Vote of the living dead
As the Iowa State Fair wrapped up this summer, I received a news release indicating the results of a poll conducted at the Iowa secretary of state's booth. Deemed "unscientific" -- my favorite kind -- fairgoers were asked their opinion on whether they "think Iowa voters should show a photo ID to vote?" In addition, they were asked about demonstrating proof of their county of residence.
The results from the 3,053 who took time to participate were dramatically in favor of the ID process. Yes votes tallied 2,394 -- or 78.41 percent -- against 596 no votes -- or 19.52 percent. Sixty-three cast "no opinion" votes. So if you have no opinion, why bother voting? That's an increase of more than 2 percent from the voter ID poll conducted at the 2012 Iowa State Fair.
One of the state's largest paper's asked the voter question in a February poll and the notion received 71 percent support.
In any event, it seems like common sense won out by a large margin.
So the question remains: What's holding this up? If 70 percent of the people want Iowa to demand ID proof of those going to the polls to vote for its federal, state, county and local representation, why isn't it happening?
I've never had a rational person sit down and offer a rebuttal to the idea of voter ID. Aside from the fact that it prohibits the dead from weighing in on the political landscape -- sorry Chi-town -- or the fact that it keeps illegal and unregistered voters from finding a way to influence the outcome, I've never been privy to a legitimate argument against adding the simple step to the process.
A driver's license will work. If you don't drive, a state ID will do the trick. Seems pretty simple.
So if you're on the other side of the coin, if you've got some solid reasoning as to why voter ID is unfair and unacceptable, I ask you to weigh in. I look forward to listening to your reasoning -- or lack thereof.