Print Story A solution
Politics
By ucblockhead (Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 12:53:54 PM EST) (all tags)
A solution to "voter registration fraud".


We join spokes together in a wheel,
but it is the center hole
that makes the wagon move.

We shape clay into a pot,
but it is the emptiness inside
that holds whatever we want.

We hammer wood for a house,
but it is the inner space
that makes it livable.

We work with being,
but non-being is what we use.


There's much ado about "voter registration fraud" here in the states.  First, a clear description of what is actually going on:

An organization wants, for whatever reason, more voters.  For instance, they might be interested in seeing more minority voters.  They decided to get someone to go try to get people registered.  Volunteers are usually rare, so they decided to pay people.   It's hard to watch these people, so they tend to pay by the registration turned in.  These people tend to not make much.  Fairly often, they come to the realization that it's hard to weed the fake out of the real, and just making up shit is a lot easier than working.

I do have a solution, though.  It's pretty simple.  This country could completely stop all registration and voting fraud.  You just need one thing:

A national ID tied to biometrics.

Without that, of course, it is completely impossible to stop.  Hell, for five years, my wife was registered twice under the same name/address, completely by accident.  (She only over voted once, being an honest citizen.)

So yeah, it is trivially easy to commit voter fraud if you are willing to sign your name on a registration form, right below the part that notes that lying on the form is considered perjury.

But it is amusing how neither side of this debate will bring up the obvious solution.  It's particularly amusing that it is those on the right who will rant endlessly about illegal immigration who would most go ballistic at the thought of being required to caring a card that proved their citizenship.



The FoML has croup.  Because of this, I have been stuck home for two days, trying to get work done (and mostly failing) while "parenting".  It'd probably be more relaxing if I didn't feel like I was slacking.


The big gaming news is that the game everyone (or at least every $BigJapaneseCorp fanboy) has been waiting for, Little Big Planet has been delayed one week.  Not because it isn't done, but because someone apparently heard two barely intelligible phrases from the Koran in the soundtrack.

Irritating.  I'm not sure when the rest of the world signed up to follow the rules of Islam.  $BigJapaneseCorp had the balls to say "bite us" when the Church of English whined about Resistance: Fall of Man setting a gunfight in an English Cathedral.  (Apparently the C of E is against teaching children to defend their cathedrals from alien invasion.)

In any case, when the game actually arrives, I think I shall register my opinion on the matter by creating a level featuring a giant raving Mohamed.

< liquidity crisis creates panic on domestic beer market | No movies yesterday, so review of Zoo art fair.... >
A solution | 63 comments (63 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
registration fraud / voter fraud by R343L (4.00 / 1) #1 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 01:08:40 PM EST
Despite how easy it could be to commit voter fraud and how much attention is paid to it (remember a bunch of those US attorneys that were probably fired for not finding voter fraud cases to prosecute?), it rarely happens. Very rarely. As in even with all the attention paid to it they found 26 cases of criminal voting to prosecute since 2002. In the entire country. While like fifteen US attorneys were told to be looking for it and some of them lost their jobs for refusing to prosecute absurd cases.

I can live with that level of fraud so as to avoid a national ID.

"There will be time, there will be time / To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet." -- Eliot

pfft. Yeah, the Dems use that argument a lot. by ObviousTroll (2.00 / 1) #16 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 03:03:08 PM EST
 Despite how easy it could be to commit voter fraud and how much attention is paid to it (remember a bunch of those US attorneys that were probably fired for not finding voter fraud cases to prosecute?), it rarely happens. 

Given that it's been ruled unconstitutional to make people show ID to vote, how the hell can you tell whether or not voter fraud is happening or not?

Is Mike keeping up with his riding?
[ Parent ]
err by R343L (4.00 / 3) #17 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 03:23:45 PM EST
You're exactly wrong.

The US Supreme Court ruled that Indiana could require a voter to show a state issued ID to vote in order to vote.

And I don't know how you tell exactly how much voter fraud there is. Ask the sociologists and political science types who study it. They all think there is no more than trivial voter fraud. But off the cuff, I would just pick some districts where it's alleged fraud has been happening, pick some reasonable sized sample of registered people who voted (they mark off if you vote obviously) and then go try to verify their existence and identity.

"There will be time, there will be time / To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet." -- Eliot

[ Parent ]
I dunno about indiana by LinDze (2.00 / 0) #23 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 05:22:14 PM EST
but I believe the Arizona law, which caused a huge fuss last year, was recently upheld at a fed level.
 

