There has been an increase in controversy over voter ID and registration laws, as many states are passing them to discourage voter fraud, and ensure only US citizens can vote. Critics of these laws say that they disproportionately effect minorities and the poor, preventing them from voting when (if they did not have to buy an ID card or go through a lengthy registration process) they would have otherwise. Read this article from NPR (and do other independent research on your own) and add to the discussion. Be sure, in your comments, to include reasons why you believe what you do. This is an open forum for any discussion regarding this issue, but here are some questions to consider:
1. Should voters decide the fate of voter ID laws or should the courts?
2. Should photo IDs be required to vote? What should be done if citizens can not afford to buy an ID card?
3. Is it constitutional for states to have different voter ID laws? Concerning federalism, should these laws vary by state or should there be a federal law addressing the issue?
28 comments:
I feel that all voter must present a US government issued ID card to be able to vote. While i personally believe that this voting law should be voted on by the american people, it may seem that it would not be the appropriate setting for such a event. Issues would arise most likely as people without identification would vote against such a law while citizens with identification voting for this law most likely since they already posses ID's. This decision should be handled by the court system as it would present a fair and equal opportunity for the law to be inspected by knowledgeable professionals. It is understandable that not everyone will be able to buy an ID card if they do not already posses the multiple possible forms ( drivers licence, military ID, passport) the government should issue vote id cards which someone would request by either going to a local DMV or by mailing in a copy of their birth certificate, and a photo which would have similar requirements as a passport photo. The photo would be taken at any place that takes passport photos ( post-office, DMV, Walgreens, Walmart, etc.) free of charge with a voucher printed offline during the application process. Although this plan may not be the most efficient, it will drastically lower the nuumber of illegal voters or people who vote multiple times.
My response to this post comes in two parts: one I think is too interesting not to mention, the other reflects my more personal point of view. The more interesting one (at least to me, maybe I’m being kind of nerdy here) is an argument concerning why the U.S. government (and citizens, alike) feel the need to exclude non-U.S. citizens from voting. When you first consider that statement it seems almost apparent that non-citizens shouldn’t vote — why should they? But I feel that’s the wrong question to ask, and rather, it may be better to ask why they shouldn’t be voting. As a country, we pride ourselves on promoting democracy yet it is our basic tenant to limit voting to those who are citizens. Does that not seem mildly contradictory? We want democracy everywhere, but in our own country we value the votes of some people — citizens — more than others. Now, of course, I understand the implications of this argument and why we limit voting to citizens; if you open up voting in that way you certainly allow for the possibility of the country to be overthrown by radicals immigrating to the U.S. in huge numbers. Practically, I understand. Theoretically, it seems absurd.
Now, to address this topic more specifically, I think I’d have to air on the side of not requiring proof of citizenship for voting. To me, the situation is reminiscent of the classic “would you rather see ten guilty men go free or one innocent man go to prison?” — would you rather ten non-citizens can vote, or one citizen be denied that right? While both sides clearly have big issues, I find a larger problem with deliberately enacting law that will limit the rights of some people. It is fact (CNN statistics, BBC statistics, the works) that many people are simply too poor to pay for verification of their citizenship. Moreover, the U.S. has a low voter turn-out as it is and adding complication to the process seems counterproductive. In my personal opinion (this is not supported by any facts, anecdotes maybe), people are lazy and even if steps are implemented to make getting an ID card cheap or free, my assumption is that more people will decline to vote because of this extra hardship. To create legislation that requires citizenship verification for voting is essentially to say, “Well yes, we know you won’t be able/want to vote anymore, but it’s more important to stop non-citizens from abusing the system.” I don’t want to live in a society where I could go to jail for a crime I didn’t commit, and I similarly don’t want to live somewhere where I can’t vote because of my economic status. If that means letting ten guilty men go free, letting ten non-citizens vote, then that’s just the price of ensuring rights to all American citizens. It’s an ugly price, but it’s better than the alternative.
