I was an international observer for the 1997 Mexican Federal Elections and in Mexico, every registered voter has a Voter ID card that includes their picture, fingerprint, and signature in addition to a magnetic strip, hologram and other security measure to prevent fraud. The citizens I spoke with were proud to have those cards because it meant they had the right to vote (1997 was the first true free and fair election in Mexico and was the year that PAN won the legislature and a number of governorships from PRI.) They also use those cards for things such as check cashing, etc.

McConnell's amendment doesn't go as far as issuing a Voter ID card, but it isn't a bad idea and it won't deter anyone from lawfully voting who is entitled to do so.

Florida has required a photo ID for at least a decade. We will take any photo ID with your name on it, but prefer one with your signature on it too. If there is no signature on the photo ID we will take a photo ID and some form of identification without a photo but with your signature on it.

Not sure why this is a problem.

Not sure why this is a problem.

It's a "problem" because some of the more vocal elements in the African-American community can use the issue as a way to stir up their base by associating photo ID with the discriminatory voting laws in the south before the civil rights movement.

No rational person can successfully argue that having to show photo ID to vote is a hardship to the poor and to minorities; there are simply too many reasons why a photo ID is a necessary tool. Here in Georgia, to get around court challenges to our state's enactment of photo identification to vote, legislators included a provision permitting photo IDs to be made for free for the poor. But an unmotivated individual isn't going to be persuaded to get a photo ID just because it is free--effort is required--and this is what scares "leaders" like Jesse Jackson.

I just had to show photo ID in order to rent a car. No, I wasn't offended, and the request seemed reasonable given that I was about to drive off with $30K worth of their property.

Likewise, a photo ID to vote seems like a good idea, given that there is a natural temptation for some people to try to cheat the system. I fail to understand why any honest citizen would be against this. The notion that there are large numbers of voters out there who are disuaded due to a lack of photo ID is nonsense. Even the poorest person out there has to have ID in order to cash their government checks.

I am uneasy with the politicians who push this stuff. Either they have ulterior motives, or they lack the judgment to see that they are opening a Pandora's box for no good reason. Not flattering however you slice it.

Not sure why this is a problem.

That's easy: The Democrats are the party of vote fraud, and requiring photo id to vote makes it harder to carry out vote fraud.

It's a problem because if you take ANY id with a picture and a name and a signature, I can make them up at home with a printer and a laminating machine. I could go to three different polling stations and vote once as myself and two more times as a recently expired voter and nobody would know the difference.

It's a problem because it disenfranchises Democrates who want to vote more then one time, are in prison, or are dead.

Joking assign, the anti-photo ID gang say that requiring photo IDs is a barrier to vote that is similar to the poll tax and will lead to disenfranchisement of minority voters. No, I don't get the argument either.

Not sure why this is a problem.

Knee-jerk opposition to Republican proposals, I'd think, with some honest-to-goodness professional fraudsters at the fringe. Proposals like this in the past always brought a chain of spurious objections (poor people can't afford the ID! oh, wait they can get it free? well, uh, then it's racist! black people are less likely to have ID!) from some very odd quarters.

I remember the WSJ took this on a while back and found that several of the opponents had been caught committing vote fraud in the past. One even had the gall to assert that vote fraud never happens, and demanded proof to the contrary!

If a little self-promo can be forgiven, my new book Identity Crisis: How Identification is Overused and Misunderstood helps show why ID doesn't do all that people think it does - and why it's a bad policy to expand the use of government-issued ID.

majkia: "Not sure why this is a problem."

I can tell you why this is a problem. The Democrats everywhere oppose the photo ID requirement, because this will put a crimp in their voter fraud efforts. The Dem's can't win elections, but they feel entitled as the 'party of compassion' and the 'party of superior morality' to rule. Therefore, ballot fraud, stealing elections and cheating is the higher moral action for Democrats.

