Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Voter id laws controversy
Argumentative essay on voter id laws
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
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.
The idea of Voter ID laws began to sprung after the 2000 election, when George W. Bush won Florida after it was too close to call. The main issue that surfaced after the election was in regards to voter fraud. The first Voter ID law was the Help America Vote Act, which was signed into law by President Bush which required all first time voters of general elections to present a photo Id upon registering and voting. Help America Vote Act, or HAVA for short, was a coordinated attempt by Republicans to enhance security regarding the casting of ballots. HAVA also helped establish the Election Assistance Commission which would be in charge of creating new ballots and adjusting the security. This act was the first one that gave voters various options to use regarding the verification of their identity. After HAVA was signed into law, states began to act on the new proposals for Voter ID laws. Arizona was the first state to pass a Voter ID law, requiring citizens to have a state-issued photo ID when they were going to vote. In other states, proposals for similar laws began to pop up.
Civil Rights groups have launched various lawsuits...
... middle of paper ...
...4.
Houston Chronicle. Lisa Falkenberg, 11 Feb. 2014. Web. 26 Mar. 2014.
.
Huffington Post. Ashley Alman, 03 Nov. 2013. Web. 26 Mar. 2014.
.
National Conference of State Legislatures. Wendy Underhill , 26 Mar. 2014. Web. 30 Mar. 2014.
.
Outside the Beltway. Doug Mataconis, 23 Aug. 2013. Web. 18 Mar. 2014.
.
Pitts, Michael J.Neumann, Matthew D. "Documenting Disfranchisement: Voter Identification
During Indiana's 2008 General Election." Journal Of Law & Politics 25.3 (2009): 329-373. ContentSelect Research Navigator. Web. 10 Apr. 2014.
The issues surrounding the voter ID law have been shrouded in controversy. The voter ID law is a law that require voters to show a valid form of photo identification before receiving a ballot to vote. It has been said to protect the integrity of the electoral ballots, but many feel as though the voter ID law was made to favor those who are more conservative than those who are more liberal in their view on the government. This may be due to the fact that polling stations will only accept valid government issued photo IDs and weapons permits, not including college IDs. This new law also may be disenfranchising towards minorities. Many are calling it a poll tax on minority voters, creating an unconstitutional burden on the right to vote. Others
United States. Cong. Congress. FAS.org. By Linda Luther. 111 Cong. Cong. Rept. Congressional Research Institute, 12 Jan. 2010. Web. .
The case study about Voter IDs has become more popular ever since the presidential election began in November. This case study demonstrates the importance of having a Voters ID to prohibit Voter Freud. It has come to the attention of several individuals that many of the elections in the past have been a victim of voter Freud, and nothing has been done to resolve the situation. Others view the Voter ID laws as depriving voters; however, the laws are there to protect US citizens from non-US citizen votes that decrease US citizen’s odds of their vote counting. The case study on Voter ID needs to become further acknowledged to minimize future voter Freud.
Voter ID laws eliminate all forms of voter fraud and restore integrity to elections, Government-issued photo IDs are inexpensive and easy to obtain, and voter ID laws don’t restrict the right to vote and restore confidence to voters. To begin with, what is voter fraud? Voter fraud is the illegal obstruction of an election. Voter fraud is composed of double voting, intimidation, undocumented citizens voting, tampering with electronic or paper ballots, as well as deceased voting. Some opponents, such as Attorney General Eric Holder, suggest that there is not a problem with voter fraud.
“Voter ID laws require individuals to show government-endorsed identification when casting their ballots on Election Day” (Wilson and Brewer). Many people see these laws as necessary to prevent voting fraud, others argue that fraud is extremely rare and that voter ID laws can suppress voting. Voter fraud undermines public confidence in democracy, and that's why we need, whether you are a Democr...
In the past decade, a total of 34 states have passed voter identification laws with the same guidelines from state to state. These laws require voters to show a proof of photo identification in order to be eligible to vote or receive a ballot at the voting polls. The initial purpose of the voter ID laws was to prevent voter fraud. However, the laws have made voting harder for some Americans, like minorities, women, students and elders by requiring a government issued photo ID.
