In vetoing the bill to require Kansas voters to show photo identification, Gov. Kathleen Sebelius suggested the rule would deter turnout. But state Sen. Tim Huelskamp, R-Fowler, thinks she has it backward – that more secure elections would mean more voters. “If people don’t trust the system, they’re not going to vote as much as they would,” Huelskamp said.
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Skeptic on Jail consultants straining patience
- Chas on Health care reform would save state money
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Politico on Health care reform would save state money
- Politico on So they said
- Pleefer on Open thread 11/22
- cosmos_originally on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
- Phantom on Open thread 11/22
53 Comments
The voters aren’t the part of “the system” that I don’t trust!
Yeah, low voter turnout has always been because people feel like the system is broken and suddenly showing ID is going to make crappy candidates like Tim Huelskamp look good.
How is a system that deprives elderly nuns from voting supposed to improve the system?
I would have to disagree Linda. Unless it is 28% of the voters who re-elected our president in 2004, I don’t really trust the average voters critical thinking skills (aka BS detection)
You have to have an ID for almost anything official you do. Apply for a loan. Enroll in school. Cash a check. Drive a car. Get married. Get a SS card. Fly.
Yet the most powerful thing that a citizen can do is vote. No ID, no problem. Come right in! Who’d do you say you are?
I find objections to proposed voter ID laws; suspicious. Give everyone who is unable to afford it a free ID. Then implement voter ID laws over the next two elections.
larry, lol
Yeah, there are some voters I worry about. You are right about that.
But maybe even then there were only 28% of those who choose to vote (boy that would be a tiny number!) who were for bush and the other parts of the system stretched those numbers far enough??
“Unless it is 28% of the voters who re-elected our president in 2004,”= LLVet
————
I wonder how many times they each had to vote to accomplish that.
See?
Trust me on this, there is no overwhelming concern by the Democratic Party that some voters will be disenfranchised by a voter ID card.
It’s called protecting the over vote.
The Democratic Party “overvote” has been a problem in Kansas?
I’ve lived here many years and haven’t seen any evidence of that. In fact, little evidence of a Democratic Party.
How about if I don’t think you make enough sense to trust you on this!?
The scary thing about that Linda is that you might just be right. Ah yes, Clay Aiken could get more votes than John, Hillary or Barack.
But I won’t entertain the conspiracy theory very long. I watched the blogs in 2004. I thought I had time warped back to 1952.
12 nuns in Indiana were prevented from voting under their state’s voter ID law.
Can someone please explain what danger nuns are to national security?
Beyond urban legend, has anybody ever verified voter fraud in Kansas?
Just asking…
mrcontroversy
Posted May 20, 2008 at 1:46 pm | Permalink
12 nuns in Indiana were prevented from voting under their state’s voter ID law.
Can someone please explain what danger nuns are to national security?
——————-
Bull Chips Mr. C,
There are more handicapped enabled vans around Notre Dame and the surrounding community owned by the Catholic church and the university than the entirity of Sedgwick County.
Try another ‘cry me another scenario.’
Nano, urban legends all (I like that description!), no evidence, no proof.
But then these are the kinds of “problems” our state legislators are capable of taking on.
Regular
Posted May 20, 2008 at 1:51 pm | Permalink
There are more handicapped enabled vans around Notre Dame and the surrounding community owned by the Catholic church and the university than the entirity of Sedgwick County.
Try another ‘cry me another scenario.’
And that has what to do with anything?
Please re-take the Evelyn Woodhead Spid Ridding Course.
Nano, I don’t actually know how it all came out but there were some pretty serious charges of vote tampering and fraud recently in local elections in St. Marys Kansas. I’m not sure if the Eagle gave it coverage or not. It was mostly in the Topeka paper.
Evidently Mr. C, you didn’t read the news story on the nuns who claimed because of their age and infirmity couldn’t get to licensing bureau to get their ID’s made.
One call to their Parish Priest would have resolved the problem. There would have been more vans and helpers there to assist them than you can shake a stick at.
hernando
Posted May 20, 2008 at 2:04 pm | Permalink
Nano, I don’t actually know how it all came out but there were some pretty serious charges of vote tampering and fraud recently in local elections in St. Marys Kansas. I’m not sure if the Eagle gave it coverage or not. It was mostly in the Topeka paper.
