[EL] in-person voter fraud Washington 2004 follow up

[Doug Hess]

I was just about to post a note saying that I think almost everything that
could be reasonably said about voter fraud and ID policy has been said
(barring new high quality research). But then I saw this observation below
by M. McDonald  (note: I copied just the part of Michael's email I am
referrring to). This is a great point  (and original, I think) and destroys
the silly use of the GA numbers by ID proponents (a sort of reductio ad
absurdum). It is also a point that is easy to communicate: if ID works
*and*there is lots of fraud...where's the difference?

(Note: as I argued before, if the ID law doesn't help activists on the right
win elections that they think are stolen from them, I think we could see a
big drop off in support for this law in the future...and even some
backpeddling on it in states with ID laws.)

-Doug


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Michael McDonald <mmcdon at gmu.edu>
To: law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2011 16:27:27 -0400
Subject: Re: [EL] in-person voter fraud Washington 2004 follow up
If there were a massive amount of voter fraud occurring that could be
prevented with photo id, wouldn't turnout rates go down following the
imposition of photo id? Yet, proponents often tout that turnout went up
following adoption of photo id.

[remaining text snipped out]

============
Dr. Michael P. McDonald
Associate Professor, George Mason University
Non-Resident Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110802/23209c5b/attachment.html>