I think that an ID should be presented to be able to vote. Knowing that true citizens care about our future makes for a well suited fit. Yes, some people may not be able to because of money issues, such as homeless people, but the thought of uneducated people voting is also harmful to everyone. Not being Id'ed while voting can cause more trouble and make people less reliable as to where their head is at. An ID is an important possession that anybody should have and being able to prove yourself makes everybody feel somewhat comfortable. If people wanted to impact the world that much and make a difference, they would work to get an ID or some form to show who they are and showing they have some compassion and care for what is ahead.
In my personal opinion I believe that voters should show some form of identification when they vote. Yes, voting is meant for every single American, but what is the point in the system if you are not voting as yourself? Voting was designed in this country for an individual to express his or her views. With a photo ID requirement, many of the people voting aren't affected, as they have a drivers license, passport, etc. The problem arises on the individuals who do not have photo identification. Now it is important to find an efficient and reliable way to get these certain citizens an ID. I do think that government issued ID's are the way to go, as they can be free to a person that needs them and they can be available to anyone. Now one of the problems discussed is that people are too lazy to go out and ask for this government issued photo ID. But, if you think about all of the other forms of ID, like a drivers license, it takes time and effort from us to get these. now we have a good reason for getting them, such as you know, driving. same with a passport. We spend our valuable time because we get something out of it. Well thats how voting should be, shouldn't it? Even though our votes seem extremely small, they voice our opinions. These people that would most likely be too lazy to get this identification, why should they vote? It is probably a safe assumption that they would be an uneducated voter, as they are too lazy to get an ID.
Now I believe that the Court system should resolve this matter, since it is about the voting system, and that the court system would keep their arguments more on the constitutional side. I've looked at many news articles, and many just describe it and then it turns into a political issue. It really doesn't have to be a political issue, as more of a moral one. I wish we lived in a society where this wasn't a consideration, but certain individuals have abused the power they've received and it has caused this kind of debate. As long as it would be possible and relatively simple and easy, and of course free to get a Photo ID, there should be photo ID requirements when voting.
I feel like the voters should have the choice in this, but I also feel that any educated voter would agree that an identification card should be required to vote. Without an identification card, not only can non-US citizens vote, but one voter might be able to vote several times under several different aliases. This may seem like a small deal- if only a few people do it, it won't make a difference, but when a few people do it at one place, at one time, and a few more at another place, and more at another, it can have a big effect. The right to vote is for every individual citizen, so people being incapable of affording IDs is definitely an issue, but there should be a way for those people to get an ID. The court should have some sort of financial aid for that, as an identification card is important, not only for voting, but you have to have an ID for more and more in this generation; flying, when being confronted by police, or for any rentals. The solution is simple. We don't all need to pay fifty dollars for a piece of plastic. And another fifty to take a drug and alcohol and road signs/ rules test. I think there should be some sort of photo ID available as an alternative to a drivers license. One that is government issued, with a picture, that doesn't tell you that you can drive or not, but it used for just that- identification. And identification alone.
I believe that photo IDs should be required to vote, but in a different manner than it is currently being done. Instead of having to show proof of citizenship, every person should have required national IDs that are free and given by the government with proof of residency in America. This technique is what they do in other countries like Korea, and can accommodate the less fortunate who can not afford to buy an ID card, which are the people whose vote matters the most because they need the most help, but whose vote didn't count before.
I believe that every citizen (assuming they are old enough) should have the potential to get a vote. Democracy was designed to represent the people, and a government cannot be representative of its population and its desires if they limit those who are able to vote. However, that does not mean I believe anyone anywhere should be able to vote. Asking a voter to show some proof of identification (passport, driver’s license, etc.), while maybe creating an extra step in the process, would ensure that fewer people vote just because they can. Adding an extra requirement has the potential to separate those who don’t actually care from those who want their vote – and voice – to count. While that may make it more difficult for some people, I think it would reveal who actually wants to take part in the political process. I believe keeping the federal form the way it is and adding a proof of identification would ensure that the maximum amount of people can vote, while making sure that those who do vote have shown that they want to do so. I do not believe that they should require proof of citizenship. If a non-citizen wants to take part in voting, wants their voice to be heard, I don’t think that’s the worst thing possible. I think that we should be encouraging people to vote. Lower and lower voter turnout, in my opinion, would be worse than a few non-citizens taking part in the democratic process. And maybe it is the lesser of two evils, allowing some non-citizens to vote as opposed to missing out on actual citizen votes. Our representative government only works if the people are able to contribute.
