I hate to sound like Martinus, but why the hell is there such a thing as voter registration at all? Shouldn't citizenship be the sole condition required for voting? The only possible use of it that I can conceive is that it prevents election day gerrymandering (eg move hundreds of voters from a safe seat to a marginal seat).
Especially when I read stuff like this. These people in Florida are apparently (as presented in this article) are being actively prevented from being able to vote. Shouldn't getting an SSN, paying taxes, getting a drivers license, owning a home or owning/running a business while being a citizen automatically get you permanently registered to vote? Can I get an explanation please? Is gerrymandering fair dinkum in American politics?
When Voter Registration is a Crime (http://ideas.time.com/2011/11/07/when-voter-registration-is-a-crime/)
QuoteWhen Voter Registration is a Crime
Is a new war on voters dismantling our democracy?
By Adam Cohen | November 7, 2011
Dawn Quarles, a high school teacher, is facing a $1,000 fine for doing something Florida has been cracking down on lately: registering students to vote. The state's leaders want to stop registration drives that add more qualified voters to the rolls – and they are having a disturbing level of success.
Florida's crackdown on voter registration is part of a larger national campaign against voting, which includes tough new voter ID laws in many states, rollbacks on early voting and other anti-democratic measures. Supporters of these laws argue that they are concerned with deterring fraud. But the real driving force is keeping down the number of voters – especially young, old, poor, and minority voters.
Quarles is a government teacher at Pace High School in the Florida Panhandle. Along with teaching her students about democracy, she has tried to get them to participate, by helping them register to vote. This should be a good thing. Our nation's founders insisted that government should operate with the consent of the governed. Ideally, everyone who is eligible should be registered and vote.
In recent years, civic-minded organizations and political groups of various kinds have been conducting mass voter registration drives across Florida – and they have been signing up a lot of voters who lean Democratic. The state's Republican elected officials have responded with a series of laws that make voting and voter registration much harder.
The rule that Quarles is accused of violating says that people who register others to vote must submit the filled-out forms within 48 hours, down from a previous requirement of 10 days. There is a $50 fine per late form, up to a maximum of $1,000. Even if a teacher puts the forms in the mail right away, depending on mail service, he or she could miss the deadline. The 48-hour rule serves no practical purpose except creating the fear that among people and groups who register voters that they will be late – and face large fines.
It isn't just teachers who are being intimidated. In May, after the law passed, the League of Women Voters announced that it was stopping its voter registration efforts in Florida, calling the law a "war on voters," and declaring that "under the false pretext of reducing 'fraud,' Florida's legislative leaders have instituted a law that will shut down the efforts of groups such as the League, the Boy Scouts, student groups, civic organizations, and others." Along with the fines for submitting late forms, Florida's new law cut the number of days of early voting from 14 to eight, and specifically eliminated early voting on the Sunday before Election Day. It is hard to see the rollback of early voting as anything but an attempt to make it harder for eligible voters to cast ballots.
The war on voters is taking different forms in different places. Some states have instituted tough new voter ID laws. Their supporters claim the purpose is deterring fraud, but the fact is that there are almost no documented cases of people showing up at the polls to vote and using a false identity. What the ID laws do, however, is make it hard for poor people, students, and the elderly – groups that are less likely than average to have driver's licenses – to vote.
Florida's new voting restrictions are being challenged in court as a civil rights violation as they especially affect minority voters. But the courts have a mixed record of reining in these anti-voting laws. When the Supreme Court had a chance to strike down Indiana's strict voter ID law in 2008, it declined to, saying there was little evidence that it was keeping qualified voters from casting ballots. A week later, at least 10 retired nuns, some in their 80s and 90s, were barred from voting in Indiana's Democratic primary because they did not have driver's licenses.
The courts should strike down laws like Florida's that interfere with voting rights. But better yet, legislatures should not pass them and should repeal the ones now on the books. In a democracy, candidates and political parties should prevail because they have the most support among the people – not because they have rigged the rules to favor their side.
Cohen, the author of Nothing to Fear, teaches at Yale Law School. The views expressed are his own.
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 06:58:33 AM
Shouldn't getting an SSN, paying taxes, getting a drivers license, owning a home or owning/running a business while being a citizen automatically get you permanently registered to vote?
Seems you can do a fair number of those without acquiring citizenship first. :hmm:
A lot of states have 'motor voter' laws where you can register to vote when you apply for or renew your driver's license.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 08, 2011, 07:02:59 AM
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 06:58:33 AM
Shouldn't getting an SSN, paying taxes, getting a drivers license, owning a home or owning/running a business while being a citizen automatically get you permanently registered to vote?
Seems you can do a fair number of those without acquiring citizenship first. :hmm:
thats why I included the bolded bit in my initial post
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 07:18:10 AM
thats why I included the bolded bit in my initial post
Well if the driver's license isn't proof of citizenship, why do you think it should be sufficient to cast a vote? Presumably they want to check that at some point in the process.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 08, 2011, 07:49:21 AM
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 07:18:10 AM
thats why I included the bolded bit in my initial post
Well if the driver's license isn't proof of citizenship, why do you think it should be sufficient to cast a vote? Presumably they want to check that at some point in the process.
I phrased it as
doing activity X while being a citizen should automatically get you registered. So I'm not saying non-citizens should get registered while doing any of those activities, but rather those that could register would get registered in all cases.
Keep in mind Puff that the US doesn't have a single Gestapo-run database of the names and addresses of its citizens. And the IRS, which probably has the most complete set, is forbidden by law from sharing personal information.
I like it, I hope we will have it too. If voting is not important enough for you to register, you have no business around an election.
I have moved multiple times and voter registration has never been an issue.
The article seems to me to be extremely biased. While some of the laws seem absurd, they are being presented by a highly partial source, so i take his argument with a grain of salt.
The author appears to be asserting that the time to "submit" voter registration forms includes time in the mail; I'd bet real internet money that this is not true and that a postmark completes the requirement.
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 08:06:50 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 08, 2011, 07:49:21 AM
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 07:18:10 AM
thats why I included the bolded bit in my initial post
Well if the driver's license isn't proof of citizenship, why do you think it should be sufficient to cast a vote? Presumably they want to check that at some point in the process.
I phrased it as
doing activity X while being a citizen should automatically get you registered. So I'm not saying non-citizens should get registered while doing any of those activities, but rather those that could register would get registered in all cases.
We actually have that. Doing activity "X" while being a citizen automatically does get you registered. However activity "X" is called "voter registration".
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 08, 2011, 08:10:15 AM
Keep in mind Puff that the US doesn't have a single Gestapo-run database of the names and addresses of its citizens. And the IRS, which probably has the most complete set, is forbidden by law from sharing personal information.
In reference to the slur against Germans I must point out that IBM's daughter company in Germany ran the GeStaPo's lists.
But, as you say, you have multiple lists regulated by multiple agencies which do and do not overlap. Wasn't the Department of Homeland Security created to solve the same problem in policing. Wouldn't the constitutional rights of Americans to vote not merit such a common list?
