Strict Voter Id Laws

The voting rate in America has been very low the past few elections. There are many reasons people feel that people aren’t going to the polls to vote. For example so people believe that its because the people running for positions of power aren’t the the best so nobody votes. Other people believe that its or right as Americans to go to the polls on election day. Forcing People to go vote on election day is not democratic because we are given the freedom to do what we want.

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.

Voter ID Laws, now present in some form or another in thirty states, require individuals to show government-issued identification in order to cast a ballot on Election Day. The debate over the need for such laws has never been more important. Voter ID laws were brought to the forefront of American politics in the most recent presidential election as a result of President Elect Donald Trump’s insistence that the election process in America is riddled with wide-spread voter fraud. His claims of a “rigged election” were printed, broadcast, and proliferated through social media for the majority of his campaign. Such claims, if factual, should certainly be immediately rectified. The United States is built on the integrity of its election process and maintaining that integrity is paramount. The issue at hand is: Are these claims of widespread voter fraud fact or fiction? The key driver in the debate over Voter ID laws is whether or not such laws are intended to prevent voter fraud or whether the laws themselves are a form of government-endorsed fraud intended to suppress the vote of specific populations. The fact remains that neither the President Elect nor the states implementing Voter ID laws have been able to produce evidence of election rigging or widespread voter fraud. As such, without evidence of the need for the supposed protection from fraud that these laws are intended to provide, we can only conclude that such laws are not

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

When the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 (also known as, the Motor Voter Act) was passed, I believe it may have had a postive effect by facilitating the registration process. However, people have become significantly lazy in the past few years. Even though this act made it very easy for peoplet to register to vote, I believe many feel as though their personal vote is insignificant or maybe they just really don't have an opinion in politics. But in reality, their vote would definitly make a difference. I feel as though it is a privellage we as a people get to vote for our leaders of the country and many may have forgotten that with all of the political wars and arguing going on around us today. When I am able and the next election comes

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

Why? Because of the strong impact it has on the outcome of the election and the number of votes registered. According to Lauren Justice, Latino’s especially were less likely to vote in ‘12 than in ‘08 because of their inability to get a hand of the identification (3). Thousands of people in the states have not been able to require all the necessary items they need in order to get an ID. Some states require an original birth certificate which isn’t always easy to get because of where it’s from. This may not be a problem to some, some like the republicans who set up these laws. Calling them ‘fair’, ‘necessary’, and ‘voter friendly’. The reason they set these rules up is to keep Democrats from stealing elections. How would they do it? Based on numerous studies and surveys, election fraud has been found to be rare, and the in-person fraud that the laws could prevent is virtually absent (Justice 2). Not only is this absurd, but these laws makes it even more difficult for people. If by any means they are not able to get an ID, states like Texas and Wisconsin may let them take an oath. An oath that lets those without an approved ID vote after signing it, only after stating that they cannot “reasonably” obtain one. What about the others who weren’t able to ‘reasonably’ obtain one? What about all the others who can’t take the oath? How can this be fixed? What the states need to do in order for these problems to be fixed is to get rid of the strictness these laws have on the voting. If they do, then more people are willing to vote and can impact the election greatly. If this were to happen, maybe Donald Trump would have not become president and more votes would have

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.

Our Voting System is clearly being corrupted. Problems identifying legitimate voters is much more serious than anyone is acknowledging. With identity scams on the rise, states are getting tougher on the identification requirements needed to vote. In 2013, the Supreme Court ruled that a provision of the Voting Rights Act was unconstitutional and those counties and states previously subjected to these laws did not need approval to make changes to their voter ID laws. Eight states passed voter ID laws that year. Since then three states Georgia, Indiana and Florida require photo ID’s, eighteen other states now require some form of identification (National Conference of State Legislatures), with the other 25 only requiring signatures. In lieu of all the voter ID fraud, is it imperative for states to put in place a Voter ID Law? Will these laws put a burden on the states citizens or will they become disenfranchised if they don’t have the proper ID (Rodriguez, US. Election Assistant Commission), and is it just another hurdle that voters will have to leap over to vote for who or what they believe in?

The main focus of the Dye reading was on voter participation procedures and citizen participation in local politics. It was especially interesting to learn about the history of affirmative racial gerrymandering and how the laws regarding racial gerrymandering are still unclear today. The Smith reading Voter Identification in the Courts went over voter ID laws and legal claims in different states. The main point of Voter ID History was to go over the history of voter identification legislation and enactments from 2000-2015. I thought it was interesting how it seemed to be midwest and southern states that mostly experimented with voter ID laws during this time. In Aging Voting Machines are a Threat to Democracy, the main point was that the current

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.

Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission has defended the formula used to distribute the Biometric Voter Registration (BVR) kits for the ongoing mass voter registration exercise. The commission on Friday sent a press release to the media seeking to give a clarification on concerns raised by sections of the public on the ongoing exercise.