Abigail Philip
Power and Politics
Professor Karras
10/5/06
Current Events Assignment 1
The name of this article found in the New York Times is “Stricter Voting Laws
Carve Latest Partisan Divide” by Joyce Purnick. The article is dated September 26,
2006. The issue that the article is discussing is enforcing stricter voting laws in the
country. It deals with Immigration and different legislation being passed. Also, it is
discussing the state of Arizona passing the law and tying it into immigration. The
issue at hand is that officials or law makers are trying to implement new
requirements to vote. Also they are trying to keep people who don’t belong in the
country from voting.
The issue is that some persons in Arizona may not be able to vote in November
because of an Arizona law that requires proof of citizenship to register. This
legislation will require persons to have photographic identification. And this step is
being argued or debated in Washington on both sides on whether this should be
enforced in all states to prevent illegal persons from voting and preventing fraud.
Some of the measures of this issue include tighter controls over absentee balloting
and stronger registration rules. In some states such as Georgia, Indiana and
Missouri, people need government issued picture ID’s to vote. In some of these
states person require 4 pieces of ID’s to vote such as two official and two unofficial
ID’s. The parties that are involved with or affected by the issue are both the
Democratic Party and the Republican Party. And persons affected by this issue are
citizens and illegal immigrants alike. The arguments of both each individual side is
as follows.
The Republicans are in support of this issue in that they see it fit that
persons should show proof of citizenship to register. And some are not making any
apologies for this, Russell K. Pierce, a republican in the State House of
Representatives says that “he offers no apologies for being a leading proponent of
the new requirement,” he argues that “one has to show an ID for almost everything
and nobody has the right to cancel my vote illegally. This is about political
corruption.” The republicans say that “laws are needed to combat fraud, especially
among illegal immigrants.”
On the other hand the Democrats say that there is minimal fraud if any and they
are accusing the republicans of suppressing the votes least likely to have
documentation and these people are minorities, the poor and the elderly who tend to
vote for democrats. The democrats see this could provide a loss of votes which could
really matter. The democrats argued also that “close to 10% of registered voters in
Indiana do not have driver’s licenses. And seniors and minorities are affected the
most. Democrats say that republicans are just targeting a certain group of persons
to make it difficult to vote. Their arguments are that it is taking away the right to
vote from minorities and it makes it easier for Republicans to vote. The Republicans
are the ones that benefit the most.
Also, a major concern in this issue or debate is fraud, this is whether people are
who they say they are, because in some instances impostors are voting, so standard
methods of providing identification, like utility bills are no longer adequate.
Of the both sides, the side which makes the most sense to me is the Republicans,
because they are trying to enhance the voting system and to prevent persons who
should not be voting from voting namely illegal immigrants, but although this is
good, I think that they are going to the extreme asking for four pieces of
identification and I think that they have an ulterior motive because these persons
are the ones who usually vote for the democrats, so they are trying to curve or
remove some of the democrats supporters by making it extremely difficult for them
to vote.
I do however have a problem with the republicans proposition or solution because
there are many person who do not drive or own a driver’s license, and persons who
are elderly and may not be able to get around, this may cause problems for them,
also as mentioned in the article the Native Americans who are too poor to drive and
are without electricity or telephone bills or alternate forms of identification. Both
sides have good arguments though.
The conclusion that I drew from my reading of this article about how the
American political system works is that there is always an issues to debate and that
there will always be two sides of opinions or views on that issue, the Republican’s
view and the Democratic view. And that we the people must be involved and listen
to both sides and have our own opinions.