerned if there was evidence of such practices on a wide spread basis....hell, even on a limited basis....and there isn't.

IMO, this is an attempt at selective voter repression.

There isn't?

I'm not talking about voter suppression, I'm talking about making sure that one person votes and that person is THAT individual.

Dead Voters Still Showing Up on Election Records, Puzzling Officials - America’s Election HQ

Quote:

“We have one person who appeared to have voted 17 times since he died,” Dufresne told FOX News.

Dufresne said there is no evidence of any election fraud, but the number of dead voters “shows the system is vulnerable, and it shows that people who are clever and have a little cooperation in the town level, you could use this and get people to vote for people who died.”

Yet Connecticut Secretary of State Susan Bysiewicz is adamant that “actually no dead people voted.”

“I want to be very clear about that,” she said, explaining that while votes were cast and counted in the names of the dead, “there was no voter fraud at all in the state of Connecticut.”

“Did we have clerical errors where the wrong voter was crossed off? Yes,” she said.

But ballots cast in the names of the dead were counted in her state and in others. In the 2004 governor’s race in Washington state, officials confirmed 19 votes were cast by people who were dead. Republican Dino Rossi lost that election by only 133 votes.

“It was the closest governor’s race in U.S. history. After the fact we found a number of dead people voted. I don’t know how they voted — you have to talk to Shirley MacLaine about that,” Rossi said.

dc_dux · 09-13-2008, 02:37 PM

I didnt say it was non-existent...I said it was neither widespread nor found anywhere on a more limited basis. You can always find an example here and there...start with Ann Coulter, who used her real estate agents address to vote in Florida.

Policies should not be set based on examples of one!
-----Added 13/9/2008 at 06 : 41 : 19-----

Quote:

Of course people will extend it to a "voter tax" if one is compelled to get some sort of government id. The same kinds of thing you need to cash checks or get jobs, so I'm not really sure what they are talking about.

My concern is with requiring a PHOTO idea which disproportionately might impact minorities and elderly.

I have no problems with requiring some form of ID...most states allow bank statements, utility bills. etc.

But that still doesnt address the issue of the homeless...who regardless of their economic status, should have the right to vote.

Cynthetiq · 09-13-2008, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

I didnt say it was non-existent...I said it was neither widespread nor found anywhere on a more limited basis. You can always find an example here and there...start with Ann Coulter, who used her real estate agents address to vote in Florida.

Policies should not be set based on examples of one!
-----Added 13/9/2008 at 06 : 41 : 19-----

My concern is with requiring a PHOTO idea which disproportionately might impact minorities and elderly.

I have no problems with requiring some form of ID...most states allow bank statements, utility bills. etc.

But that still doesnt address the issue of the homeless...who regardless of their economic status, should have the right to vote.

I don't understand how it can impact elderly disproportionately. There are NGO programs that drive them around for any errands that they may have.

Minorities? why? how come? Because there is no DMV?

Using a utility bill? really? what about the rest of the household?

jewels · 09-13-2008, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cynthetiq

I don't understand how it can impact elderly disproportionately.

There is often difficult or no access to birth records for the elderly and the number soars even higher for older minorities, especially those who were born of slaves or reared in smaller towns that have no/lost/burned records. No birth certificate? No ID or passport.

dc_dux · 09-13-2008, 03:08 PM

Cyn....only 7 states require PHOTO idea....three are fairly recent - GA, IN, MI - coincidentally swing states, where recent laws were enacted by Republican legislatures. There is ample testimony I could probably find that would point out that such laws are likely to impact minorities and elderly disproportionately because of more limited (not limited entirely) access to state-issued PHOTO ids.

Fewer than 20 other states require something other (less) than PHOTO ID.

From NCSL: Requirements for Voter Identification

In most states, and under federal law, a social security number should be enough to register to vote and there are provisions for those who dont even have that.

