Voter ID: The Social, Economic, Legal and Political Aspects of Voter ID Laws - Case Study Example

Voter ID-The Social, Economic, Legal and Political Aspects of Voter ID Laws Introduction Some of the political consequences that accompany the enactment of voter identification laws are evident in the politics of the republicans in Pennsylvania, which became the 16th state to adopt the strict voter identification laws. It is evident that the laws that were put in place required the voters to produce their Pennsylvanian driver’s licenses or government issued photos such as passports, their military identifications or their municipal employee identifications. It is evident that the state also accepted personal care home identifications, or college identifications provided the documents were current with the expiration dates indicated. An examination of the Governor Tom Corbett’s speech concerning the enactment of these laws reveals that the governor proposed for the enactment of the laws stating that he signed the bill because he believed that the bill was a scared principle protecting the rights of the citizens. The governor described this as a principle that encouraged the one person one vote issue. It is evident that the governor did believe that the enactment of the laws did put in place simple standards that would protect the integrity of the elections. However, it is evident that some sources argued that the main reason as to why the Corbett might have signed the bill is because he was under the republican led legislature. This was the same case in eight other states, which include; Kansas, Alabama, Tennessee, Carolina, Wisconsin and Texas. Some of the politicians did believe that the enactment of the laws would have prevented fraud related to voter impersonation. However, these were followed with reactions from other politicians who believed that voter impersonation fraud was rare in most states (Barnes 29). Other political consequences that accompanied the enactment of voter identification laws included; the reactions from supporters in states such as South Carolina who suggested that; the enactment of the new voter identification laws resulted to the casting of votes even in the names of dead people. However, it is evident that when the states election commission carried out their investigation, no evidence of fraud or clerical errors was obtained. It is believed that such demonstration might have been driven by political factors because even investigations from the courts revealed that nobody had been convicted of voter fraud. The other political consequence that followed the enactment of voter identification laws included reactions from those in the opposition, who believed that the enactment of the laws would suppress voter turnout among minorities, the poor and students. Those in the opposition examined the enactment of the laws as a way through which individuals belonging to democratic leaning groups would be prevented from voting. They argued that individuals belonging to these groups would not have voted because they lacked the identifications, and had a difficulty in obtaining the identifications. These were followed by reactions from Governor Corbett who stated that individuals who did not possess any acceptable form of identification, were in a position to obtain the identifications free of charge provided they were in possession of the essential documents such as voter identification cards (Biskupic 33). The other political consequence that has normally accompanied the enactment of the voter identification laws is evident from reactions of bodies such as Brennan center for justice. It is evident that this body was against the enactment of voter identification laws and the laws that limited early voter registration and early voting. It is evident that the body raised concerns stating that the laws were put in place to enhance a significant cutback in the citizens voting rights. They believed that the laws were implemented to enhance a barrier to voting. These thoughts were accompanied by reactions from some Americans who also thought that the laws were put in place to prevent other individuals from voting, hence a consequence of the laws (Barnes 30). The other political consequences that resulted from the enactment of the laws are evident from the reactions of the justice department who believed that the laws were discriminatory targeting Hispanic voters. This led to reactions among citizens who also thought that the laws were implemented to enhance the discrimination of the black voters. Some of the citizens claimed that the strict laws were implemented, in order to, block registered voters from voting on the Election Day (Barnes 31). It is evident that the enactment of the voter identification laws was followed by some advantages and disadvantages. It is evident that those in defense of the laws argued that the applicable requirements that were implemented in the voter identification laws were eminently reasonable. Individuals defending the voter identification laws claimed that the laws which required citizens to acquire, to possess, and to show their identification were not severe compared to the burdens that were involved during the process of voting. Those defending the laws stated that the enactment of the laws was advantageous to the state because it would enhance the prevention of fraud during elections. It was also thought that enactment of the voter identification laws would have been advantageous because the laws would inspire increased voter confidence. It was thought that the legitimate goals that were put in place by the voter identification laws favored all citizens. These advantages have normally been illustrated in cases of states such as Indiana, which have normally ensured the provision of voter identification cards was free especially for the poor. The other advantage that has been attributed to the enactment of the laws is evident when the laws allowed the voters to cast their provisional ballots and they would later appear at the county court house, in order to, attest to their identity. Individuals such as justice Paul Stevens also stated that the enactment of the identification laws were advantageous because the laws were justified by their valid interest in ensuring the protection, the reliability and the integrity of the nation’s electoral process (Colleen 21). It is also evident that the enactment of the voter identification laws has normally been accompanied by criticism from some individuals who think that the laws were disadvantageous viewing them as a means of disenfranchising voters. It has always been argued that despite the laws being implemented to ensure the confirmation of the voters, the laws are thought to be disadvantageous because of the variance involved in what the voter needs to show. It is argued that some states have normally required the voters to show government issued photos, while in some states individuals are normally required to show their current utility bill or a statement from the bank. It is such variations in the requirements that have led to questions concerning the validity of the identification laws (Colleen 22). The other disadvantage that has been accompanied with the enactment of these laws is evident from those in opposition, who have normally viewed the laws as disproportionate. The laws have normally been considered disadvantageous because it is thought that the identification laws have normally affected the minority, the low income groups and the elderly disproportionately. It is argued