Since this is a federal issue, affecting the country at large, I understand that Congress wants to be able to determine what form is used. However, since this can also be a state issue, I can understand why they want to be able to select their own forms and requirements. In this case, I think it’s best resolved by the court, since they are the most able to determine what is constitutional.
(Additional source: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/24/us/politics/us-court-to-hear-case-on-voting-restrictions-as-arizona-prepares-for-polls.html?_r=0)
I believe that voter ID’s should be used when elections are being conducted. It makes sure that one person is not voting for another and vice versa. The voter ID’s would be the ticket to make it to the ballot to vote and I think that citizens should show proof of residency in America so only legal Americans can vote. Voting was a right given to the America people in the constitution, not for anyone in the world to come over and vote for an election that would most likely not even affect them. I don’t see why there is such a big issue for the use of Voter ID’s and if the person could not afford one, then they should submit information (W2’s and such) and the government should issue them a free ID because their finances could not handle the cost. The voting laws need to be the same in all the states so it is easier to enforce the same law; every voter is required to have a government issues Voter ID to receive a ballot. Also with federal laws, it prevents the issue of states having different laws on the ID’s and make people move to another state if they don’t agree with the system (which is highly unlikely but if they feel strong enough about the situation, they may move out of the state).
(1B) - Voting is a privilege that all United States citizens get to appreciate living in a country ruled by a democracy. While I feel that it should not take an arm and a leg to register to vote; providing a birth certificate or some other type of proof of citizenship would not be hard for citizens of the United States who are not illegally abiding in this country. It would prevent unlawful citizens from influencing elections as well as in sure that one person does not vote for somebody else. While also I feel like voting rights should be consistent in each state so voting is easier; each state does have a constitutional right to make their own voting qualifications. States should receive this right since the constitution is the supreme law of the land in the United States. Most United States citizens who are register to vote do not which is a huge reason to make voting easier. But the people who truly care about voting and who already vote will not find it hard to provide proof of United States citizenship. Voting is a great quality of the United States and should only be allowed to people who are citizens; not people who live in the United States illegally.
I believe that all potential voters should present a valid ID as proof of citizenship. As a citizen, it becomes one of your assured rights to be able to vote. Citizens pay the taxes that fund the government which gives them a not only a right but priority in voting. Photo ID would be a small obligation for most people and it would help legitimize the votes that are cast during elections. A small certificate the size of a drivers license with the appropriate credentials would work. Now although citizens should have priority in voting and should be the ones who choose our leaders and policies, all residents of America should be given a chance to voice their concerns and opinions. However there are other ways for people who are not legal citizens to voice their opinion. Social media has taken flight and plays a large role in getting a message to become public or "viral". In the end I believe that US citizens are the ones who should have the ability to cast their vote in favor of who they believe should run the country.
(1B) I believe that voters should decide the fate of the voter ID laws. It is an American right to freedom of speech and press, so it’s only fair that we decide on who should vote and who should not. I am not saying that all Americans want everyone to vote including aliens, because some won’t; but I say let the people decide on that. I do think that photo ids should be required to vote, but I don’t feel they should be costly. Photo ids ensure security on who is voting and number of times a person votes. They should be a priced at something affordable or even free, because everyone’s vote counts and makes a difference. If in some case someone cannot afford and ID card the government should provide an alternative for those people no one should be left out when it comes to voting. I think it’s constitutional for the states to have different voting laws because it basically says so in the constitution. In the NPR article it states that in “Article One, Section Two of the U.S. Constitution, the states solely get to decide who votes in elections and get to police those qualifications”. If a state wants to change the voting law is up to the state. Now will it cause controversy, maybe? But it is up to the state and the state’s citizens.
