Voter ID Law or Constitutional Restrictions?

By Brandy Emily   

Republicans in Indiana were accused of abandoning the poor and elderly when a Republican controlled General Assembly passed voter ID legislation three years ago.

Now, as Indiana awaits the Supreme Court’s decision on the legislation, citizens of not only Indiana but from around the country should be outraged at the restrictions imposed by government on the people’s constitutional right to vote.

The state of Indiana abandoned roughly 25,000 citizens in 2005 when legislators voted in favor of the voter ID law. The law requires voters to show photo identification before casting their ballots in local, state and national elections. Those in favor of the legislation said the law is required to battle voter fraud in Indiana, even though there is no proof of voter fraud in Indiana.

The plaintiff, or the state’s Democratic Party and Indiana residents, argue the law is aimed at the poor, racial minorities and elderly citizens who cannot afford a photo identification card or cannot obtain a certified copy of a birth certificate, which the state requires. They also claim that taking away the votes of these individuals could ultimately take votes away from Democratic candidates.

Honestly, the law sounds simple enough. Voters are asked to present a photo ID when they go to their precincts to vote. If voters do not have an ID at the time, they can cast a provisional ballot and bring an ID back. The law even goes as far as to say the state will issue free photo identification cards from the Bureau of Motor Vehicles to those who have a birth certificate or a certificate of naturalization.

But no matter how simple the law seems, Americans should be standing up for those who want to vote but cannot because of restrictive laws.

It is wrong if the law prohibits even one person from exercising his or her right to vote. To approve legislation under which an estimated 25,000 or more people may lose their right to vote because they cannot obtain the proper identification is appalling.

As the defense argued, most of Indiana’s four million registered voters will most likely not be affected. But there are still an unknown number of individuals who are touched by this change in requirements.

In making their cases to the Supreme Court, the two sides could not agree on how many people are affected by the law.

The plaintiff said roughly 200,000 individuals could feel the effects of the legislation. The defense claimed there couldn’t be anymore than 20,000 individuals being affected by this law.

To implement the law without knowing that most basic piece of information, how many people it will affect, is disturbing.

This should not be a Democratic versus Republican issue.

Both parties should be standing up to say this is not right.

Instead of spending time and money to impose a law that affects thousands, why isn’t Indiana using its resources to create accurate voter rolls to know how many people are actually voting? By the state’s own estimate, 40 percent of names on voter rolls are fraudulent.

Indiana has approximately four million registered voters. Four hundred thousand of those who are eligible do not have the proper ID to vote. Two hundred thousand of those eligible are registered voters. It is estimated by the state that 25,000 of those eligible would not be able to obtain the proper ID to vote.

This is too many. Not allowing 25,000 people to vote is like not letting any of the registered voters in Wabash County to vote. Or it would be like not letting any of the citizens, registered and unregistered, of Rushville or Nashville to vote.

The people of Indiana should be outraged and all Americans should be concerned. Voting is a right, a privilege.

If this law is acceptable then where do the restrictions end? Is the freedom of the press going to depend on how many times a show airs or newspaper prints? Will freedom of speech be confined to our homes?

While we wait to see which way the Supreme Court will cast its decision it’s time for us as Americans to remember what are rights are. Sen. Hillary Clinton did not say after her New Hampshire win that she is here for the photo ID carrying American people.

She simply said she is in the campaign for the American people. No stipulations or requirements mentioned.

Sen. Barack Obama didn’t say to his supporters after his Iowa Caucus win that they had done what photo ID carrying Americans can do in this New Year. He said in his victory speech "You have done what America can do in this New Year."