Wednesday, April 30, 2014
Federal Judge Strikes Down Wisconsin Law Requiring Photo ID at Polls
This article discussed a Wisconsin law that required voters to produce state-approved ID at polling places. One judge found that the law violated the 14th Amendment and the Voting Rights Act. Republican leaders have indicated that they may soon hold a special session to approve a revised law that could possibly go into effect before this years election. What do you think about this law? Should it be approved?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I think a photo ID should be required when you go to vote, and the assumptions made by Judge Adelman are extreme. “Blacks and Latinos in Wisconsin are disproportionately likely to live in poverty. Individuals who live in poverty are less likely to drive or participate in other activities for which a photo ID may be required." To me, that's an unfair and irrelevant assumption. Plus, it shouldn't matter where or how you live, having a photo ID is necessary for many things, including polls, and it should stay that way.
ReplyDeleteI agree with the article where it states that the photo ID is "really aimed at suppressing the turnout of Democrats." Voting has been fine before without photo ID, so why is it now suddenly necessary? Plus, voter turnout is already so low, why would we make it even more difficult to vote? It's often young people and minorities who are less likely to have photo ID, so yes, this law is targeting most likely Democratic voters. I don't agree with it in the least.
ReplyDeleteI honestly cannot think of any disadvantages of having a photo ID. Most cashiers ask to see ID when you make a purchase using your debit or credit card, well at least they should ask to see ID. The reasoning as to why they began to require photo IDs is logical. They wanted to decrease the amount of fraudulent votes that would be received. I just don't see why having voters show their photo ID before they vote would be a bad or unfair requirement.
ReplyDeleteI think that a photo ID when voting is a great idea. However, I don't believe someone should be denied the right to vote simply because they don't have a state-issued ID. I don't know what the solution is because making the ID optional is almost pointless. No one would go out of their way to present ID (other than a driver's license.) I'm slightly leaning towards no ID because everyone should have the right to vote.
ReplyDeleteI was so happy to read this article. I am completely opposed to the photo ID. The people who typically don't have photo ID's tend to be those living in Poverty. Why should your socioeconomic status determine if you get to vote or not? It shouldn't. Voter fraud wasn't an issue before. I think that the voter ID law was only aimed to keep minority and poorer people from voting, and to me that is very messed up.
ReplyDeleteIt's all about winning the election, that's it. People in politics always say that they want a higher voter turnout, but in reality they want less people to vote because that means less people are educated on the major issues. In this case, requiring a photo ID would absolutely result in less votes for democrats. All this law was for was to give the republican candidates a major advantage at the polls.
ReplyDeleteThough I don't think a photo ID is necessarily the solution to providing some form of identity when someone goes to vote, I do think that there should be some form of identity required when somebody goes to vote. Yes, some people may not have a form of photo ID, especially somebody in a less fortunate financial situation, but that doesn't mean they should just be able to show up and vote. I think there needs to be some form of identification required to vote.
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Voter ID laws because they do discriminate against people of a lower socioeconomic status, there is no way to deny that. Unfortunately voting is never going to be a perfect system. Nothing can be done to make every person who is eligible go to the polls and vote. But if a law restricts the voting of a certain group of people so heavily then something should be done about it to make sure that all the people who want to can vote. I think Judge Adelman is right in saying getting rid of the law will allow more legitimate votes to be cast than fraudulent ones.
ReplyDeleteI don't agree with the Voter ID laws. The people who advocate these laws think that they "promote public confidence in the voting process," but I don't think that's exactly right. This would probably decrease the already low voter turnout, so that to me would actually do the opposite of promoting public confidence. It would be obvious that some people were unable to vote due to the laws, and because of this, not everyone that wanted their voices heard would be able to do so.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Lydia here-- why are these laws suddenly necessary? It's definitely not the way to get a higher representation of votes in the country because it would decrease voter turnout. Our trend in our history has been to remove obstacles that prevent different groups of people from voting, and I think this would be backtracking our steps.
ReplyDeleteConsidering the extremely low voter turnout we already see at elections, I don't think it would be wise to implement another requirement for voters. I think this law is trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. We should be coming up with ways to increase voter turnout not ways to decrease it.
ReplyDeleteConsidering the extremely low voter turnout we already see at elections, I don't think it would be wise to implement another requirement for voters. I think this law is trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist. We should be coming up with ways to increase voter turnout not ways to decrease it.
ReplyDeleteIt amazes me that this is even a debate. Even if these laws were not racially and partisanly motivated, these laws would do nothing!! Over the past five years there have been 86 voter fraud convictions. If we assumed that around half of those occurred during the 2012 Presidential election that would mean that would mean that .000033% of voters committed voter fraud in 2012. The fact is that these laws do target minority voters; but even if they didn't these laws could possibly (in no way definitely) prevent something that occurs in .000033% of the voter population. So if you look at how microscopic the problem of voter fraud is, the only logical conclusion is that these laws are passed to discriminate against poor minority voters. It disgusts me that we even have to discuss these laws.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me like this is pure politics. Voter ID laws severely decrease voter turnout in minorities, and would deter more votes than it would stop fraudulent ones. This is only a big deal to republicans who would benefit because most minority votes go to democrats. Having Voter ID laws at this time, when there is still a fairly significant portion of people who do not have state issued ID's, would simply be discriminatory and unfair. It goes against some of the fundamental ideas that our country was based on.
ReplyDelete