-Lin Dze
Arbeit Macht Frei
[ Parent ]
Do you actually read the news much? by lm (2.00 / 0) #25 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 05:38:33 PM EST
Ohio, and quite a few other states, require voters to show a photo ID at the precinct before they are given a ballot. SCOTUS has upheld Indiana's version which was widely construed as being the most restrictive. See Supreme Court Upholds Voter Identification Law in Indiana

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Excuse me, you are correct. by ObviousTroll (2.00 / 0) #28 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 06:17:12 PM EST
In 2008, the Court finally upheld the ID requirement. So, before 2008 how would anyone know if there had been voter fraud?



Is Mike keeping up with his riding?
[ Parent ]
So those laws were passed in 2008? by lm (2.00 / 0) #30 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 06:26:42 PM EST
I don't think the SCOTUS case is the only thing you're deluded about.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Maybe there was by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #32 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 07:42:32 PM EST
But if there was, one assumes the party that one was better at it.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
The lawyers for Indiana, who looked into that by georgeha (2.00 / 0) #36 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 06:54:50 AM EST
found a handful of cases nationwide, maybe 19 or 20. It's in the footnotes for Crawford vs. Marion County.


[ Parent ]
There is no foolproof biometric system by lm (2.00 / 0) #2 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 01:27:48 PM EST
I wouldn't want to show up to vote to find out that I had already voted.

But, more importantly, in modern times most vote fraud happens at the counting not at the voting. A biometric ID, even if full proof, won't stop a crooked count.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
Oh, I agree by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #4 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 01:49:52 PM EST
But it isn't the biometric system that is important so much as the national database that tracks exactly who is a citizen.  If we had this, we wouldn't need "voter registration" at all.  But it's exactly that database that would send many elements our society into complete conniptions.  That's really what this diary is about...if find that irony amusing.

But to take your comment seriously: showing up and finding out that "you" had already voted at least signals that fraud exists.  Currently, there is no easy way to determine if illegal voting is actually happening. 

Not that I think it actually goes on in statistically important numbers...

It is easy to imagine a system that would be relatively fool-proof that involved private tokens that allowed voters to ensure that they voted, and that their votes counted.  If you want to ensure an utterly secret ballot, it is possible, though more difficult.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
That still only works with mandatory voting by lm (2.00 / 0) #6 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 01:57:01 PM EST
If I don't show up to vote, I don't find out that I've already voted. And if I've died last year, it isn't necessarily the case that the county in which I'm registered to vote was notified so I may never found out that I've already voted. Nor does it prevent me from becoming triplets.

A better way to prevent voter fraud would be something more akin to the purple ink used in Iraq and Afghanistan. If you concoct something that will take at least a weak to come off the only fraud you have to worry about is with people who shouldn't be voting at all and people willing to sacrifice body parts for each vote after the first.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
citizenry database doesn't solve much by R343L (2.00 / 0) #8 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 02:07:43 PM EST
It probably doesn't solve anything -- we have birth certificates and INS naturalization forms if we need that.

What if you changed addresses? How does my being a citizen prove I'm allowed to vote here?

Or former felons?

"There will be time, there will be time / To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet." -- Eliot

[ Parent ]
No system is perfect by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #9 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 02:27:16 PM EST
But a national database would make it much harder to defeat the system.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
I don't think it would unless ... by lm (2.00 / 0) #10 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 02:36:45 PM EST
... you nationalized most, if not all, of the work presently done by county boards of election. AFAICT, the only thing the national database really buys you is questions about when someone's ID says Wurzelbacher and the voter rolls say Worzelbacher.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
You would, obviously by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #12 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 02:47:29 PM EST
You'd have to nationalize the entire system.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
really? by R343L (2.00 / 0) #15 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 02:55:23 PM EST
The problems with registration are generally either intentional or accidental:
  • mispellings or typos in name
  • incorrect addresses (either just mispelled or not current or not accurate)
  • other status (felony conviction and whether voting rights are restored is I think the main one here).
How does a national database help with this any more than the current system?

And if you're worrying about people inventing fake identities, do you really think it's going to be so much harder to get a new national ID than it is to get a fake driver's license? In Arizona they've had rings of DMV employees putting actual records in the computer system as well as giving people the pretty plastic card ....


"There will be time, there will be time / To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet." -- Eliot

[ Parent ]
systems by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #18 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 03:25:10 PM EST
I don't think you are understanding the proposal.

