Nathan Moore's Thoughts
Voter ID's, What's Really the Big Deal?
It is a fair question. I have written extensively on the law and objections surrounding the idea when Georgia and Indiana proposed a similar law in their last legislative sessions. Both states’ laws were upheld by their respective circuit courts, and the Indiana legislation was deemed constitutionally sound by the Supreme Court of the United States.
Fortunately, the Bill Ketron sponsored bill emerged from committee with a 6-3 party line vote.
The most ridiculous allegation is that this is akin to a “poll tax”. Those making that assertion seem to have trouble reading the bill. From the summary
Under this bill, if a voter does not have proper identification as described in this bill and is unable to afford a photo identification license issued by the department of safety, the identification card will be issued to the voter upon the voter’s signing a pauper’s oath. The application for the photo identification license must be accompanied by an affidavit of indigency in order to have any fees waived for the card.
Plus, even without an ID, you are still allowed to vote provisionally. No one is being denied the right to vote, ballots are just being checked more closely. The horror!
As if making a point, Nashville Democrat Senator Joe Haynes has been parading his 98 year old mother around for political posturing and similarly situated Nashville Democrat Thelma Harper’s claims of election commission “evasiveness” make about as much sense as a sombrero in the legislative chamber. Other lefty Democrat commentators make similarly intellectually lurid arguments.
I refuse to accept at face value those who claim to believe that photo identification is an undue burden to vote. It would be rude of me to insult their intelligence like that. If Democrats truly thought the vote so sacred, they ought be excited to ensure its integrity to the fullest extent possible. Sadly, we know the real download catacombs answer has nothing to do with electoral integrity.
Go ahead and read what I wrote back on December 31, 2007. It all practically applies to Tennessee today.
March 3rd, 2009 at 10:11 pm
I’d be willing to be that “those who claim to believe that photo identification is an undue burden to vote” have no problem about applying for a driver’s license.
March 4th, 2009 at 10:59 am
My 88 year old mother doesn’t take her pocketbook anymore when she goes out, so didn’t have an ID at the last election and had no trouble voting. Merely had to sign an affidavit and be checked against the rolls.
March 4th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
[...] In light of the party line vote, and recent on air discussions we’ve had about empathy, I have a few questions for those out there sitting in their ivory towers: [...]
March 4th, 2009 at 2:29 pm
Info from the League of Women Voters, published October 2008:
There are approximately 11 million eligible voters in this country who don’t possess a photo ID, and most of them can’t easily get one. Who are they?
18 percent of Americans over 65 (6 million) don’t have a photo ID and the percentage goes way up for those over 75 years of age
25 percent of African Americans don’t have a photo ID
10 percent of 40 million people with disabilities don’t have a photo ID
15 percent of low income voters don’t have a photo ID
There are lots of valid reasons why these eligible voters can’t easily obtain an ID. It requires at least one trip to a location which is usually a good distance from home. Those seniors who no longer drive don’t want to bother their friends or family to take them to get an ID; they save that favor to get groceries. People who live in the inner-city and those with low incomes very often use public transportation, which may not take them to the places they need to reach to obtain an ID. Furthermore that office may be open only from 9 to 5, hours when they are probably still at work and can’t take time off.’
March 4th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
The argument that it is not the most convenient thing to get is not a good enough one to not require it.
Let me get the numbers right, though.
Over 80% of elderly Americans have a photo ID already.
75% of black people have photo IDS already. Of course, race is not a disability, so it has nothing to do with the difficulties surrounding obtaining a photo ID.
90% of those with disabilities already have a photo ID. This is the only group that would remotely have a legitimate gripe. I am presuming that this includes any elderly individuals are disabled (see above). Fit elderly individuals are no more in need of assistance than you or I.
85% of low income voters already have a photo ID. There are indigency provisions in all these laws, anyway, so I’m not sure how that affects anything.
As for public transportation, there tend to be stops around government buildings. For instance, in Nashville Howard School is easily accessible by bus. We can certainly assuage that concern completely by requiring at least one photo ID location be accessible by public transit. Easily done.
The legitimacy of every person’s vote affects everyone’s vote. My vote is diluted (as is yours) every time an invalid vote is cast. It is not too much to ask that someone get a photo ID once every five or ten years to make the process air tight.
The problem though is that without admission of methodology on these statistics, I suspect the League of Women Voters is quadruple counting (an elderly African American disabled on a fixed income fits four boxes). The real number is what matters, but they skew that, too. (”As many as 11 percent of United States citizens do not have a photo ID” and there is no demarcation between non-ID holders who are and are not registered to vote).
Please pardon my en Francais, but their numbers are crap (I know! I know! Thomas Crapper was English…). And remember, the voter photo ID bill allows for provisional voting, anyway.
March 4th, 2009 at 4:01 pm
All good info, Nathan. Just grist for the mill. What’s important is that we don’t just ignore the issues. My hope is that, as happened in Indiana, it will inspire volunteers and neighbors to get involved and help each other out.
March 4th, 2009 at 6:12 pm
Who says it won;t be a big deal? It will be for my mom who hasn’t got a birth certificate and the church she was baptised in has closed. She’s older now so she hasn’t gotten a driver’s license. She’s never driven. Why pick on the elderly and poor in this political move? It’s just meant to appeal to those voters who are being whipped into a frenzy about nothing. It’s the usual scare tactics and we all know what party thrives on fear. The reasons listed here that are against are sound. NO ID cards for Americans please.
March 4th, 2009 at 6:22 pm
There is an indigency provision in the bill. Ensuring the integrity of the vote is not picking on anybody.
March 4th, 2009 at 10:18 pm
If the senario is that there can never be a 100% solution as an excuse for not doing something, NOTHING would get done.
Why not say that because 100% of the population does not vote for any reason you may choose, we should not have elections……that makes about as much sense….
March 9th, 2009 at 12:19 pm
FORGET ABOUT PHOTO ID’S!! It’s too easy to create fake ones.
THUMB-PRINTS!!
RETINA SCANNERS!!
You can’t fake those!