April 28, 2008

Supreme Court Upholds Voter ID Law

The Supreme Court of the United States upheld an Indiana law requiring voters to produce a government issued photo ID before voting. Many are complaining that this law will disenfranchise voters, and is especially unfair to younger voters. While some voters might not have an acceptable form of ID, most do. Requiring this proof if identification is essential to preventing election fraud, and the inconvenience of having to produce a form of identification is a small price to pay.

Moreover, the law is not especially troublesome to younger voters. Students in particular tend to have an appropriate ID with them at all times. Students need these forms of ID to get around, to apply for credit cards, get into bars, and so much more. Younger voters need to be encouraged to vote, and everything should be done to ensure they get to the polls. This measure however, is in no way a roadblock to that.

What do you think?

by @ 9:50 pm. Filed under 2008 General Election
Trackback URL for this post:
http://race42012.com/2008/04/28/supreme-court-upholds-voter-id-law/trackback/

15 Responses to “Supreme Court Upholds Voter ID Law”

  1. Suyapa Says:

    Yeah, I didn’t get that supposedly students would be disenfranchised. What happened to student IDs? And what college kid doesn’t have a license?

  2. Illinoisguy Says:

    I wholeheartedly support the need for ID’s. I think it especially important that we weed out illegal immigrants from the voting process. Though I can’t prove it, I believe a huge number of them are currently being allowed to vote because things are just way too loose.

  3. Aron Goldman Says:

    The reason Indiana’s law passes constitutional muster is because the state provides IDs free of charge to those without driver’s licenses. It also allows voters without a photo ID to cast a provisional ballot, which counts, provided identification is produced within 10 days.

  4. Alex Knepper Says:

    We should not only demand ID for voting, but insist on literacy tests, too.

    And I am not kidding.

  5. IR-MN Says:

    #4 Hamiltonian

  6. Doug Forrester Says:

    I’m glad to see Indiana is providing ID free of charge to those without driver’s licenses.

  7. Jonathan Says:

    Nothing like good old Hoosier common sense. Which is exactly why they will be voting Republican in Novemember; common sense.

  8. Illinoisguy Says:

    This is open for anyone to comment on: What prevents illegal immigrants from getting one of these ID’s and voting? If they can, then Republicans can be losing literally millions of votes that way each election cycle.

  9. Ory Rinat Says:

    In response to number 8, I am assuming you need proof of citizenship to register to vote, and the IDs are just to verify identity.

  10. Clarence Claus Says:

    I am very much in the minority among Republicans, but I do not think a photo ID is necessary. I also don’t think voter fraud is not common. Who is going to risk going to jail to insure a candidate they like gets one extra vote? It is illogical, and who has time? A law requiring a photo ID would require non-drivers to purchase one, amounting to a poll tax. Having said all that, I do not see it as unconstitutional, and it is up to every individual state, so I agree with the 6-3 majority on the Supreme Court. However, I wish Republicans would just suck it up when we lose elections instead of saying, “If it wasn’t for the fraud, we would win.” There is little fraud.

  11. Clarence Claus Says:

    Doug Forrester, if Indiana is providing photo IDs to non-drivers free of charge, it would not be a poll tax and would be alright in my opinion. I don’t think a photo ID is necessary though as long as a person signs an affidavit under penalty of perjury that they are who they say they are and live where they say. That’s how it is in NH.

  12. Chris L. Says:

    What do you think?

    I think that this is a very good and logical Court ruling. With regards to voter eligibility, etc., I have often wondered how many non-US citizens are on the “eligible” voter roles. In my state, Virginia, there seems to be little evidence of citizenship and legal eligibility required to register.

  13. Illinoisguy Says:

    Let’s not leave my #8 so quickly, ok? What makes you think that proof citizenship is being required? In Illinois, it seems to be that you just need your drivers license. I’m very concerned that many people are voting who are not citizens. Many apparently can get dirver’s licenses without proof of citizenship, so how can we be sure this is not widespread?

    I think its a bigger problem than you believe CC. I could be wrong. What do others think?

  14. Steve Says:

    Amazes me that places like Afghanistan, Bangladesh and Iraq can require photo ID for their elections, and we even argue about it here. Like we have less sophisticated means to provide IDs than some of those countries.

  15. Merkis Says:

    I’m from Indiana and support this particular law. We have a large Amish portion of the population and they don’t have driver’s lisences – that’s why we have other forms of ID.

State of the Race


Obama Approval


Support R4'12

Meta

Recent Posts

Buy This Book

Categories

Archives

Search

Blogroll

Site Syndication

Main