Wednesday, October 3, 2012
Recently someone wrote to the U-B stating 30 states make it harder to cast a vote "especially if you are a person of color, student, poor, elderly or disabled."
Anyone in the United States wanting to cash a check must have picture identification, must have an ID to drive. A student must have a student ID. A disabled person must present identification to receive public assistance and be issued a "disabled person parking permit."
A visiting student, diplomat, tourist, etc, must have picture identification.
The USA is "a melting pot" of differing ethnic peoples from every corner of the world. It is incredible to me that we are arguing about a simple requirement for people wanting to vote for people who want to run our country -- from small town mayors to the president of the United States -- to prove they are in fact citizens of this country.
In the 1980s an extremist group moved into a small town in Oregon not that far away. It had a specific set of goals and beliefs. It purchased a ranch in Antelope, Ore. This group's leader conspired to take over this area by intimidation and fraud.
The group, renamed the town "Rashjneeshpuram." In order to achieve its goals, it bused homeless people from other cities into the small town long enough to establish residency.
For examples of voter fraud we only need to have a memory, and in our case, the above incident happened only a couple of hours away from our homes. In this day and age we are asking people to screen their emails and telephone calls for fraudsters and imposters. Is it unreasonable to ask a voter to present identification of citizenship?
The argument that requiring voters to possess and present a valid identification when voting is empty and without validation. The argument is merely an attempt to distract and inflame those who will not take the time to educate themselves to the issues.