Why It Should Be Required For Every Election
As Americans once again cast their votes for state and local officials, the nation revisits a debate that gained significant traction following the 2020 election between Donald Trump and Joseph Biden, amid heightened concerns about voter fraud.
Currently, there are only thirty-six states holding laws that either request or require proof of identification when casting a vote at the polls. The remaining fourteen states and Washington D.C. have other methods of identifying voters, if any at all. In states such as California, Nevada, and Illinois, traditionally left leaning states, there are absolutely no required documents when it comes to proving your identification according to a nationwide map provided by NCSL.
The debate over whether states should require citizens to present identification at the polls has been ongoing for years, resurfacing every election cycle. Critics claim that voter ID laws are discriminatory to minority groups or suppress voter turnout, but this argument overlooks the simple truth: verifying identity is a basic standard in nearly every aspect of our day to day lives. We show ID to drive a car, purchase alcohol, board a plane, and sometimes even to check into a hotel. Yet, somehow, proving who we are to participate in one of, if not, the most important civic duties is seen as controversial.
Requiring voter ID isn’t about exclusion; it is about fairness and accountability. Every legitimate vote should count, and every citizen should be allowed the confidence that their ballot isn’t being tampered with, as is the case with deceased voters, or cancelled out by fraud or error.
At its core, voting is a constitutional right, and a privilege built on trust. Every ballot cast should represent one verified voice, not a question mark. Yet opponents of voter ID continue to claim that showing identification is somehow oppressive, a claim that rings hollow when nearly every other aspect of civic life requires proof of identity.
As for the fear that voter turnout would decline with some form of government identification required, consider the case of Wisconsin Institute for Law & Liberty’s report titled, “Doing the Math: How Voter ID Laws Affect Turnout in Wisconsin”. The authors found that after the implementation of a photo ID requirement in Wisconsin, overall voter turnout actually rose, rather than dropped. They also found that there was no evidence of disenfranchisement of racial-minority voters — more specifically, in the Dance and Milwaukee counties, as critics of the strict voter ID policies expressed that there would be.
Meanwhile, a Gallup poll from the same year showed that 79% of Americans support requiring photo ID at the polls, demonstrating broad bipartisan agreement. When nearly four out of five citizens believe in something as reasonable as verifying one’s identity to vote, the resistance starts to look political rather than practical.
With this, if it was truly suppressive and oppressive for certain communities to present your ID at the polls — despite the data showing otherwise, then I believe that the issue doesn’t lie within requiring identification, but rather the accessibility of acquiring said identification, if certain prerequisites are met prior to acquirement.
When faith in elections falters, every other freedom begins to falter. Ensuring that every legal vote counts and only legal votes count isn’t restrictive. It’s the bare minimum that any democracy, and in our case, any Constitutional Republic should demand.
