The Voter ID Bill

The Macon Telegraph down in Macon, Georgia takes a look at the voter id legislation that is pending in that state.

Republicans nationwide, from the national party to talk radio and weblogs, have railed against what they claim is widespread voting fraud by Democrats, taking advantage of loose voter ID requirements.

Staton was assisted in drafting his law by Erick Erickson, a self-described political junkie from Macon and blogger who contributes to Redstate.org as well as his own weblog, www.erickerickson.org.

Redstate.org’s 2004 election page is a long series of raging posts about the Washington state governor’s 129-vote victory, which many Republicans believe was tainted by fraud.

Twelve states are currently considering legislation to ensure more precise voter identification, Storey said. Currently, 18 states require voters to present some form of ID at the polls, while most of the others rely on a signature to catch vote fraud.

Some new laws were inspired by the 2002 federal Help America Vote Act, or HAVA, which requires an ID number be recorded for first-time voters when they register. The HAVA law is intended to create uniform state databases of voters, which will allow for easier detection of fraud. It doesn’t require photo ID.

We would truly be fooling ourselves if we did not recognize the historic, negative impediments to black voting. Notwithstanding that, we should also not allow various individuals to scream racism — a ridiculous charge — over this law to have it defeated. That does not do anything to advance the conversation.

l concern. We should work to stop voter fraud in absentee balloting, early voting, at the polls, and through intimidation. Requiring voters to show photographic identification is common sense. Additionally, the law, as written, would allow any person to obtain a free photographic id card to vote.

Black politicians in the state are intent on framing the debate around what happened forty years ago. Let us talk about today and let them show why, given today’s racial climate, requiring photographic identification will intimidate black voters. Perhaps I am naive (and granted I am white and did not grow up in this country so I’m at a disadvantage on understanding the issue), but it just makes good sense to me that when anyone votes, they be required to show they are who they say they are. Voting is our most sacred right and we should safeguard it. Afterall, you have to show id to enter many government buildings, get on planes, or write checks. Isn’t voting more important than any of those?

About the author

Erick Erickson

View all posts

4 Comments

  • Seems like another way for racists in Georgia to disqualify poor, usually black voters, who vote overwhelmingly Democratic.

  • I have an idea lets register every gun in America and tie it to a governmental id card. Then we’ll put chips in everyone to keep track of them and limit id fraud. Couple that with the warrantless wiretapping, data mining of an unprecidented amount and minute detail, and pretty soon we won’t even have to vote, the government will know ahead of time who we would have most likely would have voted for based on our complete profiles. I don’t see how any freedom loving person who believes in the Constitution and states rights can abide by the loss of privacy in this country. This is just one more chip in the rock of our freedom.

  • Make no mistake, this is not an effort at fraud, but at limiting voter turnout. It relies on three intertwining understandings about poor people: (a) they do not value their vote as much as wealthier or middle class people, so they will not go through as much bullshit to exercise that right; (b) poor people are less likely to spend $20 on an ID than to spend $20 on food, cigarettes, etc., especilally when the i.d. is presumably only needed to vote . . . which they don’t value as much anyway, and (c) even if they get the ID, poor people are still less likely to actually go to the polls on voting day.

    The easiest way to cut the nuts off this cynical strategy? Have church groups, community organizations, etc., organize together to get people IDs. It would require those organization to connect with the poor communities in a way that litigating for poor people won’t. But,sadly, I suspect they will go the “litigation only” route, instead.

  • How does this disenfranchise anyone? How does this discriminate? This is just another way to stop the Democrats from their usual voter fraud turnout. Notice who is against this bill..Doesn’t take a genius to spot who has been supplying the deceased and otherwise illegal votes.