Voter ID Laws Rankle Left

May 24th, 2008 By: marc moore | Tags:

Legal scholar Jeffery Toobin thinks laws requiring voters to show a valid picture ID before voting are biased in favor of Republicans.  This argument makes sense given the affinity of poorer Americans to vote Democratic.  But is that relevant?  Two principles of free and fair elections are contradictory, that we count every vote and that every vote be from a legal voter.  A picture ID seems to be the ideal compromise.

Toobin:

I thought it was a bad decision, but a predictable one because it was a very clear attempt by Republicans to stop Democrats from voting.

Ali from Think Progress:

…there are as many as 21 million voting-age Americans without driver’s licenses. Thirteen percent of registered Indiana voters lack the documents needed to obtain state identification.

Indeed, getting one’s identification in order can be an annoying process, particularly for the elderly, infirm, and/or poor.  However, the presidential election is more than 5 months away.  That’s plenty of time for every interested voter to get their paperwork in order.

Every election has its inconsistencies, the Bush/Gore fiasco in Florida being only the most infamous example.  Between electronic voting and voter identification the validity of upcoming elections will be better than ever before.  I would think that the losing side of the Bush/Gore recount would be in favor of any mechanism that would ensure no such mess happens again.

Judging from the comments on Ali’s post that’s not the case.  Numerous people call the voter ID law a form of poll tax, which is ridiculous on the face of it.

The obvious solution would be to put a picture on the voter ID card that voters - at least in Texas - are required to present.  How hard is that?

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  1. BJ
    May 25th, 2008 at 01:48
    Reply | Quote | #1

    I’m still waiting for someone to explain how they use photo ID to confirm the mail-in ballots.

  2. tonto
    May 25th, 2008 at 02:02
    Reply | Quote | #2

    The same way I just paid my traffic fine, with a photocopy of the ID.

  3. robocaller
    May 25th, 2008 at 08:27
    Reply | Quote | #3

    A lot of Democrats I’ve heard on this issue have stated that there is unambiguously no problem in our country with voter fraud. But one of the complaints of Republicans during the whole 2000 election season was that Democrats were involved in getting people who were not legal voters to the voting booths.

    So with this "Legal scholar Jeffery Toobin thinks laws requiring voters to show a valid picture ID before voting are biased in favor of Republicans." Why is it not legitimate to question—maybe Democrats are involved in voter fraud efforts, and that’s why they don’t want a voter ID law.

  4. BJ
    May 25th, 2008 at 20:41
    Reply | Quote | #4

    Tonto,

    Interesting, but doesn’t answer the question.  I take photo ID down to the voting booth so they can match the photo to my face and ensure that it is really me voting.  Who matches the photo to the face when you mail it in?

  5. robocaller
    May 25th, 2008 at 21:17
    Reply | Quote | #5

    BJ, since only registered voters receive absentee ballots in the mail, I doubt its a huge problem. I assume by whatever means you get an absentee ballot, something is verified against registration databases.

  6. tonto
    May 26th, 2008 at 01:29
    Reply | Quote | #6

    Robo is right. Do you really believe that they are going to give you a ’mail in ballot’ then let you walk in and vote again? 

  7. Orson Buggeigh
    May 27th, 2008 at 03:45
    Reply | Quote | #7

    Voter ID makes very good sense.  It is a reasonable compromise to protect the public from voter fraud.  Mr. Toobin protests too much.  The locations where voter fraud has historically been a problem have been, *ahem!* Democratic strongholds.  I’m sure one reason some Democratic party operatives object is that it might abolish those fine old big city machine traditions of voting early and voting often, and the miracle of the dead being resurrected to vote (Democratic, natch!) in select precincts. 

    While there has been much made of the re-count in Florida in 2000, perhaps we should revisit the election of 1960.  It might be interesting to re-count the ballots from the precincts in Texas and Illinois that allegedly were fraudulently cast, supposedly costing Richard Nixon the election. 

    Both parties try to do what they can to increase the turnout of people likely to vote for their candidates.  However, it seems that everyone is better served by preventing fraud - and voter ID seems like a very reasonable means to do this.  I don’t see it as inherently favoring one political party any more than another, unless one of the parties is cheating.  In which case, the cheating party stands to lose more from voter ID than the party playing honestly.  So why are the Dems so unhappy?  Guilty conscience? 

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.


Warning: is_writable() [function.is-writable]: open_basedir restriction in effect. File(error_log) is not within the allowed path(s): (/home/p6525pol:/usr/lib/php:/usr/local/lib/php:/tmp) in /home/p6525pol/public_html/wp-includes/wp-db.php on line 500