I mean a completely national system that is used for tracking citizenship for all purposes, from social security to drivers licenses to insurance to everything.

A completely nationalized system would only have two entry points: births and immigration.  Note that both are already pretty tightly controlled.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
Okay by R343L (2.00 / 0) #19 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 04:14:33 PM EST
And what happens when I update my address incorrectly (either accidentally or fraudulently)?

Or anything else that changes your status to vote?

"There will be time, there will be time / To prepare a face to meet the faces that you meet." -- Eliot

[ Parent ]
Well by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #22 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 04:38:11 PM EST
Given that you have to tell the Social Security your current address and the DMV your current address and the IRS your current address, making those all the same system essentially makes this a non-issue.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
Not really by lm (2.00 / 0) #26 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 05:44:47 PM EST
You're assuming that this über system can (a) gracefully deal with an address change in late October for an election in November, (b) find fraudulent cases where a shyster votes for someone who doesn't vote, (c) defeat fake registrations, and (d) survive all court challenges that it is unconstitutional.

I'll concede that with regards to (c) it will weed out fake registrations where some yahoo is just making names up to get paid for collection new registrations. But I don't see how it will handle the creation of fake people any better than the current system.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Simple by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #27 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 06:04:26 PM EST
It will defeat fake registrations because the only way to get entered into the system is to either be born, or naturalized.  The first way obviously takes 18 years to get you into the ballot box, and the second obviously has lots of controls right now.

As far as (d) goes, I make no such claims.  It probably is unconstitutional.  And my point, again, is that the people who would bleat loudest about its unconstitutional state are those that are complaining about voter registration fraud.

I did not make the claim it would stop (b).  I'm saying it's the way to stop bogus registrations, not bogus voting.

As far as (a) goes, I'd think it'd be much more "graceful" than the current system, given all the other government databases you have to update your address for right now.  Combining all of these means that you don't have to do what you have to do now, which is to separately change your voter registration address. 
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
Maybe from this point forward, it might work by lm (2.00 / 0) #29 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 06:25:23 PM EST
But good luck stopping me and my two twin brothers who were born in a rural county which had its courthouse burn down 20 years ago from registering to vote.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Well by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #31 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 07:41:11 PM EST
Do all three of you have social security numbers?  Did you all file taxes for the last ten years?  So all three of you have driver's licenses?  Did all three of you register with the selective service?  Do all three of you have credit records?
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
Those are all rather trivial to obtain by lm (2.00 / 0) #35 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 03:23:03 AM EST
And in a nation of millions there thousands, if not hundreds of thousands, of people who vote who don't have social security cards, driver's licenses, credit cards and were never required to register with the selective service. One of the problems with your plan is that either you disenfranchise all of them, wait for them to die, or try to find some system to include them. IF the last of these is chosen, it will be as trivial to game the system as it is to face a plausible birth record from a rural area where the town courthouse burn down in the late seventies.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
single national system for everything. by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #37 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 06:55:17 AM EST
I'm not saying those are requirements.  I am saying that there's one national system for everything that everyone would be required to be part of to be a "citizen".
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
I understand that by lm (2.00 / 0) #38 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 09:16:32 AM EST
My point is how we get from here to there. Going forward, it isn't so difficult. But how do you handle the present situation where people exist without those records?

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Obviously by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #39 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 09:38:11 AM EST
There would have to be a very rigorous process whereby all current citizens have to present themselves to become part of the database.

Which obviously won't happen because people would object, which is what my point is.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
My point is that there is no such process ... by lm (2.00 / 0) #41 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:24:05 AM EST
... which is qualitatively better than the present system with regards to catching fraud.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
fraud by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #42 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:32:03 AM EST
If you are talking "voter registration fraud", then you are incorrect.  For instance, tatooing the citizen ID on their wrist would be clearly better than the current system at catching registration fraud.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
Would it? by lm (2.00 / 0) #44 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:50:10 PM EST
Between tattoos not being all that difficult to remove and the fact that the process of tattooing existing citizens with unique numbers involves a tremendous number of human factors, I have trouble envisioning a system that would be more than one order of magnitude harder to game.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Gaming the system by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #45 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 02:12:10 PM EST
Since it is all one system, there'd be consequences to gaming the system to misvote.  For instance, would someone risk screwing up their social security benefits to vote twice?  Sure, you can remove that tattoo, but if the tattoo is required at traffic stops, or to submit a legal claim, or whatever, would you?
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
You're shifting the goalposts by lm (2.00 / 0) #46 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 02:54:55 PM EST
First, it was a biometric measure. Then it was a tattooed identification code. Now it's a tattooed identification code that is tied in with traffic stops and other law enforcement measures. It seems to me that everything beyond the first of these is an ad hoc embellishment designed to cover up the weaknesses of the first thing.

