Voter Id And The United States

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.

The fact remains that in an ever-evolving modern society, IDs are a necessity for people in their daily lives (Zorka). IDs are needed to board a plane and to protect against insurance fraud (Zorka). Does this make airports and hospitals racist? (Zorka). The fact remains that the majority of people in the United States have identification, and it is not that much to ask to have them bring it to vote (Kobach). Kobach points out that there are more valid IDs in Kansas than there are eligible voters (Kobach). Zorka goes so far as to say that it is racist to claim that voter ID laws are disenfranchising because you are saying that minorities are too lazy to get the identification needed to vote (Zorka). In Indiana, driver’s licenses are free, which means that in no way is a voter ID law a poll tax (Siegel). Also, identification is not needed for those who are disabled or older than 65 because this may be burdensome on them (Siegel). Voter ID laws are a necessity, and the burden of obtaining an ID is not something that great. This is why the claim that voter ID hurts minorities is

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

Throughout the years many Americans have faced what is known as voter suppression. When researching voter suppression you will find that it is defined as a strategy to influence the outcome of an election by discouraging or preventing those with voting rights from voting. I interpret that the causes of voter suppression derives from that of equality issues or a misconception of government. However, history recorded the effects of voter suppression which leads to major violence, rebellion, strikes, or in some cases fear. The jarring act of voter suppression began early as 1776 when white men owning property were allowed to vote denying Jews, Catholics, and others their voting rights.

Before the Civil War, there were no federal laws to protect voting rights. Only white males had the right to vote. In 1870, the 15th Amendment was established which stated “Specifically that the right to vote shall not be denied or abridged on the basis of race, or previous condition of servitude” (Introduction to Federal Voting Rights Laws). This amendment gives all Americans the right to be a voice of change for the people by electing officials who will make a difference in their communities. Unfortunately, one mistake can cause you to lose this right forever. As stated by Eric H. Holder, JD, US Attorney General, in his Feb. 11, 2014, speech;

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.

Since its birth, The United States has always had a troubling past on giving its citizens the “right to Vote.” Initially the “ right to vote “ was an exclusive right given to white freemen and before the 15th amendment wasn’t even a true right, more of a privilege. For this reason, it is my belief that the 15th amendment was the most important. The 15th amendment is also the first of four amendments extending the Right to Vote to all in the United States. In 1869, the United States congress passes this amendment which allowed for all citizens no matter what race, color or previous condition of servitude to vote. This meant that “on paper”, this right, naturally pass on to African American. However, as demonstrated by Louisiana passing a the

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?

In the article "The Big Lie Behind Voter ID Laws," the editorial board explains how Republican officials and legislators try to pass new voting laws such as requiring photo ID in order to keep eligible voters from voting. They explain how such laws target mainly minorities and poor people. Along with that, there is discussion of a Federal District Judge’s written opinion showing how the law abused the Voting Rights

The 15th and 19th amendments play a major role in the heated topic of enforcing states to ID a citizen before being able to vote. The 15th amendment allows any citizen to vote no matter what race, color or previous condition of servitude. Also, the 19th amendment gave women the right to vote. With these amendments, they empower every citizen with the right to vote no matter any situation they are in. Yet, some states require voters to show photo ID to vote, for the sole purpose of preventing voter fraud. Only opponents of such voter ID laws argue that such laws disable the poor, the minority, and the elderly because not all of these citizens cannot afford a photo ID.

Voter Identification Laws, Diminished Registration Opportunities, and Reduced Early Voting Periods Impact Minority, Poor, and Elderly Voters

The Voting Rights Act 42 U.S.C. §§ 1973 et seq., decision is important regarding the laws governing voting rights and their relationship to minority voters. Its implication and effects however does not end within the legal realms and dimensions but continues through to society, culture, and human rights. The Voting Rights Act initially established in 1965 under Lyndon B. Johnson’s administration protected “racial minorities” from biased voting practices. It was a huge stride in the civil rights movement and a victory over harmful, archaic, and biased voting practices and traditions.