Picture ID to vote isn't repressive
In the past, poll antics have been used to keep those from voting who might change the status quo. They have been weapons of exclusion, not inclusion.
But the Indiana state law — now being considered by the U.S. Supreme Court — does appear to be a way to cut down on voter fraud without causing undo grief. Opponents see it as a thinly veiled attempt to discourage the elderly, poor and minority voters. And they make the valid point that fraud at the polls has not been a big problem.
But we see this as an "ounce of prevention" issue. As voters and voting machines become more sophisticated, common sense says that there are those who will look for ways to game the system. The country, in fact, has a history of that. Jokes were often made in Chicago during the era of the Daly Machine about his constituents "voting early and voting often." And stories of candidates recruiting voters from cemetery grave markers are more than mere urban folklore.
Voting, in America especially, is almost a sacred rite — and a sacred right. And citizens get understandably antsy when bureaucrats start tinkering with it. But every right — from owning guns to speaking one's mind — has parameters. The vital concern is that those parameters don't quash the very freedoms they claim to protect.
We don't believe an "ID law" for the polls undermines democracy.
In time, as technology continues to leap ahead, we even may be thankful there are checkpoints to keep the wheels of democracy not only spinning smoothly, but spinning fairly.
Recent comments
A lot of you are now speaking about "election fraud", which...
Mark B | Jan. 13, 2008 at 10:41 p.m.
I support photo ID to vote. The real problem is not at voting it...
Stewart | Jan. 13, 2008 at 8:40 p.m.
Great editorial.
Glenn | Jan. 13, 2008 at 8:15 p.m.