Double voting is when someone goes and votes twice during the election but in two different places. Double voting is great evidence that the election is being tampered with. According to Fox News, it was reported that 52-year-old Robert Monroe was sentenced to jail in 2012. He filled out an absentee ballot and the commenced to drive all the way too Lebanon, Indiana to fill out another ballot with a different license. Yes, both of his votes were not counted but it still occurred. Another case of double voting was reported by News 21, they stated “Texas law entirely, but under a temporary fix signed off on by a federal judge, the state's voters won't have to show ID” meaning people will not have to show ID when going to vote. This gives people the opportunity to double, maybe even triple vote. Individuals without ID’s are able to just go in and vote. People will go to great lengths just so a candidate will not win, even doing something that may very well be illegal. Double voting is definitely pure evidence that the election was
Most would agree that voter identification should be required in order to cast a ballot. A valid ID can be obtained at any Department of Motor Vehicles for a minimal fee. This would minimize skepticisms during elections concerning the validity of voters. Voter fraud is on the rise and can certainly taint election outcomes. "Proponents of the law say not requiring a photo ID makes it easy for people to vote more than once or under names not their own, inviting fraud that compromises the integrity of elections" (Phelps). In today's time, the majority of individuals possess identification "to drive or buy alcohol" (Phelps).
Many have claimed that laws, such as requiring an ID to vote, are designed to prevent voter fraud. If this is true than voter fraud must be a significant problem and there should be evidence that such measures will greatly reduce fraud, however, this is not the case. Political scientist and author Lorraine Minnite reports her analysis of voter fraud in the United States in her book, Myth of Voter Fraud, and comes to the conclusion that, " ... criminal voter fraud is episodic and rare relative to the total number of votes in a given year or election cycle" (Minnite, 57). Other research has also found that laws requiring voters to present ID or proof of citizenship does not prevent the most common forms of voter fraud. In an article analyzing the effectiveness of voter ID laws, the author cites research conducted by the News21 pertaining to all reported cases of election fraud since 2000, they found that "14 percent involved absentee ballot fraud. Voter impersonation, the form of fraud that voter ID laws are designed to prevent, made up only 3.6 percent of those cases. (Other types included double voting, the most common form, at 25 percent, and felons voting when they were prohibited from doing so. But neither of those would be prevented by voter ID laws, either)"
In a country that, pundits tell us, is becoming more and more polarized every day, voter identification laws have become one more point of polarization. More than thirty U. S. States have passed such laws in recent years, most patterned on a sample bill that came out of the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).
There are two ways to win an election. One is to get a majority of voters to support you. The other is to prevent voters who oppose you from casting their votes. Occasionally, attempts at voter suppression are illegal dirty tricks, such as the phone-jamming scheme carried out by Republican operatives against a Democratic phone bank in New Hampshire in 2004. Some voter suppression is unintentional, the result of applying or misapplying changes in voting laws. However, voter suppression today is overwhelmingly achieved through regulatory, legislative and administrative means, resulting in modern-day equivalents of poll taxes and literacy tests that kept Black voters from the ballot box in the Jim Crow era. However some examples are in Ohio Secretary of State Ken Blackwell has implemented rules to carry out a new state elections law. Blackwell’s rules make it extremely difficult for small churches and other nonprofit organizations to hire and train voter registration workers and they expose voter registration workers to felony charges for making mistakes. In Texas Congressman John Carter has suggested implementing literacy tests and English-only ballots despite the existence of a federal law requiring minority language ballots at the polls.In Florida in 2004 Governor Jeb Bush was forced to deactivate a list of purported felons who were to be blocked from voting when the news media discovered that the list included Black, but not Hispanic, voters and that many people on the list were actually eligible voters.In California this year, nonsensical requirements for matching new voter names to existing state databases resulted in numerous voter registrations being
Light, Paul C., and Christine L. Nemacheck. "Chapter 7 Congress." Government by the People, Brief 2012 Election Edition, Books a La Carte New Mypoliscilab With Etext Access Card Package. By David B. Magleby. 2012 Election Edition ed. N.p.: Pearson College Div, 2013. N. pag. Print.
Giant print reference ed. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan Pub. House, in the House of Representatives, 1994.
In Texas, there are more than 600,000 people who are eligible to vote but have no acceptable form of identification (Fernandez, Wise). Texas first implemented their photo identification laws in 2013 and since then voter turn-out has been reduced and elections have been swayed. Take Mr. Pete Gallegos, for example, who attempted to regain his congressional seat but narrowly lost in 2014 to republican Will Hurd due to voter identification laws enforced in the state of Texas. Ian Millhiser, Senior Fellow at the Center for American Progress Action Fund, covers Gallegos’ narrow loss in his article, “Study Reveals the True Scope of Voter Disenfranchisement in Texas.” Millhiser asserts that a large part of Gallegos’ loss in 2014was due to the implementation of strict voter identification laws that discouraged democratic constituencies from voting. Millhiser explains, “Five times as many non-voters who listed the photo ID law as the principal reason they did not participate would have voted for Gallegos rather than for Hurd” (Millhiser). Gallegos was defeated by a mere 2,400 votes in the general elections of 2014. The effects that voter identification laws have on elections are clear and it is absolutely vital that California withdraws from implementing these laws to avoid faulty