Question

please reply to each paragraph with 3-5 sentences ( do you disagree or agree with the person when talking about requireing photo id when voting )

1.I disagree and find voter id laws very constitutional. To me, requiring someone to have a government issued form of identification is not to the same discriminating scope as literacy tests and poll taxes were. Those who are against voter id laws claim that there isn’t enough voting fraud to have this put into place. That is completely false, and voting fraud is still very prevalent. For example, there is currently a man by the name of Melowese Richardson from Ohio sitting in jail due to voting multiple times in the past Obama election. Voter id laws help prevent this exact problem. American citizens have the right to vote. They deserve to feel comfortable knowing that their vote is in an election that is just. There really is nothing in the way of stopping a citizen in getting an appropriate government issued identification. There are many in which they can choose to obtain or use. Such as a driver’s license, election identification certificate, license to carry a handgun, and much more. Even if there is a problem with getting a certified license to vote with, there are other options a voter can present. All they need is a legitimate reason on why they do not have their identification or why they are unable to obtain one. If there really is a true problem with a lot of eligible citizens not being able to acquire a certified identification, then the government should offer a program that distributes free government regulated voting cards in which they can use to vote. Although it will be extra funding, I find the investment necessary in order to solve the problem. Voter id laws are constitutional. Without them, how is the government supposed to regulate election voting?

2.Photo ID laws for voting may serve as a roadblock, but I believe that showing a voter ID card is in best interest of the people. One of our basic rights is being able to vote, so making sure that our vote is safe is very important. In Texas on August 10, 2016, the federal district changed the voting requirements; making it mandatory to show identification before voting. Without this, someone could easily impersonate a person, as we have seen in the past. In 2016, in Dallas, Texas, “James Armstrong, expressed concerns that elderly residents are being targeted in a possible mail-in voter scheme after some of his church members said they received ballots, only they never applied for them” (Logan Churchwell). Even though voter fraud is not very common, it does happen. Many assume that it is an inconvenience for people who do not have a Photo identification card, but the court listed other options for showing proof of identification. Some include, a U.S passport, a certified birth certificate, copy of utility bill, or a copy of a paycheck. If someone has a Photo ID, but did not bring it to the polls, “the voter may cast a provisional ballot at the polls. However, in order to have the provisional ballot counted the voter will be required to visit the county voter registrar’s office within six calendar days of the date of the election to either present an acceptable form of photo ID OR submit one of the temporary affidavits…in the presence of the county voter registrar” (VoteTexas.Gov). Since there are many options when showing proof of Identification before voting, everyone should be able to vote, and be comfortable with the process.

3.Photo ID law for voting carries some advantages and some disadvantages as well, but most of the restrictions have taken away the right to vote for the poor and the racial minorities. Basically, this is a law which requires people to provide some forms of official identification such as ID, a driver's license number, or Social Security numbers when registering to vote. It brings a lot of benefits when implementing this policy such as preventing electoral fraud and preventing multiple voting. Mathew Rousu who is a professor of economics at Susquehanna University in Selinsgrove, Pennsylvania, said that “With 66 cases exposed, this means a conservative estimate indicates that there have been at least 6,600 cases of voter fraud in the past decade in Texas alone. A voter ID requirement strengthens voters’ rights by protecting the votes of all who vote legally. When voter fraud occurs, it dilutes and weakens the votes of all law-abiding voters.” That does not mean that the law has no downside. Definitely, photo ID law is a double-edged sword. It creates barriers that limit the number of the poor and ethnic minorities to participate in the election. According to a study from NYU’s Brennan Center, “11 percent of voting-age citizens lack necessary photo ID while many people in rural areas have trouble accessing ID offices.” Moreover, stringent voter identification laws increase racial polarization. For many years, the court has repeatedly cut and narrowed the electoral rights of minority voters. In 1892, in Shelby County, “approximately 2,400 discriminatory voting changes had been blocked by more than 750 Section 5 objections, approximately 400 of which involved cases with specific evidence of intentional discrimination” (Cohen). Similar to Texas, although it does not actually apply the literacy tests to check the level of legal knowledge of each individual, it uses other ways to limit their right to vote. Furthermore, the poll tax is also a factor which prevents racial minorities from being able to vote, because it requires ones to pay a fee when registering to vote. Most Latinos and African Americans hesitate to pay the tax, even they can. In general, an election is a form of expressing the aspirations of the citizens towards their country, so why ones try to limit people’s right to vote? Racial discrimination became a stain on American history, and now it still exists in modern society under the law.

4.

Theoretically, there shouldn't be a problem with requiring a photo ID in order to vote. If you're a citizen of both Texas and the United States, which is necessary to vote in person in Texas for a national election, then there isn't any legal obstacle to prevent you from getting a state ID card, making the voter ID laws seem pretty constitutional to me.

In practice, however, at least in some cases, this might be different. This news report cites statistical evidence that states with strict voter ID laws see less minority turnout than states without them, in some cases by more than 10%, more than enough to swing an election. It doesn't mention why. I had a hard time finding a concrete reason why myself, when almost everything you do requires an ID. The most common example I've heard is of someone with no ID who has trouble physically getting to a DPS office to obtain one, because of they don't own a car or can't drive due to injury or old age, and public transportation or walking takes more time than they can afford to take off from work, caring for family, etc. People who experience these difficulties would exclusively be low-income, as transportation isn't an issue if you have money, especially in major cities with cheap door-to-door paratransit services (like Houston's MetroLift) and rideshare services like Uber or Lyft. Because of this, legislation requiring photo ID to vote causes major difficulty for a portion of the population based on their income, making it unconstitutional.

However, I think voter ID laws aren't the actual problem in situations like this. I'm still somewhat skeptical of how many people are actually impacted by laws like this, and it would seem to me that the ones who are would a) have just as much trouble getting to the polls on election day, regardless of ID laws, and b) have more pressing concerns than voting. Doing almost anything requires a government ID. I personally don't drive. I can't afford a car of my own, so I take the bus to and from school, but I still needed an ID to open bank accounts, register for college, and get a job. The fact that there are people at all who are facing such medical or financial difficulties that they can't get an ID to do any of these basic things points to more fundamental problems of poor or inaccessible healthcare and income inequality, which, if fixed, would make discrimination through voter ID laws a moot point. I think those are the problems that we should focus on fixing through legislation, much more so than voter fraud.

Answer 1

1. The speaker is correct as he has put forward facts that apply to the logic of a person. It is required for every person to have the right to vote, as well as, there have to be laws that would prevent people from misusing their rights to chose an elected leader. Though, there might be some investment required, but with options and correct planning, the voting process could become more legitimate.
2. I agree with the views of the person. The speaker here elaborates on the number of options that are available for a voter in order to vote and these are not only voter ID cards, but also government approved other proofs of identification. The speaker has a positive approach in displaying ways that could make the voting process easier, so as to eliminate any fraud that is going on.
3. I disagree with the speaker as he had not been able to elaborate on his point. The point raised by the speaker is about the injustice that happens to the minorities in the name of obtaining a valid id. The reason given by the speaker is that because most minorities are not paying taxes and that they are poor. Also, that poll tax is another way of taking the rights away, but he didn’t specify how. Though the speaker has acknowledged both advantages and disadvantages of requiring a photo Id, he has not been able to establish the disadvantages.
4. I agree with the speaker. Though mentioning the same points as the earlier speaker, this person has elaborated on their points, making their points clear. The ideas have been properly organised, with citing both positive and negative points. Also, the speaker has given a proper conclusion of his points, making them clear.