I
have talked about this and the motivation of those who hold strong positions on
it. I have indicated a general position
about such matters, but I don’t think I have indicated how that position
determines how I would view a particular voter ID law.
General
Position:
A.
If a person claims to have a right or an entitlement to something,
they should have
to demonstrate that they are eligible for that thing. This would include welfare benefits, SS, and
medicare as well as voting rights.
B.
Since voting is essential to a democracy it gets special treatment.
There is a fundamental obligation by the government to ensure there is no
impediment (other than eligibility and the time it takes) to the exercise of
the right to vote. In particular (24th
amendment) there can be no financial impediment – tax, charge, or
cost. In particular, if you require a picture ID, then you must provide a
way for the voter to get one cost free.
I believe that these are pretty
much self evident if you keep in mind that I expect the reader to know that we
are taking proof to be reasonable documentation.
So here comes a voter ID law which
will revise the current law.
It
will require a birth certificate at the time of registration and a picture ID
at the time of voting.
Here
are the questions I would ask and the answers that I would need to get my
support. Someone would point out the
absence of voter fraud as evidenced by the absence of convictions for voter fraud and someone else would note that that
did not prove the lack of voter fraud. In particular who are we relying on to report voter fraud?
1. Why do we need this revision?
This one is pretty easy. Times
change, improvements in technology, etc.
2. Registration: What do you do with a current or previous
voter who does not have the birth certificate and can’t get one?
If
you grandfather these people in and keep them on the rolls, then I am OK. If you want to throw them off of the voting
roles then you are trying for too much.
The burden of proof should be on the state to prove
that someone should be taken off of the rolls.
The burden of proof is on the individual to get on the rolls in the
first place.
3. Voting: Why
do you require a picture ID?
A
picture ID is more secure, technological advances have made them easier to get
and they have become the norm – almost everybody has got one.
What
about those that don’t have one?
They can go to the Driver’s License Bureau
and we’ll make them one free. "part of the bill"
Who
pays to get them there?
The voter does.
That
is not good enough.
What
do I have to do?
Pay all costs or go to
their home.
The thing is that unless it is a reasonable bill it will have the media and the Democratic party all over it: using it as "proof" that the Rs are racists.
The public debate is not
connected to reason, it is based on paranoia and propaganda and goes like this:
D Those Rs
are just trying to deny the right to vote of the old, poor, and minorities who are expected
to vote Democratic. They are racists.
R. The Ds
are just trying to fix it so that when those
10-15 million illegal aliens become legal residents then the Ds can get
them to vote illegally.
So on this one if
I have to choose between those, then I think that I would go with the Rs because ff the D’s are right in their paranoia then the R’s will have their leadership
doing their dirty work (making bad voter ID laws) in full public view. I think that that is impossble. On the other hand if the Rs are right then
the Ds actions (voter fraud) would be carried out by the rank and file and not see the light of day.