Disenfranchisement Should Be Abolished Essay

Voter ID laws in the United States have begun to create controversy since the beginning of its adaptations in the early 2000’s. Voter ID laws in the United States is a law that requires U.S. citizens to have a special form of identification in order to vote in an election. The idea with Voter ID laws is that the state must make sure that the laws do not pose any sort of burden on the voters. These laws have been proposed in order to stop voting fraud. However, the institution of Voter ID laws have made trouble in states, including Texas, regarding to the various amount of identification requirements needed.

In fact, in Document C it states that “requiring citizens to vote is no more restricitve than requiring them to register for the draft.” Forcing people to vote is gonna result in a unwanted voting result that might hurt the country in the end. The random vote that the people you are forcing to vote will not help us in anyway even though they want the voting percentage to go up think about all the terrible results that will come out. If they do not want any say in voting do not force them. Let the people who want to voice their opinion and are educated go out and vote.

How would you react if you learned that the Presidential candidate you had cast your vote for, had actually received more of the popular vote than his competition, but was not elected the next President of the United States? Every four years in November over 90 million Americans vote for the presidential candidates, then in the middle of December the president and vice president of the United States are actually elected by the votes of only 538 citizens. Wouldn't you think there was an obvious flaw in the system? I would be willing to bet that the majority of you would, but in the case of the Electoral College apparently the majority doesn't count.

The Founders built certain protections for individual rights into this country's founding documents. The United States Constitution was one such document. In particular, such protections guard Americans who hold minority viewpoints from those who side with the majority. For example, the First Amendment protects the right of free speech to ensure that people who hold unpopular views have just as much freedom to express those views as do people who tend to agree with the majority. The United States Constitution, therefore, was intended to protect the individual rights of Americans from a tyrannical government and majority. However, today, the Electoral College does not represent the vibrant democracy into which the United States has grown.

Felony disenfranchisement is a law that was made in the 20th century. Disenfranchisement refers to restrictions on which convicted felons are not allowed to vote. The United States’ disenfranchisement law places drastic effects on felons in their state of residency by preventing them from voting. English colonists brought disenfranchisement to America as a punishment for felons’ criminal behavior. Committing a crime showed that they were unfit to be included in political events. There is a lot of controversy about Disenfranchisement laws.

Disenfranchisement is the state of being deprived of a right or privilege, such as the right to vote. Although the United States awarded all citizens the same rights legally; socially the difference was clear. Black Americans could expect being threatened or “disqualified” from exercising their rights due to failing a test. Disenfranchisement was the product of white citizens, it was a social construct. Disenfranchisement was a racially discriminatory practice as it deprived certain rights from citizens based on their skin color.

Many people believe that the law will help reduce voter fraud. In our day-to-day lives identification is required as a security measure. We are required to provide identification for simple things such as cashing a check, boarding a plane, and picking up a prescription. These identification requirements are legitimate

In Arizona, the voter registration system was confusing which resulted in tens of thousands of people who thought they are registered to vote were disenfranchised when they try to vote. It was a way for Arizona to enforce the proof of citizenship requirement. If an individual in Arizona wanted to vote both state and federal elections, the individual must provide specific documents such as a birth certificate to prove citizenship. Such “political disenfranchisement” (Chavez-Garcia 550) was seen by the Supreme Court and held that Arizona cannot add a document to prove citizenship in federal elections which every state has to accept the federal form. This “dual registration system” is designed to deprive registration for eligible soon to be voters

According to the Constitution, every U.S. citizen has the right to vote. However, this constitutional right was not upheld in the Gore vs Bush election. The election of 2000 was not legitimate. First and foremost, George W. Bush limited 20,000 people from casting a vote. He prompted Katherine Harris to make a list of felons and restrict their voting rights. Instead of limiting only felons, the computer found innocent people with identical names as felons and disqualified them from casting a ballot. Many law abiding citizens had been stripped of their vote. Furthermore, many people in Palm Beach County voted for who they wanted elected as president. Unfortunately, many of their votes were not represented because they left dimpled chads on their

The Constitution of the United States has been repeatedly amended to further extend suffrage to disenfranchised groups. Disenfranchised groups are a groups of people, typically minorities, that lack the right to vote. Throughout history, these groups of people who were denied suffrage fought for their rights in order to gain suffrage for their group. There were four groups of Americans who did not have the right to vote or had restrictions in voting. Women, African Americans, the economically disadvantaged, and 18 year olds did not have complete suffrage until amendments were passed to give them the right to vote.

There are thirty states in the United States that require some form of official identification in order to register to vote and to vote for federal, state, and local elections. Voter identification laws ensure the integrity of elections by deterring impersonation fraud at the polls. Requiring a government-issued ID to vote will prevent voting under fake names or under the names of deceased voters, which according to The Pew Center of the States “more than 1.8 million deceased individuals are listed as voters”.

Recently state and federal legislators have been discussing voter identification laws, also known as voter ID laws. This issue is controversial because it can lead states to deny voters a vote without an approved ID. On one hand, some supporters of ID laws argue that these laws are preventing criminals from committing fraud. From this perspective, the laws are protecting the value of a vote and what it means to actually participate in an election vote. On the other hand, however, people argue that by placing the restriction on voting it is impeding the people constitutional rights much like a poll tax. Opponents also claim that by enforcing an ID law it is creating a poll tax similar to the ones created to prevent the African American people from voting. A poll tax is a specific amount a person is charged before being able to place a vote; the comparison between a poll tax and a driver’s license fee is like comparing apples and oranges, when getting a driver’s license a person is using their license as their main form of ID. Poll taxes were outlaw in the 1960s by the 24th amendment.

Voter ID laws are the laws set into place that require a person to show some form of identification to vote, most of which require PHOTO ID. Senate Bill 14, which requires proof of Identification; providing criminal penalties and Senate Bill 5, which requires a voter to present proof of ID; providing a criminal penalty and increasing a criminal penalty are the two bills being questioned at the time. Senate bill 5 was the revised version of SB 14, which was put into place so that voters with no photo ID could sign a declaration and still cast their vote. SB 5 was thrown out with Attorney General Paxton saying “our argument is simple that this is a legitimate act of legislature. This is not discriminatory.” In 2011 the

I do not think stricter voter ID laws are necessary because of the already low voter turnout. If the states go stricter on voter ID laws that will lead to the voter turnout even lower. The voter ID is an ID to confirm that the person voting is same as the photo shown on the ID and the person is registered to vote. I do not think the voter ID is useful. So stricter voter ID just make people more pressure or time to do all kind of extra paper work. That just make more process and be much harder for certain groups to vote. Maybe they can do like if who have voter ID, they can go to express line. Although voter ID can reduce vote fraud but is it necessary to completely get rid of voter fraud. No, because people can still have other way to do voter

the lands their property because it's belong to God and no one have the right to