Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, February 13, 2019

Ross Douthat: For as long as I've been politically conscious, conservatives have touted tougher identification requirements at the polls as a means to fight the scourge of voter fraud, and over the last decade Republicans have successfully implemented voter ID laws in a number of reddish states. Over the same period those laws have been cited by liberals as evidence that Republicans are bent on winning elections by disenfranchising Democrats -- locking out poor and minority voters in a rerun of the Jim Crow-poll tax era, and electing conservative politicians at the expense of democracy itself.

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

The link to the study within the article is behind a pay wall. However, it is also published here. The abstract:

U.S. states increasingly require identification to vote – an ostensive attempt to deter fraud that prompts complaints of selective disenfranchisement. Using a difference-in-differences design on a 1.3-billion-observations panel, we find the laws have no negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any group defined by race, gender, age, or party affiliation. These results hold through a large number of specifications and cannot be attributed to mobilization against the laws, measured by campaign contributions and self-reported political engagement. ID requirements have no effect on fraud either – actual or perceived. Efforts to improve elections may be better directed at other reforms.
Sounds like a wash to me.

#1 | Posted by et_al at 2019-02-13 01:50 PM | Reply

"But before conservatives claim vindication, the new paper also casts doubt on the argument for voter ID laws, finding no effect on fraud itself, nor even any effect on public confidence in the integrity of the ballot.

Which should be even less surprising than the absence of evidence for voter suppression, because since the George W. Bush administration a large group of people with strong incentives to uncover voter fraud -- Republican lawmakers, law-enforcement personnel and conservative election researchers -- have failed to produce any evidence that the problem exists on a scale that requires a legislative response.

And the rare prosecuted cases generally seem disproportionate to the offense involved -- with confused individuals in the dock rather than old-fashioned Chicago-style machines.

At the same time there's also no question that a lot of Republican operatives pushing voter ID laws are cynics who expect their party to benefit from lower minority turnout, and a number of professional right-wing partisans -- including our president -- see an upside in frightening their voters or viewers with the racialized threat of "urban" ballot-stuffing."

And in letting it slide, Republicans might even have more to gain than Democrats. After all, the cynical side of the voter ID push is pretty transparent, meaning that even if the laws don't have real vote-suppressing consequences, they do serve as a continuing gesture of disrespect to minority voters, a continuing expression of G.O.P. indifference to the African-American memory of what vote restrictions used to mean. So their removal from the Republican agenda could be an act of minority outreach unto itself." excerpts

Not really a "wash".

So, Republicans make fake issue out of voter requirements, and the Dems are equally to blame for pushing back.... otay.

What does the study say about biased redistricting?

Not a thing.

#2 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-13 02:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

They should do a similar study for CrossCheck!

#3 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-13 02:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Lt. Snoofy: Voter Id Narrative destroyed sir!

Capt. Corky: Shift all deflector shields to neutralize the thread, Lt.

Lt. Snoofy: Aye aye Captain, redistricting and CrossCheck shifted to thread.

-Star Trek: The Oblivious Generation

#4 | Posted by Rightocenter at 2019-02-13 02:33 PM | Reply | Funny: 4


I've not had a problem with VoterID itself. My state has had it for as long as I can remember.

Where I do have the problem is Republicans using voter ID laws in an attempt (an apparently unsuccessful attempt) to suppress voters that they would prefer not vote.

#5 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-02-13 02:50 PM | Reply


From the cited article...

... I have had enough arguments with fellow conservatives on this issue to attest that the specter of those old Chicago operations haunts the right, along with more contemporary fears generated by a left that really does want to extend some of the benefits of citizenship to illegal immigrants.

At the same time there's also no question that a lot of Republican operatives pushing voter ID laws are cynics who expect their party to benefit from lower minority turnout, and a number of professional right-wing partisans -- including our president -- see an upside in frightening their voters or viewers with the racialized threat of "urban" ballot-stuffing....


[emphasis mine]

#6 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-02-13 02:54 PM | Reply

Not really a "wash".

Sure it is. Voter ID is constitutional and here to stay, it ain't goin' nowhere. The question is to what end. The study says none. It doesn't suppress votes and doesn't effect fraud. The effect is a wash.

What does the study say about biased redistricting?

Not a thing.

