On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:22:20 -0700, Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Oct 31, 12:00?pm, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 10:39:08 -0700, Chuck Gould





wrote:
On Oct 31, 10:11?am, John H. wrote:

Or...nope, I didn't have my birth certificate. Your arguments lean toward
the absurd. They seem to support the 'no ID' philosophy which allows anyone
to vote, whether a citizen or not. I don't buy it.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Since there is no such thing as a "federal election," (citizens do not
directly elect any federal officials- except Senators and
Representatives from their individual states) there is no need for a
federal voter ID.

The smaller the government, the less of a threat it becomes to the
governed.Let the individual states take responsibiity for identifying
residents and issuing licenses for franchise and privileges. If State
X, for example, registeres everybody who can fog a mirror to vote the
solution is to tighten up procedures in that individual state- not
mandate a huge federal ID program. IMO.

Well, we differ in opinions. Wonder why there was so much vote recounting
in Florida? Just stupidity?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

The closer the election, the more bitter the losers will be and the
greater the propensity to scream "fraud!". It's always regrettable
when the margin of victory for one candidate or another is obviously
less than the amount of normal human error and the couple of percent
skullduggery included in any count of hundreds of thousands of votes.

In my state, the last governor's race was decided by less than 200
votes. The losers are still screaming bloody murder, after turning the
largest "blue" county upside down trying to prove a rigged election.
Fact is, the folks representing the losing candidate are absolutely
right- there undoubtedly were errors made and even some fraudulent
ballots cast in that election- the impossible challenge is to sort out
how many of the errors and fraudulent votes favored which side in the
end? The errors and fraudulent votes go both ways. (one of the things
that came to light during our local protest was that a voter for the
losing candidate actually voted twice- using his recently deceased
wife's absentee ballot for the second vote. His excuse was "she
intended to vote for that candidate, and would have done so had she
lived until the election.")

I absolutely favor honest elections, as well as safe boating. But we
do disagree that a national ID card would do very much to eliminate
fraud and mistakes in the election process or keep criminal terrorists
off the water.

But, you do agree that the number of individual votes has some bearing.
That's a start.

A national ID, if properly done, would be much more effective than *no* ID
at eliminating fraud and mistakes. If you disagree with that, then there's
no point in further discussion.