"Voter Fraud"--GOPee talking point, is there *any* legit evidence?

[bunkerbuster1]

As the current poll tax--er, I mean, "voter ID" bill goes through its current set of legal challenges, one thing keeps cropping up in discussion: the idea that the voter ID is needed because of documented cases of voter fraud in the state.

I keep on trying to find such documented evidence and so far have found almost nothing beyond anecdotal heresay. Apparently there have been some issues with absentee balloting, but the new voter ID bill does nothing to address this.

Are the Reeps just blowing smoke, or do they have even a smidgeon of a legitimate case here?

I ask because it is bound to come up and I want to know what, if any, ammo these guys really have. I've done some googling but found no smoking guns, so to speak.

And yes, I know that evidence of any voter misrepresentation doesn't justify this abortion of a bill they're trying to keep from being rule unconstitutional. Just want to know if there is even any evidence to begin with.

[kevinam]

1. From what I can tell...

it appears they are just blowing smoke.

According to this AJC article referring to Cathy Cox. http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/legis05/0305/19legvote.html

snip
She said she cannot recall a single incident in the past few years where a voter has arrived at a polling station pretending to be another voter.
end snip

Since she is the secretary of state, and she handles election issues I would think she should be aware of it.

One thing that I find hilarious.

From the same article, the sponsor of the voter ID bill said

snip
"The bill does get at the heart of voter fraud," Burmeister said. "The reason voter fraud isn't caught at the polls is because there is no picture ID requirement." Burmeister also took exception to the argument that allowing more absentee voting would lead to more fraud. "With absentee voting, you have a paper ballot," she said. "You can go back and verify that."
end snip

She is praising the merits of having a verifiable paper ballot. Yet repubs refuse to include a paper trail with the diebold machines. Interesting hypocracy.

One other thing that has been annoying me. When you hear the right wing radio people like bortz talk about it. They try to frame the arguement that voters should have ID. Current law does require ID. Right now current law does not require PHOTO ID. This is all about PHOTO ID's. The misinformation being put out there is, as usual, obnoxious and intended to deceive.

Kevin.

[roody]

2. lots of research at blackboxvoting.org

[napi21]

3. I don't know, but I saw a very weird case when I was in line at the polls

in 04. My husband and I were standing in line and the poll aid cam out to verify ID's. The couple in front of us had what I thought was a very strange story. They were married 7 months earlier, but the lady hadn't changed her drivers license YET, so her name was wrong & her address was wrong. Her husbands address was also wrong because they had rented a new apartment when they got married, but he hadn't changed his DL info either. I was quite surprised that the poll worker said they could both vote, they just had to sign an affidavit that they were who they said they were.

Now, they probably were ligit. My problem is, WHY couldn't they find time in SEVEN MONTHS to get their proper ID? We moved to Ga. in July of 2000, and we had DL's and voter registration done within two weeks!

It does raise the question...if they were allowed to vote, what regulations existed to prevent anyone from pretending to be anyone and just signing an affidavit?