Damn, that's some astute analysis. A study designed to "present[] empirical evidence on the consequences of strict ID laws in the context of the United States" doesn't address other issues. Wow! Can't believe I missed that. I defer to your genius./snark

BTW, go learn about partisan redistricting here, here and here. I'll post a thread sometime around oral argument and we can talk about that then. Maybe by then you'll have something cogent to say about that issue since you now have nothing about voter ID.

#7 | Posted by et_al at 2019-02-13 03:09 PM | Reply

Just about every case of voter fraud I've read about here the last few years has been:

GOP campaign workers forging signatures.

GOP campaign workers throwing out ballots.

GOP campaign workers filling out mail in ballots for people in democratic districts.

GOP voters filling out ballots for dead spouses/girlfriends.

GOP secretary of state purging democratic voters without cause.

Something voter ID would not solve.

#8 | Posted by Nixon at 2019-02-13 03:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#4

Okay, that was funny.

#9 | Posted by et_al at 2019-02-13 03:10 PM | Reply

My favorite part was "an ostensive attempt to deter fraud."

So now that we know it doesn't deter fraud, why do the self-proclaimed small government conservatives still support the expansion of government required for Voter ID?

#10 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-13 03:13 PM | Reply

"Lt. Snoofy: Voter Id Narrative destroyed sir!"

Reading Comprehension Time!

My voter ID narrative has always been that voter ID has nothing to do with safeguarding elections; rather it's a GOP ploy to disenfranchise likely Democrat voters.

The authors agree with me, calling it "an ostensive attempt to deter fraud."

I'll ask again, now that this study shows it doesn't deter fraud, why do you still support Voter ID?

???

#11 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-13 03:34 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Why is a scientific paper headlined with "Opinion."

???

#12 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-13 03:45 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"So now that we know it doesn't deter fraud, why do the self-proclaimed small government conservatives still support the expansion of government required for Voter ID?"

Just for the taste of it.

#13 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2019-02-13 03:50 PM | Reply

- The effect is a wash.

"And in letting it slide, Republicans might even have more to gain than Democrats. After all, the cynical side of the voter ID push is pretty transparent, meaning that even if the laws don't have real vote-suppressing consequences, they do serve as a continuing gesture of disrespect to minority voters, a continuing expression of G.O.P. indifference to the African-American memory of what vote restrictions used to mean.

So their removal from the Republican agenda could be an act of minority outreach unto itself."

Not really a "wash".

#14 | Posted by Corky at 2019-02-13 03:59 PM | Reply

Sounds like a wash to me.

#1 | Posted by et_al

Something that serves no purpose but keeps people from voting sounds like "a wash" to you?

That says either you WANT people to be prevented from voting, or you aren't too bright.

#15 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-13 04:46 PM | Reply


@#12 ... Why is a scientific paper headlined with "Opinion." ...

The Op-Ed column is not the scientific paper itself, but an op-ed writer's comments about the topic covered by the scientific paper.

#16 | Posted by LampLighter at 2019-02-13 05:19 PM | Reply

Crosscheck should be applied between Florida and New York / New Jersey.

We lived there for a number of years. People would buy a winter home in Florida and change their official residence to Florida since there is no state income tax there. They would keep their house up north for summers and vote in both places. They told us they saw nothing wrong with it since they owned property in both places.

#17 | Posted by TenMile at 2019-02-13 05:40 PM | Reply

The link to the study within the article is behind a pay wall. However, it is also published here.

It's not a study, it's a working paper and has not been peer-reviewed.

#18 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-13 05:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#14

It is if you focus on the empirical data instead of the partisan politics which I could not care less about.

#15

Speaking, not so softly, of not too bright perhaps you could spend a minute comprehending the article, the abstract and the study which conclude that voter ID does not suppress the vote.

Why have voter ID? Because the polling I've seen show the majority, whether R or D across the demographics, support it. Latest poll I found is Pew from last September. www.people-press.org

#19 | Posted by et_al at 2019-02-13 05:58 PM | Reply

"Because the polling I've seen show the majority"

Well-armed sheep on line 2, says he's contesting the vote.

Try making legal arguments, unless ad populem is a valid legal argument, in which case acknowledge the very basis of law itself isn't rational and shouldn't be regarded as such.

