Advocates for voter ID laws requiring voters to produce ID to vote are often labeled as “racist” by the left side of the political aisle and its leadership. Well, it certainly sounds racist, but not in the way critics would lead one to believe...
In the wake of the contested 2020 national election, the Georgia state legislature has come under fire by the failed Georgia Democrat gubernatorial candidate, Stacey Abrams, for attempting to strengthen its voter ID laws via Georgia Senate Bill 241. Ms. Abrams described the bill, which would end no-excuse mail in ballots and require photo identification for submitted mail-in ballots and requests for mail-in ballots, as “racist” and “a redux of Jim Crow in a suit and tie”—the implication being Senate Bill 241 is racist towards black people. She also stated a lack of voter ID laws enabled more minorities to vote in the last election, inherently implying less minorities would be able to vote if required to present ID.
Without ascribing motive to Ms. Abrams, her statements, and those like them, hinge on the invalid premise that a law disproportionately impacting a race of people is intentionally designed to target the impacted race. Despite the fallacious logic, this article will assume it is true and treat it as such.
As a result, the relevant question that must be asked is “how specifically does a voter ID law target a particular race?” Short answer: it does not.
The singular purpose of a voter ID law is to prevent ineligible voters (such as illegal aliens, underage citizens, or felons) from casting ballots in political elections by requiring an individual to present valid ID. Logically, this type of law would impact only those unable to obtain an ID. This is a relatively easy task considering a valid ID can be obtained in every state if an individual can:
Pay for the ID (typically $5-$30), free in some cases
Prioritize 30-60 minutes to find and visit a local government branch OR obtain internet access to renew an ID online
This would require internet access, freely available in public libraries
Read, comprehend, and act on the requirements set by the state government to obtain an ID (proof of address, citizenship, etc.)
One must next consider the barriers an individual would face in obtaining an ID based on the conditions above:
An individual in debilitating poverty
An individual unable to prioritize 30-60 minutes over the course of a two-year election cycle (four if only counting Presidential elections) to find and visit a local government branch to obtain ID
An individual lacking the mental capacity to comprehend the process for acquiring an ID
An individual unable to meet the requirements laid out by a relevant state government for obtaining an ID
Many states allow individuals to register to vote for situations in which individuals are unable to produce documentation such as proof of address (e.g. the homeless population)
Some states even provide official government IDs to illegal immigrants so they can vote
Read more bluntly, anyone who is beyond poor, has bad time management skills, is irresponsible, is stupid, or is otherwise legally prohibited cannot vote. Broken down this way, it is not only unreasonable to claim the process for obtaining and producing an ID to vote is prohibitively restrictive, but it is far from racist. Rather, there is a strong argument to be made that anyone who attributes this list of characteristics to a particular race is the racist.
Fortunately, it is unlikely Stacey Abrams is as racist as she appears to be. Rather, she has almost certainly abdicated her responsibility to understand the logical implications and consequences of the policies and opinions she advocates. If she believed laws requiring ID were racist, she would be forced to condemn industries such as vehicle rental services, airlines/TSA, alcohol, and any other product or service that requires ID to purchase or partake. If these are not racist, voter ID laws cannot be.
Comments