I received this in an email today: (emphasis is mine)

The poll finds 34 percent of voters believe supporters of voter ID laws are trying to “steal” elections by keeping eligible voters away from the polls. Yet more people — 50 percent — think opponents of the laws are acting in bad faith by trying to increase participation from ineligible voters. Some 17 percent think both supporters and opponents of voter ID laws are playing dirty.

I’ve worked hard against Voter ID here in Pennsylvania, but I’ve been wondering if we are framing the issue incorrectly, and that is standing in the way of getting the real message across. I’m actually not opposed to a Voter ID  law, as long as there is a fool proof way to make sure that it doesn’t disenfranchise any eligible voter. The idea of protecting the vote isn’t a bad one. Those of us working oin the issue however realize that the efforts behind Voter ID are rarely really about protecting the vote, but to many who don’t deeply study the issue, that language- protecting the vote- seems too reasonable, and they support the idea. In my mind, the objectionable parts of voter ID are:

1) States that implement do not allocate adequate resources (etc) to properly train all poll workers, which places thenm in akward positions that are not fair to the p[oll workers and can lead to discrepencies which as just as bad as poor vote protection. The solution, in otherwords causes more problems than it solves.

2) States do not make adequate measures to assure that all eligible voters are educated and have adequate ID. If this type of law is enacted, it should be with the stipulation that the State can guarentee that no eligible voters are disenfranchgized. When I say, “no,” I mean none- zero. Voting is the single most basic right in our democracy, and every effort must be taken to make sure it is not taken away from any person who deserves to vote.

3) States do not create a plan for roll out that is designed to work out the bugs of any system without disenfranchizing any voter.

4) States are not required to prove that a Voter ID approach is the only way to fix a proven problem.

In otherwords, for me, it isn’t VoterID itself, that I have a problem with- it is the myriad issues that surround it and come about because of the way it is implemented.

What do you think?