What illegal votes are you referring to exactly?

I didn’t refer to any illegal votes; the concern is how loose restrictions could lead to voting illegality. But, since you seem to want to dig on this, lets:

Very few voting districts ever do professional, statistical due diligence on illegal voting behavior, and when they do, they tend to report those aberrations in raw numbers, as opposed to extrapolating the aberrations out to the entire population.

Let’s say, for example, that a voting jurisdiction said “We did an analysis and found 3 illegal votes.” I’m sure that you would say “See? We don’t have an illegal voting problem.”

Well, the stats junkie in me would first caution you by pointing out that there are thousands of voting jurisdictions in the US, and 3 bad votes in one does not mean that other jurisdictions would find the same.

But more disturbing is when the jurisdiction fails to mention the scope of their analysis. 3 votes out of 1,000,000 (.0003%) doesn’t bother me. But if that’s 3 votes out of 100 (3%) damn right I’m bothered. And you should be as well.

Even more to the point, voting is fundamental to the integrity of a democracy. It is bewildering at best to hear otherwise intelligent people like yourself arguing for loose guidelines when tighter ones have been shown to be both simple to implement, inexpensive to implement, and do not impede anyone’s access to the ballot box.

Yes, the government does need to justify how it spends my tax dollars. It’s called accountability.

All for it.

I am sorry that you think that everyone is guilty of some fraudulent charge and have no respect for the Constitutions due process clause.

This reference to due process would make sense *if and only if* there existed no current restrictions to voting. You see, when you have restrictions on something, it is perfectly reasonable to ask a person for evidence that they meet those restrictions; and you are not making a de facto accusation against them by asking for such evidence.

But, we have several restrictions on voting, the most important in this case being age and citizenship. Because of these, it is not a violation of “due process” to insist that an individual show some sort of identification that attests to both of those factors.

In fact, one could very easily justify the a requirement, on those grounds, that one show a birth certificate or naturalization papers in order to vote, along with visual evidence that you are in fact the person cited in those papers.

Too much to get passed the second amendment?

I have no idea what the 2nd has to do with any of this.