I fail to see how a law requiring photo ID at polls is discriminatory against anyone, but that’s just what the NAACP is claiming.

"The NAACP accuses the U.S. Justice Department of weakening one of the nation’s most important voting laws. On Friday, the Justice Department approved a Georgia law requiring voters to present a government-issued photo ID before casting a ballot. Supporters say the new law will prevent fraud at the polls. But opponents say it will keep thousands of voters away — especially poor and elderly people who don’t have drivers’ licenses and can’t afford to pay for a state-issued ID card. They say the new Georgia law essentially requires many black people to pay a fee before voting."

….

"Under the new Georgia law, the list of acceptable photo IDs for voters is limited to the following: a Georgia driver’s license, U.S. passport, U.S. or state agency employee ID, military ID, tribal ID or an ID card issued by a legally empowered branch of Georgia, any other state or the U.S. government."

How much could it possibly cost to get a non-license photo ID in Georgia?! In PA, it’s about $10. For what poor soul is that too much to bear? If the cost really would be a deterrent for many, lobby for some kind of subsidy instead of trying to get the whole idea scrapped. Don’t they realize how many dead people and other inelligible parties vote each year?

Am I missing something or is this really as stupid as it sounds?

Update: Gclectic left an intriguing comment in which he called my bluff and presented an interesting idea. As he points out, I haven’t a clue how many fraudulant votes are registered at elections. I don’t think anyone would really deny it’s a problem, but he’s right that I ought to have provided evidence. I was being flippant and he called me on it. That’s fair.

He also suggested some alternatives to the photo ID idea. I really like one of them – indellible ink. Yup, the same ink used in Iraq’s elections. I think that’d be a really cool – and fair – way to curb voter fraud. I’d be very interested to see how many of my fellow citizens were – or weren’t – walking around with inky fingers on election day. Come to think of it, there might even be a fringe benefit to the practice – increased voter turnout.

Something similar happens in the Catholic Church. Every year on Ash Wednesday, churches are packed. More people attend that mass – one that isn’t even a holy day of obligation – than any other mass throughout the year. Why? Well, the full answer is complicated, but at least some of them likely attend because they get something to show for it. They get ashes put on their foreheads. First of all, people, particularly Americans, like to feel like they get something to show for their efforts. Secondly, for the rest of the day they can advertise what good Catholics they (allegedly) are, simply by being seen in public.

What does the Catholic Church have to do with US elections? Well, perhaps if voters got to walk around with ink on their fingers – a something tangible they could show off – they’d be more inclined to get off their lazy butts and vote. I’m sure I don’t have to provide statistical proof that voter turnout is often no higher than 60% of those who are eligible. So, with indellible ink we could fight voter fraud and possibly increase voter turnout in the process. Cool. 🙂