My state recently implemented a law that says you need ID before you can vote. Yesterday was a test run -- you were asked for ID, and if you had it, cool; if not, still cool, but you got a flier advising you that in November, it would be required. There's some backstop to that; if you don't have ID in November, you can still vote, but the vote is 'provisional', meaning that you fill out a paper rather than voting on the machine. You then have five days to come up with ID, or they pitch your vote.
The liberals say this is an attempt to suppress turnout. They say that the kind of person most likely not to have ID is also the kind of person most likely to vote for Democrats.
The conservatives say this is needed to combat voter fraud. Last time around, several people said to us that they thought ID should be required, just for that reason. This time, several said 'good idea'.
Not all of the approval came from Republicans. Not all of the dismay came from Democrats.
4 comments:
The day may come when the Federal Government enacts a universal, national ID for US citizens. I used to live in Texas where years ago they had a poll tax and you needed the receipt for payment of this poll tax to vote. That was to discourage black folks from voting. Eventually Texas went to a voter registration system then to the Drivers License and a voter ID, issued by the state. No telling where this will wind up in the foreseeable future. You, coming from a larger populated area may be more capable of seeing the future on a national ID system, than some oif us from these backward states.
Pennsylvania is just as capable of being backward as any other state.
The argument is that there has been minimal teeny tiny voter fraud found. You can go to jail and be fined for it. The only voter fraud is going to be these big millionaires tinkering with the machines!
Oh no, we're assured that they are non-tinkerable unless you happen to have a bobby pin or the top of a Bic pen.
Post a Comment