Since 2011, twelve states have passed laws that require a photo identification to vote. Supporters argue that ID’s are needed to increase confidence in elections and prevent voter fraud. Critics argue that voter fraud rarely exists and that ID requirements are intended to suppress turnout by economically disadvantaged voters.
No that is a form of voter suppression, by requiring a photo ID at the polls you aren't going to let millions of people, in low income neighbor hoods centered around big cities, to vote. Many people in big cities don't get there drivers license for they don't need to drive to work, they can take public transportation. So by requiring it that is suppressing the vote by only allowing rich people from the suburbs to vote i.e. white people.
A driver license is only $25, I'm not a citizen so I have to renew every year, but I don't have any problem with that.
How come an American cannot let aside $25 every 5 years?
While 25$ isn't much to me, it will be to some people. Also, there should never be a fiscal charge for voting. If you don't have, or can't afford a driver's licence, there should be a alternate form of (photo) ID available for free. We need it to get on a airplane, voting is just as important.
Depends, I think yes if you can so we can prevent voter fraud but no so those who dont have the resources to obtain one dont have a disadvantage. I think they need to have someone prove that they cant get one.
The historical activity of users engaging with this question.
Loading the political themes of users that engaged with this discussion