Since elections have consequences, it is important that they express the true will of the people. “Voter ID” has become a contentious issue because it is expresses the frustrations of a large segment of the population that believes that our representative government is not fairly elected.
There are two main sides to the argument; all else is secondary to these two sides.
On the one side there is the issue of vote fraud. On the other side is the issue of disenfranchisement. Let’s look at these two issues.
Whenever there is an issue of fairness or harm against our society, there is a tendency to point to the person or thing that is unfairly treated or harmed. It is naturally easier to find a case of somebody who is harmed than it is to counter with the general welfare of all. For example, in the environmental argument, while you can point to a specific member of an endangered species, it is hard to objectify the compensating harms that the general society will suffer to protect that species. Or in a labor issue, you can point to the specific person who suffers as a result of some supposedly unfair labor practice, but harder to show compensating lower employment levels that result from the remedy for that specific individual.
The reasoning here is that a specific suffering person is more compelling than an abstract argument about the general welfare.
Let’s see how this principal applies in the case of vote fraud verses disenfranchisement: when you have vote fraud, you can point to specific actual cases of votes that should not have been cast. One such type of vote is case when the voter is patently ineligible to vote, such as when the votes of felons are counted. Such cases have been documented in many jurisdictions. Or when an eligible voter is impersonated. Such fraud has also been documented. But far worse is the case of the 2008 Minnesota election, in which 17,000 more votes were cast than registered voters (even including all the same day registrations). Or in that same election, where in one county there were more Democrat votes cast than registered voters.
Clearly we have rampant vote fraud. You can point to the fraudulent votes; I could also point to myself as a victim, as my vote is being diluted by these fraudulent votes.
On the other side is the issue of disenfranchisement. There is a funny thing about voter disenfranchisement. In any precinct where Voter ID is required, there has never been a single case of an actual person who has claimed disenfranchisement. Yes, there are reports of vast potential for disenfranchisement, but again show me any real person who has ever been validly been disenfranchised. Yes, I read the report about the 84 year-old woman, but that sounds like a case of “she decide to leave her ID at home.” In that case, she disenfranchised herself.
Even so, such cases are minuscule compared to the vast number of actual fraudulent votes cast. The issue is not disenfranchisement by the system; it is that voters must take responsible actions to be able to vote. Just as having a valid photo ID is necessary, you also have to have the election day in your mind, gas in the car, time allotted to vote, and the willingness to wait in line. These are all part of the price of voting, and having a valid photo ID is just one part of that.