#20 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-13 06:04 PM | Reply

Speaking, not so softly, of not too bright perhaps you could spend a minute comprehending the article, the abstract and the study which conclude that voter ID does not suppress the vote.

Why have voter ID? Because the polling I've seen show the majority, whether R or D across the demographics, support it. Latest poll I found is Pew from last September. www.people-press.org

#19 | Posted by et_al

You bring an anaylsis by a conservative activist and call it a study?

Here you go:
www.politifact.com
www.wired.com
www.vox.com
"Voter suppression really may have made the difference for Republicans in Georgia"

#21 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-02-13 06:07 PM | Reply

So long as we're using non-peer reviewed literature, here's some more.

Wisconsin's Voter ID Law Affected Turnout in 2016 Presidential Election

#22 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-13 06:09 PM | Reply

GAO's analysis suggests that the turnout decreases in Kansas and Tennessee beyond decreases in the comparison states were attributable to changes in those two states' voter ID requirements. GAO found that turnout among eligible and registered voters declined more in Kansas and Tennessee than it declined in comparison states -- by an estimated 1.9 to 2.2 percentage points more in Kansas and 2.2 to 3.2 percentage points more in Tennessee -- and the results were consistent across the different data sources and voter populations used in the analysis.

www.gao.gov

#23 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-13 06:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The analysis shows that strict identification laws have a differentially negative impact on the turnout of racial and ethnic minorities in primaries and general elections. We also find that voter ID laws skew democracy toward those on the political right.

www.journals.uchicago.edu

#24 | Posted by JOE at 2019-02-13 06:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

It's gotta suck to be in the sciences and have a last name of "Pons."

One might even call it a "chilling effect!"

#25 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-13 06:15 PM | Reply

I couldn't help but chuckle at the guy in line in front of me when I voted in Nov. He was openly complaining about the signs at the polling place about how photo ID wasn't required due to a recent court ruling here in Missouri. This is how "they" get away with vote fraud. Blah Blah Blah. If you are too dumb to get an ID you are too dumb to vote. Blah Blah Blah....

He gets up to the table to check in and get his ballot and he's got a problem. He had requested an absentee ballot. He says he decided to just come vote in person instead of sending his ballot back. Wants to know if there is someone they can call to verify. By the way, in Missouri you are only allowed to request an absentee ballot if you are likely to be prevented from making it to your polling place. So technically this guy broke Missouri election law.

I step up to the poll worker next to him and say loudly enough "Sorry, didn't bring my photo id but there's my sample ballot I received in the mail". They can the bar code on my sample ballot, have me sign the registration sheet and give me my ballot. I imagine he gave me a dirty look.

Anyway, back to the guy. It was obvious to me that a phone call wasn't going to solve this for him because absentee ballots may continue to be received for something like up to two weeks after the election as long as they were postmarked by the deadline. Anyway, they get off the phone with the County election office and they tell him they have no way to verify that he had not already cast his absentee ballot and they offer to let him cast a provisional ballot. The guy is starting to get mad and really starts raising his voice at the poll worker. About this time, I've finished my voting and I'm about to leave. I hear the poll worker politely tell the guy "I'm sorry. I can't do anything else for you. This is how people could get away with vote fraud."

That had me laughing at the guy as I was walking out the door. I'm glad the guy didn't shoot the place up.

#26 | Posted by johnny_hotsauce at 2019-02-13 06:25 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Just about every case of voter fraud I've read about here the last few years has been:

Dems registering more voters than what the population is in certain counties

Dem campaign workers forging signatures.

Dem campaign workers throwing out ballots or hiding Military votes

Dems campaign workers filling out mail in ballots for people in republican districts.

Dem voters filling out ballots for dead spouses/girlfriends.

Dems want to allow illegal immigrants to vote

Dems want felons to be allowed to vote

Dem secretary of state purging republican voters without cause.

Dems ------- Bernie and his supporters right in the ass......and the money donors PROVEN that dems screw their own

poor Bernie

#27 | Posted by Maverick at 2019-02-13 08:05 PM | Reply

oh, how about ACORN!

#28 | Posted by Maverick at 2019-02-13 08:06 PM | Reply

(None of those, or #8 that you're retorting, are voter fraud.)

#29 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-13 08:50 PM | Reply

The most important point was this: "Efforts to improve elections may be better directed at other reforms."

