Voter Id Laws - Fraud Or Fraud Prevention?

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.

Voting has not always been as easy as it is today. It is interesting to examine how far America has progressed in its process of allowing different types of people to be able to vote. Voting was once aimed at a particular group of people, which were white males that owned their own property. Today, most people over the age of eighteen can vote, except for the mentally incompetent or people who have been convicted of major felonies in some states. The decline of voter participation has always been a debate in the public arena. According to McDonald and Popkin, it is “the most important, most familiar, most analyzed, and most conjectured trend in recent American political history (2001, 963)” The question is, how important is voter

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

As everyone may know The Daily Show is a widely popular show that informs viewers of current news through humour (John,2017). The Daily show had an episode dedicated to why Shelby county wanted to get rid of sec 4(b) and 5 of the voting rights act (John,2017). Supposedly Voting I.D laws was a suggestion to prevent voting fraud which was assessed to having 1 to 2 cases not 1,000 to 2,000 but simply 1 to 2 cases (John,2017). It's a non-ethical approach because there have only been 1 to 2 cases of fraud which does not call for an extreme tactic of presenting I.D laws (John,2017). The Daily show dived into how the voting I.D laws was a strategic ideal to incorporate all these restrictions to stop the Democratic party (John,2017). By going after black & Latino they would overall halt the Democratic party because they mainly vote democrat (John,2017). Thankfully the voting ID laws were shut down in Alabama, but has started an uproar in the south

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.

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

Throughout the years, the United States has been choosing its president using the electoral college, voter ID laws to reduce voter turnout, gerrymandering to choose our representatives, and using methods to select candidates in the primaries. Through the electoral college, their presidents have been unfairly chosen using the winner take all system. In this system, if they, the voters, choose the losing party, they might as well go home because of how it works. To make matters even worse, voter ID laws have been making their laws even more difficult to surpass, in able to reduce the number of votes. Gerrymandering is used to give a party a special advantage by using the packing and cracking method, and as for the primaries, they are held by

Democrats, who almost unanimously oppose voter identification laws, strongly feel that minority groups of voters, who tend to vote Democratic, are more likely to not have the resources, knowledge, or means to have or obtain the necessary identification requirements for the polls. In a research project developed by Matt A. Barreto, Stephen A. Nuño, and Gabriel R. Sanchez, testing was conducted to “determine the rates of access to valid photo identification among voters and non-voters in Indiana, with an eye towards specific demographic groups, such as the elderly and racial minorities” (Barreto, Nuño, and Sanchez 112). Indiana was selected because of its strict voter identification law and for the ability to closely assess specific segments of the electorate under such a law. Their research method, using a random telephone survey of 1,000 registered and 500 non-registered voters, was conducted in a way that was unbiased and provided the most reliable and accurate results possible (Barreto, Nuño, and Sanchez

There is no doubt that the attacks on 9/11 caused Congress to pass the Real ID Act in order to prevent foreign nationals from fraudulently obtaining a U.S. driver’s license. Congress said the Real ID Act is about security, not stigmas. The law was intended to set principles for states that issue licenses and to procure acceptable documents. However, due to budgets, there are not enough resources to verify the accuracy of these documents from foreign countries. This is based solely on three 9/11 hijackers being able to obtain state identification cards while using fictitious documents. In total, thirty three hijackers acquired state driver’s licenses. Unfortunately, stern stipulations have gradually decreased due to several states and local governments allowing Identification cards to be issued without distinguishing from an authentic driver’s license (Jeunesse, 2015).

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

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?

After research-filled, highly targeted, and negative campaigns, the results of the 2016 Presidential Election stunned the world. But were these results really all that surprising? America was prepared for a change in policy and election projections were incorrect due to the fact that there existed many “under cover Trumpers”, whom voted their conscience but were not willing to openly admit their political beliefs for fear of condemnation. The 2016 Presidential Election results open many areas for research into the legitimacy of the Electoral College, civic engagement, and campaign strategies as well as raises concerns over the fear American people possessed in defending their political values.

In 2008, the Supreme Court upheld Indiana’s law despite lack of evidence of voter fraud. In Texas, however, voter fraud is a real concern. In a column by Greg Abbott, the Texas Attorney General, he states, “In recent years, my office has secured more than 50 voter fraud convictions. Those include a woman who voted in place of her dead mother, a political operative who cast ballots for two people, and a city councilmember who registered foreign nationals to vote in an election decided by 19 votes. Voter fraud is hard to detect, so cases like these are just the tip of the iceberg.” Texas legislature believes that requiring photo identification is a simply way to prevent these fraud issues from occurring. Not everyone agrees with the motives of the

In recent years, voter fraud has been a controversial topic. Many states have passed or have tried to pass laws that enforce strict Voter ID laws if a person wants to cast a vote in their state. Donald Trump has been someone who has spoken widely on the topic of voter fraud. According to Zeke J. Miller, a writer for Time Magazine, Trump has “repeated his unfounded allegations of widespread voter fraud”. I personally do not believe voter fraud is happening this much in our elections and really think some politicians are looking for someone to blame when the outcome is not what they would have liked.

“Given that someone who is dead, is in jail, or has moved isn’t likely to complain if someone votes in his name, how do we know that voter fraud at the polls isn’t a problem?” (Fund, 1) With the amount of the general public that have been held accountable for committing voter fraud I can say that it exists. The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now is an organization that, while it intentions are for the good and public, has been known for participating in several cases of criminal activities, during election their members are arrested for voter