Editorial: Texas voter ID law passes muster

Do you want an example of how politics invades a discussion that ought to be solely about federal law? 

Consider the case of Texas’ voter identification law, which is being contested in a federal courtroom in Washington, D.C.

Texas Attorney General Greg Abbott is among the lawyers who are arguing on behalf of the 2011 voter ID law passed by the Texas Legislature.  The law isn’t as onerous as opponents say it is. 

The law stipulates that anyone who votes in person must present a valid government photo identification, along with a voter registration card.  What’s involved?  A U.S. passport, a concealed handgun permit, a driver’s license and a military identification card. 

The Texas law bans use of student ID cards, even if they are issued by a publicly funded institution. 

There ought to be little debate over whether the state’s requirement is reasonable.  It is.  The Texas Legislature approved a law that is similar to those in many countries, such as, say, Mexico. 

But the three-judge panel hearing the case in D.C. is going to decide whether the Texas law violates the 1965 U.S. Voting Rights Act, which plaintiffs allege is being violated because — and here comes the politics of the argument — it disenfranchises ethnic and racial minorities who might be unable to obtain the required photo identification. 

The battle, to no one’s surprise, is split by a partisan divide as well. 

Democrats dislike the idea of requiring voter identification, while Republicans favor it.  Democrats accuse Republicans of seeking to suppress voters’ ability to cast their ballots; Republicans counter by saying they merely are trying to protect the integrity of the process by ensuring that everyone who votes are doing so legally. 

In this highly charged political atmosphere, the argument likely will veer far from its strictly legal implications. 

If the court examines the law purely on the reasonable requirement it places on those who want to vote, then the Texas voter ID law will stand — as it should. 

ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for
following agreed-upon rules of civility.  Posts and
comments do not reflect the views of this site.  Posts and comments are
automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some
comments offensive or inaccurate.  If you believe a comment violates our rules,
click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment. 

Comment viewing options

Sort Comments

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes. 

It is perfectly legal and logical to require a valid ID in order to vote.  It is next to impossible to function without a valid picture ID.  To cash a check, open a bank account, receive social security payments and cash them, obtain a drivers license and any number of other things, you must present a valid ID and in some cases, a social security card too.  Why should we be not required to show an ID to vote, one of the most important things we do, even if our votes don’t count anymore. 

I was watching Eric Holder give a speech and when he said a concealed carry license would be valid ID under this law, his liberal audience went "oughhhhhhhhhhhhh" - I laughed at how silly that was.  It was like there was something wrong with law abiding citizens who have passed background checks exercising their Second Amendment rights, but it's okay to sneak an illegal vote by not living in the district where a person is voting, or okay to be a convicted felon and sneaking an illegal vote, or not being a citizen of our country and sneaking an illegal vote.  Idiots. 

I think it says much about the character and motives of the opponents of the voter I.D. law.  These people will travel in buses to picket and protest against what they say is discrimination, but they won't travel across town to the DPS office to get a driver's license of state I.D card!  I would and have driven through a blizzard to vote, because it's my " obligation " as a citizen.  I don't see these people protesting having to show I.D to cash checks at the supermarket or bank!  I think they speak with "forked tongue" ! 

Getting a state ID card is a snap.  No driving tests, no studying.  What is it with people who DON'T want to get that ID card?  Maybe they are illegal and don't have the right to vote anyhow!  Save me from mindless idiots! 

Your questioning the character of those of us that oppose the voter ID law is irrational as is your comparison of cashing a check to voting. 

I also exercise my right to vote and with the exception of one run off election I don't think I have missed any election since I became voting age many years ago.  No, I don't protest a supermarket requiring an ID to cash a check.  I have a right to vote not to cash a check.  I respect a business owners right to establish whatever policy about check cashing they want.  That doesn't mean I speak with a forked tongue. 

If there were credible evidence that any significant amount of voter fraud was occurring and that photo ID would decrease that fraud I would support photo ID legislation. 

As I have said before this law is about politicians making people think they are doing something about illegal immigration without doing anything about illegal immigration. 