———————–
I sort of remember that story. Some employees of a company used the address of their employer which was in the voting district, but none of the employees actually lived in St. Marys. There was some other stuff too, but don’t recall what it was.
Wrong, folks. The incident you’re refering to happened in KCMO. http://www.kmbc.com/politics/10214492/detail.html
Seems it didn’t take any special IDs to ferret the crime out. And wouldn’t you know it was Democrats what committed the crime.
A quick Google search doesn’t turn up any voter fraud in Kansas. So why are we waisting time and taxpayer money on this dog of a bill?
Nano, where did you read the party affiliation of those charged?
Linda dear, ACORN is a Democrat organization.
http://www.mogop.org/wp/2006/11/02/democrat-linked-acorn-members-indicted-for-voter-fraud-in-kansas-city/
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2006/10/missouri-acorn-voter-fraud-scandal.html
WOW, and they only employ Democrats? What a deal!
Linda, are they responsible for their employees? Does it make sense to you to hire Conservatives to work in a Democrat get out the vote drive?
I wonder how many Republicans they registered?
Here’s the story I was referring to Nano.
http://www.cjonline.com/stories/032408/kan_261007070.shtml
Whatever you say, Nano. Guess they required more than photo ID before paying the hourly wage, huh? In my world people who want to make a few dollars at a temporary job often aren’t registered with any party
I’d say you make assumptions and then try to convince us they are facts.
lindainks,
The ACORN voter stories were huge a few years ago. You would have to have been out of the country or incapicitated not to have heard about them.
There were several TV specials on them. Most of them centered around St. Louis Missouri.
Dead people voting, several people use the same address of an empty lot, etc. etc.
Unfortunately the conservatives’ only favored tax, the poll tax, was ruled unconstitutional quite some time back. It’s taken them this long to come up with even a remotely satisfying way to keep the riff-raff out of the polls.
I wasn’t dead then and I wasn’t out of the country. I still don’t see any proof that the people who were paid by how many they registered (probably why there were abuses and wrong doings!) were registered themselves. S/he made a statement as if it was fact but gives nothing in the way of backup. That is the only part I questioned. Got it?
Nano:
A quick Google search doesn’t turn up any voter fraud in Kansas. So why are we waisting time and taxpayer money on this dog of a bill?
____________________________________________
Nano, so the GOP can sue for veto infringement (coke zero theme)
The eligible voters in the U.S. waaaayyyyy under vote. That has been true for many years.
So, the Republican solution to this problem is: lets make it more difficult to vote. Are those guys geniuses or what, I ask you?
StevenEDavis
Posted May 20, 2008 at 4:02 pm | Permalink
The eligible voters in the U.S. waaaayyyyy under vote. That has been true for many years.
So, the Republican solution to this problem is: lets make it more difficult to vote. Are those guys geniuses or what, I ask you?
—————————-
Steven Davis,
Does your photo ID on your Driver’s License make you feel less like voting?
Excluding any factors that you may have had a bad ‘hair’ day of course. :D
Anyone who knows anything about how campaigns operate knows that the Republic Party has always been the beneficiary of low voter turnout.
They’ve tried all sorts of sophomoric tactics. In Florida in 2000 they ran radio commercials on black-oriented radio stations with a message: “Due to high voter turnout, officials have extended election day. If you’re a Republican, vote on Tuesday. If you’re a Democrat, you’ll vote on Wednesday.” They always pray for rain or snow on election day in hopes that Democrats are perceived to be less likely to show up at the polls if there are enough impediments. None of the “government-issued Photo ID” laws have provided any funding for providing such documentation to places such as nursing homes, convents, folks living a significant distance away from the voter-registration offices.
The 90-something little old lady who lives on my block asked me to take her to the drivers’ license bureau to get her non-driver’s photo ID not long ago. It was at the county court house and (thanks to ADA, we found elevators and ramps) but it was a labyrinthine maze to get there. And, since this little old lady has voted in every election in the same precinct since the 1930s, the chances of at least one of the election officials not knowing her are practically nil.