It's not a problem in a practical sense, but certain civil rights leaders like to claim that their followers would be 'disenfranchised' by such a requirement. They seem blissfully unaware that those same people typically have to show a photo ID to cash a check, buy liquor, board an airplane, and so on.

Does the civil-rights faction still claim that Florida voters are 'disenfranchised'?

It's a problem b/c one political party has a prominent history of cheating.

I can see no reason anyone would object to having to show a picture ID to vote, Unless ofcourse they are trying to do something they shouldn't.

Empirically, photo ID laws have been shown (for whatever reason) to reduce voting, especially among Blacks and Hispanics who ARE entitled to vote. EMPIRICAL RESEARCH has shown voter fraud is exceptionally rare -- not anything prevalent enough to be a problem in deciding elections. We should forego photo ID laws, unless we want to see fewer votes being cast by Blacks and Hispanics. Poor turnout by voters in general IS a known problem. Why make a known problem worse in order to "solve" a problem that does not actually exist. We already have laws and procedures that seem to be quite effective against voter fraud. Do we want an unnecessary law that discourages participation in voting just to keep our elections more "White?" Do we?

14% of voters in Georgia do not have a driver's license or a state issued photo ID according to the Georgia Secxretary of State. That's about 700,000 voters who are disenfranchised from voting. A superior court judge correctly ruled that the photo ID requirement is an unconstitutional burden to votingin Georgia.

Of the approvimately 11.7 M voters in Florida, it's estimated that 1.4M do not have a driver's license or state issued photo ID to vote. If we substact the other forms of acceptable photo ID to vote in florida which total about 300K, that leaves 1.1M voters in Florida w/o an acceptable photo ID to vote.

Do Americans really have the right to vote when 700K in Georgia and 1.1M in Florida can't exercise their right to vote? I think not.

Finally, have you ever wondered why states that pass a photo ID requirement to vote are controlled by Republican legilatures w/ a Republican governor? The answer is simple and right out of the Karl Rove playbook to win elections: a photo ID requirement to vote substantially supresses the vote (5 to 6%) which would mostly vote Democratic b/c they are poor, elderly poor, minority, or disabled.

Thomas Manaugh -- thank you, that was excellently and precisely stated.

The risk of lowering voter turnout is considerable, and I think far overrides the lessening of what may be just a straw dog, the issue of illegals committing voter fraud.

Above and beyond that, for me as a Libertarian, any form of government tampering with citizens' privacy or personal sphere is abhorrant.

I think the most important thing to note is the large numbers of men, women, students, members of the armed services whos' votes didn't count in 2000, 2004 because they were "caged" or otherwise disenfranchised by dishonest members of the Republican party. In my opinion no law should be passed that doesn't work to PROTECT voter rights, not make it harder to vote. Becuase THIS is the recent history of our country.

1. What is the criterion for "valid photo ID?"
2. How do people in nursing homes, people that don't drive or go to the library, how do they get valid photo IDs?

Our prime motivator in this country should be to MAKE SURE that EVERYONE is heard.

If i am correct, doesn't it cost money to get a state issued photo ID? If it costs money to get a photo id, doesn't that make the requirement to have one to vote a defacto POLL TAX? Hasn't the Supreme Court ruled poll taxes are unconstitutional? Come on guys it isn't rocket science.

"a photo ID requirement to vote substantially supresses the vote (5 to 6%) which would mostly vote Democratic b/c they are poor, elderly poor, minority, or disabled."