States are also required to maintain voter registration databases to ensure that persons dont register in more than one precinct.
-----Added 13/9/2008 at 07 : 38 : 58-----
added:

IMO, the requirement for voting should be when you REGISTER to vote (and a SS# or something comparable should be enough) ...and if the state is doing its job, you will appear in a database...so you should NOT be required to show an ID when you physically go to the polls to cast your vote.

Anyone w/o a permanent address (as a result of losing their home through foreclosure..or any reason) should be able to use their last address, if that is the address they used to register.

Xazy · 09-13-2008, 04:41 PM

I live in NYC and I know I can vote 3 times in the same district. I have moved 4 times in the neighborhood since 2000, and my name each time I re-register somehow comes out slightly different. In our area everyone votes in their own building. Whenever I go in to my old buildings the staff there have offered to let me vote again. I never have voted more then once, but the point is it is so obvious and so easy for people to cheat the system and this is just stupid clerical mistakes due to typos in the system.

I think we should require ID's not as a tax, but to keep integrity in our system.

snowy · 09-13-2008, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

Cyn....only 7 states require PHOTO idea....three are fairly recent - GA, IN, MI - coincidentally swing states, where recent laws were enacted by Republican legislatures. There is ample testimony I could probably find that would point out that such laws are likely to impact minorities and elderly disproportionately because of more limited (not limited entirely) access to state-issued PHOTO ids.

Fewer than 20 other states require something other (less) than PHOTO ID.

From NCSL: Requirements for Voter Identification

In most states, and under federal law, a social security number should be enough to register to vote and there are provisions for those who dont even have that.

States are also required to maintain voter registration databases to ensure that persons dont register in more than one precinct.
-----Added 13/9/2008 at 07 : 38 : 58-----
added:

IMO, the requirement for voting should be when you REGISTER to vote (and a SS# or something comparable should be enough) ...and if the state is doing its job, you will appear in a database...so you should NOT be required to show an ID when you physically go to the polls to cast your vote.

Anyone w/o a permanent address (as a result of losing their home through foreclosure..or any reason) should be able to use their last address, if that is the address they used to register.

In Oregon you have to show ID when you fill out your voter registration as we do vote-by-mail. It's not limited to a state-issue ID:

Quote:

New laws require that people must provide identifying information to register to vote. If you have a current, valid Oregon DMV Driver's License/ID, you must provide that number. A suspended Driver's License is still valid, a revoked Driver's License is NOT valid. If you do not have a current, valid Oregon DMV Driver's License/ID, you must provide the last four digits of your Social Security number.

If you do not have a current, valid Oregon DMV Driver's License/ID or a Social Security number, you must affirm this on the voter registration card, and if you are registering by mail, you must provide a copy of one of the following:

* valid photo identification
* a paycheck stub
* a utility bill
* a bank statement
* a government document
* proof of eligibility under the Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act (UOCAVA) or the Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act (VAEH)

The other upside to vote-by-mail is that there are two records of your vote--the paper Scantron sheet you bubble in with your vote, and the computer record of your vote after it's scanned. There are no polls to keep someone away, or for people to try to keep other people from voting. When you change your address through the DMV or renew your license or state-issued ID, you have the option to also update your voter registration. It makes it really easy to keep it up-to-date and to keep the records in order. However, because of the vote-by-mail, people have to register to vote in Oregon well ahead of the election--no last-minute registrations here. And for possible selling of votes or other people filling out ballots--it is a crime to allow someone else to fill out your ballot, and you sign a contract (when you sign the ballot envelope) attesting to the fact that it is in fact your vote. The signature on the envelope is then electronically compared to the signature they have on file.

I have never voted at a polling place, as we've been vote-by-mail for 10 years now. Personally, I think a lot of the voter suppression issues brought up by this election and the other issues we've seen in recent election history could be avoided if the rest of the country went vote-by-mail.

fresnelly · 09-13-2008, 05:39 PM

Sounds to me like the UN should be monitoring your election. Stories like this make you sound like a third world country.

ItWasMe · 09-13-2008, 08:54 PM

After my divorce years ago, I used to get two ballots in the mail. One with my current name, and the other with my former name. Not quite sure how that happened. I asked them to stop, and they finally did. I never did cheat and vote twice, but did wonder how many other people in a similar situation do.

