Photo IDs Required to Vote

**NickTheCage** · 10-02-2012, 11:13 AM

Judge halts Pa voter ID law

http://http://www.usatoday.com/story...uling/1608047/

**seand** · 10-02-2012, 11:38 AM

So the end result of all this -
1. State is now issuing voting only IDs that don't require a birth certificate but different PennDOT offices are confused on the rules and seem to be implementing it differently. Officially these IDs are only for voting but they come from PennDOT with a hologram etc so you know someone somewhere is going to use them to dodge i-9 requirements, to get on a plane, to buy liquor, etc.

2. Municipalities including Allegheny County are issuing their own voting only ID's where you basically have to only show what you did to vote when you first registered (proof of residence) via community colleges and senior homes - to non-students and non-seniors. Yet more semi-official IDS.

3. If you don't have an ID you can vote using provisional ballots by writing your vote on a piece of paper. The type of voting fraud the measure was trying to halt - where someone votes with someone else's inactive or bogus registration suddenly becomes much easier. I.E. a political operative checking to see who hasn't voted yet goes and gets a group of various friends "without ID" to go and fill out provisional ballots for the no-shows thereby tipping a close election or dragging out the results for months while each of the provisional ballots is individually challenged by a team of lawyers working for each candidate.

Man this Voter ID law has made a working system with no actual cases of the type of fraud it was meant to stop into a giant mess where that type of fraud is suddenly much easier - and a whole bunch of Pennsylvanians are now walking around with official looking IDs with none of the security guarantees that the old state-issued IDs had.

What a mess.

**raider.adam** · 10-02-2012, 12:08 PM

Originally Posted by seand

3. If you don't have an ID you can vote using provisional ballots by writing your vote on a piece of paper. The type of voting fraud the measure was trying to halt - where someone votes with someone else's inactive or bogus registration suddenly becomes much easier. I.E. a political operative checking to see who hasn't voted yet goes and gets a group of various friends "without ID" to go and fill out provisional ballots for the no-shows thereby tipping a close election or dragging out the results for months while each of the provisional ballots is individually challenged by a team of lawyers working for each candidate.

How does it make it easier? What's the difference between before and after? Beforehand the procedure before law would be for them to put you in a booth. The procedure after is they have you fill out a provisional ballot.

If the concern is impersonation, that is actually better because you can verify if they are legitimate votes and toss them if they aren't. If they are on the machine, you can't.

**seand** · 10-02-2012, 01:23 PM

You are absolutely right that if the strategy is impersonation the ability to go back and look at each provisional ballot provides some protection you don't get from machine tallies. But on the other hand when there are a lot of provisional ballots, lets say 5% or 10% of votes cast, the opportunity for funny business in a scenario where the poll worker is in collusion go up tremendously. You just don't turn in the provisional ballots of the "wrong candidate" or you toss it and have a political operative "revote" those provisional ballots.

Of course if the poll worker is in collusion, almost anything is possible.

Neither scenario is likely common. But provisional ballots are slow to tally, cumbersome to handle securely and lead to challenges that go on for months and months.
They make the likelihood of errors and misplaced votes simply from errors handling the ballots more likely, especially in instances when it isn't a few ballots per polling place (like it is normally) but a sizable proportion of votes cast.

**robot** · 10-02-2012, 01:33 PM

Originally Posted by seand

But provisional ballots are slow to tally, cumbersome to handle securely and lead to challenges that go on for months and months.

I agree. This will certainly lead to an increase in the number of provisional ballots cast. Best case is that Obama wins with a margin that is more than the total number of provisional ballots cast. Worst case is that Romney wins with a margin that is less than the total number of provisional ballots cast. Then there will be huge fight about which provisional ballots should or should not count, and possibly even whether they should be counted at all based on the voter id law which was not invalidated. Hopefully if something like that happens it won't hold up the entire election like Florida did.

**seand** · 10-02-2012, 01:45 PM

How long did the challenges over the Kelly-Oh run off stretch out? Like 4 or 5 months? Blow that up by adding two or three didgits to number of ballots potentially challenged state wide and it gets real interesting, potentially.

