The Voter ID Farce

So the ballot initiatives for Voter ID has simply exploded in the politisphere lately, with supporters claiming a desire to keep illegals from voting, and critics claiming that the supporters are racist and trying to disenfranchise and suppress the vote of poor blacks, Hispanics and elderly people - the logic being that they are less likely to endure the hardship of riding buses, taxicabs, waiting in long lines, etc. to get to ID locations, when there is limited need for them to have one.  I'm thinking both sides are a bit full of it, to varying degree.  But first and foremost, let's accept that ID is required for almost everything we do anymore:

Social Security, Airports, DMV, Hospitals, Doctor's offices, Pharmacies, Jails, Court, Pawn Shops, Credit Card use, Check use, Adoptions, Blood Donation, Guns, Insurance, any phone call you ever make about an account of any kind.  Welfare, Food Stamps, and Medicaid all require ID.  ID is required for virtually everything. 

And statistically, the poor are the least likely to vote (in USA, we average 36.4%).  The numbers go up as income increases.  Education shows similar effect.  So what's to suppress?  They don't need ID for something they don't participate in, yes? 

I think the voter purging in Florida is complete garbage, and any Miamian knows, illegals go out of their way to avoid government.  This is why they've had almost no success finding illegals voting in Florida - THEY'RE NOT REGISTERED.  It's getting so deep in Rick Scott's office, you need hip boots and a bottle of Febreeze to keep the stink off of you.

Most of us should recognize that photo IDs are the most secure form of ID, since all other forms simply require information to fake.  There's a reason the REAL ID requirements were enacted, and I am of the opinion that everyone should have a photo ID, period.  And from a voting standpoint, if everyone has one, there's nothing to suppress, yes?

So if the problem is simply getting people to the places that issue photo IDs, I have a solution:  why not start issuing IDs in places that the poor would frequent... say, Welfare offices?  Most of the poor are on assistance of some kind.  They already have the documents in hand, because they have to if they're not using a photo ID to get benefits.  The benefits agent, upon verifying their documents for Welfare eligibility, has a webcam at their desk.  They take a photo, the photo ID is printed out at a central printer in the office by the time the lengthy benefits process is over with.  The ID information is forwarded to the state at the same time the benefits processing is (by way of their respective departments' secure web address).  Two birds, one stone.

This could also be accomplished in places where identification verification is required - like employers.  Every employer is required to file employment eligibility forms at the same time they file W-4s when they hire people.  Standard verification is a photo ID and a SS card (or green card), with other verification options if photo ID isn't available.  Once again, webcam - cheap, easy.  Take a picture, send it with the verification form.  State issues a photo ID, mails it to the employer within a couple of weeks, employee gets it with the next paycheck..  Not altogether different than getting a passport.  Two birds, one stone.

For the elderly, how about the doctor's office?  If their Medicare card legally verifies their ID as far as the feds are concerned, then it's simply a matter of obtaining a photo (webcam...) and submitting paperwork (done electronically these days, so no real hardship on the doctors' offices), state mails the ID to the home address, not unlike they do now for renewing drivers' licenses.  Two birds, one stone.

These cover the most likely scenarios for virtually everyone.  If they work, they can get ID through their employer.  If they don't, they're most likely on some kind of assistance, and they can get ID  at the same time they apply for benefits.  Elderly can use the other two options or their Medicare provider.  With almost everything being done on computers and internet, there's simply no reason an easier means of acquiring photo ID can't be accomplished.  Welfare offices are a state agency, so the same system security is available as at the DMV.  If employers are found to be misusing the system for fraud IDs, their occupational license is revoked, and any IDs applied for by the employer are re-verified for accuracy and validity, either through current employers or the Welfare office, if they are on assistance.  Same can apply for doctors' offices.

This is not a perfect solution, but it's an option.  It's certainly better than complaining that poor minorities might have to take a bus and stand in line.  Really?  That's the argument?  So any suggestion of utilizing a more secure form of ID besides a library card and a utility bill, and requiring it to vote, is simply racist and an attempt to suppress voter turnout?  The intellectual laziness is staggering...

I don't think voter fraud (at the polls, anyway) is a huge problem.  If photo IDs can cut down on the dead votes and double voting, great.  Not too worried about illegal immigrants - they pretty much avoid anything governmental the best they can anyway, so they're not showing up in voting booths, I don't care how hard you argue that - it's sounds ridiculous (because it is).  But identification security has become an increasing important issue, and has to be addressed.  Photo ID is the most efficient way to do it. 

And if everyone has one, then requiring it to vote, along with the myriad of other things we need ID for, is no big deal.