In order for the process of voting to be fair in the United State, voters must have identification cards issued by their state Department of Motor Vehicle center. The Supreme Court should be allowed to make the decision regarding voter ID laws because the voters are the population that is being debated in this argument. The Supreme Court is better informed and has the foresight to see how their decision may affect the future where the voters are more focused on the ramifications of the decision on the present. Photo ID cards should be necessary for people to vote since the only people that should be voting in the USA are citizens of the USA who, for the most part, have the good of the USA in mind when they are voting. There is no excuse for someone to not be able to afford an ID card. Even the homeless have the opportunity to visit shelters and social workers who work to make the lives of homeless people better. My mother was a social worker for many years and explained that a homeless person can visit a shelter such as the Sulzbacher center where a social worker or employee will take them to the DMV or government office where they can go through the process of obtaining an ID card to vote. Even if the homeless person doesn't have the money to complete the process, nearly all homeless centers will take care of the charge of getting the homeless person an ID card. On another note, I don't think it is constitutional for states to have different voter ID laws except in the cases when there is a vote for local or state government positions. When positions are up for grabs in the federal government, all states should have the same laws, otherwise certain people may not have a voice in the elections. According to NPR and The Atlantic, certain states are trying to subvert the standards for voter registration that Congress set. The only case where voting laws should vary state by state is when state or local government positions or laws are being voted upon. Otherwise, when national issues come to the ballot, all states should have the same laws. Voting is an important part of the freedoms we are allotted in this country and neither should we the voters, nor the government take this issue respecting voter ID laws lightly.
All voters should have to prove that they are legal U.S citizens in order to be eligible to vote, in my opinion. Although democracy is meant to have the power in 'the people' and be representative of 'the people' I feel that the founding fathers inferred 'the people' would be citizens. Although this is an inference, the main critics of this bill are concerned about discrimination to the minorities; quite frankly if the minorities are not U.S citizens then we should not be worried about offending them! America offends many minorities around the world daily, but if they are not U.S citizens and we aren't causing them harm, no foul! For the issue of the immigrants that are not legal U.S citizens voting, I believe they have no right to vote. But for the issue of the cost of voter ID's and registration cost I do believe there is some discrimination against the poor and if the poor are citizens this must be addressed. If the Government is going to require the citizens to have ID's then they should also supply the citizens with ID's. Use some federal tax money to supply all citizens with a photo ID voting card. Continuing, all voting laws should be the same for each state; meaning a national standard must be agreed upon. If some states do require photo ID and some don't it is not fair and it is not equal. In this case 'big government' is necessary because voting is such a significant aspect of democracy is must be strictly regulated to make sure only the citizens of the country have the power to vote.
I think that it is clear that the measures taken against voter fraud around the country are politically motivated. On the surface the argument that Voter ID laws preserve the integrity of voting is a sound one. However looking closer it is clear that there exists a stunning lack of any widespread voter fraud. The Washington Post reported that a "comprehensive investigation" of voter fraud found 31 counts between 2000 and 2014 out of over 1 billion ballots casts throughout the U.S. As noted by Al Jazeera these laws have been met with fierce opposition, as anti voter ID law advocates take cases around the country to the courts. These laws put the burden overwhelmingly on minorities, young people, the elderly,and the poor, making it more difficult for them to vote. I believe that requiring a photo ID for voting is a common sense solution to ensuring that those who vote are who they say they are. At the same time, there are many who's economic condition makes attaining a voter ID very difficult. I believe the Federal Government should waive the costs of a photo ID for those in serious economic need. Furthermore I feel that it is the responsibility of the courts to decide the fate of these laws. While no court is perfectly impartial, I don't believe a decision on such an issue of civil rights should be entrusted to polarized American citizens. Finally I believe it is the Federal Government's responsibility to ensure uniform respect for the basic right to vote across all states. History has shown us that when states are allowed to decide for themselves on civil rights issues, such as voting, school integration, and other rights the result is often not a good one.
Everyone should be against voter fraud. I think the states have every right to monitor and set their own laws for voting and voting registration. Showing proof of identification and citizenship seems legitimate, one has to show this while driving by carrying a license. Identification could be something simple like a work or school ID card, something inexpensive and not even a federal issued ID. Also, voting should only be done by citizens and Kansas, North Carolina, and Arizona have every right to impose "restrictions" (under Article One, Section Two of the Constitution) because issues in America need to be voted on by the true, law abiding American citizens. In America people enjoy democracy but fraud voting is taking advantage of this freedom and muting the concerns of people in the polls who actual follow the laws of citizenship and the federal government. Democracy is not giving people the freedom to follow the laws or not. Immigrants should obtain legal status in order to vote. Showing proof of identification would stop people from lying to the sworn statement at the polls and prevent further voter fraud.