Charlatan · 09-13-2008, 09:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fresnelly

Sounds to me like the UN should be monitoring your election. Stories like this make you sound like a third world country.

That is just what I was thinking.

It doesn't bode well.

guyy · 09-14-2008, 03:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonadWarrior

After reflecting upon the many who died in order to ensure our right to vote, I have zero sympathy for anyone who claims it's "too hard" to get a fucking state ID. Apparently, voter fraud via Diebold is terrible, but voter fraud by those who use other methods is acceptable.

When our country was founded, only property holders could vote. It should still be that way in regard to votes on property taxes.

Apparently fraud via bogus de-registration is acceptable.

And due to the wonders of the capitalist market economy, the costs of property taxes are distributed throughout society. Renters pay it through rent. Consumers pay property taxes for producers when they buy their products. Everyone pays.
-----Added 14/9/2008 at 08 : 24 : 07-----
In Wisconsin, the Republican attorney general has been very busy purging the voter registration lists. 4,000 of 19,500 voters checked had been de-registered, including 4 of the Republican members of the cross-voters-off-the-list-board. Ma & Pa, who have been living in the same house for 5 years, have the same address on everything found they had been de-registered when they went to vote in Tuesday's primary. Apparently if you're listed as Jane Doe on one list and Jane Z. Doe on another, you get de-registered.

Wisconsin has same-day registration, so this is not going to matter too much to documented and propertied citizens with autos. It's going to bite people who might need a ride to the polling place, and who might not have the time to go back and get their papers, who might not even have papers. They have a right to vote, too.

inBOIL · 09-14-2008, 03:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by guyy

And due to the wonders of the capitalist market economy, the costs of property taxes are distributed throughout society. Renters pay it through rent. Consumers pay property taxes for producers when they buy their products. Everyone pays.

For owners of commercial properties this is true, but the average homeowner can't make his boss give him a raise whenever the property tax goes up.

333halfabeast · 09-15-2008, 06:21 AM

That is ridiculous and I doubt it would ever pass.

jewels · 09-25-2008, 09:57 AM

I moved to a new County within my state and registered here and received my new Voter's Registration card a couple of weeks ago. I thought it odd that I couldn't give them an address change, I was forced to re-register. I had to bring all the proof I'd brought when I was 18 and registered in that other County, but she was able to pull up my last known address and party affiliation. Okay, so they figured they had to make sure it was me, right?

Yesterday, I received a FORWARDED absentee ballot from the County I used to reside in. Maybe they crossed, but it shames me to think I probably could get away with voting in each County.

09-11-2008, 03:25 PM	#2 (permalink)
inBOIL I have eaten the slaw	Can't precincts cross-reference their registered voter lists to make sure there aren't any voters who show up in multiple precincts? __________________ And you believe Bush and the liberals and divorced parents and gays and blacks and the Christian right and fossil fuels and Xbox are all to blame, meanwhile you yourselves create an ad where your kid hits you in the head with a baseball and you don't understand the message that the problem is you.

09-11-2008, 03:26 PM	#3 (permalink)
jewels Eponymous Location: Central Central Florida	Wow, that's insane. What if the (previous) owner doesn't have a permanent address or is now homeless? It's sad that we've come to this. __________________ We are always more anxious to be distinguished for a talent which we do not possess, than to be praised for the fifteen which we do possess. Mark Twain

09-11-2008, 04:09 PM	#5 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	How about showing a state issued form of ID? (you could also dip people's fingers in ink once they have voted) __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

09-13-2008, 02:26 PM	#11 (permalink)
Cynthetiq Tilted Cat Head Administrator Location: Manhattan, NY	ah, fair enough. I don't disagree with the caging accussation, but I don't find an easy or compromised way to allow for voters to be counted only once in one precinct only. __________________ I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not. What's the best nation in the world? DO-NATION!

