Repeal Of Voter ID Laws Hurts Election
Texas, Wisconsin and South Carolina have already thrown out similar laws, and justice departments in Florida and Ohio are severely restricting the identification laws.
The Pennsylvania judge ruled that Pennsylvania residents did not have sufficient time to acquire the photo identification in time for November’s election; but, the law still exists and may be applied in the future.
The ruling is “great news” for President Obama and other Democratic candidates who believed the laws would keep potential supporters from voting, and they were right. The law would largely affect the poor, elderly, students and minorities, who constitute a great portion of the Democratic vote.
So the Democrats are happy, but how should the rest of America feel?
These laws are not discriminatory or prejudicial in their founding. Yes, certain segments of the population are more likely to be affected, but the laws were not designed to intentionally suppress Democratic votes.
The laws stand as a way to prevent voter fraud. Double voting, “ghost” voting by deceased people and voting with made-up names are pervasive issues that capitalize on the government’s inability to accurately determine voter validity without photo identification.
Voting with a photo ID essentially extinguishes each of these threats to voter integrity, and keeps our democratic process more honest.
Furthermore, the necessity of photo identification eliminates human error. Possession of drivers’ licenses and identification cards allow voters to access the contemporary and electronic voter booths. Long-gone are the days of laboriously hand counting votes, which could be misread or mishandled in the process.
Voter registration laws have an additional bonus: providing accessible and free identification. The laws negate any previous fees involved in obtaining government identification. For the left-wing critics of the laws, this actually stands to benefit the poor, who could perhaps not previously afford ID.
These laws are not discriminatory in nature, and repealing them nationwide is a poor decision. They serve to benefit the populace and keep voters honest when entering the polls. On the eve of what is expected to be a very close presidential race, the United States should hold on dearly to anything that will make the process more uniform, authentic and error-free.