Kris Kobach: 'The Case for Voter ID'
<http://www.bizzyblog.com/2011/05/23/kris-kobach-the-case-for-voter-id/>
Filed under: Taxes & Government
<http://www.bizzyblog.com/category/taxes-government/> --- TBlumer @ 9:05 am
In a Wall Street Journal op-ed
<http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704816604576333650886790480.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop>
this morning, Kobach demonstrates that requiring positive photo ID at
the polls and when originally registering can't depress turnout,
because, contrary to critics' absurd assertions, virtually everybody has
one (bolds are mine):
Critics of these laws nevertheless make outrageous arguments against
them. New York University's Brennan Center, which stridently opposes
all photo ID laws, claims that a whopping 11% of the American
voting-age public---that means tens of millions of people---don't
possess a photo ID. It bases this number on a survey it conducted in
2006.
However, we don't have to rely on implausible estimates when the
actual numbers are readily available. In Kansas, my office obtained
the statistics, and they tell a very different story. *According to
the 2010 census, there are 2,126,179 Kansans of voting age.
According to the Kansas Department of Motor Vehicles, 2,156,446
Kansans already have a driver's license or a non-driver ID. In other
words, there are more photo IDs in circulation than there are
eligible voters.* The notion that there are hundreds of thousands of
voters in Kansas (or any other state) without photo IDs is a myth.
Carrying a photo ID has become a part of American life. You can't
cash a check, board a plane, or even buy full-strength Sudafed over
the counter without one. That's why it's not unreasonable to require
one in order to protect our most important privilege of citizenship.
But just in case any person lacks a photo ID, Kansas's law provides
a free state ID to anyone who needs one. Other states have included
similar provisions in their photo-ID laws.
Some opponents of election security laws also declare that they are
part of a sinister plot to depress voter registration and turnout,
especially among minority voters who are more likely to vote
Democrat. Here too the facts do not support the claim. Georgia's
photo ID requirement was in place for both the 2008 and 2010
elections, when turnout among minority voters was higher than
average. Likewise, Arizona's proof-of-citizenship requirement for
registration has not impeded minority voters from registering.
So there's still a danger, but it's that there are people out there with
multiple IDs who might vote more than once. The danger is certainly not
that there are hundreds of thousands or millions of people who don't
have one in the first place --- and if they don't, as noted, they can
get one for free.
Read the whole thing.
The only conclusion one can reach is about many of the opponents of
voter ID laws is that they are not only unconcerned about the integrity
of elections, but they are also interested in rigging their results.
Comments [moderated] (0) <http://www.bizzyblog.com/?comments_popup=34743>
--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
