I have a question for my friends of the Democratic persuasion. You know who you are so don't be afraid to venture an answer.
So here we go. A private commission, co-chaired by former President Jimmy Carter (he's a Democrat by the way), has recommended some sweeping changes to the election laws in this country to try and avoid repeats of the 2000 and 2004 elections. In those two national elections, you may recall, the Democrats questioned results on several fronts.
So Carter, along with a long list of heavy hitters, began to study the election laws. And one of their primary recommendations was to require some form of free photo identification for voters in order to cast a ballot. They made other recommendations and I'll get to them in just a minute. But first, the voter ID requirement.
No sooner had the recommendations been made public than Democrats, minorities and voting rights activists attacked the report. They feel that the ID requirement would keep many minorities from voting and thus, they want the recommendations changed.
Here's the question. Could someone explain to me why someone would be unwilling to provide some free form of identification to be allowed to participate in the election process? What am I missing here? Granted, let's say you're a criminal and are hiding your identification, then maybe you would be reluctant to vote. But so what!
The commission also recommended improved voter registration lists, a paper trail for electronic voting machines and rotating regional primaries. But nothing captured the attention as much as the identification requirement. And for the life of me, I just must be missing something because I can't understand why people would be hesitant to prove their identity before voting - unless they were ineligible to vote or had voted before. All of the opposition to the ID seems to be grounded in cases of questionable voters.
The Democrats always seem to moan and complain that their voters were somehow "disenfranchised." What that really means is that someone tried to vote without following the rules such as registering, voting in the correct precinct or some other reason. But the national ID requirement would simply assure that all voters who are eligible to vote can indeed do just that.
I must not fully understand the opposition to this identification requirement. So I ask today, someone please explain to me the point that I must be missing.