I have mixed feelings toward this discussion. On one side I feel that non-citizens being able to vote is trivial. A vote is a vote regardless of who is behind it and should hold just as much weight as a vote from an American citizen. I understand that the idea of too many non-citizen's voting who may have hidden agenda's is scary and threatening to our country, but what about the educated voters who don't the means to acquire an ID. To fix this, the government should provide a way for people without proof of identification to apply for free a voter's ID card that is only valid for that year. Also, there should be a federal law concerning the issue. Voter's across the country should be expected to meet the same qualifications.
(1B)
I think that the voters should have the power to decide the fate of the I.D. laws. The reason behind this is because they are the ones who are voting!I think that photo I.D should be required because it is required with things that are not as big of a deal as voting is. Some places ask for your I.D when you are using a debit or credit card.Voting is ten times more important than using a debit or credit card. I think that the states should have their own laws on regulating voter ID laws. It is their state and they should be able to decide the rules and regulations behind voting in that state. In concern of the minority...I think that only US citizens should be able to vote. I think that the people who sneak into this country or do not have their citizenship should be able to vote. Yes, people can argue that this is a democracy and a free nation and all of that, however, this is The United States, not just some nation people should be allowed to sneak in and decide the future for this nation. The denizens that have their citizenship should choose the path this nation goes down, not the immigrants. On the subject of the people who cannot afford a voter I.D card, I think that this should be funded by the government whether it be the national government or the state government. Everyone who is a US citizen should have the ability to vote and should be given an I.D card. This is the United States, and its future should be determined by the legal citizens.
In my opinion when it comes to voting, a form of ID should be present in the process. Since people are voting for the future of the United States, citizens of America should be the ones deciding what they want. When it comes to the problem of some people not being able to afford an ID, then there should be an alternative way to at least provide a minor identification card for all citizens to show that they are legal residents because it is important to get all people’s votes counted and rather not leave anyone’s decision out. Since we are a system of United States, I believe the courts should decide the voter laws because many states will disagree on what they would rather implement in their system and that can cause tension. Whereas if the courts decided, it would be a national law that would apply to all states.
In my opinion, I believe that all voters should have some form of identification in order to prove that they are legal and that they are citizens of the United States. Even though I do agree with the fact that voters should have a say in how they should vote in their states, considering that we are living in a democracy, but I think that ulimately, it should be the courts decision because they know what's in the best interest for the United States. The courts and are governments need to be aware of the votes that towards any election to know that they are legitimate and accounted for, whereas having fraud voters, "it effectively cancels out the vote of a U.S. citizen." This is where I would have mixed feelings about this controversy because I do feel like the people in Kansas and Arizona should have at least some sort of input or contribution as to how they want to identify their voter ID since it is their vote going towards political interests. However, the courts in those states ultimately seek what is in the best interest of the people, how they can effectively check voter IDs in order to decrease fraud voters. One thing I can agree on is that all voters should have some form of identification to show that the are legitimate and that they have the right to vote under this state. I believe that a photo ID is always the best option becuase it will give an accurate physical description of the person to ensure that another person is benefitting of someone else's ID, and it can help decrease the chance of fraud voters if this enacted. Photo IDs should be required because not only will it make easier on the officials verifying with others, but it will also eliminate the chance of fruad and deception amongst voters in that particular error. If the person, however, cannot afford to buy an ID card, the courts of that particular state can provide alternatives in order to verify their citizenship in the U.S, such as using their passports, birth certificates because then they verify and validate birthdates, etc. I believe that implenting alternatives will give all U.S. citizens a better to chance to vote equally and to make sure everyone is represented not only within their state, but also in the national governement, becuase once it is enacted in one state, the national government can propose it other states, so that they can reduce the amount of fraud voters in other states in order to recreate the political unity but also to strengthen the democracy within our government.