True conservatives used to advocate fewer laws and less governmental complications. The Republic Party is desperately using their past fifteen years or so of power to leverage government for Republic Party partisanship.
In every other aspect of the citizen/government relationship, true conservatives used to believe in the Constitutional concept that you’re innocent until proven guilty. Photo ID laws are 180 degrees opposite; they assume a voter is guilty of fraud unless they prove otherwise.
It’s not “conservative.” Hell, it’s not American. But it is, these days, Republic Party policy.
As for driver’s licenses being proof positive ID, I recently designed and printed photo ID badges for a regional conference. It would have been just as easy to make them look just like driver’s licenses, and there are quite a few people out there who are as good or better than me with Photoshop.
The Constitution prohibits poll taxes, so if I have to pay for a DL is that not a poll tax? And does that mean that DL’s used for voting purposes now would have too be free? that would certainly save me 30, 40 dollars whatever they cost now.
lindainks55
Posted May 20, 2008 at 3:28 pm
“I’d say you make assumptions and then try to convince us they are facts.”
LOL Linda! Here’s another assumption. You were blonde before you turned gray.
#
LLTVET
Posted May 20, 2008 at 3:44 pm | Permalink
Nano:
A quick Google search doesn’t turn up any voter fraud in Kansas. So why are we waisting time and taxpayer money on this dog of a bill?
____________________________________________
Nano, so the GOP can sue for veto infringement (coke zero theme)
LLVET, I don’t get it….
I’ve never been either blonde or gray, however my hair is natural. Great genes! Another wrong assumption on your part. Do you know a poster who calls herself ksgrm? If you haven’t made her acquaintenace, you’ll like her a lot. I think the two of you are like two(?) peas in a pod.
Nano, maybe you’ll bring some backup to the table, instead of just asking people to accept your opinion as fact? Everyone here has an opinion and they are each as good and as useless as the next.
the increasing number of illegal aliens, along with not having to show any proof of citizenship to register makes Kansas Destination Sanctuary!!!
the increasing number of illegal aliens, along with not having to show any proof of citizenship to register makes Kansas Destination Sanctuary!!!
Of course Repukes are suppressing the vote. Low turnouts favor Repukes, high turnouts favor Democrats. Ergo, invent fictional dangers of “voter fraud,” and disenfranchise those who are likely to vote against you.
William Rehnquist, for example, had a long and successful career doing just this in Arizona in the 1960’s.
“When partisan hirelings show up at polling places next week to challenge the registrations of minority voters, they will be reenacting scenes from Phoenix in the early ’60s, where Rehnquist and other supporters of Goldwater sought to block voting by dark-skinned people suspected of being Democrats. The name of the game — “ballot security” — was the same then as now, as was the pretense of seeking to prevent “vote fraud.”
Testifying before the Senate against Rehnquist’s elevation to chief justice in 1986, former Assistant United States Attorney James Brosnahan described an earlier encounter with him, circa 1962. As a Justice Department lawyer, Brosnahan visited Phoenix polling places to investigate alleged civil rights violations:
“The complaints we received alleged in various forms that the Republican challengers were aggressively challenging many voters without having a basis for that challenge …
“Based on my interviews with others, polling officials, and my fellow assistant U.S. attorneys, it was my opinion in 1962 that the challenging effort was designed to reduce the number of black and Hispanic voters by confrontation and intimidation …
“When we arrived, the situation was tense. At that precinct I saw William Rehnquist, who was serving as the only Republican challenger. The FBI agent and I both showed our identifications to those concerned, including Mr. Rehnquist … The complaints did involve Mr. Rehnquist’s conduct. Our arrival and the showing of our identifications had a quieting effect on the situation and after interviewing several witnesses, we left. Criminal prosecution was declined as a matter of prosecutorial discretion.”
