A growing number of states have passed voter ID laws requiring voters to present a state-accepted form of identification. In each an every case, Democrats have challenged the laws and in almost every case have lost those challenges--the recent stay in the Pennsylvania case is one "victory" for the left, albeit a minor one as the law will go into full effect following the upcoming elections.
These laws are meant to prevent voter fraud of several kinds. The least important of these is so-called "in-person voter fraud" or "voter impersonation". More important, however, is the ability to filter out illegal immigrants from voting as well as citizens who's residence (per their ID) conflicts with the voter registration indicating that they should be voting in another district or even another state.
Democrats' primary response to these laws is a cry of racism. For some
reason "people of color" are purportedly more likely to be impacted,
because they are poor, uneducated, and more likely not to have a
driver's license. It's never been clear to me how poor, uneducated white people are not going to be impacted equally, but maybe they all have driver's licenses?
Bear in mind that, recognizing that not all citizens possess current and valid forms of ID, states passing these laws have a number of provisions for free IDs, so there is no "poll tax" implication. Also, anyone who still has not managed to obtain an ID before Election Day can still cast a provisional ballot, which effectively gives them more time to get ID or simply swear an affidavit.
With all of the public discussion, with all of the free IDs available, it seems to me that the problem here is that some people simply cannot be bothered to make the slightest effort to ensure their vote will be counted.
The Supreme Court has rejected the arguments regarding undue burden:
There is no question about the legitimacy or importance of the State's interest in counting only the votes of eligible voters.
Moreover, the interest in orderly administration and accurate
recordkeeping provides a sufficient justification for carefully
identifying all voters participating in the election process.
For most voters who need them, the inconvenience of making a
trip to the [Indiana] BMV, gathering the required documents, and posing for a
photograph surely does not qualify as a substantial burden on the right
to vote, or even represent a significant increase over the usual burdens
of voting.
And yet, the fight continues state-by-state, with Democrats making the same tired--and rejected by the Supreme Court--arguments.
I say all of the above so that the following offering of a counterpoint is more stark.
Recently Venezuela held an election, an election that is widely considered to be rigged to favor the current President-cum-dictator-for-life Hugo Chavez. Elections in Venezuela allow expatriots to vote, by appearing in person at a Venezuelan consulate.
There are some 20,000 U.S.-based Venezuelans, many who left their home country to escape the predations of the Chavez government, living in the Southeast. Earlier this year, the consulate in Miami was closed after the US State Department expelled the consul after she was implicated in an Iranian plot for a cyber-attack against the U.S.
Voters only recourse was to make a trip to New Orleans, the next closest consulate.
Thousands of U.S.-based Venezuelans flocked to New Orleans by bus, car and airplane to vote.
Venezuelans
around the world also came out to vote en masse: An anti-Chavez
Venezuelan television station showed people traveling to a consulate in
Germany to vote, and others voting in Panama.
Sequera
said the closure did not deter the thousands who turned out, chanting
"Venezuela" and waving their nation's flags from cars. A street party
unfolded as voters left the convention center, where votes were cast
because New Orleans' consulate couldn't handle the crowds. Vendors sold
food and drinks to the cheering crowd.
"We're tired of the situation at home, and we've come together to make a stand for change," he said.
Alexandra Viamonte...moved
to the Florida at age 17 because she saw few opportunities for higher
education in Venezuela. So she moved in with an aunt while studying
English and medical technology. She married a man originally from Cuba,
and together they have five children. However, most of her extended
family remains in Venezuela, and she fears their fate if Chavez wins
another term.
Chavez, however, underestimated the resolve of voters in the U.S.
"He thought that we wouldn't drive almost 900 miles to vote, but he was wrong," she said. "We have the opposition we needed."
[http://www.chron.com/news/article/Venezuelans-to-vote-for-president-in-Louisiana-3926136.php]
As expected, Chavez has "won" the election, but I was encouraged by the attitude of these people who had to make a very long trip to cast a vote in a rigged election, especially when compared to people who would rather complain, cry racism, and file suit than make a trip to the local DMV for a free ID.
