ext_220617 ([identity profile] kemono-art.livejournal.com) wrote in [personal profile] varjohaltia 2008-01-10 02:32 am (UTC)

I agree. It feels very odd when I go to the polls and I -don't- have to show my photo-ID, I just sign the book by my name after presenting my voter ID card and there we go.

From what I've gathered, my stance would be that yes, we should require some form of identification, which brings up the whole idea of having state-issued (rather than federal) photo ID cards for everyone. The trouble comes when figuring out how to go about handing those IDs out. The state specifically in question during the supreme court arguments offers free IDs, if I remember what I heard correctly, but the trouble was proving one was one's self without having the other forms of proof like birth certificate, social security card, etc., which are not necessarily easy to obtain nor are they necessarily free.

I think that given that voting is a right and registering to vote is free (if I recall correctly), we should require the identification at that time (don't we already require that?), and issue a photo-ID voters registration card instead of the paper cards we have right now (at least in Florida). The card remains with you unless you need to have it amended (change of party affiliation, address, etc.) just like you would a driver's license.

Doing this would cost tax-payer money, however, and there's a good chance the states will screw it up (touch screen voting anyone? no paper-trail included), but perhaps this will put the issue to rest.

Post a comment in response:

This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting