Should We Have An Id When Voting?

The idea of obtaining a voter ID and presenting it at polls to vote is a concern amongst Republicans and Democrats. Republicans believe that a voter ID should be required at polling areas and create laws in support of this notion, however Democrats believe that by passing these laws we deny the constitutional right of citizens to vote, therefore rendering these laws unconstitutional. I for one believe that we should have voter ID laws which required people show a form of ID at polling stations to ensure that votes registered for a poll are that of a citizen and that of the one who is voting. Based on the three articles from The Enduring Debate, debating whether we should have Voter ID laws, we can see as to how voting fraud can be committed and how it’s only use may possibly be used to push the Republican agenda and disrupt the Democrats agenda.

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.

What is more American than voting? This right has been fought for by many groups and people throughout the life of our country. From the people in our history books to the everyday person fighting for their rights, voting has been yearned for by many. However, even with voting being such a big deal, voter turnout is low for America and still there are some Americans who can’t vote. With so much being done throughout the years to get the vote to Americans, we’d expect high voter turnout and everyone being able to vote, but that isn’t true and it needs to change. We should make voting required as turnout will rise, more people would get involved in the government, and more people will be able to vote.

It 's the time of the season when the stakes run high. Our democracy is currently under a fierce battle to decide its next leader, supreme court justice, and overall pathway forward. Another item on the docket of democracy is the new voter ID laws. These laws have been strengthening and becoming more widespread over the past decade. North Carolina is but the latest state to adopt this voter ID policy and with the current circumstances, few realize the fierce battle North Carolina is facing.. These new laws, passed laws in 2013, made showing an approved government issued ID mandatory if one wanted to vote this election cycle. In addition they also outlawed same day registration and the ability to vote outside one 's precinct. North Carolina’s passage was just another addition to the ongoing controversy surrounding these voter ID laws. This is an issue that has divided the nation, and now our home state. Critics of the new laws say that the laws disenfranchise potential voters, specifically those of African-American and Hispanic backgrounds. Supporters of the laws have adopted the platform that voting is a privilege and that the new laws are necessary and proper to protect against voter fraud. Whichever side you find yourself on one thing is clear, these new

Voters Identification law may suppress minority voting and it may not suppress minority voting. We have so many different races that enter this country with permission and without. The laws for visiting or becoming a legal resident in this country is complicated especially because of the terrorist attacks. Identification laws are necessary in my opinion. It helps identify people, most importantly it helps to decrease any fraudulent activities in this country. I can say if it has anything to do with racial and ethnic minorities, maybe it’s a coincidence that majority of African Americans and Hispanic have less access to photo IDs, some of us are not legal citizens, or maybe not. The law complicates everything in general for good reasons so they feel. I can understand what the research and studies demonstrates, about the decrease in minority audience and increase Republican Party turnouts. I do believe if you have a higher mindset you can attain all things that seem impossible. I know firsthand how difficult it is for African Americans to register to vote without an ID, the law won’t even to let you register if its expired. So what the law has gotten strict, so what, that should motivate African Americans and other races in this country to push through any obstructions to get an ID so they can be apart in making changes in this society. I know African Americans went through what may have seem like Hell but they overcame it and contribute to adding Amendments, why go through

I believe that American citizens should be required to vote in national elections. Jury duty is mandatory so why isn't voting? (“Telling Americans to vote, or else”1).

Mandatory voting in America should be implied in the political system. Countries such as Australia and Belgium have already enforced this law on its people, and have had great results in the increasing turnout of voters going to polls. In excess of seventy years in Australia, voters have been obliged to appear to survey Election Day. Disappointment to show up causes a fine of up to fifteen dollars. Australian races since mandatory voting was implemented the turnout has reached an amount of ninety percent and above. Australian citizens have gotten use to showing up to polls and voting that it is a common obligation in their lives. (Ornstein) Based on this statistic mandatory voting has a clear effect. It raises participation rates this would also prompt more Americans to pay attention to which candidate to vote for. Mandatory voting will help change the political system of the United States, which will lead to different political culture and ultimately increase voter-turnout. As well as engage the citizens of our nation to vote who they feel is necessary. Money is also a big issue in becoming a president or even getting people to notice a candidate. Billions of dollars go into these campaigns, but if mandatory voting was enforced, this would lower the amount of money spent tremendously candidates can focus on debates and talk about a right path for our nation. Overall, mandatory voting would create a stronger, smarter, and more democratic United States of America.

The I.D. requirement for voting is unnecessary. The governors argue that it would prevent fraud because voters are required to prove their identifications. However, just like John Oliver said, although I.D. voter appears to be a common sense, it may become impossible for some people.There are six types of government-issued identifications that can be used at voting polls in Texas. First of all, driver's licenses seem to be the most common method; however, not everyone drives or has a car. Secondly, Texas authorizes gun holders to carry their handguns around. Apparently, not all Texans obtain or carry weapons with them; therefore, it is not a popular choice to be used at voting polls. Thirdly, the passport can be one option; however, only a

Republican proponents claim that voter identification laws do not discourage those who are most likely to vote from turning out to the polls. They also believe voter identification laws are vitally essential to discourage voter fraud and to strengthen public trust in the electoral system (Gerken 40). Looking closer at both sides of this continuing controversy will help to clarify each sides claims and reveal any misinformation.

Whether protecting and expanding voting rights through permitting more valid vote identifications is a controversial topic during the presidential election of 2016. Many people believe that the current voter ID law makes young, women, minority groups, and seniors hard to access to the ballot box, and thus, should be revised to broaden lists of acceptable forms of voter ID. On the other hand, the supporters of the Voter ID law argue that the law is effective to eliminate undocumented immigrants and noncitizens to make a fraud when voting. Janell Ross, in her article “Hillary Clinton declares war on Voter ID,” uses examples and professional language to demonstrate the negative sides of the Voter ID law in a polished manner. In the article, “Here’s what Donald Trump thinks about Voting,” Zachary Roth uses strong reasons to make a clear argument on the necessity of implementation of the Voter ID law. A valid and persuasive argument should be able to appear to reason, writer’s character, and emotion. Therefore, although Ross and Roth both clearly present their opinions in a professional manner for the audience, they lack validity in providing credible sources to back up some of their ideas.

In contrast Midwestern states, as well as New Hampshire and Rhode Island are more likely to have white populations at or above the national average of 79% as well as higher GDP per state than their Southern counterparts as seen in Appendixes 4 and 5. Unlike Southern states, Midwestern states, plus New Hampshire and Rhode Island, have less need to keep minority and poorer populations, who are less likely to have a form of voter Id, from the voting booth because they do not hold as much sway in elections as they do in the south. In addition, a few of these states are Democratic strongholds negating any need to disenfranchise these populations as they make up the majority of the Democratic voting base. While political culture and region, race, and poverty level appear to be strong indicators of voter ID laws in the south, the Midwest alongside New

Texas’ voter ID law is one of the strictest in the nation. Discriminatory evidence the majority opinion might see is in the list of acceptable forms of identification. There are seven acceptable forms of identification, which includes a handgun license, but not a student ID. This can be seen as discriminatory towards students who possess a student ID, but not one of the forms of identification specified by the voter ID law. On the basis that younger voters tend to lean towards Democratic opinions. Certain Justices of the Court, like Ginsburg, might find this as proof that with the voter ID law, Texas legislatures are trying to refrain from demographic changes of the state. The law is discriminatory against minorities and poor voters in that not all of these individuals have one of the acceptable forms of identification. Accessing one of these forms of identification could be costly and inconvenient. In order to obtain a Texas ID or drivers license, one must visit a DMV. This can be difficult for individuals who live a significant distance from a DMV and those who do not have a

According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, such proposals were considered by 34 states in 2011, and in 32 states in 2012# . Nine states now have laws in place that require citizens to show government-issued photo identification before casting a valid ballot.

Is there any way to increase voter turnout? Compulsory is a way to increase voter turnout. In 2016, only 57.9% of eligible voters voted. Should Americans be required to vote? In my opinion, Americans should not be required to vote. There are three reasons why Americans should not be required to vote: many young people don’t have time to vote, citizens have the liberty to choose vote or not, and people that’s inexperience have to vote will be dangerous.

The idea of compulsory voting has been discussed for almost every democratic nation in the world. It has been shown to work for some nations but, would compulsory voting benefit the United States? Many have posited that if all were forced to vote, many would vote at random or on a whim, randomizing our democratic process. This would undermine our political system and put into office whoever happens to be randomly selected. Many who push for compulsory voting say that it will even the playing field, forcing those underprivileged parties that did not vote before to vote. I see this as a movement in the wrong direction. The people that should be voting are those who have an opinion on the election, or want one of the candidates over the others, but that is not always who is voting. Many either can not because it is too hard, or do not because they believe it is too hard. The effort should be spent on making voting accessible to every American citizen. In the end compulsory voting is not the solution to the problem of low voter turnout, as it raises many more problems in itself.