Under oath, Rehnquist denied Brosnahan’s charges, and based on conflicting testimony from other witnesses, the issue was left sufficiently murky for the Republican-dominated Senate to confirm him. But in his 2001 account of that nomination battle, “The Rehnquist Choice,” former Nixon White House counsel John W. Dean concluded that Rehnquist — who said he didn’t “remember” engaging in voter challenges — had almost certainly lied to the Senate.”
http://dir.salon.com/story/opinion/conason/2004/10/29/injustice/index.html
Repukes hate democracy: always have, always will. It’s why the knee-jerk response to this post will be for some numb-nuts Repuke to bleat that the United States isn’t a democracy–it’s a republic.
Oh, and Repukes? The voter challenge sword cuts both ways. Just remember that if someone challenges YOUR voting credentials at the polls come November.
They’ll try anything that works to their advantage;redistricting, eliminating voting locations, voter id.
And the idiot citizen will think they’re trying to take care of them.
usaproud4567
“the increasing number of illegal aliens, along with not having to show any proof of citizenship to register makes Kansas Destination Sanctuary!!!”
The illegal aliens that I’ve run into are trying their damnedest to keep a low profile. They aren’t about to risk exposure by registering to vote!
1962?! Well, I see politics haven’t changed. Suspicious attacks and denials. Regardless, this story is relevant 45 YEARS LATER because…. Right, it’s not relevant.
Of course now, CF will claim that I refuse to consider his “evidence” because of a personality disorder.
outlander,
Of course it’s relevant: the pattern hasn’t deviated in 45 years. If anything had happened since to change that, it wouldn’t be. But nothing has: the GOP goes on doing everything it can to manipulate the process, and to use the law to bully and intimidate non-white voters. And as the Rehnquist example shows, the top echelons of the GOP are as involved as the lower ones. Ever heard of the Federalist Society, outlander?
In this case, outlander, I think that what’s in play on your part actually is a lack of reading comprehension, rather than your often-observed unwillingness to concede factual evidence that refutes your beliefs. But I could, of course, be mistaken.
Steven Davis,
Does your photo ID on your Driver’s License make you feel less like voting?
Excluding any factors that you may have had a bad ‘hair’ day of course
**********
Of course not. But we don’t need barriers to people voting, unless of course you are interested in fewer people voting. Shaking my head at Republican dumb butts.
The CON’s love to make statements like this one:
“Yet the most powerful thing that a citizen can do is vote. No ID, no problem. Come right in! Who’d do you say you are?”
Hey, idiots, you have to show your ID when you register to vote.
I know this because I personally registered about 50 people during the last election cycle.
Once your ID (your DL number or your SS number) checks out at Bill Gale’s office, you’re registered.
That’s why showing ID again at the voting place is wholly redundant and adds no extra measure of security, unless you call reducing voters so Republic Party candidates can win security.
If the Republic party wants to trade away registration for on-the-spot voting with a photo ID, I’d go for that.
Clearly, the extremist Kansas Republican leaders are not solving real problems that Kansans face. They take their marching orders from their Washington overlords.
When will the people take back their Republican Party from these radical usurpers?
Folks (and Mr. Huelskamp),
This is just a “JIM CROW” “Horse of a different color”! This amounts to blatant government invasion and control of our most sacred right: To Vote! Maybe they ought to sponsor a bill requiring people to take a course on Government and the Bill of Rights every 10 years? Or is this just more Nuefeld and the Nobbleheads absurdity? The Gov. was right to veto this for all of us!
CapnAmerica
Posted May 21, 2008 at 12:33 am | Permalink
“Once your ID (your DL number or your SS number) checks out at Bill Gale’s office, you’re registered.
That’s why showing ID again at the voting place is wholly redundant and adds no extra measure of security, unless you call reducing voters so Republic Party candidates can win security.”
==========================================
Cap, are you saying that if a person dies that no one can come and say he is that person and vote under his name? This is only one example!!
Hey Mr. rimshootr, just how is the requirement to show an ID taking away our right to vote if we are legal?
A problem needs to be established FIRST. If a problem exists a solution should be sought. Since there is no indication of voter fraud this isn’t an area where a problem exists or a solution is needed.
Do these legislators not see where problems are waiting for solutions? Obviously not! They’ve proven this session the extent of their incompetence. We the voters have seen the problem and know what the solution is — they need to be UNelected!