**raider.adam** · 10-02-2012, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by seand

You are absolutely right that if the strategy is impersonation the ability to go back and look at each provisional ballot provides some protection you don't get from machine tallies. But on the other hand when there are a lot of provisional ballots, lets say 5% or 10% of votes cast, the opportunity for funny business in a scenario where the poll worker is in collusion go up tremendously. You just don't turn in the provisional ballots of the "wrong candidate" or you toss it and have a political operative "revote" those provisional ballots.

Why do you think the level of collusion would increase? That makes absolutely no sense. the collusion over provisional ballots would be no different than collusion over machine votes. The only difference is that theoretically the provisional ones could be thrown out.

Of course if the poll worker is in collusion, almost anything is possible.

Exactly, which is why I am pointing out it is a red herring. If the election worker(s) are going to cheat, they can do it via provisional or machine.

Neither scenario is likely common. But provisional ballots are slow to tally, cumbersome to handle securely and lead to challenges that go on for months and months.
They make the likelihood of errors and misplaced votes simply from errors handling the ballots more likely, especially in instances when it isn't a few ballots per polling place (like it is normally) but a sizable proportion of votes cast.

Which is a different issue than the one I was discussing with you.

Originally Posted by robot

I agree. This will certainly lead to an increase in the number of provisional ballots cast. Best case is that Obama wins with a margin that is more than the total number of provisional ballots cast. Worst case is that Romney wins with a margin that is less than the total number of provisional ballots cast. Then there will be huge fight about which provisional ballots should or should not count, and possibly even whether they should be counted at all based on the voter id law which was not invalidated. Hopefully if something like that happens it won't hold up the entire election like Florida did.

It doesn't work like that.

Originally Posted by seand

How long did the challenges over the Kelly-Oh run off stretch out? Like 4 or 5 months? Blow that up by adding two or three didgits to number of ballots potentially challenged state wide and it gets real interesting, potentially.

Not really. I think this is a bit of an exaggeration.

For the record, I think the resources invested into this is a poor decision and they would have been better spent on raising election worker pay with higher training bonuses and that would have resulted in a better voter system. I think there are plenty of sensible reasons to argue against it without resorting to highly unlikely hypotheticals.

**seand** · 10-02-2012, 02:52 PM

Not hypothetical, however, I submitted a depositon in a legal case the state of PA lost about handing out provisional ballots when machines go down. During the Dem parimary 4 years ago both machines arrived at my polling place jammed and non-functional. The polling place workers had no idea how to do a provisional ballot and had no blanks. I literally think they had never even heard of the word "provisional ballot". They were just sending voters away for several hours. Some of those voters might not been able to come back later due to work schedule, whatever.

If those folks didn't come back, they litterally had their vote denied because the folks at my polling place had zero notion of how to do a real live provisional ballot.

That was 4 years ago. The exact same poll workers were still working there this spring. I'd like to think they will have brushed up on what to do when old folks come into vote and say "what do you mean ID, I've been voting here for 20 years" but my personal experience gives me every reason to doubt it.

My polling place is 46th ward, 10th division. PM me if you would like to discuss the details.

**robot** · 10-02-2012, 02:59 PM

Originally Posted by raider.adam

It doesn't work like that.
.

What do you mean? If the number of provisional ballots cast is less than the margin of victory then why would anyone challenge whether the ballots were properly cast or valid?

**raider.adam** · 10-02-2012, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by seand

Not hypothetical, however, I submitted a depositon in a legal case the state of PA lost about handing out provisional ballots when machines go down. During the Dem parimary 4 years ago both machines arrived at my polling place jammed and non-functional. The polling place workers had no idea how to do a provisional ballot and had no blanks. I literally think they had never even heard of the word "provisional ballot". They were just sending voters away for several hours. Some of those voters might not been able to come back later due to work schedule, whatever.

If those folks didn't come back, they litterally had their vote denied because the folks at my polling place had zero notion of how to do a real live provisional ballot.

That was 4 years ago. The exact same poll workers were still working there this spring. I'd like to think they will have brushed up on what to do when old folks come into vote and say "what do you mean ID, I've been voting here for 20 years" but my personal experience gives me every reason to doubt it.