If you're going to add additional measures, sure, it will make things more problematic with regards to gaming the system. But the question is whether or not it will make things more problematic with regards to gaming the system than it would with those additional measures would without the single nationalized biometric system.  I contend that it wouldn't.

Consider a single state that requires state issued ID in order to vote. Traffic stops (and etcetera) would also require this state issued photo ID. Moving to a national system neither buys you additional security nor reduces the opportunity for voter registration fraud. Someone who registers to vote 10 times will only be driving on one ID. So long as that one ID is good, then there are no consequences for the other 10 IDs. That holds whether or not the system is nationalized.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Again by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #47 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 03:21:26 PM EST
I'm saying that a system that works would be unpalatable to the people who are complaining about voter fraud.

The goalposts for that contention haven't shifted.

Besides, you can't "register to vote 10 times".  You'd have to register in the national system ten times, and presumably the system would notice that no wages are registered for 9 of the 10 ids.  That'd likely cause the IRS to come calling.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
uh, no by lm (2.00 / 0) #49 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 05:47:46 PM EST
The IRS does not routinely come calling to people who don't file their taxes for the past ten years. If no W2s and 1099s are filed, the IRS would have no reason to presume that someone has any income.

If there is a mechanism in place to handle people who are not currently in the system, I don't understand how 10 national IDs are more difficult to get than 10 voter registration cards. There is no prima facie reason for it to be more difficult to register Grandma Ruth who was born in 1920 in a county where the courthouse was wiped out in a flood and who never worked a day in her life and was never expected to register with the selective service with a national database than it is to register her with the county board of elections. The only thing the biometrics buys you is some mechanism to make it more likely that the person who registered is the same person who voted.

That doesn't stop registration fraud. That stops voter fraud.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Grandma Ruth by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #50 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 05:52:45 PM EST
If she didn't register with the national database as a citizen, she'd be breaking the law.  That's the incentive.  It makes registration in the database a requirement for citizenship and all it entails.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
That doesn't matter: Grandma Ruth doesn't exist by lm (2.00 / 0) #51 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 06:06:32 PM EST
We're talking about registration fraud, registering people with the national system who don't really exist.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Again by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #52 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 06:49:21 PM EST
The fact that Grandma Ruth generates no trail on the ID other than voting makes it easy to catch.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
You keep saying that by lm (2.00 / 0) #53 Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 07:33:49 AM EST
But you aren't explaining how this supposedly works. Grandma Ruth never worked, has no social security number, no driver license, and was never required to register with the selective service.

Just how is she easier to catch when she's not on the radar?


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
She won't be "caught" by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #54 Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 07:51:41 AM EST
She won't get to vote because she's not in the database.

If she is in the database, her lack of any other records will get her looked at because the number of real people who don't do anything other than vote will be so vanishingly small that it'd be a simple matter to have investigative agents go talk to them.

Besides, in order to fake her way into the system, someone would have to show up at a government office to have their picture taken as her, have biometric data taken as her, both things that, given modern database technology could be used to find duplicates.  This is obviously a lot riskier than mailing in a form.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
I'm still not buying it by lm (2.00 / 0) #55 Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 08:27:50 AM EST
This is the same assertion over and over, ``her lack of any other records will get her looked at because the number of real people who don't do anything other than vote will be so vanishingly small that it'd be a simple matter to have investigative agents go talk to them.''

Government agencies don't work that way. Take the IRS as an example. Ceasing to file taxes at all doesn't make one more likely to be audited unless information from other sources (W2s and 1099s) tip off the IRS. Without some information coming in that suggests that there should be additional records that aren't there, government agencies don't have sufficient reason to investigate. The fact of the matter is that there are thousands, if not tends of thousands, of people in Grandma Ruth's position and investigating them would be a waste of time for the most part.

``Besides, in order to fake her way into the system, someone would have to show up at a government office to have their picture taken as her, have biometric data taken as her, both things that, given modern database technology could be used to find duplicates''

The risk is very slight, especially if the claim is that Granma Ruth is one of three triplets. Picture matching, finger print matching, and DNA matching all suffer from a problem with false positives, especially with regards to identical twins. Until such time as a biometric measurement that guarantees uniqueness is found, there will be no substantial risk of getting caught out in the fraud.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
You are assuming by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #56 Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 09:59:42 AM EST
The unconnected databases like we have now, not a true overall national database specifically designed to root out fraudsters.