The two things that are baffling me are that the government is not actively seeking to register all citizens itself, leaving that process up to NGOs; and that it seems that it seems to be a legitimate political activity to prevent the other side from registering voters likely to vote for the other side.
I'm a democrat before I'm a "Høyremann" (a member of the party in Norway which calls itself conservative but really is liberal, in the classical 1850s sense of the word). I'm much more concerned with maintaining the system of democracy than I am in achieving positive results in the next 4 year period. Why don't I see Americans standing up for these principles of mine? Is the culture war and the 4th great awakening to blame for labeling opponents as evil thus making cheating at democracy legitimate as long as it defeats evil?
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 08:18:49 AM
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 08:06:50 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 08, 2011, 07:49:21 AM
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 07:18:10 AM
thats why I included the bolded bit in my initial post
Well if the driver's license isn't proof of citizenship, why do you think it should be sufficient to cast a vote? Presumably they want to check that at some point in the process.
I phrased it as
doing activity X while being a citizen should automatically get you registered. So I'm not saying non-citizens should get registered while doing any of those activities, but rather those that could register would get registered in all cases.
We actually have that. Doing activity "X" while being a citizen automatically does get you registered. However activity "X" is called "voter registration".
Then I ask you this. Why do you have to register at all? Shouldn't it enough to be a citizen with proof of residence to get to vote in a specific district?
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 08:28:08 AM
Then I ask you this. Why do you have to register at all? Shouldn't it enough to be a citizen with proof of residence to get to vote in a specific district?
So they know what voter district you are in. You also can get your voting rights revoked for committing felonies.
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 08:28:08 AM
Then I ask you this. Why do you have to register at all? Shouldn't it enough to be a citizen with proof of residence to get to vote in a specific district?
I don't know what you mean by "proof of residence." The US equivalent of "proof of residence" is voter registration. Which, as I said, is easy as pie - you just mail in a postcard (which is postage-paid, AIR). It takes some six weeks to actually get registered because of the bureaucratic process (you are right that this could be streamlined, but I think that should come as part of a general federalization of congressional elections), but it is simple and sure.
It is even easier to register when getting a driver's license or registering a car, but I have never done that because I never needed to.
Plus, voting automatically renews one's registration.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 08:35:12 AM
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 08:28:08 AM
Then I ask you this. Why do you have to register at all? Shouldn't it enough to be a citizen with proof of residence to get to vote in a specific district?
So they know what voter district you are in. You also can get your voting rights revoked for committing felonies.
I don't think you understand my primary complaint. The government is not trying to find out what district you are in, the government is just waiting for you to tell them. Furthermore it seems, from the process as it seems to be, that you don't have to prove that you live in a district to get to vote there.
These new voter registration laws do smell strongly of very selective pressure to not register certain people. Then again, my sympathy for those people's franchise is limited, since if you need an activist to register you, you're probably less than fully involved citizen anyway. Setting up intentionally overcrowded polling places in strategic places is, IMO, a much more serious assault on democracy, as it selectively inaccurately culling the voter registration lists.
I'm pretty sure you have to prove you live in a district to vote there. Every time I voted they had a list of registered voters in the district. When I voted, they checked my name off the list. They also asked for some form of ID. I reckon if my name wasn't on the list they probably wouldn't let me vote. There are some requirements for voting in a certain district. You have to live there, you can't be a felon, and you must be over 18. Registering with the state seems a logical way for the government to enforce these requirements. What would you have us do?
I don't know enough about the Florida law to know what it actually says or does.
Quote from: DGuller on November 08, 2011, 08:50:02 AM
These new voter registration laws do smell strongly of very selective pressure to not register certain people. Then again, my sympathy for those people's franchise is limited, since if you need an activist to register you, you're probably less than fully involved citizen anyway. Setting up intentionally overcrowded polling places in strategic places is, IMO, a much more serious assault on democracy, as it selectively inaccurately culling the voter registration lists.
This is always problem in Missouri. For some reason polling places change location at the last minute quite a lot in St. Louis when we have a Republican Sec of State. It's weird. My Polling place (which leans heavily Republican), has never changed. Viking will love this, it's in a Catholic Cathedral. About six blocs from my house.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 08:53:36 AM
I'm pretty sure you have to prove you live in a district to vote there. Every time I voted they had a list of registered voters in the district. When I voted, they checked my name off the list. They also asked for some form of ID. I reckon if my name wasn't on the list they probably wouldn't let me vote. There are some requirements for voting in a certain district. You have to live there, you can't be a felon, and you must be over 18. Registering with the state seems a logical way for the government to enforce these requirements. What would you have us do?
I don't know enough about the Florida law to know what it actually says or does.
What would I have you do? Well, automatically register all people eligible to vote automatically. Use IRS, Medicare, Medicaid, DMV etc. records to register. You pay taxes? Well that registers you to vote as part of the process.
Ideally, you'd set up unified database like scandinavia does. You have SSN's which presumably every citizen has. If your address is on any government database (at any level) you should be automatically registered.
We've got voter registration too. It's run by the local authorities and they try and update it every year by sending round forms. They also use it to pick jurors.
There's no automatic registration here either. Admittedly I get the impression there's no partisan aspects to it here which is a difference. But I don't think voter registration in itself is some absurd imposition that erodes democracy.
Edit: Just looked it up and apparently banks and credit reference agencies also often use the electoral roll to verify people's addresses which is a strong incentive to register.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 08:57:02 AMViking will love this, it's in a Catholic Cathedral. About six blocs from my house.
I have no problems with using public houses of worship for voting. Churches are built where it is convenient for the parishoners to go to, so it probably makes sense to vote there. In most of Scandinavia schools and government offices are primarily used, but churches are often used where they are more suitable.
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 08, 2011, 09:03:28 AM
We've got voter registration too. It's run by the local authorities and they try and update it every year by sending round forms. They also use it to pick jurors.
There's no automatic registration here either. Admittedly I get the impression there's no partisan aspects to it here which is a difference. But I don't think voter registration in itself is some absurd imposition that erodes democracy.
The system I object to is one where the local authorities don't act to register themselves, but rather leave the system up to NGOs and private initiative. IIRC British voter registration is the local authority or voting body registering who is eligible to vote. The US system seems to be voters registering themselves.
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 08:25:06 AM
In reference to the slur against Germans I must point out that IBM's daughter company in Germany ran the GeStaPo's lists.
WHAT?!
Paying taxes or having a driver's license isn't the same as being a citizen eligible to vote so automatically being allowed to vote because you do those things doesn't make sense. They also have to know where you are, so you don't vote in every polling place the county. Incidentally, if you are male you have to send a selective service form to the government after your 18th birthday in the unlikely occasion they want to draft you. You aren't automatically added to the rolls of that either. Or at least you weren't in 1999.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 09:10:02 AM
Paying taxes or having a driver's license isn't the same as being a citizen eligible to vote so automatically being allowed to vote because you do those things doesn't make sense. They also have to know where you are, so you don't vote in every polling place the county. Incidentally, if you are male you have to send a selective service form to the government after your 18th birthday in the unlikely occasion they want to draft you. You aren't automatically added to the rolls of that either. Or at least you weren't in 1999.
