I don't think we will ever have a trustable voting system without foolproof voter identification. Heck even Mexico requires picture ID to vote and nearly every industrialized nation requires voter identification in the form of ID that proves their right and eligibility to vote. The US seems to be far behind that curve.

It just seems bizarre to me that a private company can check my entire credit history, my citizenship status, and my ability to pay for goods and services in mere seconds, yet our own Government cannot determine if I am eligible for benefits, eligible to work, or even a citizen of this nation in a time frame of less than a day, let alone a week, and even more disturbing that it cannot verify this information when it comes to something as serious as franchise.

The courts have consistently taken an overly broad view of voters rights, to the disenfranchisement of legal voters and it needs to stop. Given the Democrats desire to Federalize everything, you would think that they would attempt to put in place national standards when it comes to voting, and yes I am aware of the Constitutional issues involved in that given that the States are given the power to determine how their representatives are elected. Still it might be time for a Constitutional amendment to fix some of the shortcomings of our voting system, as well as a full re-write of the 14th amendment that would close some loopholes regarding citizenship, but hey that's another bag of worms to deal with.

I'm not nearly so optimistic as you AL.

Not only do I think that the electorate does not care, but here are some pretty powerful forces in the US committed to seeing that no means of confirming that the vote is valid. I agree with Gabe that without a requirement of a voter ID (even if only a driver's licence) that every voting system has gaping security hole, but the Democratic party has absolutely no desire to close this hole. If you threw out the 60,000 NYers that illegally voted in Florida in the 2000 election, then its not even close. And that's to say nothing of all the Democrats that come out of thier graves nation wide to vote.

Now, that's not to say that no GOP voter shenanigans ever goes on, but its not the GOP that's heavily opposed to picture IDs. Idiotarianism being what it is, I suspect that as long as each side feels the other is cheating, that they will each feel entitled to cheat in thier own ways.

If we could do something about junk mail, we could post the voter rolls on the internet and let citizens challenge ghost voters.

The candidates already have things organised at that level.

example

The "incumbency effect" almost guarantee's inaction by our elected politicians. Much like allowing the ruling party to gerrymander district's to their advantage, passing speech restrictive "campaign finance reform", and a whole host of other protective ills, Congress is in the business of staying elected first, taking bribes second, and I think doing the work of the people shows up around 34th or 35th. It's truly disgusting, but the sheeple don't seem to care enough to do anything about it. The media only reports on it if they want to attack corruption on the Republican side, and those members of Congress who do try to speak out, are quickly shuffled into the bottom of the Rayburn building and silenced.

I supported her because she promised this review; in so doing, I voted against my favorite Republican in state politics.

I hope she does the right thing.

But as long as federal law requires that all disabled voters be allowed to vote unaided, some electronic machines are going to be required. How to work around that when all of the machines have been shown to be unsafe is beyond me.

But as long as federal law requires that all disabled voters be allowed to vote unaided, some electronic machines are going to be required.

Allow disabled voters who can't handle their own ballots to choose their own assistant? Where's the harm?

J Thomas: there's no harm whatsoever in allowing disabled voters who handle their own ballots to choose their own assistant (presuming it's a free choice), but that's not what federal law requires.

I'm opposed to electronic voting because it's not right that our leaders should be chosen by Russian computer hackers, instead of by illegals and dead people.

Glen: LOL. However, I have yet to see any substantce showing that illegal voting occurs on a substantial scale (link?). Hacking into these computers, on the other hand, scares the begesus out of me.

I agree, some kind of national ID is a good idea (simply so that I don't have to change ID's every friggin time I move to a new state), however I'm still not convinced that 'illegal voting' laws are more than a red herring to suppress minority/poverty votes.

Glen - Bowen's response to your comment:

"absolutely hilarious. thank you --- we needed that!"

See, you're helping!!

A.L.

"I agree, some kind of national ID is a good idea..."

I don't know who you are agreeing with, but I didn't say that. I'm a supporter of Federalism. If you want to see widescale fraud, put all your eggs in the same basket. If you want to see the system abused, give some organization all sorts of authority and pervasive presence in your life.

"(simply so that I don't have to change ID's every friggin time I move to a new state)..."

Seeing as you've changed ID's so often, did you ever find it actually hard to do? There really isn't a huge burden involved in obtaining indentification. Someone sited the cost as $200. Really? I've chaged place of residence alot, been a poor student for far too long in my life, and I don't recall any such burden.

The cost of overt and hidden taxes on my car is usually excessive (inspection, stickers, transfer of title, taxes, required insurance, blah, blah, blah), but the cost of a picture license itself was negligible even back when I was working fast food.

"however I'm still not convinced that 'illegal voting' laws are more than a red herring to suppress minority/poverty votes."

Of course not. If you didn't have 'racist' to fall back on, how would you ever feel you'd had the last word in a debate?