Claims of triplets would require all three to present themselves simultaneously in order to obtain separate citizen numbers.  Otherwise, the system would simply refuse to issue a second and third ID.

Note that one of the reasons the IRS doesn't catch ceasing to file taxes is because its database isn't integrated with those local ones processing death certificates.  A truly national database would also solve this.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
No, I'm not making assumptions by lm (2.00 / 0) #57 Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 10:17:07 AM EST
You're shifting the goalposts.

If I'm making any assumption, it's that this new system will be designed and enforced with the same level of competency as most federal agencies now exhibit. You can argue that the past is no indication of what would happen in the future if you like but unless you present some reason to believe that this hypothetical federal program will be more competently administered than today's DHS or SEC, I'm going to keep thinking it's little more than wishful thinking on your part.

Let's look at the way that goalposts have been shifted.

First, the claim was that such a national database would prevent registration fraud.

Then, the claim was that such a national database in conjunction with a competent federal enforcement agency would prevent registration fraud.

Now, the claim is that such a national database in conjunction with a competent federal enforcement agency with specific countermeasures to the specific problems I've pointed out will prevent registration fraud.

It isn't the database that's preventing the fraud in your solution. It's the ancillary competency and counter measures which could just as easily be applied without the national database.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Gah by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #58 Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 11:09:05 AM EST
I seem to think I am arguing for a particular system.  I'm not.  I never have been.

I am arguing that a system is possible, and that it have features that would be unpalatable to those who are currently screaming about acorn.

But in any case, the counter measures could not be applied without the national database, because the national database includes the requirement that all be in it, and includes the overall tracking of all behavior that makes it near impossible to fake a person.

If there is a single database that every citizen is required to be in, and that database is used for every interaction between the government and each citizen, then it is very hard to make a fake record that is used for only one narrow bit like voting without getting flagged by the most trivial data mining.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
You are arguing for a particular system by lm (2.00 / 0) #59 Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 11:32:58 AM EST
You are arguing for a national database that:
  1. is used for every interaction between government and citizen
  2. has some sort of mechanism to predict what interactions should be happening and are not in order to flag possible fraud
  3. is used by a competent federal administration to enforce voter registration
My point is that (2) and (3) are not only not essential to a national database but could be used by local databases. You can claim all you want that putting validation of citizenship in the hands of the feds in inherently more secure from a data validation perspective than that same function being handled by state or county boards of elections, but it just isn't so. Any way the federal system uses to validate citizenship can be used by the local boards. The federal system buys you absolutely nothing.

There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Yes it does by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #60 Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 11:43:39 AM EST
It buys you the comprehensive system for everything, which is precisely what allows data mining to catch fraud.

Local systems would not have access to all this information.  It is impossible to detect that a person has no history other than voter registration if the only information you have is the voter registration rolls!

The key point: in such a system there is no "voter registration" as such.  Polling places have lists of people with the right to vote at that place and voters are required to submit the proper national ID + whatever other validation is required.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
Sure, it allows data mining to catch fraud by lm (2.00 / 0) #61 Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 12:11:48 PM EST
But in order for data mining to catch fraud, some agency or the other had to use it. Federal agencies seldom use the data mining tools that they presently have at their disposal. The claim that they would begin to use this new system to crack down on citizens created out of thin air seems a bit far fetched.

Local systems, at least potentially speaking, have every bit of the capacity for new voters to demonstrate citizenship as the putative new system. As I mentioned several times, going forward new births and naturalizations don't have the same problems as the problem of putting existing citizens on the roles. But entering in those citizens who have no records creates the potential for just as much fraud as local voter registration now allows for.

That there is not voter registration per se doesn't really matter. Implicit in this discussion from the start has been the suggestion that voter registration has been subsumed by the creation of a personal ID record in this national database. The potential for fraud has merely shifted from the voter registration level to the identity level. If you think this really solves anything, look into the level of social security fraud going on.


There is no more degenerate kind of state than that in which the richest are supposed to be the best.
Cicero, The Republic
[ Parent ]
Shifting by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #62 Sun Oct 19, 2008 at 01:22:31 PM EST
The potential for fraud has merely shifted from the voter registration level to the identity level

Exactly.  And therefore combines it with the anti-fraud efforts of the IRS, the Social Security Administration, the DMV, the unemployment office, etc, etc, etc.

You seem to be saying that the existing system is the zenith of possible systems, which seems to me ridiculous.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
Have to?!? by ammoniacal (2.00 / 0) #48 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 04:43:59 PM EST
Of those three, none of them know my current address.

In fact, that's my main bitch about Germany--mandatory registration of your address with the Bulls. That's fucking disgusting to me.

"To this day that was the most bullshit caesar salad I have every experienced..." - triggerfinger

[ Parent ]
National ID database by Herring (2.00 / 0) #33 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 07:44:40 PM EST
It's easy to fix those things - Access will just let you knock up a bit of VBA that can handle the validation. Where's the problem?

christ, we're all old now - StackyMcRacky
[ Parent ]
Done son! by LinDze (2.00 / 0) #24 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 05:27:20 PM EST
Secure Voting, Rivest and pals already done it. I seem to recall there was an issue with that version and an update was proposed.

-Lin Dze
Arbeit Macht Frei
[ Parent ]
Biometrics by duxup (2.00 / 0) #3 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 01:42:14 PM EST
Oh no don't mention biometrics!  I don't think I could go down the shortly after 9/11 path again where every pundit was going on and on about how we'll create a national id card with biometrics and somehow terrorism will just stop because we'll all just know who the terrorists are...

I know it isn't related to voting but I just don't think I could take that again.

____
I don't actually want that by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #5 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 01:50:40 PM EST
But neither do most of those screaming "voter registration fraud" right now, and that amuses me.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
""" (airquotes) Real ID by wumpus (2.00 / 0) #7 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 02:06:07 PM EST
I think Bruce Schneier has given up posting on the futility of an accurate national ID database.  Too many fish in the barrel.

Wumpus



The fraud perpetrated by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #11 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 02:39:33 PM EST
is far less in registration than it is with crooked poll workers and people like the Florida Secretary of State and Ohio Elections Department. Biometrics would do nothing to address any of that.

--
The three things that make a diamond also make a waffle.
Yes. I know. by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #13 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 02:48:44 PM EST
I'm not saying this should be done.  I'm pointing out the irony that the people complaining about registration fraud are the same sorts of people who would go ballistic if a system that would really prevent it were put in place.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman
[ Parent ]
I'm not so sure. by ad hoc (2.00 / 0) #14 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 02:51:52 PM EST
Certainly a biometrics voter registration system would only be cataloging brown people.

--
The three things that make a diamond also make a waffle.
[ Parent ]
What the hell, man? by dark nowhere (2.00 / 0) #20 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 04:19:03 PM EST
A national ID tied to biometrics.

I thought you gave up the ganja. I know you're probably being sarcastic, but: there's no money to do this, there's no time to do it, and it won't be an Issue next time--whether or not it's still a problem. I've never met a biometrics scanner that could remember my identity. I'm just... ambiguous. Maybe RFID would work--but I probably have a really weird biofield too. I've even had a unix box tell me flat out: you do not exist, but that was a different situation.

Chill out, snowflake.

Yes, I know. by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #21 Fri Oct 17, 2008 at 04:35:38 PM EST
Again, I am not saying we should do this!  Far from it!

I am saying that the solution to the problem certain groups are braying about is unpalatable to that group.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
Welcome citizen to Britain by jump the ladder (2.00 / 0) #34 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 12:24:59 AM EST

Doubleplusgood idea that our government is going ahead with along with a database searchable real time of every phone call, email and website visited. Rememember if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.



Upset the CoE by codemonkey uk (2.00 / 0) #40 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:16:45 AM EST
And someone might write you a stern letter.

Upset the Muslims and someone might right you a stern letter bomb.

--- Thad ---
Almost as Smart As you.

Overreactions by ucblockhead (2.00 / 0) #43 Sat Oct 18, 2008 at 10:34:04 AM EST
What is sad is that the people who complained requested a patch, not a release delay.

What is doubly sad is that this happened because they hired a Muslim to do the music.
---
[ucblockhead is] useless and subhuman

[ Parent ]
Seeking: Flash Developer by codemonkey uk (4.00 / 1) #63 Mon Oct 20, 2008 at 01:40:41 AM EST
"words from the Koran should not be set to music because the words are seen to have come directly from God."

Fast scrolling Koran text + Benny Hill Theme MP3 = WIN.



--- Thad ---
Almost as Smart As you.

[ Parent ]
A solution | 63 comments (63 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback