Voter ID: Mexico's electoral system is superior to America's

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

To some people, the idea that any part of Mexico's political system is superior to the United States is crazy. However, when it comes to our different methods of conducting elections, it's very true.

The Mexican electoral system is perhaps the most fraud proof in the world. America's, by comparison, is a mess. Our system is different from state to state, and is open to all kinds of fraud.

It wasn't always this way. In fact, Mexico's system used to be a corrupt mess. The 1988 presidential election in Mexico was plagued with scandal and widespread corruption. Not wanting to put the country through another ordeal, the major parties agreed to create a non-partisan and non-governmental electoral commission that would conduct the voting process, and ensure honest and fair elections. In 1990, the Federal Electoral Institute (IFE) was created, and the first presidential election was held under the new rules in 2000.

The electoral system created by IFE is open and transparent. Every eligible Mexican citizen has a tamper-proof photo-ID card with a thumbprint and an embossed hologram. All voters are required to vote in their neighborhoods and in 2005, the law was amended to allow for ”external,” or out of country absentee voting. There is no such thing as a provisional ballot. All elections are held on Sundays. Mexico is a relatively poor country yet does not lower standards to allow for the poor to register and vote as is done in America. No excuses are made while setting a high standard for all with no discernible drop in voter participation.

The registration process requires all citizens to personally enroll. Proof of birth or citizenship is step one. Applicants are photographed and fingerprinted and then required to personally return to collect their voting credential.

There is also no early voting in Mexico. When we dare talk about requiring identification to vote here in America, the left screams that it would suppress the vote. When the Republican legislature in Ohio passed an election reform bill to curtail early voting from 6 weeks to 4, Democrats had a fit and got their union masters to fork up the cash for an expensive petition drive to put the issue on the ballot. Again, they claimed that the evil Republicans were taking away voters' rights and trying to suppress the vote.

However, the facts simply do not bear that out. Consider these Mexican electoral numbers from before and after the reforms.

In 1994, voter registration was 45 million, which was 50% of the population. In 2009, it rose to 72 million which is 65% of the population. So, even though the reforms made it more involved to register, registration actually increased.

What about turnout? Did the tough new voter ID laws and lack of voting by mail suppress the vote? Let's compare apples to apples and look at presidential elections.

In the 1988 election, there were 19.6 million votes cast, representing about 25% of the population.

In 2006, under the strict new rules, the number of votes cast skyrocketed to 41.7 million, which was almost 40% of the population.

This is compelling evidence that laws aimed at eliminating vote fraud do not supress the vote, but actually increase voter participation. Fully 70% of the U.S. population believes that a photo ID should be required to vote.

Liberals who oppose these common sense ideas want the system to remain open to fraud. There is no other explanation.

When it comes to electoral integrity, the United States needs to follow Mexico's example. Our system needs an upgrade to Mexican standards.

http://thirdbasepolitics.blogspot.com/2012/07/mexico-electoral-system-is-superior-to.html

[Usui Takumi 1,562]

Hmm...their system seems like a pathway to a National ID law.....me no likey.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Sousuke

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Hmm...their system seems like a pathway to a National ID law.....me no likey.

Think of it as a tamperproof social security card.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/09/11/library-cards-may-be-used-as-illegal-immigrant-id/

Los Angeles, California Library cards may be used as illegal immigrant ID

Published September 11, 2012Associated Press

LOS ANGELES – Illegal immigrants in California's largest city could use library cards to open bank accounts and access an array of city services under a plan being considered by city officials.

Under the plan, anyone with proof of Los Angeles residency could get a library card, the Los Angeles Times reported (lat.ms/P967MO). The idea is to provide a form of ID to those who cannot get a driver's license because of their immigration status.

The City Council unanimously voted recently to consider the proposal, which would have Los Angeles join a growing number of cities across the nation that offer various forms of identification to illegal immigrants and others who cannot get driver's licenses because of their immigration status. San Francisco and Oakland have adopted similar measures.

An estimated 300,000 illegal immigrants in Los Angeles lack a bank account because banks generally require official identification to open an account.

Los Angeles Councilman Richard Alarcon, who proposed the concept, said some immigrants who don't use banks end up being gouged by payday lenders or robbed if they keep large sums of cash on hand.

"They can be scammed and taken advantage of," Alarcon said. "This will help end that."

The cards would not be a substitute for driver's licenses and would not provide protection from deportation by federal immigration authorities.

The cards would include a user's name, address and photograph, and would be issued through the city's libraries. They would cost applicants $15 to $20, and could include a monthly fee of up to $2.99.

Ira Mehlman, communications director of the Federation for American Immigration Reform, said ID cards can easily be exploited by terrorists and criminals and encourage illegal immigration.

"Cities should not be in the business of making it easier for people to violate federal law, even if they don't pose a security risk," he said.

Gustavo Martin, a 32-year-old mechanic, told the newspaper he would be interested in obtaining a card. On payday, he goes to a check cashing business and pays $5.50 in fees to cash his $317 weekly check, he said.

"It's safe, then OK," Martin said.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SF_City_ID_Card

San Francisco, California City ID Card

The SF City ID Card is a municipal identification card program operated by San Francisco, California for residents of the city-county, regardless of their immigration status. The cards also do not specify the person's gender, to assist transgender individuals who often have difficulty with identification documents.

The stated purpose of the photo ID card is "to streamline access to City programs and connect residents to local businesses." San Francisco is the largest city in the United States to issue municipal identification. The program is modeled after a similar program operating in New Haven, Connecticut since 2007.

According to the SF City ID Card website, users of the card can use it to:

"Serve as proof of identity and residency

Include information about the card holder's medical conditions or allergies

List an emergency contact

Provide discounts on San Francisco family excursions, restaurants, museums, and more

Be used as a public library card

Serve as a form of identification to open a checking account at participating banks

Serve as a form of identification to open a Family Account with the Recreation and Parks Department"

Such cards are not accepted as licenses to drive or purchase alcohol or tobacco, nor are they recognized by federal or state law. Possession of these cards is not considered mandatory by the city government.

Applicants must submit proof of identity and city residency. Parents may obtain a card for a minor; there are separate cards for children 13 and under, and for anyone 14 years of age or older. A fee ranging from $5 to $15 is charged for the card.

Expiration of the card occurs every 2 years, or when the cardholder turns 14 years of age or loses residency in the city limits.

History

The ordinance authorizing the County Clerk to issue the ID card was passed by the Board of Supervisors on November 20, 2007. An immigration group, the Washington-based Immigration Reform Law Institute, filed a legal challenge against the law, claiming the program conflicts with federal law, but a judge dismissed the challenge on October 14, 2008. The first cards were issued on January 15, 2009. San Francisco thus became one of a "small but growing number of municipalities" issuing municipal identification cards so that illegal immigrants will have access to some form of document.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Bad_Daddy

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The previous two posts are not related to the OP. Moderators, please remove these posts. Kip can start a new topic on that subject if he so wishes.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

The previous two posts are not related to the OP. Moderators, please remove these posts. Kip can start a new topic on that subject if he so wishes.

ID's for illegals yet some government officials including most of the Dems in California and the Obama administration have a problem with requiring an ID in order to vote. That's your tie in to the OP.

Edited September 18, 2012 by Bad_Daddy

[james&olya 1,121]

I personally believe that the realities we face today require us to accept some kind of national ID card.

Of course, the religious right will have a field day with their screams about the 'mark of the beast'! That by itself might make it all worth it, just watching them screaming their nonsense and making utter fools of themselves (again)! Too bad it couldn't happen before Dec 21, 2012!

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

ID's for illegals yet some people including California and the Obama administration have a problem with requiring an ID in order to vote. So that's your tie in to the OP.

Please stop trying to hijack this thread.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

I personally believe that the realities we face today require us to accept some kind of national ID card.

Of course, the religious right will have a field day with their screams about the 'mark of the beast'! That by itself might make it all worth it, just watching them screaming their nonsense and making utter fools of themselves (again)! Too bad it couldn't happen before Dec 21, 2012!

Funny you say that seeing how it's the "Right" that wants a voter ID law.

Please stop trying to hijack this thread.

Be thankful I'm posting on this thread. Most of your threads have a habit of dying on the vine so to say.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Same thing in the Philippines. Seems fairly logical. The Liberals reason for not wanting people to show an ID to vote is more transparent than air.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

Please stop trying to hijack this thread.

BAWAAAAA How dare you try to Hijack this poor mans thread. :rofl::rofl:

[james&olya 1,121]

Funny you say that seeing how it's the "Right" that wants a voter ID law.

Which is why it would be humorous seeing them get confused as to which side they are on!

[james&olya 1,121]

Same thing in the Philippines. Seems fairly logical. The Liberals reason for not wanting people to show an ID to vote is more transparent than air.

Most liberals would be perfectly happy with voter ID laws if the laws made it mandatory for election authorities to make such ID free and reasonably accessible for those without cars, etc.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

The previous two posts are not related to the OP. Moderators, please remove these posts. Kip can start a new topic on that subject if he so wishes.

How could you not think his posts were related. besides if they nuked every post that was a little off thread, there would be no posts in here.

Most liberals would be perfectly happy with voter ID laws if the laws made it mandatory for election authorities to make such ID free and reasonably accessible for those without cars, etc.

I bet if they required an ID to play the Lotto, everyone would have one then