please reply to each paragraph with 3-5 sentences ( doyou disagree or agree with the person when talking about requireingphoto id when voting )

1.I disagree and find voter id laws very constitutional. To me,requiring someone to have a government issued form ofidentification is not to the same discriminating scope as literacytests and poll taxes were. Those who are against voter id lawsclaim that there isn’t enough voting fraud to have this put intoplace. That is completely false, and voting fraud is still veryprevalent. For example, there is currently a man by the name ofMelowese Richardson from Ohio sitting in jail due to votingmultiple times in the past Obama election. Voter id laws helpprevent this exact problem. American citizens have the right tovote. They deserve to feel comfortable knowing that their vote isin an election that is just. There really is nothing in the way ofstopping a citizen in getting an appropriate government issuedidentification. There are many in which they can choose to obtainor use. Such as a driver’s license, election identificationcertificate, license to carry a handgun, and much more. Even ifthere is a problem with getting a certified license to vote with,there are other options a voter can present. All they need is alegitimate reason on why they do not have their identification orwhy they are unable to obtain one. If there really is a trueproblem with a lot of eligible citizens not being able to acquire acertified identification, then the government should offer aprogram that distributes free government regulated voting cards inwhich they can use to vote. Although it will be extra funding, Ifind the investment necessary in order to solve the problem. Voterid laws are constitutional. Without them, how is the governmentsupposed to regulate election voting?

2.Photo ID laws for voting may serve as a roadblock, but Ibelieve that showing a voter ID card is in best interest of thepeople. One of our basic rights is being able to vote, so makingsure that our vote is safe is very important. In Texas on August10, 2016, the federal district changed the voting requirements;making it mandatory to show identification before voting. Withoutthis, someone could easily impersonate a person, as we have seen inthe past. In 2016, in Dallas, Texas, “James Armstrong, expressedconcerns that elderly residents are being targeted in a possiblemail-in voter scheme after some of his church members said theyreceived ballots, only they never applied for them” (LoganChurchwell). Even though voter fraud is not very common, it doeshappen. Many assume that it is an inconvenience for people who donot have a Photo identification card, but the court listed otheroptions for showing proof of identification. Some include, a U.Spassport, a certified birth certificate, copy of utility bill, or acopy of a paycheck. If someone has a Photo ID, but did not bring itto the polls, “the voter may cast a provisional ballot at thepolls. However, in order to have the provisional ballot counted thevoter will be required to visit the county voter registrar’s officewithin six calendar days of the date of the election to eitherpresent an acceptable form of photo ID OR submit one of thetemporary affidavits…in the presence of the county voter registrar”(VoteTexas.Gov). Since there are many options when showing proof ofIdentification before voting, everyone should be able to vote, andbe comfortable with the process.

3.Photo ID law for voting carries some advantages and somedisadvantages as well, but most of the restrictions have taken awaythe right to vote for the poor and the racial minorities.Basically, this is a law which requires people to provide someforms of official identification such as ID, a driver's licensenumber, or Social Security numbers when registering to vote. Itbrings a lot of benefits when implementing this policy such aspreventing electoral fraud and preventing multiple voting. MathewRousu who is a professor of economics at Susquehanna University inSelinsgrove, Pennsylvania, said that “With 66 cases exposed, thismeans a conservative estimate indicates that there have been atleast 6,600 cases of voter fraud in the past decade in Texas alone.A voter ID requirement strengthens voters’ rights by protecting thevotes of all who vote legally. When voter fraud occurs, it dilutesand weakens the votes of all law-abiding voters.” That does notmean that the law has no downside. Definitely, photo ID law is adouble-edged sword. It creates barriers that limit the number ofthe poor and ethnic minorities to participate in the election.According to a study from NYU’s Brennan Center, “11 percent ofvoting-age citizens lack necessary photo ID while many people inrural areas have trouble accessing ID offices.” Moreover, stringentvoter identification laws increase racial polarization. For manyyears, the court has repeatedly cut and narrowed the electoralrights of minority voters. In 1892, in Shelby County,“approximately 2,400 discriminatory voting changes had been blockedby more than 750 Section 5 objections, approximately 400 of whichinvolved cases with specific evidence of intentionaldiscrimination” (Cohen). Similar to Texas, although it does notactually apply the literacy tests to check the level of legalknowledge of each individual, it uses other ways to limit theirright to vote. Furthermore, the poll tax is also a factor whichprevents racial minorities from being able to vote, because itrequires ones to pay a fee when registering to vote. Most Latinosand African Americans hesitate to pay the tax, even they can. Ingeneral, an election is a form of expressing the aspirations of thecitizens towards their country, so why ones try to limit people’sright to vote? Racial discrimination became a stain on Americanhistory, and now it still exists in modern society under thelaw.

4.

Theoretically, thereshouldn't be a problem with requiring a photo ID in order to vote.If you're a citizen of both Texas and the United States, which isnecessary to vote in person in Texas for a national election, thenthere isn't any legal obstacle to prevent you from getting a stateID card, making the voter ID laws seem pretty constitutional tome.

In practice, however,at least in some cases, this might be different. This news reportcites statistical evidence that states with strict voter ID lawssee less minority turnout than states without them, in some casesby more than 10%, more than enough to swing an election. It doesn'tmention why. I had a hard time finding a concrete reason whymyself, when almost everything you do requires an ID. The mostcommon example I've heard is of someone with no ID who has troublephysically getting to a DPS office to obtain one, because of theydon't own a car or can't drive due to injury or old age, and publictransportation or walking takes more time than they can afford totake off from work, caring for family, etc. People who experiencethese difficulties would exclusively be low-income, astransportation isn't an issue if you have money, especially inmajor cities with cheap door-to-door paratransit services (likeHouston's MetroLift) and rideshare services like Uber or Lyft.Because of this, legislation requiring photo ID to vote causesmajor difficulty for a portion of the population based on theirincome, making it unconstitutional.

However, I think voterID laws aren't the actual problem in situations like this. I'mstill somewhat skeptical of how many people are actually impactedby laws like this, and it would seem to me that the ones who arewould a) have just as much trouble getting to the polls on electionday, regardless of ID laws, and b) have more pressing concerns thanvoting. Doing almost anything requires a government ID. Ipersonally don't drive. I can't afford a car of my own, so I takethe bus to and from school, but I still needed an ID to open bankaccounts, register for college, and get a job. The fact that thereare people at all who are facing such medical or financialdifficulties that they can't get an ID to do any of these basicthings points to more fundamental problems of poor or inaccessiblehealthcare and income inequality, which, if fixed, would makediscrimination through voter ID laws a moot point. I think thoseare the problems that we should focus on fixing throughlegislation, much more so than voter fraud.