National Conferece of State Legislatures Website- http://www.ncsl.org/programs/legismgt/elect/taskfc/voteridreq.htm
Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles Website-
A "hot" political debate that is currently taking place across the nation and in Washington, D.C., concerns the issue of voter identification. Today, no national law requires voters to present any form of photo identification when going to the polls to vote. Opponents to voter identification view a requirement of presenting photo id before casting votes as a public act of discrimination. On the other hand, those in favor of adopting legislation to make voter identification mandatory believe that this requirement would decrese the amount of fraud and illegal voters in political elections. In some elections across the country, politicians offer incentives to the voters who will cast multiple votes in favor of them. How can this be done? Simple. The voter casts one vote under his or her real name, but because there is no requirement to present photo identification, that same individual can go to the polls later that day and vote under another name-- often the name of a deceased person. This strategy sounds immoral and "dirty," doesn't it? Well, that's politics!
According to the National Conference of State Lesiglatures, twenty-five states require some form of identification before casting a vote at the polls. However, only seven of the twenty-five actually require a photo on the identification. Mississippi falls in the 50 percent of states that do not require any identification at the polls. In the states that require identification, but not necessarily with a photo, polls accept Social Security cards, hunting licenses, or even credit cards. Many who are opposed to voter identification argue that requiring people to identify themselves before voting is discrimination. How someone may ask? I'm not too sure; it's a good question. Everyone would be required to present identification, not just select groups of individuals. Unlike poll taxes and the Grandfather clause, voter identification is not intended to keep people away from the polls. Instead, voter id would ensure that American voters do not abuse their privilege to vote, and it would prevent politicians from carrying out illegal campaigning methods.
When considering the requirement for voter identification, most think of showing a driver's license as the proof of identification. Opponents believe that requiring voter id would keep those who are unable to drive away from the polls. However, other forms of photo id other than a driving license are available to the public free of charge. For example, in Connecticut, if you do not possess a vehicle and do not drive, you may obtain a non-driver id. Also, photo identification is required to do several daily activities. We must present id to board an airplane, buy alcohol, use credit cards, write checks, the list could go on and on, yet we don't feel we are being discriminated against when we get asked for these specific purposes. Take boarding an airplane as an example. After September 11, 2001, airport security cracked down and now requires every individual to present a ticket and a photo id before entering the terminals and before boarding the actual plane. We don't complain, however, because we feel as if our safety is being ensured from possible terror attacks. In fact, we would probably be extremely irritated and frustrated with the airport security if they just let people board planes freely without any photo id.
If this is actually the case, how could we be against voter identification? Hopefully, people want those elected officials who are chosen to serve the public to be truthfully elected. Maybe I'm crazy, but I do not particularly care to have an elected official who used illegal and immoral methods of campaigning to represent me in office. Without legislation requiring voters to have photo identification, officials who have bribed voters or offered incentives to individuals to vote for them have a lesser chance of getting caught and a higher chance of being voted into office. When the United States was founded, the government was set up to be a democracy, in which every person would have an equal vote in the election of government officials. Sadly, today, politics has become so "dirty" that politicians are encouraging individuals to illegally vote twice. Not only are the politicians encouraging voter fraud, but also, the individual (in a sense) is practicing identity theft by proclaiming to be someone else and taking their vote. Because there is no requirement for voter identification, we let people get away with these dispicable and crooked acts. Making photo identificaion mandatory should not offend those politicians who are honest and want each individual to be equally represented. Requiring photo identification is not discrimination; rather, if a person who cannot drive does not take the time (or if they do not care enough about exercising their right to vote) to get a photo identification card, then they should not be voting in the first place.
1 comment:
I don't think that politicians are encouraging voters to vote multiple times illegally. Instead, certain voters care so much about who gets elected that they are willing to violate the law in order to ensure that their candidates wins.
During the 2004 presidential election, one such over-excited voter in Alabama reported every Hispanic name in the phone book to INS. The day before the elections, he contested their eligibility to vote. Standard procedure required that INS suspend the contested voters' ability to vote until the completion of the investigation. This prevented a lot of Hispanic Americans from voting. Meanwhile, with the exception of Cubans, Hispanics traditionally vote for Democrats. So, this one man's activities altered the local results of the election.
It's not that the Republican party asked him to disrupt our democracy. Instead, he was such a strong supporter that he was willing to do it on his own.
Likewise, the electronic voting machines installed in Florida had a button you could press in the back of the machine that would allow the voter to vote multiple times. So, without anyone asking the voters, many Floridians reached behind the machine and pressed the button in order to ensure more votes for their candidates. Nobody asked them to do this.
So, I wouldn't assign guilt to the candidates for other people's immoral behavior.
Post a Comment