Yes, this is apparently something the highest court in the land must settle for us. Because the idea that citizens, and citizens only, should be able to vote only after they’ve proven that they are actually eligible to vote is a concept that’s apparently just too controversial.
WASHINGTON (AFP) - In a case that could roil the US presidential race, the US Supreme Court will consider whether requiring voters to provide identification to cast a ballot is constitutional.
Traditionally, US polling station monitors could simply check to see that a voter’s “fresh” signature was the same as the one on record on the books, to keep one person from casting another’s ballot.
But in an updating of rules and procedures following the 2000 presidential vote fiasco, more than half of the 50 US states passed laws requiring voters to present one form of identification to cast ballots—an unusually sensitive issue in a country where there is no national ID card.
In most cases, a library card would do the trick.
But in Indiana and a handful of other states, it is necessary to present a form of identification issued by a government agency, such as a passport, driver’s license or military ID. . . .
Critics argue that Indiana’s law, passed in 2005, keeps some citizens from exercising their right to vote. And unjustly so, they say, because no one in Indiana has been prosecuted for voting in another’s place. Others say fraud balloons electoral lists and irregularities in absentee-ballot or mail-in voting.
The idea that the simple act of obtaining a state-issued ID in order to vote, something that is totally free for those that can’t afford it, is an insurmountable obstacle that a significant number of citizens can’t overcome is just plain ridiculous. If going to the local court house or other government office to obtain an ID is too difficult for some of these people, how in the world do they get down to their local polling place?
In Iraq they’ve managed to hold three elections since the toppling of Saddam Hussein, each one executed under the threat of violence and murder of terrorists. What sort of an example do we set for that fledgling democracy, and indeed the many other places in the world where the struggle for freedom is on-going, when our citizens can’t even be bothered to spend 15 - 30 minutes getting a free ID at a government office?
These objections to voter ID laws aren’t about poll taxes or voting rights, they’re about keeping our elections susceptible to fraud. Which isn’t an objective that’s all that unique to either political party, but at least right-leaning Americans are trying to do something to clean this up. The left seems perfectly content to sit back and enjoy the fruits of the deceptions perpetrated by far-left activist groups like ACORN.
Original article
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 24
The idea that the simple act of obtaining a state-issued ID in order to vote, something that is totally free for those that can't afford it, is an insurmountable obstacle that a significant number of citizens can't overcome is just plain ridiculous.
Either Port has not read the Indiana legislation or he is being willfully dishonest. While the ID is free---the means to obtain it may well not be. For example, if one doesn't have a driver's license or passport or other Government-issued ID--one has to produce a certified copy of one's birth certificate. In most states, a certified copy of a birth certificate will cost you $50 or more. Additionally, in order to obtain a certified birth certificate, one must physically go to the county clerk's office--which may be hundreds of miles away.
Perhaps the most glaring aspect of Port's dishonesty is the omission of how often voter fraud occurs. In Indiana, there has been exactly zero cases of voter fraud prosecuted in cases where someone who is ineligible to vote has voted.
I have a crazy idea there are people who drive aroung picking up people and take them to vote. Well why not pick up those who need a ride to get an ID and take them and get it. But better to claim inability than do some thing about it.
People need to grow up and be adults.
That's all that need to be said.
I'm not sure what is going on in Indiana though...
Zero.
People do need to grow up and recognize that if the GOP is trying to pass a law to address non-existent crimes---perhaps the law isn't being passed for the purpose of preventing crime. This is yet another case where the GOP is trying to disenfranchise poorer voters. It's really no different than the poll taxes used in the South during the Jim Crow-era.
Again, you really fail to address the central issue: given the fact (and it's a hard fact) that voter impersonation or ineligible voting is virtually non-existent--what is the true purpose of legislation that could adversely affect between 10 and 20M US voters?
And tell me who are those 10 and 20M US voters that are going to be adversely affected?
Without some form of ID there will be (and has been) far too much fraud. The old adage "vote early and vote often" didn't come about because of someone's imagination.
Being registered in multiple locales or states is not against the law. If it were, there'd be a lot of military folks and snowbirds who would be in trouble. What is against the law is the same person voting twice or in mutiple locales.
But again, there is no proof this is a problem.
I have to present IDs to do all sorts of things that are far, far less important than voting.
So? You signed up for whatever it is that requires you to show ID. Again, there is no evidence that fraud is occuring.
Both parties 'enjoy' voter fraud as long as it is their favor.
What the hell is wrong with a national ID card?
What are you so afraid of?
I swear I don't understand why it's such a big deal to prove who you are before you vote
It does not cost fifty bucks to get a birth certificate, i don't care where you live. Also you do not have to travel to the clerks office, you can order it online or by phone and have it mailed to your address by the good ole USPS.
http://www.vitalchek.com/agency_locator.aspx?eventtype=birth
YES, WE CAN!!
We are dangerously close to losing our democracy due to fraud, abuse of election law, and the requirement that each candidate one-up their opponent on fund-raising. You cannot receive that much money without being compromised in one way or another.