My polling place is 46th ward, 10th division. PM me if you would like to discuss the details.

I not following what that has to do with any of the points discussed.

**seand** · 10-02-2012, 03:37 PM

Well you are in a bickering mood today.

Provisional ballots are messy and infrequently used. At my polling place, 4 years ago, when 100% of the machines were down and they should have (by law) gone to provisional ballots and instead they turned voters away for several hours, several of the voters were very likely disenfranchised because in real life, many poll workers have no idea how to deal with provisional ballots.

Thats a problem when its very likely a significant proportion of the Philadelphia electorate will be forced to use provisional balllots.

Provisional ballots are messy and many poll workers in Philadelphia are not prepared to deal with them.

It has everything to do with the recent court decision about the Voter ID lawthat is going to dramatically increase the number of provisional ballots in Philadelphia.

Which is the topic of this thread.

**Litter Box** · 10-02-2012, 03:55 PM

OMG guess who ? Pot calling kettle black.

This is also on page 9 of today's METRO.

Voter Registration Fraud From GOP-Backed Firm Spreads - ABC News

**raider.adam** · 10-02-2012, 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by seand

Well you are in a bickering mood today.

Provisional ballots are messy and infrequently used. At my polling place, 4 years ago, when 100% of the machines were down and they should have (by law) gone to provisional ballots and instead they turned voters away for several hours, several of the voters were very likely disenfranchised because in real life, many poll workers have no idea how to deal with provisional ballots.

Thats a problem when its very likely a significant proportion of the Philadelphia electorate will be forced to use provisional balllots.

Provisional ballots are messy and many poll workers in Philadelphia are not prepared to deal with them.

It has everything to do with the recent court decision about the Voter ID lawthat is going to dramatically increase the number of provisional ballots in Philadelphia.

Which is the topic of this thread.

I was discussing with you your comment about it actually increasing fraud. you replied about how improperly trained election workers 4 years ago didn't know about provisional ballots and didn't have any. I was asking what the connection was because I had no idea what it was.

**mixiboi** · 10-02-2012, 09:57 PM

So how much more money will be wasted on this before 2014?(When no one will care again till 2016?)

**Cyclemurpphy** · 10-27-2012, 07:35 PM

I have wondered if one isn't asked for ID, might that be how dead people have been able to vote?

**Marquis** · 10-27-2012, 08:15 PM

Originally Posted by Cyclemurpphy

I have wondered if one isn't asked for ID, might that be how dead people have been able to vote?

Sure, why not, because people LOVE to vote.

**mixiboi** · 10-27-2012, 09:56 PM

Originally Posted by Cyclemurpphy

I have wondered if one isn't asked for ID, might that be how dead people have been able to vote?

The majority of dead people have voted through mail-in voting, as seen recently with this story:

Republican candidate quits after companion caught voting while dead | The Raw Story

**RittenhouseGirl** · 10-28-2012, 10:31 AM

Originally Posted by DCnPhilly

Maybe I made some assumptions that aren't true but I don't see the problem with this. I thought adults were already required to carry valid ID in public. I'm always surprised when I vote that I'm NOT asked for ID.

I thought so too. Who doesn't have a driver's license or photo ID for goodness sakes?

**mixiboi** · 10-28-2012, 10:39 AM

Originally Posted by RittenhouseGirl

I thought so too. Who doesn't have a driver's license or photo ID for goodness sakes?

People who have an ID that isn't a state given ID. Many places take ANY form of photo ID, but as you can see here this was only going to allow State/Driver ID from the state of PA...

Also those who have a expired license, again you be surprised how many places will take it....When you start enforcing it for voting, that is when people get "worried", but not for anything else...

**vegenigna** · 10-30-2012, 08:04 PM

Hi, many older Philadelphia residents don't have IDs. Many don't have drivers licenses nor cars. Many walk to work or take public transportation. Many who are disabled or retired walk or talk public transportation when they need to go somewhere. I'll be interested in seeing how this gets implemented. I'd suggest that voters can have a photo ID taken at the polls, post offices, libraries, or super markets. I agree with voter ID but it has to implemented so it doesn't cause voters frustration and confusion enough that they will stop voting, but I think that was the GOP's intention all along.