The article “Editorial: Shakedown for Silly Voter ID Law” in the Dallas News, comments on the new laws about voter IDs. Since the
new law concerns all voters, it is written for people who would like
to know more about voter IDs, and the cons concerning the laws, since the article is very obviously
against the IDs.
The author's point of view becomes very
clear right in the beginning of the article. After describing the
state's governments effort to help voters to get IDs, he comments on
those with an anaphora (“Of course […]. Of course […]. Of
course […]”), which underlines his dislike of the new voter ID
laws. Even though voter fraud was never proven, the bill passed after
the Republicans refused to include the Democrats' idea to extend
office hours to make it easier to get voter IDs. After a filed
lawsuit, this changed immediately. People went exactly for that problem: the
Democrats' mandate that was struck down. However, the author assumes
that the newly extended DPS hours were only made due to politics, not
to help voters to get their hands on IDs. The next problem that came
up, which he mentions, was the question, on whether the DPS would run
a background check before issuing the IDs, but the DPS soon denied
that this would happen. The author is sure that the need of voter IDs
and the confusion about it will cause a low voter turnout in upcoming
elections.
There are definitely pros and cons
concerning voter ID laws, but over all, the way the laws are
enforced, causes more trouble than good. Of course it makes sense
that you have to identify yourself, as you have to for so many other
things. But if it is obvious that so many people don't have IDs they
can show, how can those laws be put into effect, without taking care
of the ID-problem first?
It is well known that mainly voters of
color, voters with low income and elderly people don't have IDs. So
by simply enforcing the laws of voter identification, their right to
vote is denied, and this should be known by the politicians who made
the law. And even if the IDs are issued for free, there is
documentation needed to apply for IDs. Some of those documents, cost
money. So the IDs aren't really free. If people live on the edge of
existence, will they spend the money and time to become eligible to
vote after they didn't have to for the past decades? Probably not. The costly part
of getting an ID explains where the idea of poll-taxes comes from,
and yes, from that perspective it makes sense. Some people even go as
far, and compare voter IDs to Jim Crow Laws, or "Separate, but Equal",
but here, I can't say whether they go too far or not. And as
the author of the article “Editorial: Shakedown for Silly Voter ID Laws”
says: There is no evidence for a high amount of fraud.
In the past, the laws that were passed
usually extended voting rights, but this one seems to take a step
backwards.
No comments:
Post a Comment