Freeman
As I indicated, I agree that any attempt to create a law that attempts to thwart voting is bad; and it is already illegal in the first place. I do not believe all such voter ID laws are designed to do that. I am sure that there are sufficient people who don't trust the voting process for a variety of reasons, and fraud being one of them. Sure, it might be sporadic and not as great as proponents make it out to be. I'd agree on the basis of common sense. After all, the REAL danger of voting fraud is not some foreigner turning up at 5 places in one night. The real danger to voting integrity is the voting process, itself. There are no national standards, equipment is often shoddy, and there is way too much politics in vote counting, as it is. I would be happy to see us adopt the "3rd World" approach of staining a finger in a long-lasting dye after you vote. At least that keeps the "vote and vote often" crowd outside. It doesn't solve the sloppy nature of the recording/counting process that can easily lead to fraudulent results, intended or not.
The argument that, somehow, blacks and other minorities cannot get IDs is diversionary and divisive. In spite of whatever account somebody wants to throw out about Uncle Joe stuck in his cabin, unable to walk or get out (except, it seems, to vote), it is difficult to see how anybody here legally can get along in society without an ID. Some or most states that have strict ID laws provide for free IDs (eg. George, Wisconsin). "People of color are more likely to be disenfranchised by these laws since they are less likely to have photo ID than the general population." (
http://www.brennancenter.org/publication/challenge-obtaining-voter-identification). I find statements such as this inherently patronizing, if not racist. Blacks are no less capable than anybody else of getting around or getting things done.
The argument that a required ID can be used as an impediment or infringement to voting is a realistic concern and issue. But citizenship is also a requirement. As much as I'd like to not worry about IDs, they are an endemic feature of modern life. There is very little you can do without an ID: Can't fly, supposedly can't buy booze, can't cash checks, can't get your welfare/social services, can't get a library card, can't get a job in many companies, can't work for the government, etc. Hell, you
shouldn't need a driver's license or passport just to get on a friggin' plane.
And what about poor white people? They can somehow get IDs, even if they subsist in the same economic malaise as people of other cultures? They don't matter?
Here in Minnesota, we have no requirement to show ID to vote. But you have to have an ID to
register to vote (driver's license, state, ID or a SSN card). You mentioned the possibility that blacks still feel reluctant due to the "legacy of racism and segregation." Well, that's all fine in to mention at a political rally when you want to get the Choir all worked up. But it is a weak argument, all the same. This isn't the 1960s, though Democrats keep fanning the flames of intolerance as if it were. The current incarnation of the Republican Party has certainly done its share of allowing racial fear and distrust to become rampant. Both major parties are working hard to promote all manner of charlatans and opportunists eager to cash in on the White Supremacy bandwagon, spilling out the emotional fears that Whitey is still out to get the Darkies and put them in their place. That is NOT how most people feel. Unfortunately, mass media and social media love to play it up as if it were. There's money and power to be made in dividing the masses. Whether it is Trump, Clinton, Obama, BLM, or some basement drudge on Twitter, they all get want to grow power (and prestige) through making us feel threatened by others but reliant upon them for salvation.
Sorry. I think I drifted again. We were talking about IDs, right? Of course, voting is deemed by the Supreme Court (I believe) to be a privilege, not a right (the 15th amendment has to do with racial and social reasons). It can be taken away, if it is seen as not generally discriminatory, I believe, for example: felons. And surprisingly (to some), dead people. Having said that, I am totally against any political maneuver used to
prohibit voting. I don't think gerrymandering should be allowed, either. As far as that goes, politicians should not be allowed to define voting districts, voting rules, etc. For example, I think the best modern solution is to use a computer program that arbitrarily defines districts based on equalizing population, not based on voting habits or economic levels.