Quote:
Originally Posted by August
Other than that being against the law?
|
Law only works when enforced.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Platapus
We do need some sort of interstate database to keep track of people who have two or more legal residences and to ensure that for each election only one residence is used for voter registration.
We tend to resist any type of national ID database, but as more and more citizens are more and more mobile and the concept of one main residence may not apply, there needs to be some method of keeping track.
And as a precinct chief, I feel strongly about the need for photo ID in order to vote as along as the state makes it easy and affordable for all the citizens. Virginia, I feel, does it nicely.
Maybe we can adopt a system of inking voter's fingers when they vote. It could be a "badge of honor" signifying that the citizen voted.
A low tech solution to the problem. I would not mind going to work with an inked finger indicating that I voted.
|
Well, do you think that the following would work:
- each state has a separate, state run database. Ie the federal goverment doesnt access it.
- registration for the voting (I assume that it happens before the vote?) is done using proof of citizenship (birth certificate + social security number?). Ie you can sell it that you need to have right to vote in order to vote. Registration is linked to the state's photo ID or other means of ID (for example biometrics) supplied by the person.
- after registration and before the elections states run the check to verify that there are no double registrations.
- person uses those means of ID at the elections.
?
What would be the expected counter arguments to such a set up?