Well, put a checkbox for citizenship and an address line to all government forms. You can talk about the details of how the government makes no effort to register voters. I say that the government should being making serious efforts to register all citizens that could be allowed to vote.
Quote from: Tamas on November 08, 2011, 09:09:06 AM
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 08:25:06 AM
In reference to the slur against Germans I must point out that IBM's daughter company in Germany ran the GeStaPo's lists.
WHAT?!
http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com/ (http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com/)
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 09:29:47 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 09:10:02 AM
Paying taxes or having a driver's license isn't the same as being a citizen eligible to vote so automatically being allowed to vote because you do those things doesn't make sense. They also have to know where you are, so you don't vote in every polling place the county. Incidentally, if you are male you have to send a selective service form to the government after your 18th birthday in the unlikely occasion they want to draft you. You aren't automatically added to the rolls of that either. Or at least you weren't in 1999.
Well, put a checkbox for citizenship and an address line to all government forms. You can talk about the details of how the government makes no effort to register voters. I say that the government should being making serious efforts to register all citizens that could be allowed to vote.
What if you move to a different place?
Quote from: Caliga on November 08, 2011, 07:15:55 AM
A lot of states have 'motor voter' laws where you can register to vote when you apply for or renew your driver's license.
What about people who have no driver's license?
Quote from: Martinus on November 08, 2011, 09:43:29 AM
Quote from: Caliga on November 08, 2011, 07:15:55 AM
A lot of states have 'motor voter' laws where you can register to vote when you apply for or renew your driver's license.
What about people who have no driver's license?
The DMV isn't the only place you can register to vote.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 09:41:55 AM
What if you move to a different place?
The rather than registering to vote in the new area, they just report a change of residence.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 09:46:37 AM
Quote from: Martinus on November 08, 2011, 09:43:29 AM
Quote from: Caliga on November 08, 2011, 07:15:55 AM
A lot of states have 'motor voter' laws where you can register to vote when you apply for or renew your driver's license.
What about people who have no driver's license?
The DMV isn't the only place you can register to vote.
Oh sorry, for some reason I misread his post as stating that it's only when you can register.
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 09:47:13 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 09:41:55 AM
What if you move to a different place?
The rather than registering to vote in the new area, they just report a change of residence.
I thought that's where we are heading, and all anomalies aside, I prefer the US method.
In Poland there is still a communist era law which states that you have to notify the authorities when you change your place of residence - something that is rarely enforced anymore, but still there. Most people who move for work ignore it, and it is a blight on free society, but that's the reason why you do not have to register to vote. People who want to vote somewhere else than their registered place of residence (which includes a lot of residents of Warsaw for example who are still formally registered in their original places of origin) still need to register for voting so it's just a convenience for those who vote where they are registered.
As I said, I prefer the US approach.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 08, 2011, 08:10:15 AM
Keep in mind Puff that the US doesn't have a single Gestapo-run database of the names and addresses of its citizens. And the IRS, which probably has the most complete set, is forbidden by law from sharing personal information.
This however smacks of luddism.
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 09:47:13 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 09:41:55 AM
What if you move to a different place?
The rather than registering to vote in the new area, they just report a change of residence.
We call that "registering".
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 09:29:47 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 09:10:02 AM
Paying taxes or having a driver's license isn't the same as being a citizen eligible to vote so automatically being allowed to vote because you do those things doesn't make sense. They also have to know where you are, so you don't vote in every polling place the county. Incidentally, if you are male you have to send a selective service form to the government after your 18th birthday in the unlikely occasion they want to draft you. You aren't automatically added to the rolls of that either. Or at least you weren't in 1999.
Well, put a checkbox for citizenship and an address line to all government forms. You can talk about the details of how the government makes no effort to register voters. I say that the government should being making serious efforts to register all citizens that could be allowed to vote.
I think that's not enough. The government should be making serious effort to have each citizen equipped with an unremovable location detection chip, which also serves as a surveillance camera. Those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear. :ph34r:
I'm not sure what the big deal is really, ( as I said though, I don't know anything about the Florida law). It's not like filling out a voter registration form is that difficult. It takes a full five minutes to fill out and sign your name. There is no test, or poll tax or anything. Hell, you don't even have to be literate.
I admit though that reducing the amount of time to send it in from 10 days to 2 days seems odd.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 10:17:16 AM
I'm not sure what the big deal is really, ( as I said though, I don't know anything about the Florida law). It's not like filling out a voter registration form is that difficult. It takes a full five minutes to fill out and sign your name. There is no test, or poll tax or anything. Hell, you don't even have to be literate.
Same. Personally I think that it's not done by local government or some other independent body could make it more open to abuse and I think grumbler's right that it could do with being streamlined. But I don't think this seems somehow undemocratic or a big issue.
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 08:59:58 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 08:53:36 AM
I'm pretty sure you have to prove you live in a district to vote there. Every time I voted they had a list of registered voters in the district. When I voted, they checked my name off the list. They also asked for some form of ID. I reckon if my name wasn't on the list they probably wouldn't let me vote. There are some requirements for voting in a certain district. You have to live there, you can't be a felon, and you must be over 18. Registering with the state seems a logical way for the government to enforce these requirements. What would you have us do?
I don't know enough about the Florida law to know what it actually says or does.
What would I have you do? Well, automatically register all people eligible to vote automatically. Use IRS, Medicare, Medicaid, DMV etc. records to register. You pay taxes? Well that registers you to vote as part of the process.
Ideally, you'd set up unified database like scandinavia does. You have SSN's which presumably every citizen has. If your address is on any government database (at any level) you should be automatically registered.
First of all, Americans really don't want any sort of unified federal data base that contains all of our personal information. Second, such a database would be useless anyway, because the federal government doesn't actually conduct any elections--they are all done by state and local governments.
And all the stuff you keep talking about--paying taxes, owning a home or business, etc., has nothing to do with being eligible to vote. A foreign national can do all those things legally, but still isn't eligible to vote. But if you're, say, an 19-year old full-time college student who lives with your parents and doesn't work, you might not pay any taxes or do any of those other things that you keep mentioning, yet you're still eligible to vote.
Quote from: dps on November 08, 2011, 10:41:29 AM
First of all, Americans really don't want any sort of unified federal data base that contains all of our personal information. Second, such a database would be useless anyway, because the federal government doesn't actually conduct any elections--they are all done by state and local governments.
And all the stuff you keep talking about--paying taxes, owning a home or business, etc., has nothing to do with being eligible to vote. A foreign national can do all those things legally, but still isn't eligible to vote. But if you're, say, an 19-year old full-time college student who lives with your parents and doesn't work, you might not pay any taxes or do any of those other things that you keep mentioning, yet you're still eligible to vote.
1 - I'm not suggesting that the federal government register for the states, but rather that it communicates that person with ssn X that is a citizen is resident in a certain district if it learns this through normal activity.
2 - The idea is not to make the ONLY method of registration government interaction or to register non-citizens to vote. But to make registration automatic. If the government knows where a citizen lives then that citizen gets registered automatically in his or her local district.
In that case there is no more ACORN, no more Jim Crow and no gerrymandering through registration.
I don't think there is anymore ACORN or Jim Crow, and I don't think think gerrymandering is done through registration. In Missouri you don't register a political party when you register to vote.
I wouldn't register to vote in the US. So that the courts can give the victory to Bush regardless of election result? Fuck that.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 11:07:11 AM
I don't think there is anymore ACORN or Jim Crow, and I don't think think gerrymandering is done through registration. In Missouri you don't register a political party when you register to vote.
No, you gerrymander by preventing socioeconomic groups from registering you can fix elections.
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 11:13:25 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 11:07:11 AM
I don't think there is anymore ACORN or Jim Crow, and I don't think think gerrymandering is done through registration. In Missouri you don't register a political party when you register to vote.
No, you gerrymander by preventing socioeconomic groups from registering you can fix elections.
I think it's based on Census data.
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 11:02:51 AM
Quote from: dps on November 08, 2011, 10:41:29 AM
First of all, Americans really don't want any sort of unified federal data base that contains all of our personal information. Second, such a database would be useless anyway, because the federal government doesn't actually conduct any elections--they are all done by state and local governments.
And all the stuff you keep talking about--paying taxes, owning a home or business, etc., has nothing to do with being eligible to vote. A foreign national can do all those things legally, but still isn't eligible to vote. But if you're, say, an 19-year old full-time college student who lives with your parents and doesn't work, you might not pay any taxes or do any of those other things that you keep mentioning, yet you're still eligible to vote.
1 - I'm not suggesting that the federal government register for the states, but rather that it communicates that person with ssn X that is a citizen is resident in a certain district if it learns this through normal activity.
2 - The idea is not to make the ONLY method of registration government interaction or to register non-citizens to vote. But to make registration automatic. If the government knows where a citizen lives then that citizen gets registered automatically in his or her local district.
In that case there is no more ACORN, no more Jim Crow and no gerrymandering through registration.
I'm against adding to the bureaucracy. No thanks.
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 09:47:13 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 09:41:55 AM
What if you move to a different place?
The rather than registering to vote in the new area, they just report a change of residence.
:huh: But this is "voters registering themselves," which you oppose. The change of residence form is the change in voter registration, as well. In fact, changing voter registration is the only reason to change one's residence, insofar as I know.
Quote from: grumbler on November 08, 2011, 11:31:25 AM
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 09:47:13 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 09:41:55 AM
What if you move to a different place?
The rather than registering to vote in the new area, they just report a change of residence.
:huh: But this is "voters registering themselves," which you oppose. The change of residence form is the change in voter registration, as well. In fact, changing voter registration is the only reason to change one's residence, insofar as I know.
Here they use information like that to figure out how to set budgets for hospitals, schools, location of booze monopolies, roads and other infrastructure projects.
BTW, thank you, Viking, for reminding me that I need to re-register so as to change my address. Printed out the form, filled it out and as business reply mail - I can pop it in a mailbox when I take lunch today for free.
Quote from: garbon on November 08, 2011, 11:43:14 AM
BTW, thank you, Viking, for reminding me that I need to re-register so as to change my address. Printed out the form, filled it out and as business reply mail - I can pop it in a mailbox when I take lunch today for free.
Remember to vote the straight ticket Pelosi-Boxer-Obama
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 11:53:06 AM
Quote from: garbon on November 08, 2011, 11:43:14 AM
BTW, thank you, Viking, for reminding me that I need to re-register so as to change my address. Printed out the form, filled it out and as business reply mail - I can pop it in a mailbox when I take lunch today for free.
Remember to vote the straight ticket Pelosi-Boxer-Obama
Not sure how as a Republican in Manhattan that I'll manage that - but I guess I can try.
Quote from: garbon on November 08, 2011, 11:54:13 AM
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 11:53:06 AM
Remember to vote the straight ticket Pelosi-Boxer-Obama
Not sure how as a Republican in Manhattan that I'll manage that - but I guess I can try.
You can vote Obama at least.
Only people who want to vote should get to vote. If you are eligible to vote, but you are too lazy to register, fuck off. We don't need your fucking vote.
Quote from: Scipio on November 08, 2011, 02:14:39 PM
Only people who want to vote should get to vote. If you are eligible to vote, but you are too lazy to register, fuck off. We don't need your fucking vote.
I don't see how those first two statements are related. You could want to vote but be too lazy to register. :huh:
If you're too lazy to register you're probably also too lazy to vote.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 08, 2011, 02:21:30 PM
If you're too lazy to register you're probably also too lazy to vote.
Maybe or maybe you just aren't good at planning ahead.
Quote from: garbon on November 08, 2011, 11:54:13 AM
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 11:53:06 AM
Quote from: garbon on November 08, 2011, 11:43:14 AM
BTW, thank you, Viking, for reminding me that I need to re-register so as to change my address. Printed out the form, filled it out and as business reply mail - I can pop it in a mailbox when I take lunch today for free.
Remember to vote the straight ticket Pelosi-Boxer-Obama
Not sure how as a Republican in Manhattan that I'll manage that - but I guess I can try.
oh, I thought you were in california .. oh well..
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 03:14:16 PM
Quote from: garbon on November 08, 2011, 11:54:13 AM
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 11:53:06 AM
Quote from: garbon on November 08, 2011, 11:43:14 AM
BTW, thank you, Viking, for reminding me that I need to re-register so as to change my address. Printed out the form, filled it out and as business reply mail - I can pop it in a mailbox when I take lunch today for free.
Remember to vote the straight ticket Pelosi-Boxer-Obama
Not sure how as a Republican in Manhattan that I'll manage that - but I guess I can try.
oh, I thought you were in california .. oh well..
Like I could ever be convinced to vote for Pelosi. :angry:
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 11:13:25 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 11:07:11 AM
I don't think there is anymore ACORN or Jim Crow, and I don't think think gerrymandering is done through registration. In Missouri you don't register a political party when you register to vote.
No, you gerrymander by preventing socioeconomic groups from registering you can fix elections.
I don't think you know what gerrymandering means. Because, well, that's not what it means.
It may be worth pointing out that elections are basically state and local, with federal elections piggybacking those. For example, there is no federal right to vote for president, it is just that each of the 50 states decided that letting people vote is a good idea. Within constitutional limits, states have discretion on who can vote and what evidence voters need to provide to establish they are eligibile. So a federal system of registration isn't so feasible.
Quote from: dps on November 08, 2011, 11:02:32 PM
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 11:13:25 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 08, 2011, 11:07:11 AM
I don't think there is anymore ACORN or Jim Crow, and I don't think think gerrymandering is done through registration. In Missouri you don't register a political party when you register to vote.
No, you gerrymander by preventing socioeconomic groups from registering you can fix elections.
I don't think you know what gerrymandering means. Because, well, that's not what it means.
It is effectively gerrymandering since a certain population is rendered without an ability to affect the election, being moved into an "unrepresented constituency".
Quote from: alfred russel on November 09, 2011, 11:08:03 AM
It may be worth pointing out that elections are basically state and local, with federal elections piggybacking those. For example, there is no federal right to vote for president, it is just that each of the 50 states decided that letting people vote is a good idea. Within constitutional limits, states have discretion on who can vote and what evidence voters need to provide to establish they are eligibile. So a federal system of registration isn't so feasible.
Again. I am not suggesting a federal list. I'm suggesting that any interaction with the government at any level will get you registered. Apply to your local council for a building permit for a new garage? Get registered to vote. Apply for a job at the FBI? Get registered to vote.
Quote from: Viking on November 09, 2011, 11:16:12 AM
Again. I am not suggesting a federal list. I'm suggesting that any interaction with the government at any level will get you registered. Apply to your local council for a building permit for a new garage? Get registered to vote. Apply for a job at the FBI? Get registered to vote.
My interactions with the government are pretty much limited to filing a tax return and renewing my drivers' license every 10 years.
Gerrymandering would be if they made a district just for poor people without state IDs and college students who forgot to re-register when they moved out of the dorms. This is just voter suppression.
I don't understand these poor people without State IDs of some sort. How do they acquire alcohol?
Quote from: garbon on November 09, 2011, 11:21:35 AM
I don't understand these poor people without State IDs of some sort. How do they acquire alcohol?
2nd amendment remedies. An armed society is a polite society and a polite society doesn't need to ask for proof of age when selling alcohol.
Quote from: Viking on November 09, 2011, 11:16:12 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on November 09, 2011, 11:08:03 AM
It may be worth pointing out that elections are basically state and local, with federal elections piggybacking those. For example, there is no federal right to vote for president, it is just that each of the 50 states decided that letting people vote is a good idea. Within constitutional limits, states have discretion on who can vote and what evidence voters need to provide to establish they are eligibile. So a federal system of registration isn't so feasible.
Again. I am not suggesting a federal list. I'm suggesting that any interaction with the government at any level will get you registered. Apply to your local council for a building permit for a new garage? Get registered to vote. Apply for a job at the FBI? Get registered to vote.
Why would applying for the FBI do anything? That's a federal agency. In fact, the first letter in FBI stands for "Federal". So it would only go on a federal list. What if you are applying to build multiple garages all over the country? You can pay income tax and property tax in more then one state you know. You seem to be suggesting that every interaction with the government should get you registered to vote, but that is needlessly complicated. I may pay property tax in Missouri pay an Income tax for Illinois and pay a speedy ticket in Indiana all in one year.
A system that works in Iceland or Norway may not work in the US, Viking. Since the US is much bigger and has a larger population then either of those countries.
:huh: How did you get your booze before you were 21?
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 11:39:52 AM
Here they use information like that to figure out how to set budgets for hospitals, schools, location of booze monopolies, roads and other infrastructure projects.
We have a census for that. The census is held to be more reliable, because it accounts for people who don't register to vote/file change of address forms.
Quote from: Grinning_Colossus on November 09, 2011, 11:25:08 AM
:huh: How did you get your booze before you were 21?
I had friends buy it for me?
Quote from: Razgovory on November 09, 2011, 11:24:59 AM
Quote from: Viking on November 09, 2011, 11:16:12 AM
Quote from: alfred russel on November 09, 2011, 11:08:03 AM
It may be worth pointing out that elections are basically state and local, with federal elections piggybacking those. For example, there is no federal right to vote for president, it is just that each of the 50 states decided that letting people vote is a good idea. Within constitutional limits, states have discretion on who can vote and what evidence voters need to provide to establish they are eligibile. So a federal system of registration isn't so feasible.
Again. I am not suggesting a federal list. I'm suggesting that any interaction with the government at any level will get you registered. Apply to your local council for a building permit for a new garage? Get registered to vote. Apply for a job at the FBI? Get registered to vote.
Why would applying for the FBI do anything? That's a federal agency. In fact, the first letter in FBI stands for "Federal". So it would only go on a federal list. What if you are applying to build multiple garages all over the country? You can pay income tax and property tax in more then one state you know. You seem to be suggesting that every interaction with the government should get you registered to vote, but that is needlessly complicated. I may pay property tax in Missouri pay an Income tax for Illinois and pay a speedy ticket in Indiana all in one year.
A system that works in Iceland or Norway may not work in the US, Viking. Since the US is much bigger and has a larger population then either of those countries.
You still don't understand what I am saying. I'm saying registration should be automatic and all information at all levels gained by the government should be used to register people who could have registered. The system in Norway is one where there is a central database of all legal residents in the country. This database is shared by all government departments. In Iceland it is actually (much to my horror) shared with private companies. The US does not have such a system and I supposed there would be substantial resistance since americans are obviously unwilling to trust the government with their place of residence while they are happy to trust the government with their hard earned tax dollars. I'd just suggest that rather than establishing a database for registration making every interaction defaulting to including registration. Motor Voter for all government departments at all levels of government.
I'm understanding what you are saying, but I'm saying it won't work here. You are going to get conflicting information about a person's location. I don't think people are "happy" to have the government spend their tax money.
A central database will have to be a federal list, who else would run it? The US isn't a centralized state in the way Norway or France is. What you are suggesting won't work.
Most importantly Viking, I think you are vastly overestimating the effort required to register.
If we followed your advice we would spend billions on a database so that three extra people vote.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 09, 2011, 11:44:30 AM
I'm understanding what you are saying, but I'm saying it won't work here. You are going to get conflicting information about a person's location. I don't think people are "happy" to have the government spend their tax money.
A central database will have to be a federal list, who else would run it? The US isn't a centralized state in the way Norway or France is. What you are suggesting won't work.
Sometimes I wonder if you do anything more than skimread me. Norway has a centralized database, I did not suggest the US get one. I also said that
QuoteThe US does not have such a system and I supposed there would be substantial resistance
I suggested that any interaction with local, state or federal agencies includes a registration to vote. Add checkboxes for "Are you a US citizen" and "Check this box if you do not want to be registered to vote" and there you go. If you tick the right boxes applying for a license to handle explosives gets you registered to vote if you aren't already.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 09, 2011, 11:46:21 AM
Most importantly Viking, I think you are vastly overestimating the effort required to register.
If we followed your advice we would spend billions on a database so that three extra people vote.
I'd be annoyed if the database got me confused with someone else and I found that my polling place was somewhere in Idaho. Best Buy once thought I was a return customer because someone in Watertown Wisconsin had the same first and last name as me and their database screwed it up. Much easier to go down to the courthouse, or city hall or where ever and register to vote.
Quote from: Viking on November 09, 2011, 11:50:37 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 09, 2011, 11:44:30 AM
I'm understanding what you are saying, but I'm saying it won't work here. You are going to get conflicting information about a person's location. I don't think people are "happy" to have the government spend their tax money.
A central database will have to be a federal list, who else would run it? The US isn't a centralized state in the way Norway or France is. What you are suggesting won't work.
Sometimes I wonder if you do anything more than skimread me. Norway has a centralized database, I did not suggest the US get one. I also said that
QuoteThe US does not have such a system and I supposed there would be substantial resistance
I suggested that any interaction with local, state or federal agencies includes a registration to vote. Add checkboxes for "Are you a US citizen" and "Check this box if you do not want to be registered to vote" and there you go. If you tick the right boxes applying for a license to handle explosives gets you registered to vote if you aren't already.
