Polarized Voting Persuasive Essay

Election season is in full swing in the United States, the time of year in which many people wish they could go on a months-long vacation to somewhere they wouldn’t have to watch local television, listen to local radio or check their mailboxes… Be that as it may, as a judge once reminded me, there are only two ways in which a citizen of my country actually participates in governing him- or her-self: jury duty and the ballot box.

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).

It is instructive to note that no state legislature controlled by the Democratic Party has to date passed such a law.

Point, Counterpoint

Proponents of these laws raise the specter of uncontrolled voter fraud, which, they say, can have a deleterious effect on elections – on other words, elect the wrong candidate.

While proponents cannot provide evidence that such fraud exists, they point to historical evidence (sometimes anecdotal) of instances of this chicanery. “Dead people voting in Chicago” is one such bogeyman, while a potentially more realistic example is the first election win by a Texas congressman named Lyndon Johnson. In an era of electronic voting, however, it seems fairly unlikely that anyone is going to steal and destroy a ballot box from a precinct filled with the “wrong”

voters…

Opponents of voter identification laws claim that they are “A solution in search of a problem.” More to the point, opponents believe that the laws are a bald-faced attempt to suppress the vote of likely Democratic voters, especially racial minorities, the poor and the young. Some very large numbers have been bandied about by opponents: here in Texas, for instance, an academic study identified approximately 600,000 potential voters who would have trouble producing the required identification. How many of them would vote if given the opportunity is uncertain, though this country's turnout of eligible voters is shamefully low by any standard.

Talking Points

Supporters of voter identification laws almost universally raise the argument that one needs identification to function in modern society. Google variations on the phrase “drive, board a plane, cash a check, or fill a prescription” to find thousand of repetitions of a Fox News talking point in favor of the laws. Those seem to be fair points, until you realize that driving, getting on planes and cashing checks are pastimes in which some minority and poor citizens don’t partake; and that your local pharmacy does NOT require picture identification to fill a prescription (something else many poor citizens rarely or never do). An inability to put oneself in the shoes of another is apparently the hallmark of Fox News.

To be sure, the laws almost universally provide for a free election identification card for those who do not already have proper picture identification (ALEC suggested that even the current U. S. Supreme Court would find charging for such identification a poll tax, and thus unconstitutional). Proponents of the laws point to these free ID cards as evidence that they do not create a barrier to voting. To the contrary, however, here in Texas one need not pay for the identification itself, but one must pay for the documents needed to get the identification. You cannot obtain this ID without producing proof of citizenship such as a U. S. Passport ($65 charge) or a birth certificate from a U. S. State or Territory – which can cost anywhere from eight to twenty-five dollars ($25 in Texas). It’s that simple – without one of those two documents, you cannot get a voter ID – and neither of them is free.

Texas requires one of seven forms of picture identification: a Texas Driver License (don’t ask me why Texas insists on not calling it a “driver’s license” like the other 49 states…), the above-mentioned election ID, a state-issued personal ID card, a state-issued concealed handgun license, a U.

S. passport, or a U. S. military ID; all of which must be current or have expired in the past 60 days; or a U. S. citizenship certificate. Very visibly missing is state-issued student identification, an omission opponents of the law claim to be proof positive that the law is intended to suppress young voters. Many students, while tax-paying residents of the state who are contributing tens of thousands of dollars to the local economy every year, maintain their vehicle registration and driver’s license at their permanent address. Texas is happy to take their tuition, room and board, however the state apparently does not want them voting

here…

Opponents to these laws also point out that the most likely source of fraudulent votes is not in-person balloting, but voting by mail. Even after enactment of the Texas Voter ID law, mail-in ballots still do not require that the voter provide any identification. The only stricture placed on mail-in ballots is that someone claiming he or she will be out of the county on election day must mail the application from somewhere outside the county.

Texas Voter ID Law

The voter identification law in Texas was struck down by a federal court in October, 2014, as an unconstitutional poll tax but the U. S. Supreme Court left it in effect for the upcoming mid-term election (pending appeal of the Federal court decision). While the court did not state a reason, the presumption is that the court felt it would be too confusing for election judges if the law – which was just enacted in 2014 – were to be rescinded.

But Are these Laws Really Meant to Prevent Fraud?

Opponents of voter ID laws point to a speech made before the Pennsylvania Legislature by that state's House Republican Leader Mike Turzai as proof that the laws are examples of wink-wink, nudge-nudge legislation passed for something other than its stated purpose. A video snippet from that speech helps them make their case:

One Voter’s Experience

I voted in early voting on October 30, 2014. I arrived at the polls carrying not one but two picture IDs and my voter registration card. I presented my Texas Driver License in accordance with the law, and was directed to a ballot box.

My driver’s license expired in mid-August, and the address is five years out of date. One must wonder whether the election judges would have allowed me to vote without comment if I were not a middle-aged white male.