Thread: Voter IDs, done right, can work

Editorial: Voter IDs, done right, can work

Updated 17h 10m ago

Supporters of laws that require voters to have a photo ID say that even one fraudulent ballot undermines the electoral process. Fair enough.

• OPPOSING VIEW: Our law prevents fraud

But the reverse is also true: Even one eligible voter who loses the right to vote because of a flawed ID law undermines fair elections and cheats that citizen of democracy's most fundamental right.

The problem is living up to both of these noble sentiments simultaneously.

Requiring voters to show ID at the polls to prove that they are who they say they are, and that they're eligible to vote, is a reasonable precaution against fraud. Fraudulent in-person voting seems to be far rarer than other, more effective forms of vote stealing, but it happens, and it could conceivably swing a razor-tight election.

Given that concern, this page agreed with the recommendation of the bipartisan commission headed by former Democratic president Jimmy Carter and former Republican secretary of State James Baker, which called for uniform photo ID for voters. But ID supporters typically ignore the other half of the panel's advice: Any ID requirement should be phased in over five years, and states should bend over backwards to make sure eligible voters can get free IDs, including sending out mobile units to provide them.

That's not what's happening. The almost exclusively Republican state lawmakers and governors who have rushed to impose voter ID laws in time for this fall's elections seem to care more about requiring an ID than ensuring that every legal voter can get one. Studies show that the 10% of Americans who lack acceptable ID tend to be low-income, minorities, the elderly and urban residents, who tend to vote Democratic.

USATODAY OPINION


It's awfully hard not to see a deliberate political agenda here, and the ongoing tribulations of Pennsylvania's new voter ID law illustrate the point.

Pennsylvania's law was passed by the state's Republican legislature and signed by its GOP governor in March. Though it was supposedly aimed at combating vote fraud, House Majority Leader Mike Turzai gave away the game at a June meeting of the Republican State Committee as he ticked off a list of legislative accomplishments: "Voter ID, which is going to allow Gov. Romney to win the state of Pennsylvania — done."

More recently, a seven-day trial in a lawsuit against the new ID requirement lifted the veil further. The state stipulated early in the proceedings that it had no evidence of past vote fraud, would not argue that there was any, and had no evidence that vote fraud would occur in the absence of the new law.

Lawyers attacking the law presented more than a dozen legal voters who had tried to get voter ID but could not. Testimony showed that Pennsylvania officials had no good idea how many of the state's roughly 8.2 million voters lacked ID acceptable under the new law.

The first estimate was 89,000, which was then raised to 759,000. Testimony at the trial showed it could be almost 1.5 million.

To its credit, the Pennsylvania Department of State has been scrambling to make it easier for people without ID to get it. But trial testimony suggested that for all those efforts, state officials still grossly underestimate how many people need ID and overestimate the state's ability to provide it by Election Day.

The Pennsylvania court that heard the challenge to the voter ID law is expected to rule as early as next week. There and elsewhere, it makes sense to move deliberately to make sure the laws are implemented fairly. Otherwise, efforts to ensure clean elections can too easily turn into schemes to suppress the vote.

Voter IDs, done right, can work
=============================
POLL @ link.

and
What are the voter ID laws in your state?
@ Voter IDs, done right, can work

An elderly resident who goes into a Care Facility uses Medicaid signs a Health Directive a will, a trust etc has to have a legal picture I.D. If they don't have an acceptable ID they have to have a statement from two wittnesses signed in front of a Notary. So tell me again how having a legal ID would incovenience them.

Why on God's green earth are people whining about voter ID? We have to use it literally every day of our lives for everything from writing a check, cashing a check, using credit cards, registering vehicles, etc. etc. etc. To suggest that requiring an ID to vote somehow disenfranchises some segment of the voting population is ludicrous on it's face! I have seen not one single source that can accurately account for all the voter fraud that goes on in this country but common sense alone suggests that even the possibility of a SINGLE illegal vote cast should be minimized. Else, what's the point of voting? I know that I don't want my vote to be nullified by some @$$hole that shouldn't be voting! The Democrats know #@$@% well why they are crying about voter ID requirements. They have the MOST to gain by ensuring that fraud continues. These people have absolutely no moral compass and in their world there is no wrong. Makes me sick.

And how do the elderly collect social security without ID. Current requirements are tougher than running for President because you must provide a formal certificate of birth with raised seal issued by the state in which you were born. No exceptions.

Also: 1. The Supreme Court has already ruled states have the right to establish voter ID requirements
2. Most state voter ID provisions have processes in place for absentee ballots, early voting provisions, and provisions for voting where the vote is held until eligibility is establishes, at which time the vote counts.
3. It is not the responsibility of the state to hold everyone's hand on this. Citizens are expected to be responsible. How do these citizens who are being disenfranchised get their food, hold a job, go to school, receive medical care, etc. Are all of those poor people in Pennsylvania housebound with bars on the windows? I doubt it.
4. But, if the Democrats are so concerned about it why don't they do the same thing they did in Nevada to get all of the casino workers to the polls? And if the voters have to find their way to the polls, why can't they get to a state facility that will issue the ID?
5. The following is a stat from the 2008 presidential election:

The overall voting age (18 and older) citizen population in the United States in 2008 was 206 million compared with 197 million in 2004. Of that total, 146 million, or 71 percent, reported being registered to vote. That's slightly lower than the 72 percent who reported being registered to vote in the 2004 presidential election, but does represent an increase of approximately 4 million registered voters. The percentage of those registered to vote that actually did so was slightly higher in the 2008 election (90 percent) than in 2004 (89 percent).

So, according to this report, only 71-72 per cent of eligible voters are actually registered to vote. Of those, about 90% vote. That amounts to only 60 per cent of the eligible voters actually did register and vote. And USA Today is concerned about disenfranchising someone because they might have unique barriers to registering? Did USA Today do any credible research to determine how many of the 89,000 or 759,000, or 1.5 million Pennsylvanians they fear will be disenfranchised are currently registered? What percentage has voted in a national election in the last 12 years?

I would guess the knee jerk Democrat reaction to voter ID is really based on the party's knowledge that voter fraud is an important bloc in their base support.