Much has been written and spoken about the idea that we should require those who are authorized to vote to present a valid form of government identification in order to do so.
Proponents often see only the benefits and claim that such a requirement can only help to improve the overall electoral process. Opponents often see only the detriments and claim that such a requirement would disenfranchise certain segments of the voting population.
I tend to see both the up- and downsides of the issue and I think we should be able to address the valid concerns of Voter I.D. opponents and still accomplish the requirement of a valid government I.D. in order to vote.
First a bit of background:
I hope we may all agree that our elections should have the highest degree of security and integrity that we can manage. In a perfect world, everyone who wants to vote would be both qualified and readily able to do so. Unfortunately not everyone is qualified to vote.
Generally speaking, any person who wants to vote in a government election in the United States must be at least 18 years old, a United States Citizen, and not debarred by virtue of a felony conviction. This presents some challenges.
According to federal census data, as of 2010 there were about 22.5 million documented non-citizens residing in the country (Legal Permanent Residents, various Visa’s, Refugees, Asylees, etc.). None of these people are authorized to vote but it is reasonable to believe that, whether maliciously or not, at least some of them try to do so and that at least some of those succeed. If only 5% of these documented non-citizens try to vote, that’s 1.12 million people attempting to vote. If only 5% of those people succeed, that’s, hypothetically, 56,000 people casting votes in our elections that should not have been able to do so. With some of our elections decided on far slimmer margins, this potential of documented non-citizens voting seems, to me, to be reasonable cause for concern.
According to this NBC News article, as of 2011 there were about 11.1 million undocumented immigrants (or illegal aliens) in the country. Using the same calculus as before, we may hypothesize that about half a million of these people try to vote and as many as 27,750 manage to succeed in doing so. This, to me, is also a reasonable cause for concern.
According to a joint study by the University of Minnesota and New York University, as of 2012, “5.85 million Americans are forbidden to vote because of…laws restricting voting rights for those convicted of felony-level crimes.” Because these people have already demonstrated an inclination to violate the law, the potential for their trying to vote and for their succeeding may be noticeably greater. Let’s be generous, however, and say that increased potential represents only an additional 5%. At 10%, then, that’s 585,000 people attempting, and 58,500 succeeding.
The sum of the members of our three hypothetical groups who succeed in voting illegally is 142,250. That’s just the people, and does not consider that at least some of those may make multiple successful attempts, in multiple elections, and over multiple years.
All of this is to say that I think there is a reasonable need to make sure that none of these people can succeed in voting. Here’s how I think we can accomplish that in a way that does not disenfranchise anyone who has a legitimate right to vote.
First: Enact federal legislation that mandates a voter I.D. for all government elections throughout the nation, a range of acceptable minimum standards those I.D’s must meet, and a reasonable deadline for their issuance (say, five years). Appropriate and allocate funds to assist the States in complying with these statutes.
Second: State legislatures then decide which of the acceptable minimum I.D. standards they want to adopt and provide those directions to the counties, which will have the primary responsibility for producing and issuing the I.D.’s.
Third (and this is key): There must be -no direct cost- to the voter I.D. recipient, neither for applying, nor for receiving, the I.D.
Fourth: (and this is also key): Counties must make sure that anyone who wants and qualifies for such an I.D. will receive one. This means that for those who have mobility, transportation, or geographic challenges, the counties must make reasonable efforts to go to them. Counties can use a portion of the allocated funds to outfit Voter I.D. vans with qualified personnel and equipment and then drive those to centralized locations throughout each city in the county so that people with those challenges need not travel so far to receive them. This is part of the reason for the 5-year timeline…to give the counties sufficient time to meet their mandate to provide I.D.’s to every qualified person who wants one. After the initial issuance period, State DMV offices would be responsible for issuing the I.D.’s to those who are authorized to receive them.
After the 5-year timeline, every person who chooses to vote in any government election must have an approved I.D. to do so. Period. This includes absentee and mail-only voters. They must obtain their I.D. like everyone else and after the 5-year period, any ballot received from a person who has not been issued an approved I.D. will not be counted. Period.
If properly administered, a nationwide initiative requiring and providing Voter I.D.’s can improve both the security and the integrity of our nation’s voting system. A voting system that enjoys more security and integrity can, in turn, encourage both participation and confidence in government.