If you dont think there is any voter fraud then why are you against making sure?  What is the argument about having people show a valid ID to vote?  You say you want proof of voter fraud but how do you prove something without having ID's?  All this law does it make sure those that vote have the right to vote and are voting in the correct location.  Its not rocket science. 

With all the things people do nowadays that require ID I dont see why this is such a big deal.  They say it disenfranchises minority and low income voters.  Why?  Do they not need an ID to get government assistance?  Ofcourse they do.  If you cash a check or stay in a hotel or get on an airplane you have to have ID.  If people dont want to get an ID its for a reason.  They are usually either illegal or wanted (not all cases ofcourse). 

I just dont get the argument against this.  I am pretty sure it will be found legal by the court since they have already ruled that way for other states with the same type of law but ofcourse you never know with lawyers and judges.  Florida is now vetting their entire registered voter logs to clean it up after the court ruled they could do so against Holders approval ofcourse.  Now he clainms our law is nothing more than a poll tax.  Talk about somebody throwing race around. 

What you have is pure ,unexpurgated racism by the Attorney General who does'nt think that Blacks or legal Hispanics can get a legal photo ID.  You can't make this up.  It is embarrassing to millions of on minorities who know how to go down and get a drivers license.  What a racist. 

Question with boldness even the existence of a god; because if there be one he must approve of the homage of reason more than that of blindfolded fear.  Thomas Jefferson in a letter to Peter Carr, August 10, 1787

cards?  I cannot find any reason for that ban.  If we are going to require a photo ID along with a voter registration card, it would seem that any government or institutionally issued photo ID would suffice with the voter registration card. 

What is so wrong about presenting proper ID to vote?  Voting in Texas elections is limited to residency requirements.  You must be in this country legally and you must live in the State, The County and the City, in which the elections are held for at least 30 days.  You must also be 18 years of age. 

I don't want residents of Dumas voting in the City of Amarillo elections, nor would Dumas want residents of Amarillo to travel to Dumas to vote for their city officials.  So a form of ID is required to prove you are a resident of Amarillo. 

I live in Randall County, yet I can't vote for Potter County officials.  Why not?  Because I must show that I am registered to vote in the County I vote in.  I must have a voter's registration card, or a valid ID

Why is that considered discriminatory?  Once, they allowed people to show a utility bill.  That does not show that you the voter are actually the person shown on the utility bill. 

Therefore a simple photo ID that anyone can obtain is all that is required.  If you have a valid driver's license, you're covered.  If you don't have a driver's license, you can go down to your DPS office and get a photo ID. 

That's the only way we can assure that New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas or Louisiana residents aren't crossing the state line and voting for our state leaders.  Although, I'm not sure that these people might not pick better leaders that our own local residents have done. 

On the national level, you have to be a citizen to vote.  This is written in our Constitution.  If you are not a citizen of the US, sorry you don't have a vote.  I can't cross over into Canada or Mexico and vote in their elections, so why do people who are not citizens of the US have a right to vote for our leaders? 

I am not offended when I step up to the voting desk when they ask for my ID.  I proudly show it.  If I don't have ID, I must go home and get it (and hope I don't get stopped for driving without a license in the process.) 

And then the inane argument, "it disenfranchises ethnic and racial minorities who might be unable to obtain the required photo identification." 

How doe it disenfranchise these people.  Don't they have the same ability to get a photo ID as everyone else?  What could prevent them from getting the ID?  If they are not in this country legally?  I'm sorry, if you are not here legally, you don't have the right to vote and therefore are not disenfranchised under the law. 

Perhaps, they are fugitives from the law, have a number of outstanding warrants that showing up for registration or ID would alert the authorities.  Tough... you're supposed to be in hiding anyway, not out voting. 

And, many teenagers today, look older than they are.  You must be 18 to vote.  I don't want an immature 14 year old voting, although we already have a lot of immature 40 year old's, who do vote. 

And, with out an ID , what's to stop me from going down to the polls and telling people that I'm really Aunt Agnes, who died 20 years ago and casting a ballot.  OK maybe in Duvall County, but not here. 

This is not a debate the courts even need to consider.  The law is direct and simple.  If you're eligible to vote, get a proper ID and register.