If confirming the identity of a voter is "intimidating", what does that voter think when identification is required to cash a check, get a driver's license, passport, credit card, to get on a plane or many other services? That says we trust but we must verify. We refer to the right to vote as being "sacred". Something "sacred" should be guarded in every way possible. Verifying a person's identity who presents to vote seems as though it should be a basic requirement to be certain there are no fraudulent votes. Making the requirement to show ID sound discriminatory makes no sense if it protects the integrity of the election and the force of the legal votes.
Each party, with candidates on the ballot, is allowed to have "challengers" at each polling district. Their purpose is to determine, in some way, that the voter is who they say they are and that they haven't voted before on that day. Usually people who live in the district are selected as challengers since they have a better chance of recognising and identifying the voter. If this visual recognition is legitimate, why not a more accurate and positive form of identity confirmation? The act of identifying is not in question, only the method used.
If the person being identified is a wanted fugitive or criminal, I can understand the reluctance. Normal, honest people want to be sure their vote will not be nullified by some kind of fraud. Those who say that fraud is minimal and inconsequential are the same people who tell us every vote counts. They are right only about the last part. In many places, fraud is rampant. Voter registration rules are so loose that without voter ID a person could be registered in several places under different names, even if they are dead.
Elections are such a crucial part of a government of, for and by the people that ensuring air-tight, honest elections should be considered a matter of national security, because it is. At what point does illegal immigration become an unarmed invasion? Those who oppose voter ID could be suspected of engaging in voter fraud themselves or at least allowing it.
Post Script: Today I went to our Public Works Department to get leaf bags they distribute annually. Guess what!!! I had to show ID to get $5 worth of paper! Is your vote worth $5?
Dennis Miller says to get rid of Obamacare we should require a photo ID to get medical services.
Each party, with candidates on the ballot, is allowed to have "challengers" at each polling district. Their purpose is to determine, in some way, that the voter is who they say they are and that they haven't voted before on that day. Usually people who live in the district are selected as challengers since they have a better chance of recognising and identifying the voter. If this visual recognition is legitimate, why not a more accurate and positive form of identity confirmation? The act of identifying is not in question, only the method used.
If the person being identified is a wanted fugitive or criminal, I can understand the reluctance. Normal, honest people want to be sure their vote will not be nullified by some kind of fraud. Those who say that fraud is minimal and inconsequential are the same people who tell us every vote counts. They are right only about the last part. In many places, fraud is rampant. Voter registration rules are so loose that without voter ID a person could be registered in several places under different names, even if they are dead.
Elections are such a crucial part of a government of, for and by the people that ensuring air-tight, honest elections should be considered a matter of national security, because it is. At what point does illegal immigration become an unarmed invasion? Those who oppose voter ID could be suspected of engaging in voter fraud themselves or at least allowing it.
Post Script: Today I went to our Public Works Department to get leaf bags they distribute annually. Guess what!!! I had to show ID to get $5 worth of paper! Is your vote worth $5?
Dennis Miller says to get rid of Obamacare we should require a photo ID to get medical services.
No comments:
Post a Comment