Photo IDs: barriers to voting
Recent Supreme Court decision upholds controversial photo ID law in
Indiana
by Mai Thor
In case you haven’t
heard—it’s a big election year! Election Day is November
4th and there is no better time than the present to start getting
the facts about whom you will be voting for and other important
information in the election world. Access Press will help you along
the way. Starting this month, and for the next six months, we will
publish at least one voting article to inform you on the candidates,
how to register to vote, and other related information to keep you
on top of this year’s election. It is a great opportunity
for people with disabilities to get involved and participate in a
very important election that will affect all levels of government
from federal to local. Year after year, Minnesota has proven to
be a leader in voter turnout in elections. This year—let’s
make Minnesota a leader for turning out people with disabilities!
Recently, the U.S. Supreme
Court upheld an Indiana law that requires all voters to show photo
identification in order to vote. Those who support the ruling argue
that it makes sense to show ID when voting to avoid voter fraud.
However, voting rights advocates fear this law will create more
barriers to those who already face challenges to the right to vote.
The costs of obtaining a driver’s license
or state ID card can be considered a barrier. Among those who may
face more barriers are individuals with disabilities. Since so many
people with disabilities live in poverty, the hurdles to getting
photo ID can create a substantial financial burden. Many view this
as the poll tax of present day America which could potentially disenfranchise
thousands as it did for African Americans before the Civil Rights
Act.
Unlike the presence of poll taxes in history, the presence of voter
fraud is unsubstantiated. Proponents of photo IDs say it prevents voter
fraud. In reality, there is no evidence that voter fraud exists nor
that it has ever altered an outcome of an election.
The Indiana ruling has implications for how Minnesota elections have
been conducted for years. In Minnesota voters who are registered in
a precinct were not required to show a photo ID. In fact, election
judges were not supposed to ask for ID for registered voters. The only
circumstances in which photo IDs were required in Minnesota are when
a person is registering to vote in a precinct on election day.
Why create such a burden
for those who are already under-represented in order to prevent
something that doesn’t exist? Minnesotans
can prevent what is happening in Indiana from coming here by making
sure that the people who are elected into office understand that
the right to vote is not conditional. It is not the same as driving
or buying alcohol where showing a photo ID should be required. Voting
is a fundamental right where all people should have access to equally. ![]()
