Post by Shadow on Sept 30, 2005 17:32:44 GMT -5
USA Today
By Caroline Fredrickson
As Supreme Court Justice Stanley Matthews wrote in a landmark case in 1886, the right to vote is fundamental because it is "preservative of all rights." Requiring a photo ID to vote, as the Carter-Baker commission recommends, would have a chilling effect on voter participation. It would block some Americans from the political process. (Related: Our view)
The Carter-Baker recommendations are so restrictive that even a valid U.S. passport or photo ID issued by the U.S. military isn't good enough. Voters must have a driver's license that meets the requirements of the controversial Real ID Act, which set strict standards for obtaining state-issued licenses.
Such a requirement would disproportionately impact poor people, the disabled, the elderly and people of color, who are all statistically less likely to have driver's licenses. The commission recommended an alternative photo ID be available for non-drivers, but no infrastructure is in place to make those available, particularly for the elderly. In addition, there was no cost assessment in the report.
According to a 2001 election-reform report, 6% to 10% of voting-age Americans don't have driver's licenses, and requiring them would be a "burden that would fall disproportionately on people who are poorer and urban." This burden will increase as states are forced to cover the costs of the Real ID Act, estimated at up to $13 billion, in part by increasing the price of a new license.
By Caroline Fredrickson
As Supreme Court Justice Stanley Matthews wrote in a landmark case in 1886, the right to vote is fundamental because it is "preservative of all rights." Requiring a photo ID to vote, as the Carter-Baker commission recommends, would have a chilling effect on voter participation. It would block some Americans from the political process. (Related: Our view)
The Carter-Baker recommendations are so restrictive that even a valid U.S. passport or photo ID issued by the U.S. military isn't good enough. Voters must have a driver's license that meets the requirements of the controversial Real ID Act, which set strict standards for obtaining state-issued licenses.
Such a requirement would disproportionately impact poor people, the disabled, the elderly and people of color, who are all statistically less likely to have driver's licenses. The commission recommended an alternative photo ID be available for non-drivers, but no infrastructure is in place to make those available, particularly for the elderly. In addition, there was no cost assessment in the report.
According to a 2001 election-reform report, 6% to 10% of voting-age Americans don't have driver's licenses, and requiring them would be a "burden that would fall disproportionately on people who are poorer and urban." This burden will increase as states are forced to cover the costs of the Real ID Act, estimated at up to $13 billion, in part by increasing the price of a new license.