California introduces bill forcing presidential candidates to release taxes

a reply to: avgguy

There is a paper trail.

a reply to: Phage

Where?

a reply to: avgguy

Here.
voterstatus.sos.ca.gov...

At at the polling place you vote at.

a reply to: avgguy

It's more apt to say there is no system in place to verify voter registrants who do not provide the last 4 digits of a SS# or DL#, when they register to vote.

But, the HAVA mandates that states register voters who do not provide either of those numbers...and simply assign them a voter ID#.

In California, all registered voters are then mailed a Voter Registration Card.

AND, in California, if you don't show any ID when you register to vote, you have to show it at the polls when you vote for the first time. One acceptable form of ID is...

...a Voter Registration Card.

There would be no red flags in the system if someone registered and voted fraudulently using this method.

a reply to: PlasticWizard

I imagine it's as valid as any other state voting process. Nothing anywhere is ever 100% accurate though.

You're assumptions about California not representing it's legal citizens is again a very programmed response from a person who doesn't live here. Since you've obviously been given that opinion by some other place than your own experience you should stop and ask yourself just why you have it, let alone express it as if it's a good one.

It doesn't make you sound informed or smart. It makes you sound like someone who is biased and parroting the opinion of something they read somewhere or heard on youtube and now thinks they're some kind of expert.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

If you can't provide any of that information you then have to go to a county elections office and talk have an official there process your request for voting registration.

So that is where the validation of your request takes place. You can't just say "Nope I don't have any verification and they just say ok, well here's your voter ID then."

At some point or another the person asking to be registered to vote still has to pass verification to do so.

a reply to: mOjOm

I've spent a fair amount amount of time in California. Visited San Francisco for a couple weeks while mom was travel nursing. Lived there for over a Month while recording an album. Stayed in Santa Monica(right by the pier), West Hollywood and Malibu(nice house but not worth the multi millions our producer paid). So I have some experience with the state.

I agree with you that no state is 100% but will you agree that it's a major problem?

Quoting myself from a few posts back.

Call it a sign of the times but mandatory investigations need to be made into voter fraud and into each presidential candidate(financial and medical) in the primaries.

Quit trying to label me. My response wasn't programmed it was more of a valid concern. If illegals swung the vote enough, than those who were elected aren't the voice of the majority. I wish common sense was programmed.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

originally posted by: Bluntone22
I wonder how this will get by the legal system. Other than California's system anyway.

Ever hear of the Tenth Amendment?

except when it violates the federal laws then state law is to yield to the federal.

a reply to: mOjOm

It's interesting how many voter registration applicants cannot be verified, in California, when they do actually provide the last four digits of a SS#...


Link to SSA

What Do These Terms Mean?

The following list describes the types of data in the HAVV dataset.

Total Transactions: The total number of verification requests made during the time period.

Unprocessed Transactions: The total number of verification requests that could not be processed because the data sent to us was invalid, (e.g., missing, not formatted correctly).

Total Matches: The total number of verification requests where there is at least one match in our records on the name, last four digits of the SSN and date of birth.

Total Non Matches: The total number of verification requests where there is no match in our records on the name, last four digits of the SSN or date of birth.

Multiple Matches Found – At least one alive and at least one deceased: The total number of verification requests where there are multiple matches on name, date of birth, and the last four digits of the SSN, and at least one of the number holders is alive and at least one of the number holders is deceased.

Single Match Found – Alive: The total number of verification requests where there is only one match in our records on name, last four digits of the SSN and date of birth, and the number holder is alive.

Single Match Found – Deceased: The total number of verification requests where there is only one match in our records on name, date of birth, and last four digits of the SSN, and the number holder is deceased.

Multiple Matches Found – All Alive: The total number of verification requests where there are multiple matches on name, date of birth, and last four digits of the SSN, and each match indicates the number holder is alive.

Multiple Match Found – All Deceased: The total number of verification requests where there are multiple matches on name, date of birth, and the last four digits of the SSN, and each match indicates the number holder is deceased.

Mind boggling. And California appears to have the worst stats in the nation.

Out of 6,100,770 California voter registration applications, since 2011, A whopping 5,458,390 could not be verified using the SS# provided. Only 638,287 could be verified (and don't match a deceased person).

And these are applicants who actually provided a SS# to verify.

I'd love to see the verification data from the California Motor Vehicle Administration, but I can't find where that's published online.

***

Now, toss in the voter registration applicants who provided neither the last four digits of a SS# nor a DL/ID# for verification. Those registrants aren't verified during the process, at all.

It's not unreasonable to assume they are MOSTLY fraudulent, based on the HAVV stats alone.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

It's not unreasonable to assume they are MOSTLY fraudulent

You assume people are guilty of voter fraud based on an assumption?
You assume those people successfully registered?
You assume those people voted?

a reply to: Phage

He encouraged Latino citizens to vote. He said that citizens did not have to worry about getting their non-citizen relatives in trouble.

Yeah, but context is everything. You have to look at the question Obama answered.


Obama answers a question about whether specifically young illegal Latino immigrants are right to be fearful about voting. Rodriguez makes it explicitly clear that it is about illegals (and that he chooses to call them citizens nonetheless).

It is my understanding that whether you as an illegal immigrant are protected under DACA (i.e. whether are a 'Dreamer') or not, you are not allowed to vote in presidential elections.

Obama reassuringly answers that it is not true; that immigration will come and get them, and that "there is not a situation where the voting rolls somehow are transferred over and people start investigating, et cetera".

Sure, Obama uses the phrase "Latino citizens" but a) it is already established that the Latino illegals are to be called Latino citizens in the interview, so that does not say much, and b) he knows that he is being asked about possible repercussions of voting as an illegal, and he communicates that there is no danger of being deported.

Yes, he did rhetorically cover his back, and no, he did not, in so many words, encourage illegals to vote.

But (in my opinion) yeah, he did.

Edit: But I also think he was put in a tough spot.

a reply to: PlasticWizard

Sounds nice. But yes, very expensive in those places and not everywhere in Cali is like that by far.

No, I don't agree it's a huge problem. There have been investigations into voter fraud. In 2002 Bush had a crackdown on voter fraud too and it turned up concluding that there was no significant amount of actual fraud happening that could be found. Not that there isn't any happening to some very small degree, nothing is ever completely safe. But that it just isn't happening anywhere near the amount that would cause it to change anything.

If anything I'd say the whole "Illegals Voting" Fraud BS is just a distraction from other types of legal voting manipulation like gerrymandering, tossing out votes based on questionable criteria and other stuff. There are plenty of perfectly legal ways of manipulating the outcomes of elections that are far more dangerous and effective than some illegal votes if and when they do occur.

originally posted by: mOjOm
a reply to: MotherMayEye

If you can't provide any of that information you then have to go to a county elections office and talk have an official there process your request for voting registration.

So that is where the validation of your request takes place. You can't just say "Nope I don't have any verification and they just say ok, well here's your voter ID then."

At some point or another the person asking to be registered to vote still has to pass verification to do so.

No, they don't. You are wrong.

The HAVA mandates that the states have to register voters who do not provide a SS# or a DL/ID# for verification. It's up to the states to attempt to verify those voters some other way and California has no other process for verification outside of the HAVV (SS# and DL/ID#). If you can find one, please post your source.

From the HAVA:

(ii) SPECIAL RULE FOR APPLICANTS WITHOUT DRIVER’S LICENSE OR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER.—If an applicant for voter registration for an election for Federal office has not been issued a current and valid driver’s license or a social security number, the State shall assign the applicant a number which will serve to identify the applicant for voter registration purposes. To the extent that the State has a computerized list in effect under this subsection and the list assigns unique identifying numbers to registrants, the number assigned under this clause shall be the unique identifying number assigned under the list. (iii)

DETERMINATION OF VALIDITY OF NUMBERS PROVIDED.—The State shall determine whether the information provided by an individual is sufficient to meet the requirements of this subparagraph, in accordance with State law.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MotherMayEye

It's not unreasonable to assume they are MOSTLY fraudulent

You assume people are guilty of voter fraud based on an assumption?

Not anyone in particular, but yes. I do.

ETA: And I do not think it's unreasonable. I didn't overstate my claim. It is only my assumption, but it is grounded in some compelling data.

a reply to: opecz

Fair? i don't think its fair. its like saying someone is guilty of something with no proof. i'm not really sure where i stand on this issue t be honest.

originally posted by: VictorVonDoom
Just goes to show how racist California is. Everyone knows it's racist to ask a presidential candidate to provide documents. At least it was 8 years ago.

#doublestandards

originally posted by: Phage
You assume those people successfully registered?
You assume those people voted?

Well, point me to that "paper trail" which shows I am making the wrong assumptions.

I can't think of any reason that only people who attempt to register using a SS# would be using unverifiable information. And I don't think it's unreasonable to assume that if a person successfully registers to vote fraudulently, they would not be likely to vote fraudulently, too.

It's not like anyone is crunching the data on this and it's all transparent...or that we have systems in place to catch voter/voter registration fraud.

I am sure not going to assume the system is not being exploited after looking at the HAVV data at the SSA.

It is what it is and I don't feel bad making assumptions about this.

a reply to: DupontDeux

Obama answers a question about whether specifically young illegal Latino immigrants are right to be fearful about voting.

Yes. Because they were fearful that if they voted, ICE would come after their families.

a) it is already established that the Latino illegals are to be called Latino citizens in the interview,

False. The interviewer says:

Many of the millennials, Dreamers, undocumented citizens — and I call them citizens because they contribute to this country

An "undocumented citizen" is not a legal term. It is the term she uses for them. They cannot vote because they are undocumented. She was talking about the millennials who are citizens.

So if I vote, will immigration know where I live? Will they come for my family and deport us?

b) he knows that he is being asked about possible repercussions of voting as an illegal

False.He is being asked if Latino citizens who vote should be fearful of ICE coming after their relatives. He says, no, they should not be.

a reply to: mOjOm

2002 was 15 years ago. Times have changed, the degree of fraud has changed. Each state needs to verify that each vote is legal and a true representation of it's citizens before they declare a winner. Verifying just end count isn't good enough anymore.

a reply to: MotherMayEye

How will I identify myself when registering to vote?

The voter registration application asks for your driver license or California identification card number, or you can use the last four numbers on your Social Security card. If you do not have a driver license, California identification card or Social Security card, you may leave that space blank. Your county elections official will assign a number to you that will be used to identify you as a voter.
www.sos.ca.gov...

Even you say "It's up to the state to verify" the applicant right??? So you still have to go to some state official somewhere and prove your residence here or something.

I tried voting without first being registered and tried to do it the day I wanted to vote. I'm a white guy lived here my whole life, had an drivers License even to prove who I was. But it didn't have my resident address on it and since I had no other way to prove I was a resident here they wouldn't let me vote. Granted this was like 20 years ago but it's not as easy as just not giving any information and still getting registered to vote. Otherwise nobody would even bother giving the information to begin with.