The problem is deeper then simply not having a database.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unitary_state
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federation
Your system requires a national database since I may get a license to handle explosives in Indiana and live in Ohio. I would be able to vote in two places unless there was a national database.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 09, 2011, 11:56:43 AM
Your system requires a national database since I may get a license to handle explosives in Indiana and live in Ohio. I would be able to vote in two places unless there was a national database.
Any problem my system might have is one the present one has as well as you might wish to register in two places. I suggest that the "Place of Residence:" bit on the application to blow shit up in Indiana would preclude precisely that problem, unless in case of fraud, which the present system is equally good at resolving.
Viking, a major problem with your system is that it would require me to prove citizenship and residency for the permit to build your parking garage.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 09, 2011, 11:46:21 AM
Most importantly Viking, I think you are vastly overestimating the effort required to register.
If we followed your advice we would spend billions on a database so that three extra people vote.
This.
Quote from: Viking on November 09, 2011, 11:59:50 AM
Any problem my system might have is one the present one has as well as you might wish to register in two places. I suggest that the "Place of Residence:" bit on the application to blow shit up in Indiana would preclude precisely that problem, unless in case of fraud, which the present system is equally good at resolving.
Viking, I think you are trying to solve problems that don't exist.
As an aside, is there a way to catch people registered in multiple states? I assume states can check their own roles for duplicates; I'm curious if states share this data.
Yeah, I don't know why Viking is harping on this. He's suggesting a major change to election law which only serves to make it more complex and spend more money to solve a non-existent problem. I'm not even sure how constitutional such a law would be, since you are essentially shifting state powers to the Feds. As I tried to point out, our government is simply not structured that way.
1 - I'm not suggesting a change in election law of any kind. I'm just suggesting that the program allowing people to register to vote at the DMV be expanded to all other government agencies at all levels. I didn't use the words "government database" you did.
2 - The reason you don't need to prove citizenship to get a liquor license is the same as you don't need to prove citizenship to get a drivers license.
The reason I think this is important because I think society has a moral obligation to seek to include every member eligible to vote in the franchise. I think that government is society acting collectively. I think it is profoundly immoral for any democratic system to permit tactics designed to deny people the vote who, had they been better informed, better funded or better organized could have voted.
Quote from: Viking on November 09, 2011, 12:29:18 PM
I'm just suggesting that the program allowing people to register to vote at the DMV be expanded to all other government agencies at all levels.
Which seems like expanding the bureaucracy for no good reason. It is trivially easy to register to vote - the only big sticking point is that you need to remember to do so well in advance of any coming elections.
Quote from: Viking on November 09, 2011, 12:29:18 PM
1 - I'm not suggesting a change in election law of any kind. I'm just suggesting that the program allowing people to register to vote at the DMV be expanded to all other government agencies at all levels. I didn't use the words "government database" you did.
2 - The reason you don't need to prove citizenship to get a liquor license is the same as you don't need to prove citizenship to get a drivers license.
The reason I think this is important because I think society has a moral obligation to seek to include every member eligible to vote in the franchise. I think that government is society acting collectively. I think it is profoundly immoral for any democratic system to permit tactics designed to deny people the vote who, had they been better informed, better funded or better organized could have voted.
Viking, a few things. First, there isn't a program to allow people to register to vote when they get a driver's license. Some states have such a program, presumably some states don't. Voter registration is really a state issue. For all I know some state somewhere has a system like you describe. But this isn't a national issue, do to the way our constitution and federal system is structured.
Second, the vast majority have a drivers license or state issued ID. For the states that have voter registration linked with the DMV, that is enough. Having the few remaining people show up to an office to register is more efficient than training every other state office on how to take down voter registration.
One thing that would be helpful is a real article on Florida's new law.
Quote from: Viking on November 09, 2011, 12:29:18 PM
1 - I'm not suggesting a change in election law of any kind. I'm just suggesting that the program allowing people to register to vote at the DMV be expanded to all other government agencies at all levels. I didn't use the words "government database" you did.
2 - The reason you don't need to prove citizenship to get a liquor license is the same as you don't need to prove citizenship to get a drivers license.
The reason I think this is important because I think society has a moral obligation to seek to include every member eligible to vote in the franchise. I think that government is society acting collectively. I think it is profoundly immoral for any democratic system to permit tactics designed to deny people the vote who, had they been better informed, better funded or better organized could have voted.
How would you do this without a government database? Unless bureaucrats develop a hive mind.
The thing is, getting a voter registration is pretty easy. It requires very little information, funds or organization. You have to know where the court house or city hall, or whatever government office has some forms, the money to get on a bus (about 50 cents here), and the organizational ability to wait for the bus (or if you like most Americans and own a car you could just drive there). Hell, during voter drives people may accost you outside the grocery store to try to get you to vote.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 09, 2011, 01:26:23 PM
The thing is, getting a voter registration is pretty easy. It requires very little information, funds or organization. You have to know where the court house or city hall, or whatever government office has some forms, the money to get on a bus (about 50 cents here), and the organizational ability to wait for the bus (or if you like most Americans and own a car you could just drive there). Hell, during voter drives people may accost you outside the grocery store to try to get you to vote.
As I said yesterday - I printed out a form and mailed it in for free.
I don't remember how I registered to vote. I did shortly after my 18th birthday I think because the Presidential election was coming up. I think I just drove to the Courthouse or City hall. Not sure exactly, it was a decade ago.
I don't really understand what the problem with the US system is.
Quote from: The Brain on November 09, 2011, 01:35:32 PM
I don't really understand what the problem with the US system is.
Yet you're quite sure there is one, correct?
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on November 09, 2011, 03:53:13 PM
Quote from: The Brain on November 09, 2011, 01:35:32 PM
I don't really understand what the problem with the US system is.
Yet you're quite sure there is one, correct?
My God yes.
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 06:58:33 AM
I hate to sound like Martinus, but why the hell is there such a thing as voter registration at all? Shouldn't citizenship be the sole condition required for voting? The only possible use of it that I can conceive is that it prevents election day gerrymandering (eg move hundreds of voters from a safe seat to a marginal seat).
I happened to have worked in voter registration. Registration is required because -
1. Election officials cannot just get citizenship information from other departments. There are data privacy laws against that, at least in HK. Just because you've filed your taxes doesn't mean the tax people should have authority to transfer your personal data to other departments.
2. Voters must demonstrate consent for election officials to use their data.
3. Election officials need to know where their voters currently live. When voters move, they need to notify the election authorities. Otherwise you will have tons of fake addresses and fake votes.
Quote from: Viking on November 08, 2011, 08:25:06 AM
The two things that are baffling me are that the government is not actively seeking to register all citizens itself, leaving that process up to NGOs; and that it seems that it seems to be a legitimate political activity to prevent the other side from registering voters likely to vote for the other side.
Voting is considered a individual right. Therefore, individuals have responsibility to register themselves. A lot of people, myself included, will be mightily pissed if they are automatically registered as voters just because they renewed their driving licence. That is not a clear demonstration of consent to be registered. A lot of people don't want to be registered and they should have the right not to participate.
Here in HK, the government spends a lot of money to try to get people to register. We did everything we could. We hired legions of temp staff to get random people on the street to register. We spent millions on advertisement. We twisted the arms of celebrities for them to say a few good words for us for free. But I am happy that I have never registered, and I don't need to.
Quote from: Viking on November 09, 2011, 11:50:37 AM
I suggested that any interaction with local, state or federal agencies includes a registration to vote. Add checkboxes for "Are you a US citizen" and "Check this box if you do not want to be registered to vote" and there you go. If you tick the right boxes applying for a license to handle explosives gets you registered to vote if you aren't already.
Registering to vote is quick, simple, and easy. Having to fool around with checking a bunch of extra boxes for ever single interaction you have with the government, while no big deal in any individual interaction, would cumulatively be a major hassle.
I think allowing same-day registration, rather than the current system or automatic registration, would be a good idea. Would keep the Monos and militiamen of the country satisfied, while allowing anyone who wants to vote to be able to. I imagine there would be huge logistical problems with this.
But I do think that being able to vote in any election for the people governing you should be a basic entitlement of citizenship, regardless of how "bad" or uninvolved a citizen you are.
I also think Election Day should be a national holiday. Voting when you have to work a full day can be an enormous pain in the ass depending on your hours and your polling place, and there's no principled reason why people should have a harder or easier time voting based on their employment.
Just consolidate the populationregistries and domicile-registries and be done with it. when election comes every citizen is registered automatically. send them a nice card. If they then vote or not it's their problem. But no more hassle with wether or not there's illegal registration going on. and the advantage is that no new info is made knowledgeable to the state either. top it off with firing excess bureaucrats after database consolidation.
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on November 10, 2011, 02:34:30 AM
I think allowing same-day registration, rather than the current system or automatic registration, would be a good idea. Would keep the Monos and militiamen of the country satisfied, while allowing anyone who wants to vote to be able to. I imagine there would be huge logistical problems with this.
But I do think that being able to vote in any election for the people governing you should be a basic entitlement of citizenship, regardless of how "bad" or uninvolved a citizen you are.
I also think Election Day should be a national holiday. Voting when you have to work a full day can be an enormous pain in the ass depending on your hours and your polling place, and there's no principled reason why people should have a harder or easier time voting based on their employment.
You seem to have a lot of idealistic thoughts.
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 10, 2011, 03:22:00 AM
Just consolidate the populationregistries and domicile-registries and be done with it. when election comes every citizen is registered automatically. send them a nice card. If they then vote or not it's their problem. But no more hassle with wether or not there's illegal registration going on. and the advantage is that no new info is made knowledgeable to the state either. top it off with firing excess bureaucrats after database consolidation.
The government doesn't keep a registry of where every citizen lives...:huh:
Quote from: garbon on November 10, 2011, 09:35:35 AM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 10, 2011, 03:22:00 AM
Just consolidate the populationregistries and domicile-registries and be done with it. when election comes every citizen is registered automatically. send them a nice card. If they then vote or not it's their problem. But no more hassle with wether or not there's illegal registration going on. and the advantage is that no new info is made knowledgeable to the state either. top it off with firing excess bureaucrats after database consolidation.
The government doesn't keep a registry of where every citizen lives...:huh:
They do, they just don't call it that.
Quote from: Grey Fox on November 10, 2011, 09:40:59 AM
Quote from: garbon on November 10, 2011, 09:35:35 AM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 10, 2011, 03:22:00 AM
Just consolidate the populationregistries and domicile-registries and be done with it. when election comes every citizen is registered automatically. send them a nice card. If they then vote or not it's their problem. But no more hassle with wether or not there's illegal registration going on. and the advantage is that no new info is made knowledgeable to the state either. top it off with firing excess bureaucrats after database consolidation.
The government doesn't keep a registry of where every citizen lives...:huh:
They do, they just don't call it that.
Not sure how any every ten year census would help. Or perhaps you're thinking of when people register for state IDs and the like? Those can be woefully misleading about where a person actually resides.
Quote from: Monoriu on November 09, 2011, 08:46:31 PM
A lot of people, myself included, will be mightily pissed if they are automatically registered as voters just because they renewed their driving licence. That is not a clear demonstration of consent to be registered. A lot of people don't want to be registered and they should have the right not to participate.
Well at least in New York/California you have to opt in for voter registration when you get a license. Doesn't automatically happen.
I was thinking of the IRS.
Quote from: Grey Fox on November 10, 2011, 09:50:29 AM
I was thinking of the IRS.
Not always the best record (especially if one has little to no income in a given year) and it also picks up non-citizens. Case in point - my last tax return had me paying taxes in California and the address I had when filling out taxes is different from my current one.
Quote from: Grey Fox on November 10, 2011, 09:50:29 AM
I was thinking of the IRS.
There are probably millions of eligible voters who don't file income tax returns (the retired, full-time college students, the chronically unemployed, etc.), and a lot of people who aren't eligible to vote who do (resident aliens, minors who hold jobs, felons who has lost their voting right, etc.).
Quote from: dps on November 10, 2011, 11:09:34 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on November 10, 2011, 09:50:29 AM
I was thinking of the IRS.
There are probably millions of eligible voters who don't file income tax returns (the retired, full-time college students, the chronically unemployed, etc.), and a lot of people who aren't eligible to vote who do (resident aliens, minors who hold jobs, felons who has lost their voting right, etc.).
Aye. I wasn't arguing that it was a complete list to use as a Electors list. Just that the IRS probably has a list of where citizens live.
Quote from: Grey Fox on November 10, 2011, 11:12:33 AM
Aye. I wasn't arguing that it was a complete list to use as a Electors list. Just that the IRS probably has a list of where citizens live.
Wouldn't it be better to simply have individuals register themselves than an inaccurate, incomplete list? :P
Quote from: garbon on November 10, 2011, 11:31:32 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on November 10, 2011, 11:12:33 AM
Aye. I wasn't arguing that it was a complete list to use as a Electors list. Just that the IRS probably has a list of where citizens live.
Wouldn't it be better to simply have individuals register themselves than an inaccurate, incomplete list? :P
Maybe. I haven't followed this thread much.
Quote from: garbon on November 10, 2011, 09:35:35 AM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 10, 2011, 03:22:00 AM
Just consolidate the populationregistries and domicile-registries and be done with it. when election comes every citizen is registered automatically. send them a nice card. If they then vote or not it's their problem. But no more hassle with wether or not there's illegal registration going on. and the advantage is that no new info is made knowledgeable to the state either. top it off with firing excess bureaucrats after database consolidation.
The government doesn't keep a registry of where every citizen lives...:huh:
then how on earth does it know where to send the taxforms?
A state that doesn't know where its citizenry has it's official residence seems odd
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 10, 2011, 12:57:12 PM
then how on earth does it know where to send the taxforms?
A state that doesn't know where its citizenry has it's official residence seems odd
It sends the form to the address you wrote on last year's form.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 10, 2011, 12:59:10 PM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 10, 2011, 12:57:12 PM
then how on earth does it know where to send the taxforms?
