Tuesday, October 21, 2014
Supreme Court Allows Texas to Use Strict Voter ID Law in Coming Election
The Supreme Court allowed Texas to use stricter voter ID laws for their upcoming November election. Opponents of this rule believe that this new law will hinder thousands of voters from voting which will significantly affect future elections. Many more progressives including the Obama administration have expressed their concern for this new law. Conservative people tend to favor this law. So what are the pros and cons of stricter voter ID laws? Should stricter voting ID laws be put into place?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Personally i think voter id laws are silly. The only reason this is an issue is because the republicans thought that the few people who voted more than once decided the outcome of the election and hurt their parties chances. This is only going to make it more complicated to vote and it is already hard to register and actually go out to vote.
ReplyDeleteI agree with James. If voting becomes an irritating and complicated process, people will be less likely to bother voting. Since our country is already experiencing low voter turnout, and I assume this is including Texas, I don't think we should be alienating or discouraging anyone to make a decision on who has the power within our states.
ReplyDeletePersonally I am always against stricter voter ID laws. Making it harder and more tedious for people to vote only stifles the Democracy the founding fathers established so many years ago. Voter turnout is already extremely low, why would conservatives want it even lower?
ReplyDeleteI, like the three above students, oppose stricter voter ID laws. The opportunity to vote is integral to our system of representative democracy, and, as someone who has left her ID at home before and been denied access to the SAT test administered at her own school, I lament the struggle of those who might simply be a little forgetful and then lose out on the chance to participate in government actively in this way.
ReplyDeleteLike the others, I oppose these restricting laws, especially since the article says this disproportionately affects African Americans and Hispanics. 4.5% of voters may not be able to vote now, which significantly reduces the number of people voting. Since blacks tend to vote as Democrats, it seems a bit like a ploy for Texas Republicans to get rid of some of the support for Democrats.
ReplyDeleteI too oppose these voter ID laws. I think it is stupid. It makes it even harder for some people to go out and vote. Like many have said above, the process before which you can vote is already tedious enough that imposing more laws, will make people want to vote even less.
ReplyDeleteLike everyone else, I don't think that stricter voting laws should be put in place. If we're already facing a time in which voting on a downhill trend, making a process that some already feel is too difficult and irritating more difficult and irritating will just keep the trend going down.
ReplyDeleteAgreeing with what most of my classmates have already stated, I am against voter ID laws. They are stupid and are made to affect African-American and Hispanic voting numbers. Also agreeing with what Nia said, our country is already experiencing low voter turnout so clearly these laws are ridiculous. I am even more upset that the supreme court ruled in favor of the laws, which could affect over 600,000 people.
ReplyDeleteJust as we have been discussing in class, I think that voting should be unifiably insured.We have all learned of the disproportionate representation in the voting booths and these laws in Texas are just as stupid. Voting is a fundamental right and restriction in the way of that is unjust.
ReplyDeleteWhile I think it's important for potential voters to be completely educated and legitimate about the voting process, I do not think that stricter laws regarding identification are a step in the right direction. Those who are interested in voting but would rather not jump through hoops just to add one "insignificant" vote to the mix would just not do it. Not to mention, voter fraud is extremely rare which makes these laws an annoyance for the average citizen.
ReplyDeleteTo say that voter ID laws are an attempt to discourage minority voting is absurd. In fact, it's racist to assume that minorities are the only ones lacking proper identification. In addition, the Texas GOP is in no danger in the foreseeable future of losing the state. Texas is redder than red. That being said, bolstering these laws is unnecessary because of the insignificant nature of the issue of voter fraud. Although I'm not completely in opposition to certain checks on fraud, this is going to far; this is a growth in regulation and intrusion, this goes against the core principles of the GOP.
ReplyDeleteVoter fraud really isn't an issue in this country so I don't see why this is even an issue. I think that we should be more worried about the people who aren't voting rather than the people voting twice becuase there are significantly more people who don't vote. I do agree with Noah that assuming that minorities don't have proper identification is not ok.
ReplyDeleteThis type of restriction just seems unnecessary and irritating. The fact that this could restrict 4.5% of the voting population from voting could possibly sway the outcome of this election in Texas. It seems that the Supreme Court has also limited the type of photo ID making it extra difficult for those who do not have these documents to obtain them.
ReplyDeleteI'm afraid I don't see what's so "stupid" about voter ID laws. First of all, there's no reason why this needs to be a partisan issue. Fair and free elections seem like a reasonable proposition that both parties should support, especially in an electoral climate in which only a few thousand votes determine many national elections. The amount of voter fraud that occurs in this country is severely understated; cases are far more common than we are led to believe, and with the rise of absentee ballots, online voting, and other alternatives to the traditional ballot, it becomes easier to commit voter fraud. There are millions of deceased people who are registered to vote, and millions more who are registered in more than one state. Without requiring photo ID, how do we expect to prevent people from voting multiple times by taking advantage of these discrepancies? Texas, especially, has a right to be concerned about voter fraud considering the millions of illegal immigrants in the state who go to the polls.
ReplyDeleteIt seems that you're all opposed to voter ID laws because it is assumed that they suppress voting. That would be a legitimate reason to oppose them, if it were true that they decrease voter turnout. However, it has been widely proven in extensive academic studies that requiring photo ID does very little to reduce voter turnout; the degree to which laws of this type would suppress voting is negligible. Also, as Noah pointed out, it's racist to suggest that minorities are, for some reason, incapable of going to the DMV once every few years in order to obtain and renew a photo ID. I don't think they are any less capable of doing so, but Democrats seem to think that they are. Unless, of course, Democrats are implying that the direct interaction with government service providers that occurs at the DMV is so unpleasant that nobody should have to endure it, which is why they advocate turning our healthcare system over to the government. Why are Democrats so adamant that obtaining and presenting a photo ID, which you need to do in order to board an airplane, buy alcohol, and cash a check, is so onerous? I'm also confused as to why AG Eric Holder requires photo ID to enter his Justice Department building when presenting the same documentation to exercise a civic right is "designed to discriminate," according to his opinions voiced in the article. I disagree with the premise that it is too burdensome to go to the trouble to obtain a photo ID in order to vote, especially considering the millions of people who have sacrificed their lives in order to protect our right to vote in a system free of corruption. It's pretty shameful, in my opinion, to equate the two "difficulties."
Where is your evidence that voter fraud is "severely understated?" I can show you lots of evidence that it is hardly an issue at all. This goes to the heart of the Civil Rights struggle for voting rights, and reminds too many people of poll taxes, literacy tests etc. that were used to disfranchise minorities for generations. Making people pay to get a photo id for voting is, in essence, a poll tax.
DeleteI completely agree with Matt's statement above. Saying that requiring a state id to vote is onerous is absurd. We need identification for everything in today's society, why shouldn't we need it to vote. I am sure a higher proportion of adult Americans buy alcohol than vote, and if they can acquire an id for their alcohol, they can get one just as well to vote.
ReplyDelete