that these laws normally affect such individuals because they exhibit democratic voting. The other disadvantage concerns the costs that are normally incurred by individuals in order to, obtain new identification cards. It is evident that despite some of the States offering the voter identifications for free, there are costs that individuals have to incur, which include; costs incurred when obtaining documents such as identification cards. Apart from the costs involved in obtaining the voter identifications, it is evident that the vulnerable groups are normally exposed to some burdens in obtaining voter identifications. Studies have also revealed that the enactment of the laws have normally led to the exclusion of voting age citizens from the electoral process. It is also evident that the, laws also hindered some of the citizens from the rural areas from voting because they could not easily access the identification offices. The other disadvantage that has normally accompanied the enactment of the laws is evident from the comments of individuals such as attorney general Holder, who did compare the laws to a poll tax. It was argued that the laws would return the nation to the era during which voting fees were normally imposed on some voters as a way of preventing the poor whites and blacks from voting (Tokaji 25). Some of the legislations that accompanied the enactment of the laws include; the implementation of strict laws. It is evident that the laws stated that voters could not be allowed to cast their valid ballots without the presentation of the identifications. The other regulation that were stated in the law was that in case a voter was not in a position to show their identifications at the polls, it was essential that the voters are given provisional ballots. The laws further stated that the provisional ballots were normally to be kept separate from the regular ballots. The other regulation in the law was that in case the voter returned to the election officials within the shortest time after the electoral process then the provisional ballot of the vote was to be counted as a valid vote. However, the law also stated that in case the voter did not show back at the identification office within the stipulated time, then the vote was not supposed to be counted. The other legislations that followed the enactment of the laws include; laws that were put in place in some states, which required that the identification presented by a voter had to show the photo of the voter. It is also evident that some of the legislations that were put in place in some states involved the acceptance of a wide array of identifications for voting purposes (Tokaji 26). A comparison of the laws in Pennsylvania, Georgia, and Indiana reveals that the voter identification laws that were implemented in these three states were similar. This is evident from the voter identification law that required the voter to be in possession of voter identifications that had the photos of the voters. However, it is evident that there were differences that existed in the laws enacted in these three states. For example, it is evident that in Georgia if an elector presents a proper identification to a poll worker during the electoral process or prior to the completion of the electoral process, then the voter will be allowed to vote. This tends to be different from the laws that were implemented in Indiana, which required that any voter, who had the intentions of voting, had to provide identification as proof. The laws in this state also required that a voter voting in preference of an individual at a precinct polling station, which was located at the states care facility where the voter is resident did not have to provide an identification, in order to, vote. In Pennsylvania, however, the law required that any elector, who wanted to vote, had to provide a proof of identification (Weiser et al. 16). It is evident that the voter identification laws may also be needed in Ohio. The laws should be implemented in Ohio to ensure that all voters intending to participate in an electoral process provide an election proof, which is the voter identification to an election official at the polling station, in order to, be allowed to vote. The law allowing a voter to use a provisional ballot to vote in case they do not provide their identification, then later report to the elections office should also be implemented in Ohio. This is because the enactment of such a law is likely to impact the society positively ensuring that all every individual is treated equally during the voting process. It is with the enactment of such laws that individuals will stop thinking they are discriminated upon based on their financial status or race (Weiser et al. 17). Some of the advantages that accompany the enactment of the laws include; the reduction in the burdens that the citizens were exposed to, in order to, acquire the voter identifications. The laws are also advantageous because they would ensure the prevention of fraud during the elections. With the laws, it is also evident that the confidence of the voters towards the electoral process would be boosted. It is evident that with the implementation of the laws, the legitimate rights of the citizens would be enhanced. However, the implementation of these laws has normally led to some disadvantages. This is evident from some of the legislations in the laws that have normally contributed to disproportionality. There are instances when it is thought that these laws are thought to have led to the separation among the low income groups, the minority and the elderly in the society. It is also evident the legislations implemented in the law concerning the requirement of a voters identification, in order for a voter to be allowed to vote tends to be costly. This is because despite the voter being in opposition to obtain identification for free it is normally accompanied with some costs such as the cost of acquiring a birth certificate. An examination of the different opinions reveals that the laws tend to favor most senior citizens. However, it is also thought that the indigent citizen and the rural voters have normally suffered because of the enactment of such laws. This may be because the minorities are never in a position to acquire the requirements because of their cost or the lack of access to the facilities that provide the identifications (Kobach 23). In conclusion, despite the voter identification laws being advantageous and disadvantageous, it is essential that the laws are implemented to enhance a successful electoral process. However, voter identification laws should be implemented to govern all the individuals in the nation, and not just individuals from some states. The laws concerning voter identification should be similar in all states to ensure the equal treatment of the registered voters in the nation (Kobach 24). Works Cited Barnes, Robert. “High Court Upholds Indiana Law On Voter ID.” The Washington Post (2011). Biskupic, Joan. “Voter ID case could affect election laws.” USA Today (2011). Colleen, Jenkins. “Insight: Scant evidence of voter suppression, fraud in states with ID laws.” Reuters (2012). Kobach, Kris. “Kris W. Kobach: The Case for Voter ID.” The Wall Street Journal (2011). Tokaji, Daniel. “The Help America Vote Act: An Overview.” The E-Book on Election Law: An Online Reference Guide. Moritz College of Law (2013). Weiser et al. “Citizens without Proof Stands Strong; The Brennan Center for Justice at New York University – New York.” BrennanCenter.org. (2012). Read More