1. Halt Gerrymandering nationwide as States have begun to do
2. Stop using ALL proprietary software
3. Get rid of the electoral college
4. Get picture ID or birth certificate and signature for registration at which point signature is sufficient on election day
5. Halt interstate registration purge lists. Its OK to use them in each State against death notices so long as full name & birthday match. Its also OK to use the post office change of address notices to cancel registration, which is already done.
6. The crimes which effect outcomes involve vote tampering by partisan players that generate fake purge lists, obstruct recounts, destroy ballots,or hack computer results. These people starting with Kathleen Harris must be prosecuted and jailed.

#30 | Posted by bayviking at 2019-02-13 10:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Using a difference-in-differences design on a 1.3-billion-observations panel, we find the laws have no negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any group defined by race, gender, age, or party affiliation.

That's roughly the number of votes in a study where they found 4 or 5 cases of voter impersonation out of well over a billion votes spanning several national elections.

All these laws are efforts disguised as a solution for a problem that never existed in order to make it harder for certain groups of voters to exercise their Constitutional right. That goes for insufficient machines at certain precincts, shorter early voting periods, closing Dept. of Motor Vehicle offices in certain areas to make it harder to get an ID, etc etc etc

#31 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-02-14 05:18 AM | Reply

Joe you need to apologize to Et Al. You can't kick someone's ass so badly here without being sorry.

#32 | Posted by danni at 2019-02-14 06:54 AM | Reply | Funny: 2

"we find the laws have no negative effect on registration or turnout"

Ahhh, one of the two central lies from the Suppressionists:

If we suppressed 10,000 and word got out, so the backlash produced an additional 11,000 votes, we didn't suppress any voters.

That, and the mind-boggling central lie:

An additional barrier to voting won't be an additional barrier to voting.

#33 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-02-14 09:39 AM | Reply

I have no problem with requiring voter ID. I have a problem with adding hurdles to getting the voter ID targeted at specific groups because of their political preference. The new RealID is out in Wisconsin. My Wife needed to renew her existing license. She had her birth certificate, SS card, and current license. No problem, right? Sorry, no. Her birth certificate had a her maiden name while her DL had her married name. You have to come back with your marriage licence. Ok trip #2 obtained a copy of the marriage license. No again. This was a second marriage. We need the divorce decree and marriage license from the first marriage. Ok more money and time spent. visit #3 sorry no, this birth certificate is not the right form. (could have told us that on visit #1) Ok more documents obtained

visit #4 will happen today. I'll let you know if my wife who has had a DL for 47 years can get hers renewed

#34 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2019-02-14 09:54 AM | Reply

That is a mind blowing story Hatter!

#35 | Posted by danni at 2019-02-14 01:27 PM | Reply

#34 | POSTED BY HATTER5183

Its not surprising if you consider who the Republican base is.

Why did McConnell say that making election day a national holiday would be a "power grab"? Because the Republican base is primarily non-productive members of society. Old retired people or unemployed people who blame their lack of value on "minorities" who "take the jobs".

So, requiring multiple trips during business hours is not an obstacle to Republicans like it is for Democrats (who are, you know, busy WORKING and being productive members of society during the day). The biggest repercussions for them is they might miss a couple Price-is-Right episodes, and some of their favorite diabetes commercials.

#36 | Posted by gtbritishskull at 2019-02-14 03:47 PM | Reply

Why did McConnell say that making election day a national holiday would be a "power grab"?

Today's GOP:
Power grab BAD!
---- grab GOOD!

#37 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-14 07:24 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Why have voter ID? Because the polling I've seen show the majority, whether R or D across the demographics, support it. Latest poll I found is Pew from last September. www.people-press.org

#19 | Posted by et_al

I remember when any form of National ID was the Mark of the Debil, akin to a gun registration database...evil!

Now it's a great idea because well, everyone thinks it's great!!

Have you ever wondered how that happens?

#38 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-02-14 08:22 PM | Reply

They support Voter ID but only at the State level.

They staunchly oppose it at the Federal level.

A National ID card would thwart their plans to restrict voting at the State level, because the National ID would have to be accepted as valid ID by the States, and they can't make it hard for people to get a National ID through State level shenanigans like closing the State ID issuing offices in the poor parts of the state.