A state that doesn't know where its citizenry has it's official residence seems odd
It sends the form to the address you wrote on last year's form.
Bizarre. Over ehre, when you move, you have to register the new adress at cityhall after which the local policeofficer comes around to check. After which you return to cityhall and have your ID-card updated. Easy as pie, and it keeps the populationrecords quite up to date. No need for census every decade.
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 10, 2011, 12:57:12 PM
then how on earth does it know where to send the taxforms?
In addition to what Yi said - you can acquire your own tax forms / fill out your taxes online. I think California had decided for the 2010 to no longer send tax forms unless asked to cut down on expenditure.
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 10, 2011, 01:03:03 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 10, 2011, 12:59:10 PM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 10, 2011, 12:57:12 PM
then how on earth does it know where to send the taxforms?
A state that doesn't know where its citizenry has it's official residence seems odd
It sends the form to the address you wrote on last year's form.
Bizarre. Over ehre, when you move, you have to register the new adress at cityhall after which the local policeofficer comes around to check. After which you return to cityhall and have your ID-card updated. Easy as pie, and it keeps the populationrecords quite up to date. No need for census every decade.
We don't want a registry.
Quote from: garbon on November 10, 2011, 01:15:27 PMWe don't want a registry.
Indeed. That sounds horrible.
It blew my mind while travelling in Europe to learn that at least in some countries you're supposed to register overnight guests with the police too.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 10, 2011, 12:59:10 PM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 10, 2011, 12:57:12 PM
then how on earth does it know where to send the taxforms?
A state that doesn't know where its citizenry has it's official residence seems odd
It sends the form to the address you wrote on last year's form.
And lots of times, you don't even get that. You just pick up your tax forms at a local library.
And anymore, the IRS and most state tax departments are discouraging you from using paper forms at all and trying to get you to file online--in which case obviously they don't have to send you a form anywhere.
Quote from: garbon on November 10, 2011, 09:34:25 AM
You seem to have a lot of idealistic thoughts.
:mellow:
Quote from: garbon on November 10, 2011, 01:15:27 PM
We don't want a registry.
How do you crazy Americans keep track of your Jews???????
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 10, 2011, 01:03:03 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on November 10, 2011, 12:59:10 PM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 10, 2011, 12:57:12 PM
then how on earth does it know where to send the taxforms?
A state that doesn't know where its citizenry has it's official residence seems odd
It sends the form to the address you wrote on last year's form.
Bizarre. Over ehre, when you move, you have to register the new adress at cityhall after which the local policeofficer comes around to check. After which you return to cityhall and have your ID-card updated. Easy as pie, and it keeps the populationrecords quite up to date. No need for census every decade.
:huh: You live in the DDR?
In Sweden you may send in updated info to the authorities when you move. It's not like anyone checks up on you. For several years I lived in a different province but kept being registered in Stockholm since Stockholm tax is lower.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on November 10, 2011, 02:49:22 PM
Quote from: garbon on November 10, 2011, 01:15:27 PM
We don't want a registry.
How do you crazy Americans keep track of your Jews???????
We just watch for anyone eating Gentile babies.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on November 10, 2011, 02:49:22 PM
How do you crazy Americans keep track of your Jews???????
PE and the size of the tip.
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 10, 2011, 03:22:00 AM
Just consolidate the populationregistries and domicile-registries and be done with it. when election comes every citizen is registered automatically. send them a nice card. If they then vote or not it's their problem. But no more hassle with wether or not there's illegal registration going on. and the advantage is that no new info is made knowledgeable to the state either. top it off with firing excess bureaucrats after database consolidation.
Your lack of faith in inter-departmental rivalry disturbs me :menace:
We have a simple as shit system in Canada. Whenever the writ gets dropped, Elections Canada sends out something like 20 million cards to every eligible voter. You take your card to the polling place, show a piece of photo ID to confirm you are the person on the card, and you vote.
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 10, 2011, 01:17:20 PM
Quote from: garbon on November 10, 2011, 01:15:27 PMWe don't want a registry.
Indeed. That sounds horrible.
it isn't. And it's not as if your governments don't have the data either. So why the angst :p
This week's election for Mayor of Baltimore had 7% turnout of registered voters. Shameful.
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 11, 2011, 03:47:46 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 10, 2011, 01:17:20 PM
Quote from: garbon on November 10, 2011, 01:15:27 PMWe don't want a registry.
Indeed. That sounds horrible.
it isn't. And it's not as if your governments don't have the data either. So why the angst :p
I think we've already established that they don't really.
Quote from: garbon on November 11, 2011, 02:21:06 PM
Quote from: Crazy_Ivan80 on November 11, 2011, 03:47:46 AM
Quote from: Sheilbh on November 10, 2011, 01:17:20 PM
Quote from: garbon on November 10, 2011, 01:15:27 PMWe don't want a registry.
Indeed. That sounds horrible.
it isn't. And it's not as if your governments don't have the data either. So why the angst :p
I think we've already established that they don't really.
I think citizens of other countries are so used to their govenments having a lot of data on them that they can't believe how little our government has on us (which is still more than most of us are completely comfortable with).
Quote from: dps on November 11, 2011, 05:36:19 PM
I think citizens of other countries are so used to their govenments having a lot of data on them that they can't believe how little our government has on us (which is still more than most of us are completely comfortable with).
Being a california boy I must claim exemption. I know how little the US government actually knows, I don't think it should add more knowledge, but rather that it should pool the information it has and in this specific case to register voters using this pooled information rather than waiting for them to do it themselves.
I think that systematizing and organizing the information that the government already has can replace the census itself. The census is in the constitution, but then again 18th century farmers didn't know shit about 21st century information technology. I think US authorities on all levels should use this information they spend so much money and time collecting (often duplicating the work since they can't share the information).
Quote from: Capetan Mihali on November 10, 2011, 02:34:30 AM
I also think Election Day should be a national holiday. Voting when you have to work a full day can be an enormous pain in the ass depending on your hours and your polling place, and there's no principled reason why people should have a harder or easier time voting based on their employment.
Most western countries have elections on Sunday for this precise reason.
Some people are forbidden to do anything resembling work on Sunday.
EDIT: Also some polling stations are in houses of worship. Like mine. Which could make it unnecessarily crowded.
Quote from: Razgovory on November 13, 2011, 08:33:37 AM
Some people are forbidden to do anything resembling work on Sunday.
When deciding who to dis-enfranchise, the employed or the credulous I prefer to disenfranchise the credulous.
Quote from: Viking on November 13, 2011, 08:35:13 AM
Quote from: Razgovory on November 13, 2011, 08:33:37 AM
Some people are forbidden to do anything resembling work on Sunday.
When deciding who to dis-enfranchise, the employed or the credulous I prefer to disenfranchise the credulous.
Yes, but as a rule of thumb, we aren't interested in taking into consideration the opinions of bigots. :)
Quote from: Razgovory on November 13, 2011, 08:33:37 AM
Some people are forbidden to do anything resembling work on Sunday.
Land of the free? :rolleyes:
Land of the freeloader.