When the voter identification argument hit the mainstream, I
didn’t necessarily see it as a problem.
Supporters pointed out that most things in everyday life require a photo
I.D.—getting a library card, renting a car, making certain purchases, buying
alcohol. So, why not require I.D. at one of our more sacred activities in a
democratic society?
But there is more to it than that—something which became
quite apparent to me as I read an article in our local paper one day. The story featured the daily routine of some
of Greensboro’s homeless families, including the use of a day center. They used
the day center to get out of the weather, access computers, and even have an
address to put on a job application. An
address. Well, there’s someone who might not have an I.D. Without an address, getting proper photo
identification can be quite difficult. And what if you’re one of the many
seniors who no longer drive? You may not have a current photo I.D.,
either. The argument that “everyone
needs an I.D. for daily life” quickly deteriorates at that point.
And then I saw it.
Something that liberal commentators had been saying all along. Something
I brushed off as mere conspiracy theory: those behind the legislation don’t
want everyone to be able to vote. Paul Weyrich, founder of the conservative
Heritage Foundation, said:
“Now many of our Christians have what I call the goo-goo syndrome — good
government. They want everybody to vote. I don’t want everybody to vote. Elections
are not won by a majority of people; they never have been from the beginning of
our country and they are not now. As a matter of fact, our leverage in the
elections quite candidly goes up as the voting populace goes down.”
The people most likely to be impacted by strict voter identification laws,
voter roll purging, and other creative tactics are minorities, the elderly, and
younger voters. In others words, Democrats. For example, in Ohio, Republican Secretary
of State Jon Husted shortened the early voting period by 3 days. In 2008, nearly 30% of the total ballots
cast in Ohio came during early voting.
Obama won Ohio in ’08, and naturally, the state is in play this election
cycle. The only way to “beat” those who’d rather not see us at the polls is to be
there—no matter what laws they pass to block us from exercising our right
to vote.
4 comments:
I heard an NPR story about this elderly lady in Philadelphia who had been mugged. Her purse was stolen, along with her wallet and her ID. She is in her 80's and doesn't have her original birth certificate or any idea how to get it since she wasn't born in a hospital. She wouldn't be able to vote if a voter ID law was passed.
That's another great point. It's not so cut and dry about having an ID. Thanks for adding your thoughts to my blog.
It is too sad that voter turnout for ANY election is so low. Take the recent NC amendment - I think something like 13% of registered voters voted. 13% of the people who could vote decided that issue. Think of 30% of the country deciding the president. It is shameful!
Indeed it is a shame. And very misleading when people say that voters in NC overwhelmingly supported Amendment One. Something like 60% of those voting that day did indeed support the amendment, but as you mentioned [Anonymous], only 13% of registered voters actually showed up at the polls that day. It was the Republican primary, so you might wonder if a large portion of that 13% were Republicans.
Post a Comment