Ask Et_Al if you don't believe me. ;)

#39 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-14 09:13 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Just about every case of voter fraud I've read about here the last few years has been:

Dems registering more voters than what the population is in certain counties

Dem campaign workers forging signatures.

Dem campaign workers throwing out ballots or hiding Military votes

Dems campaign workers filling out mail in ballots for people in republican districts.

Dem voters filling out ballots for dead spouses/girlfriends.

Dems want to allow illegal immigrants to vote

Dems want felons to be allowed to vote

Dem secretary of state purging republican voters without cause.

Dems ------- Bernie and his supporters right in the ass......and the money donors PROVEN that dems screw their own

poor Bernie

#27 | POSTED BY Comrade dipsheet

All lies! You Must live in ------------- and the only channel they have there is Fox News anti-American propaganda. Do us patriotic Americans a favor and deport your American hating self!

#40 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-02-14 10:01 PM | Reply

Just about every case of voter fraud I've read about here the last few years has been:

Dems registering more voters than what the population is in certain counties

Dem campaign workers forging signatures.

Dem campaign workers throwing out ballots or hiding Military votes

Dems campaign workers filling out mail in ballots for people in republican districts.

Dem voters filling out ballots for dead spouses/girlfriends.

Dems want to allow illegal immigrants to vote

Dems want felons to be allowed to vote

Dem secretary of state purging republican voters without cause.

Dems ------- Bernie and his supporters right in the ass......and the money donors PROVEN that dems screw their own

poor Bernie

#27 | POSTED BY Comrade dipsheet

All lies! You Must live in ------------- and the only channel they have there is Fox News anti-American propaganda. Do us patriotic Americans a favor and deport your American hating self!

#41 | Posted by aborted_monson at 2019-02-14 10:03 PM | Reply

#41 | Posted by aborted_monson Getting an ID is fairly easy, what my kids thought was insulting was the ideal that they couldn't acquire one because they happen to be black. Hell in Texas, you don't even need to know how to read or spend a cent to get one. Not having any ID is a misdemeanor here.

#42 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-02-15 01:50 AM | Reply

Not having any ID is a misdemeanor here.

Seriously, how do you come up with ridiculous s**t like this?

#43 | Posted by et_al at 2019-02-15 05:29 AM | Reply

#27 | POSTED BY Comrade dumbsheet"

What a pile of horse manure.

#44 | Posted by danni at 2019-02-15 07:58 AM | Reply

"Why have voter ID? Because the polling I've seen show the majority, whether R or D across the demographics, support it. Latest poll I found is Pew from last September. www.people-press.org"

Voting rights should not be determined by "popular opinion." Every eligible voter should be allowed to vote, many elderly people cannot produce IDs because they no longer drive, so they should lose their right to vote? Take you "polls" and shove them and then the next day start whining about the tyranny of the majority in regards to the Electoral College. Figure out which side of the Constitution you are on and stick to it. You can be for it and against it at the same time.

#45 | Posted by danni at 2019-02-15 08:01 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#43 | Posted by et_al Come on down to Texas and find out if this is true. You can definitely be hassled for not having any. If asked for your name, you have to respond and be able to prove it. Keeps the Mahados in line.

#46 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-02-15 08:45 AM | Reply

#45 | Posted by danni The DMV also issues ID cards. It is easy to get, you can even use your old driver's license.

#47 | Posted by docnjo at 2019-02-15 08:48 AM | Reply

"I'll ask again, now that this study shows it doesn't deter fraud, why do you still support Voter ID?"

Personally, because it puts more money into our nation's already anemic coffers for those states who require a purchased ID. It makes finding people for crime investigations easier. It supports our demographics of America so we can properly provide electorate votes (in states that don't require party cards to vote).

Voter ID provides many tangible benefits other than "Managing votes to support xxxx party", when both sides aren't busy gerrymandering of course.

It is very hilarious though that the author provides a hypothesis and sufficient evidence to support it, and so many people STILL cling to partisan hate and ignore the information. Bad for America, but hilarious nonetheless.

#48 | Posted by humtake at 2019-02-15 12:36 PM | Reply

"Personally, because it puts more money into our nation's already anemic coffers for those states who require a purchased ID."

That's a poll tax.

#49 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-02-15 12:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#27 | Posted by Maverick

The alex jones is strong in this one...

#50 | Posted by GalaxiePete at 2019-02-15 10:54 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort