Comments on: Are Election Day Freebies A Violation of Federal Law?

By: Rebekah

Rebekah — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 23:50:14 +0000

It’s ridiculous that people turn so-called issues like this into something so political (puns aside). At best, Starbucks (or Krispy Kreme or whomever) is making a goodwill gesture to encourage people to celebrate their country and its unique democratic structure. At worst, Starbucks et al are trying to generate income through a goodwill gesture to encourage people to celebrate their country and its unique democratic structure. Neither of which is unreasonable or harmful and neither of which violates the intent and spirit of the above law. I agree with everyone above–they’re not buying votes, they’re celebrating America.

By: Election Day 2010 Freebies: What Do They Mean? | taxgirl

Election Day 2010 Freebies: What Do They Mean? | taxgirl — Tue, 02 Nov 2010 15:26:38 +0000

[...] Of course, in the effort to get out the vote, we’re going to hear about allegations of voter fraud, vote tampering and bribery. Increasingly, these issues are associated with the so-called Election Day freebies like free cups of coffee. Is it vote buying? Is it income? Here’s my take from 2008: Are Election Day Freebies A Violation of Federal Law? [...]

By: howard payne

howard payne — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 04:05:48 +0000

Loritta Sances is well known to sign up dead people to vote for her ?

By: howard payne

howard payne — Sun, 03 Jan 2010 04:03:58 +0000

Why has not ACORN prosecuted for voter fraud for using the billions given to sign up dead people? HP

By: Are Election Day Freebies A Violation of Federal Law? at Voter Fraud On Best Political Blogs

Wed, 05 Nov 2008 20:09:06 +0000

[...] Are Election Day Freebies A Violation of Federal Law? But companies are taking no chances in light of the concerns about voter fraud, offering freebies to all who ask and not just those who voted. [...]

By: Lori

Lori — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:22:40 +0000

Is a free cup of burnt coffee really a bribe? Is it payment? Or is it just a free cup a normally overpriced coffee? Does Starbucks really hold that much clout with voters? Are there caffeine addicts who voted simply to score that free cup and calm the withdrawal symptoms? Will tea drinkers sue for discrimination? (The answer – no. They gave me free tea just as willingly)

The law was clearly intended to avoid people bribing others to vote for a specific candidate. Frankly, we should have 100-percent voter turnout, so enticing someone with free coffee to care enough to vote for ANYONE THEY WANT should be encouraged.

By: Melody

Melody — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 05:27:20 +0000

We heard a little of that scuttlebut at my ward. Just to be sure that they get credit for voting, we made sure that everyone who voted got a sticker. So, if you voted in our precinct, maybe you got something for free. Doesn’t mean that you had to vote Republican or Democrat, just that you voted. Where’s the harm (that is, unless it’s very large amounts of alcohol before you staggered into the polls — didn’t smell any of that today)?

By: Kay

Kay — Wed, 05 Nov 2008 01:11:48 +0000

What kind of grump would think these promotions violate federal law!?! For that, they get a full-price cup of coffee without a heat guard!

By: Robert D Flach

Robert D Flach — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 21:31:15 +0000

KPE-

Of course it is nonsense. A typically “PC” overreaction.

To be honest I doubt Starbucks cares one ounce if people vote or not. While in the store to get a free cup of coffee a person might also pick up, and pay for, a cup for a friend. Or buy a muffin or cookie, at the Starbucks inflated price, to go with the free coffee , etc. They are using the gimmick to bring people, who might not otherwise want to pay a ridiculous price for a cup of coffee, into their store.

While I would gladly accept a free cup of coffee from any store, for any reason, I certainly would not pay Starbucks’ price for a cup of coffee, except when forced to at the airport.

TWTP