Voter Identification Law Research Paper

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.

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

There were many credentials in order to voting which were enforced in order to revoke voting rights to those on U.S. soil. Still today many things are required in order to vote in the United States such as: being a citizen of the United States, a legal resident of a state, at least 18 years old by Election Day, not disqualified from voting due to a court order and not under Department of Corrections supervision for a felony conviction. Throughout having the proper requirements to vote are very important and strict. Voting requirements are less harsh than previous history records show, being that they are very general and morally correct as the Supreme Court approve them with Congress created the requirements to voting.

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

In 2002, with the intention of updating election technology, hampering voter fraud, and increasing faith in the electoral system, President George W. Bush signed into law the Help America Vote Act (Gerken 14). Since the implementation of this act, controversial voter identification laws have begun springing up all over the country. According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, “thirty-one states require all voters to show ID before voting at the polls. In fifteen of these, the ID must include a photo of the voter; in the remaining sixteen, non-photo forms of ID are acceptable” (Voter Identification Requirements). In 2005 Indiana lawmakers passed one of the strictest voter identification laws in the country requiring voters

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 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

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

The topics discussed in this research paper are some of the political issues that the people of the United States face everyday. Starting with the Voter ID laws, which were first enacted in the 1950’s by South Carolina (1). Since than it has been a method used by registered voters to present some type of formal identification before voting at there local government poll. This created a way to insure that residents of the united states did not vote multiple times and that the actual resident registered to vote was being represented. Although the disadvantages of the Voter ID laws are also endless, by enforcing identification to be present during the time voting period people who did not have the proper documentation were not allowed to vote. This created a demising situation between people who were legally registered to vote but did not have the proper identification document to vote therefore creating less votes in the voting process.

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.

I do not see that we have a major problem of voter fraud in our democracy but we definitely have some issues of fraud happening within the voting community, as we cannot eradicate all fraud from everything everywhere. We have town clerks and other officials who hold positions specially to render for this type of jobs responsibility of detecting voting fraud during an election year. In reading the articles that we have in this week’s requirement, it seems to me and my view point, that I think some societies are trying to complicate voting by making all get a photo ID. Even that of the low poverty-stricken who are unable to get out or easily access the DMV for a photo ID. The area in which I live we still go by the voter ID cards the Registrar Office mailed when we signed up, so here it still is simple for all people in general, but one day I am sure everyone will encounter that same strict requirement of photo ID. Like everything in life, you must show some form of ID to receive something in return anymore, so it will only be eventually a requirement as time goes on and become a general rule of thumb for society in the end. Then again, this is my point of

The debate on whether photo identification should be required to vote has become very visible and heated over the past several years. Some argue that voter identification laws are only to keep certain people from being able to participate in an election. They claim that it is meant to dissuade minorities or certain economic demographic groups from voting. When you consider all activities that occur in our everyday lives that require photo identification, there is no valid reason to not verify someone’s identity before allowing them to cast a ballot in an election.

But, as of today there is no solid way of knowing if someone is or is not trying to sneak in more than one ballot. “I don’t know if anybody knows how prevalent it is, because the only time you find out is when somebody gets caught.” (Guzman, 1) And the statistics of that happening is .00000013 percent or 26 out of every 197 million cases. Because there are multiple techniques that can and have been used time after time again. Although this is the case there has been some attempt to prevent it. Voter ID law are one example, but it is far from the perfect solution. First, it prevents only one type of voter’s fraud, voter impersonation. And, second, the voter’s ID laws has been ruled as discrimination; so the rule is not enforced everywhere and the public can vote without