Voter ID's

Bill Clinton, George Bush, and Ronald Reagan are in a boat in the Potomac, when suddenly the boat develops a leak. They have only one life preserver jacket. Bill says: "Let's do the Democratic thing. Take a vote to see who gets the life preserver. " They each write a name on a piece of paper and stuff it in a coffee can. Bush and Reagan get one vote each; Clinton gets six. Obviously in this joke there was some voter fraud happening (regardless of whether your for or against Clinton), but it could have been prevented with just a little supervision which is what ID's will be providing. Pro stands for one person, one vote. But how can we keep this idea if we will do nothing to protect it? My opponents only argument in round 1 is that in person voter fraud is rare. My response to this is that even though it may be rare voter ID's can help to deter and prevent these rare occurrences of voter fraud thus providing voters with more assurance in their political system. Since my opponent has not directly argued at this point that there is any negative effects of voter ID then there is not reason to not add an extra safeguard to our voting system. Any positive impact, change or deterioration of fraudulent votes is a reason to vote pro. I'd like to illustrate my point with a quote: "Their other claim is that voter fraud is so exceedingly rare, so unlikely, such an impossibility that there's no need for any voter identification. According to the Democrats, we can afford to assume that everyone will be honest on Election Day. So, there's no need to take any basic precautions or take any steps to prevent fraud because it just doesn't happen. Well, to the contrary, voter fraud happens all the time and it does sometimes occur on a level large enough to impact close elections. Furthermore, it undoubtedly happens much more than we realize. " (. http://townhall.com...) In regard to mail in voting, ID's will be required to register for absentee or any other form of mail in ballot. People may also be required to submit their ID's or a photo copy of their ID when they mail in their vote as well. In regard to California, voter fraud is generally only detected after the fact, if at all and investigating and prosecuting election crimes is difficult and costly. It"s far better to prevent fraudulent voting than to track it down after the votes have already been counted. My next point is that people support voter ID's. In a Fox poll 70% of people said they supported voter ID's. Only 27% of people say that it is unnecessary (. http://www.foxnews.com...;). As a country created by the people and for the people there is no reason not to follow the will of the majority in this case. If the vast majority of the population is in favor of something and it doesn't harm anyone else, why not implement the policy? At the end of the day however what will we be gaining by requiring voter ID's? Well, requiring a state-issued photo ID enables the use of common technology to further improve the integrity and efficiency of our election system. A simple computer terminal and a card reader could replace old-fashioned, wasteful and error-prone paper voter registrations and roster books when coupled with an ID requirement. Long lines could be eliminated, voter check-in would be faster, data more accurate and less money would be spent on inefficient, out-dated data entry practices.