Michigan Supreme Court ruled a law to require photo identification when voting is constitutional on Wednesday July, 18, 2007. This issue has been dividing Republicans and Democrats for a decade. The law originally stated that if voters did not have a photo I.D., they can sign an affidavit swearing to their identity and then vote. Renewal of the photo I.D. law in 2005, required the I.D. to receive a ballot and was shot down by former Attorney General Frank Kelley, a Democrat. He believed that that it violated the 14th Amendment protection clause. Supporters of the law say that it would help prevent election fraud. Critics says it discourages the poor, elderly, disabled and minorities from voting and compared the law to a poll tax. Others argue that the affidavit will prevent it from becoming like a poll tax.
I believe that it does violate the 14th Amendment because it brings another requirement to allowing citizens a right to vote. It seems to me to be another way the system is keeping the rich in power, and the poor hopelessly trapped by society.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
I believe that this is against the 14th Amendment because it makes the voters have to deal with something else on there hands and not make them vote. This I.D. requirement is just plain stupid.
i disagree. i think this is an appropriate measure that was taken because if you a registered to vote then you should already have a picture id. without one, illegal immigrants can swear to be someone else and get their votes in which would undermine the system established by the founders of our country
I think this article can go both ways. I believe that it does violate the 14th amendment protection clause, however, I don't think it really is THAT big of a deal to just provide a photo I.D in order to vote. Most people have photo I.D's on them 24/7 anyway so how much of a difference could it make to provide it in order to vote. It seems logical to do and it does prevent identity theft.
I agree with you(desire yams) that it can go both ways. It really is not a big deal to provide an ID. It may be a slight violation of some amendment, but that is a extremely peddy arguement. Go argue for something that matters and just show your ID.
I dont see how this divides the rich and poor because the poorest people can obtaine a photo ID. The ID is important to ensure that voters are who they say they are. Without it people could find ways to vote illegaly.
I agree that it can go both ways. Yes, it does violate the 14th amendment, but showing your i.d. isn't going to kill you.
I don't think they need to bring their IDs, because the people want their identity to be hidden.
Post a Comment