Become a digitalPLUS subscriber. 99¢ for 4 weeks.
NewsOpinionOp-Eds

Voter ID laws uphold system's integrity

ElectionsPersonal Data CollectionInterior PolicyIllegal ImmigrantsFitness

Two recent bulletins place progressive outrage about voting rights in interesting perspective.

Item No. 1: The latest "Pew Center on the States Report" found 24 million invalid voter registrations and nearly 2 million dead people still on U.S. voter rolls.

Item No. 2: South Carolina has sued theU.S. Department of Justiceas a result of the DOJ's decision to block the state from requiring voters to show government-issued identification in order to vote.

For many of us, this juxtaposition is a head scratcher. One might think the "powers that be" would focus on fixes to broken election systems around the country. Yet in South Carolina, the full power of the federal government is aligned against a state for having the temerity to require a reliable source of identification prior to exercising our most fundamental right. The government's rationale? Such a requirement is discriminatory against minority voters who may not possess the requisite documents. Justice may need more lawyers to handle its forthcoming workload, however. Fifteen states have passed photo identification laws over the past year, and the Supreme Court has recently upheld the constitutionality of a similar law in Indiana.

The issue has hit home enough with me that I wrote about it in my new book, where I recount how my seasonal allergies necessitate periodic visits to the local drugstore for Claritin D. My familiar face and name do not secure a pass from having to produce Maryland photo identification, however. (It seems a certain ingredient in this form of the medication can be used in the manufacture of methamphetamine.) Accordingly, I dutifully produce my driver's license. No big deal, you might say. A rational explanation for an ever-so-slight imposition.

Yet, on Election Day in Maryland and 19 other states, the experience is reversed; every time I produce that same Maryland driver's license to poll watchers, I am assured that no such requirement is imposed by the state. A rational takeaway: Our state and federal government value the regulation of my over-the-counter allergy medicine far more than the exercise of the most important individual right possessed by an American citizen.

Some excuse these mixed-up priorities on the basis that there are potential voters (mostly poor) who truly do not possess valid photo identification. Interestingly, this justification is offered during a time when it is becoming increasingly difficult to live in the United States without some form of reliable ID. And there is no shortage of documents that pass muster under state photo ID laws: driver's licenses, passports, naturalization papers and student IDs, to name a few.

There are also options for the few who do not possess acceptable identification. Photo ID states typically allow provisional voting, so any potential voter can complete a ballot by supplying an acceptable form of identification before the election is certified. In South Carolina, the Department of Motor Vehicles will issue a free photo identification card to anyone who wishes to vote.

Religious freedom is also protected in photo ID states: Those with religious objections to being photographed need only sign an affidavit setting forth the reason they do not possess a photo ID.

As the debate over photo identification and voting rights rages in courts and state legislatures, it is illuminating that the proponents of "anything goes" voting fail to account for the interest of minorities in a free and fair electoral process that only counts legal votes. Voting rights are about access, transparency and accuracy — requirements that have not always been guaranteed to African-Americans and other minorities.

Ballot security concerns are heightened in so-called sanctuary states, where undocumented aliens are encouraged to live and work. It is a source of local embarrassment that Maryland and a few of its subdivisions have chosen this course. This "welcome wagon" for illegal immigrants may reflect a majoritarian view in progressive Maryland; nevertheless, it makes the realization of free and fair elections far more difficult.

The simple task of producing reliable photo identification at the polls should be a no-brainer. Every illegal vote cast and counted degrades our democracy. Lax immigration enforcement only magnifies the problem. Many of us in Maryland's significant political minority wish the state of South Carolina well in its battle against a misguided federal government.

Robert L. Ehrlich Jr.'s column appears Sundays. The former Maryland governor and member of Congress is a partner at the law firm King & Spalding and the author of "Turn this Car Around," a book about national politics. His email is ehrlichcolumn@gmail.com.

Copyright © 2014, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
ElectionsPersonal Data CollectionInterior PolicyIllegal ImmigrantsFitness
  • Why not a fraud-free election?
    Why not a fraud-free election?

    We in Texas want our elections to be as fraud-free as possible. We have more illegal immigrants than any state, thanks to no border security except what the state provides ("Messing with voting rights in Texas," Oct. 21).

  • Texas ID law is fair and necessary
    Texas ID law is fair and necessary

    The claim there is a lack of evidence of voter fraud is not a good enough reason to dismiss the voter photo identification law here in Texas as unconstitutional ("Messing with voting rights in Texas,The Sun's recent editorial also claims the ID law will do, is a complete fabrication...

  • Messing with voting rights in Texas
    Messing with voting rights in Texas

    If there was evidence that voter fraud was prevalent — or even a serious possibility — then perhaps the Supreme Court's ruling early Saturday allowing Texas to impose one of the strictest voter photo identification laws in the country would make sense. Instead what the...

  • If Walmart can ask for ID, why not polling place?
    If Walmart can ask for ID, why not polling place?

    The argument that requiring voters to produce identification is racial discrimination is absolutely absurd.

  • War on 21st-century Jim Crow
    War on 21st-century Jim Crow

    Kemba Smith Pradia went to Tallahassee, Fla., last week to demand the right to vote.

  • Why the fuss over voter ID?

    Your article about problems Maryland drivers have had getting their licenses renewed indicated that most residents of the state already have government photo IDs ("Computer glitch shuts down MD driver's license renewal system," Sept. 26 ).

Comments
Loading