To the Editor:
Requiring a voter ID has been getting a lot of press these days. We seem to have conflicting views of the court systems about the constitutionality of requiring an ID to be presented so that a citizen/registered voter can vote. The question before us today is, is this idea unconstitutional? The answer in short is that it would not be unconstitutional to ask a person to present ID to confirm who they are when voting. We require ID for many things in this country already. You need to present ID at a bank usually when you make a withdrawal. You need to present ID to purchase a pack of cigarettes or to purchase alcohol. When you apply for federal aid typically you need ID. The list goes on and on. The courts seem to be wishy-washy on the constitutionality of the voter ID requirement. They seem to, in some cases, say it is permissible and yet in other cases wish to knock it down, and this should not surprise anyone. The courts are notorious for bringing forth confusing and conflicting rulings on cases, and SCOTUS is not much better either with the confusion. People argue that it creates an unfair advantage; it hurts people who vote because they cannot get an ID. Generally speaking I am sure people can get ID, and people usually already have a form of ID. It does not stop there though. It does get a little more off the rocker because you have people arguing that it is unconstitutional because it infringes on a person’s right to vote. Granted we can bite into this argument; sure it may seem to be infringing on people’s right to vote, but does not the government already do this? What truly is interesting is that you have those who will argue that the government has a right to infringe upon, for example, the 2nd amendment yet the government is not allowed to infringe on voting rights? Does this not make you scratch your head? How can anyone be okay for infringing on one right yet is against infringing on another right? Seems maybe people get upset when they do not agree with something, and they begin to yell it is an infringement. When they agree with the infringement they contend that it is appropriate for the government to restrict person’s rights. Maybe the solution is much simpler. Maybe special interests are involved, and it depends on the side of the coin you’re on for a specific right. I leave you with the following thought, and you decide for yourself. Ask how it can be correct to infringe on a person’s right in one instance but not okay to infringe on a person’s right in another instance. Seems to be a double standard in play, and ask yourself how requiring a voter ID somehow infringes upon your right to vote. Has not the government already done so with requiring you to register to vote, is that not an infringement on your right to vote, since if you do not register you cannot vote? So is a voter ID any different? Which side of the coin are you on?