OP-ED: Voter I.D.’s Can Improve Government
Much has been written and spoken about the idea that we should require those who are authorized to vote to present a valid form of government identification in order to do so.
Proponents often see only the benefits and claim that such a requirement can only help to improve the overall electoral process. Opponents often see only the detriments and claim that such a requirement would disenfranchise certain segments of the voting population.
I tend to see both the up- and downsides of the issue and I think we should be able to address the valid concerns of Voter I.D. opponents and still accomplish the requirement of a valid government I.D. in order to vote.
First a bit of background:
I hope we may all agree that our elections should have the highest degree of security and integrity that we can manage. In a perfect world, everyone who wants to vote would be both qualified and readily able to do so. Unfortunately not everyone is qualified to vote.
Generally speaking, any person who wants to vote in a government election in the United States must be at least 18 years old, a United States Citizen, and not debarred by virtue of a felony conviction. This presents some challenges.
According to federal census data, as of 2010 there were about 22.5 million documented non-citizens residing in the country (Legal Permanent Residents, various Visa’s, Refugees, Asylees, etc.). None of these people are authorized to vote but it is reasonable to believe that, whether maliciously or not, at least some of them try to do so and that at least some of those succeed. If only 5% of these documented non-citizens try to vote, that’s 1.12 million people attempting to vote. If only 5% of those people succeed, that’s, hypothetically, 56,000 people casting votes in our elections that should not have been able to do so. With some of our elections decided on far slimmer margins, this potential of documented non-citizens voting seems, to me, to be reasonable cause for concern.
According to this NBC News article, as of 2011 there were about 11.1 million undocumented immigrants (or illegal aliens) in the country. Using the same calculus as before, we may hypothesize that about half a million of these people try to vote and as many as 27,750 manage to succeed in doing so. This, to me, is also a reasonable cause for concern.
According to a joint study by the University of Minnesota and New York University, as of 2012, “5.85 million Americans are forbidden to vote because of…laws restricting voting rights for those convicted of felony-level crimes.” Because these people have already demonstrated an inclination to violate the law, the potential for their trying to vote and for their succeeding may be noticeably greater. Let’s be generous, however, and say that increased potential represents only an additional 5%. At 10%, then, that’s 585,000 people attempting, and 58,500 succeeding.
The sum of the members of our three hypothetical groups who succeed in voting illegally is 142,250. That’s just the people, and does not consider that at least some of those may make multiple successful attempts, in multiple elections, and over multiple years.
All of this is to say that I think there is a reasonable need to make sure that none of these people can succeed in voting. Here’s how I think we can accomplish that in a way that does not disenfranchise anyone who has a legitimate right to vote.
First: Enact federal legislation that mandates a voter I.D. for all government elections throughout the nation, a range of acceptable minimum standards those I.D’s must meet, and a reasonable deadline for their issuance (say, five years). Appropriate and allocate funds to assist the States in complying with these statutes.
Second: State legislatures then decide which of the acceptable minimum I.D. standards they want to adopt and provide those directions to the counties, which will have the primary responsibility for producing and issuing the I.D.’s.
Third (and this is key): There must be -no direct cost- to the voter I.D. recipient, neither for applying, nor for receiving, the I.D.
Fourth: (and this is also key): Counties must make sure that anyone who wants and qualifies for such an I.D. will receive one. This means that for those who have mobility, transportation, or geographic challenges, the counties must make reasonable efforts to go to them. Counties can use a portion of the allocated funds to outfit Voter I.D. vans with qualified personnel and equipment and then drive those to centralized locations throughout each city in the county so that people with those challenges need not travel so far to receive them. This is part of the reason for the 5-year timeline…to give the counties sufficient time to meet their mandate to provide I.D.’s to every qualified person who wants one. After the initial issuance period, State DMV offices would be responsible for issuing the I.D.’s to those who are authorized to receive them.
After the 5-year timeline, every person who chooses to vote in any government election must have an approved I.D. to do so. Period. This includes absentee and mail-only voters. They must obtain their I.D. like everyone else and after the 5-year period, any ballot received from a person who has not been issued an approved I.D. will not be counted. Period.
If properly administered, a nationwide initiative requiring and providing Voter I.D.’s can improve both the security and the integrity of our nation’s voting system. A voting system that enjoys more security and integrity can, in turn, encourage both participation and confidence in government.