(1B) Currently I am rocking both sides of the T-chart. This is because I don't really see a problem with asking people to provide proof of them being a United States citizen, being that some institutions like schools and hospital ask for it anyway. Being apart of the future 2016 presidential election, I feel that it may be incumbent to use voter ID law, to weed out any people who are non-citizens to voting. The voters should not be in charge of this topic because there will probably be a point where people who are aware of the candidates, laws, and/or practices may not be able to vote due to their demographic. Incorporating voter ID laws may also decrease on election participation in a way that as it was stated in the NPR article that an alien vote cancels out a citizen vote. I do believe that some of the participation in voting may come directly from non-citizens. Photo ID should be required if it is not, because i feel that it is an adequate representation of being a citizen than voter registration cards. With voter registration cards people can lose it easily, just print them on their own, because it's just paper, or can be a non-citizen voting with one. I think of all states should have voter ID law the laws should not vary by state and there should be a federal law addressing the issue. I also believe that those with permanent residency should be able to vote.
Jamary K. Sykes
I do not think proof of citizenship should be required to vote. Firstly, according to the Washington State Department of Licensing, you do not legally count as a citizen and cannot gain proof of citizenship if you are here on a green card or a work visa. Why not? You’re living in the USA for who knows how long AND you’re here legally! Why can’t you get proof of citizenship? Already, this concept seems unfair, so to deny these people voting rights is absurd. Often immigrants, both legal and illegal, are more aware of our government and history than native born citizens. Having or not having proof of citizenship in no way determines your knowledge on the topics. It’d be more beneficial to actually require some form of knowledge and intelligence to vote, to be honest. Not only this, but for a democratic government, America has a very low voting turn out. So by denying even more people the right to vote, we’d be lowering our voting participation even more, not allowing those who cannot gain or afford proof of citizenship and those who do not have an ID card. Voting laws should be controlled by the federal government, forcing all states to have the same voting requirements.
I believe that the courts and voters should be able to cooperate to decide the fate of these laws. I believe that because the people are the ones out voting, they should have some sort of say in whether or not these laws should be protected or expelled. On the other hand, the vast knowledge of the courts would be able to assist the process by ultimately deciding if the laws are constitutional or not. On the subject of photo ID, I do believe that voters should have a photo ID. If you are not in possession of one, then most likely (not all the time, but most of the time) you are illegally in America to begin with. A really great example of voter fraud was back in the presidential election of 2012 (to my best recollection), when citizens were using the ID's of deceased relatives or just random deceased people to vote for Barack Obama. This was reported to have made a slightly significant impact on the outcome of the election, although statistically Mitt Romney still would have lost. If a citizen has trouble financially purchasing a photo ID, then I'm sure the government can supply them with one, I mean, the government gives out welfare to anyone that asks for it regardless of need! I believe that it is very constitutional for states to have their own voter ID laws, because it is the government's responsibility to make certain of the fact that no illegal immigrants are voting in OUR elections on any level. The constitution says that voting rights will be extended to the people who meet the following criteria: "All persons born or naturalized" "are citizens" of the United States and the U.S. state where they reside" (14th Amendment),"Who are eighteen years of age or older, to vote, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of age"(26th Amendment). These two amendments alone make it constitutional for the states to be able to crack down on voter fraud issues. I think that these laws should be able to vary by state, because states such as Arizona and Texas (others as well) have a really bad problem with illegal immigration, and the chance of voter fraud occurring in these states is much more likely than voter fraud occurring in Massachusetts.
1B
I don't think there is any discrimination going on when people are rooting for voter ID laws. It's simple - if they can't prove their a citizen, they can't vote. In my opinion, I don't think that non-US citizens should be able to vote. They can apply to become a citizen, and that may take a while, but it ensures that who is voting is a recognized citizen of the United States and that no fraudulent voting is taking place.
I think that voter ID laws should be set in place and decided by voters. America was built on the idea of the citizens deciding on what laws should be set in place, so allowing the voters to choose whether or not voter ID laws should exist is alright.
I think that photo IDs should be required to vote. When voting, you should be able to identify yourself wherever you go vote, so that you can prove who you are and what not. If there are laws set in place that require IDs, I think that ID cards should be free and funded by taxes; this, however, would increase the amount of taxes being paid, thus leading to controversy.
I think it is constitutional for states to have different voter ID laws, and its good if it is kept that way. If voter ID laws were placed and enforced nation-wide, it would significantly change the possible outcomes of elections and may only bring negative consequences.
(1B) I believe that this issue of voter fraud is extremely important and it should not be taken lightly. We should do our best to avoid it and minimize it as much as possible. I would side with Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach and say that it would be alright for Kansas..and Arizona to make their laws more strict and require an ID card. It would be especially important for states like Arizona, California, New Mexico, and Texas which are near Mexico and where the problem of aliens is extremely prevalent. I believe that the voters should be able to decides the fate of voter ID laws since it pertains to them the most. I also believe that photo IDs should be required to vote and that if a citizen cannot afford an ID card then either they should be provided one or not be required to have one (not really). It is constitutional for states to have different voter ID laws because Article One, Section 2 of the Constitution states that the states have the right to decide who votes. These laws should vary by state since every state has a different geographical, political, and cultural situation. Also i love how Kris Kobach said "And every time an alien votes, it effectively cancels out the vote of a U.S. citizen." Every vote is equal and so when someone who has the right to vote and when someone who doesn't have the right to vote actually vote, they cancel out. And every vote counts and is important so this quote really spoke to me. Although this might make the voting and registration process lengthier and prevent some people from voting, I feel as if it is necessary and the correct way to go about this issue.
1B
One of the main privileges of being or becoming a US citizen is being able to vote for your representation in the government. Putting the I.D. requirement aside for a second,for me becoming a citizen only meant one thing: being able to vote. So in this sense a citizen status is seen at a pretty high value for immigrants. Although this may go against popular belief I think that anyone that pays their taxes and portrays the behavior of a good citizen should be allowed to vote. Although there are obvious flaws to that opinion, there are also flaws in the process to citizenship. Some sort of I.D. should be necessary when voting but not the hassle of proof of citizenship. If such a law was passed then it would drastically harm then hurt the voting process as the turnout for voting isn't the greatest without the law. This would in turn cause many citizens to not be able to vote, defeating he cause of even being a citizen of such a prestigious nation. Although it may be easy for some to provide documentation, for many it is an unnecessary hassle. I think that it is extremely fair for voters to vote on I.D. laws because it will affect them in the most direct way possible. Voting on such a bill would highlight a true sense of democracy
In my opinion, I feel that it is unnecessary to make voting harder for American citizens. I understand that some states are upset by unregistered voters abusing the system, however, we must look at both sides of the coin. Making voting harder will not only deflect illegal voters but also those American citizens who have been given the right to vote, but feel that they must go through too much work to prove their legitimacy. In the long run, it will possibly mute the voices of those who have a say in who should be in charge.
According to Article One, Section Two, it is constitutional for the states to decide on who votes, however, I feel that doing so will only cause more trouble. In a sense, it would be ironic to have governments form their own systems for voting that could apply to Americans voting for a federal leader. I could understand if they have their own laws concerning voting for state leaders, however, it is only plausible to have the country on one accord when it comes to voting for their president.
I also feel that we must look at the big picture here. America is a democracy and one of the attributes of a democracy is allowing citizens to vote and actively participate. Sadly, only 57.5% of eligible Americans voted during the 2012 elections (according to the Center for the Study of the American Electorate). With that said, our country's people are not taking full advantage of the benefits that we have been blessed to have. Therefore, why make voting even harder? If only about half of the people are turning up at the polls, think about how many of that 50% will not feel motivated to retrieve their birth certificates, and etc to have their voice heard. Is it really worth implementing this new system in order to ward off the illegal immigrants?
I don't think it's fair for the government to require photo identification for voting. We, as a democracy, are attempting to get as many people voting as possible, otherwise we aren't really a democracy, as all of us are not being represented. The voter ID laws would serve no purpose but restricting people from being able to vote, which is completely against what our country is about as a whole.
I also don't feel that different states should be allowed to have different voter ID laws, because that would specifically alienate and disenfranchise certain voters, and change the political landscape. If certain states were allowed to have laws that let them change the demographics of the voters, Ohio for example, it could drastically change the outcomes of presidential elections. With that in mind, I don't think it would be long before laws were being changed to benefit those in power and help them win elections.
Post a Comment