.... and the illegally immagrated, who, as a group, typically tend to vote Democrat. how could the democrats do anything BUT speak out against something that removes a few millions votes for them? of course the yare going to shout about disenfranchisment - they just don't mention that the only peopel this will acctually STOP are people who aren't suposed to be voting in the first place. sure, some could get fake id's.. but not all of them. and maybe it will prevent a few lazy peple from going out to vote - but if pulling out an ID that most real americans already have, or if not can get cheaply ( or free) is too much trouble for them to bother with to excersize their right to vote, then it's too much trouble for me to worry about them not getting their voice heard. i have a sister who has eyesight too poor to get a drivers license - yet she has a state id for just this reason. the vast majority of places won't take a check without a photo id. so there is another reason to get one.
yeah - i don't like the idea of the government giving us all ' serial numbers" either, but we live in a time where people while cheat, lie swindle scheme and defraud to get what they want ( including their elected officals) so it sadly becomes necessary to make people prove who they are before we take them at their word. a firm handshake and a promise is no longer enough to guarentee honesty anymore. if someone is unwilling to prove to us who they are, how cna thye be trusted to help decide who runs this country?

"a photo ID requirement to vote substantially supresses the vote (5 to 6%) which would mostly vote Democratic b/c they are poor, elderly poor, minority, or disabled."

.... and the illegally immagrated, who, as a group, typically tend to vote Democrat. how could the democrats do anything BUT speak out against something that removes a few millions votes for them? of course the yare going to shout about disenfranchisment - they just don't mention that the only peopel this will acctually STOP are people who aren't suposed to be voting in the first place. sure, some could get fake id's.. but not all of them. and maybe it will prevent a few lazy peple from going out to vote - but if pulling out an ID that most real americans already have, or if not can get cheaply ( or free) is too much trouble for them to bother with to excersize their right to vote, then it's too much trouble for me to worry about them not getting their voice heard. i have a sister who has eyesight too poor to get a drivers license - yet she has a state id for just this reason. the vast majority of places won't take a check without a photo id. so there is another reason to get one.
yeah - i don't like the idea of the government giving us all ' serial numbers" either, but we live in a time where people while cheat, lie swindle scheme and defraud to get what they want ( including their elected officals) so it sadly becomes necessary to make people prove who they are before we take them at their word. a firm handshake and a promise is no longer enough to guarentee honesty anymore. if someone is unwilling to prove to us who they are, how cna thye be trusted to help decide who runs this country?

"a photo ID requirement to vote substantially supresses the vote (5 to 6%) which would mostly vote Democratic b/c they are poor, elderly poor, minority, or disabled."

.... and the illegally immagrated, who, as a group, typically tend to vote Democrat. how could the democrats do anything BUT speak out against something that removes a few millions votes for them? of course the yare going to shout about disenfranchisment - they just don't mention that the only peopel this will acctually STOP are people who aren't suposed to be voting in the first place. sure, some could get fake id's.. but not all of them. and maybe it will prevent a few lazy peple from going out to vote - but if pulling out an ID that most real americans already have, or if not can get cheaply ( or free) is too much trouble for them to bother with to excersize their right to vote, then it's too much trouble for me to worry about them not getting their voice heard. i have a sister who has eyesight too poor to get a drivers license - yet she has a state id for just this reason. the vast majority of places won't take a check without a photo id. so there is another reason to get one.
yeah - i don't like the idea of the government giving us all ' serial numbers" either, but we live in a time where people while cheat, lie swindle scheme and defraud to get what they want ( including their elected officals) so it sadly becomes necessary to make people prove who they are before we take them at their word. a firm handshake and a promise is no longer enough to guarentee honesty anymore. if someone is unwilling to prove to us who they are, how cna thye be trusted to help decide who runs this country?

If photo ID's were necessary, it might tighten some of the fraud. I disagree with some of the posts here. The poster who quoted statistics on who has photo ids in certain states did not cite his source. Many of these people who do not have ID's are NOT legal citizens or they are minors. They cannot legally vote anyway.
Getting a photo id is simple and can be free..
the lazy folks who sleep til noon and don't work are opposed to this proposal. Those of us who work and take the time to get to the polls deserve to vote. Those who are ill, disabled, or traveling, can vote via absentee ballot with a legal U.S. address. The entire system for voting should be uniform.. each state has it's own system and I think that's where it falls apart.