Quote:
Originally Posted by REDVAN
I agree that tightening voting regulations is a good thing. I don't understand the whole issue I suppose (and why some people have called it racist), but I firmly believe you should have to show some sort of government ID to vote. In Canada, you had to at the last election. In our last provincial election you didn't have to (but you did have to swear an oath saying you were who you said you were and etc) and that doesn't even make sense. For civic elections it doesn't even matter.
But this idea of his about millions of illegal voters is just crazytalk! I'm sure a VERY small number of people did illegally vote (likely done by mistake, for example they have the same name as a deceased person, or they somehow voted in the wrong electoral district by stupidity of themselves and the polling officers).
Seems like he is really making hay with his campaign promises... for good or bad.
|
Not to pile on but this is one of the populist issues that sounds really good on the surface and easy to get behind.
Each person is only allowed to vote in their district so requiring with government issued ID (which everyone should have) makes sense to eliminate any potential problems.
It sounds great and it sounds very reasonable, however it is predicated on one false assumption, That everyone should have government issued photo ID. The fact is that people for many reasons don't have government issued photo ID. The people that don't skew poorer and include more minorities.
So in the end Voter ID is just a poll tax.
On the other hand issue of voter fraud is non-existent, errors in counting outweigh instances of voter fraud so there is no evidence of it ever influencing a result.
So what was a very reasonable idea on closer examination is just an excuse to exclude voters who disproportionately vote against you.