09-13-2008, 03:08 PM	#17 (permalink)
dc_dux Location: Washington DC	Cyn....only 7 states require PHOTO idea....three are fairly recent - GA, IN, MI - coincidentally swing states, where recent laws were enacted by Republican legislatures. There is ample testimony I could probably find that would point out that such laws are likely to impact minorities and elderly disproportionately because of more limited (not limited entirely) access to state-issued PHOTO ids. Fewer than 20 other states require something other (less) than PHOTO ID. From NCSL: Requirements for Voter Identification In most states, and under federal law, a social security number should be enough to register to vote and there are provisions for those who dont even have that. States are also required to maintain voter registration databases to ensure that persons dont register in more than one precinct. -----Added 13/9/2008 at 07 : 38 : 58----- added: IMO, the requirement for voting should be when you REGISTER to vote (and a SS# or something comparable should be enough) ...and if the state is doing its job, you will appear in a database...so you should NOT be required to show an ID when you physically go to the polls to cast your vote. Anyone w/o a permanent address (as a result of losing their home through foreclosure..or any reason) should be able to use their last address, if that is the address they used to register. __________________ "The perfect is the enemy of the good." ~ Voltaire Last edited by dc_dux; 09-13-2008 at 03:40 PM.. Reason: Automerged Doublepost

09-13-2008, 02:06 PM	#7 (permalink)
GonadWarrior Upright	After reflecting upon the many who died in order to ensure our right to vote, I have zero sympathy for anyone who claims it's "too hard" to get a fucking state ID. Apparently, voter fraud via Diebold is terrible, but voter fraud by those who use other methods is acceptable. When our country was founded, only property holders could vote. It should still be that way in regard to votes on property taxes.

09-13-2008, 04:41 PM	#18 (permalink)
Xazy People in masks cannot be trusted Location: NYC	I live in NYC and I know I can vote 3 times in the same district. I have moved 4 times in the neighborhood since 2000, and my name each time I re-register somehow comes out slightly different. In our area everyone votes in their own building. Whenever I go in to my old buildings the staff there have offered to let me vote again. I never have voted more then once, but the point is it is so obvious and so easy for people to cheat the system and this is just stupid clerical mistakes due to typos in the system. I think we should require ID's not as a tax, but to keep integrity in our system.

09-13-2008, 05:39 PM	#20 (permalink)
fresnelly Functionally Appropriate Location: Toronto	Sounds to me like the UN should be monitoring your election. Stories like this make you sound like a third world country. __________________ Building an artificial intelligence that appreciates Mozart is easy. Building an A.I. that appreciates a theme restaurant is the real challenge - Kit Roebuck - Nine Planets Without Intelligent Life

09-13-2008, 08:54 PM	#21 (permalink)
ItWasMe But You'll Never Prove It. Location: under your bed	After my divorce years ago, I used to get two ballots in the mail. One with my current name, and the other with my former name. Not quite sure how that happened. I asked them to stop, and they finally did. I never did cheat and vote twice, but did wonder how many other people in a similar situation do. __________________ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Ok, no more truth-or-dare until somebody returns my underwear" ~ George Lopez I bake cookies just so I can lick the bowl. ~ ItWasMe

09-15-2008, 06:21 AM	#25 (permalink)
333halfabeast Upright Location: NY, NY	That is ridiculous and I doubt it would ever pass.

09-25-2008, 09:57 AM	#26 (permalink)
jewels Eponymous Location: Central Central Florida	I moved to a new County within my state and registered here and received my new Voter's Registration card a couple of weeks ago. I thought it odd that I couldn't give them an address change, I was forced to re-register. I had to bring all the proof I'd brought when I was 18 and registered in that other County, but she was able to pull up my last known address and party affiliation. Okay, so they figured they had to make sure it was me, right? Yesterday, I received a FORWARDED absentee ballot from the County I used to reside in. Maybe they crossed, but it shames me to think I probably could get away with voting in each County. __________________ We are always more anxious to be distinguished for a talent which we do not possess, than to be praised for the fifteen which we do possess. Mark Twain