Supporting the ‘insurance’ of voter photo ID (HB113)

This is testimony I penned, presented today on behalf of the Wicomico County Republican Central Committee.

Ladies and Gentlemen of the House:

We, the undersigned members of the Wicomico County Republican Central Committee, rise in support of safeguarding the electoral process by adopting this common-sense bill.

There are situations in our everyday lives where we are compelled by law or by custom to present a photo identification in order to prove our identity. Surprisingly, though, in performing one of the most important duties we have as a citizen, under current Maryland law we are simply asked to recite our date of birth and our address. No other steps are taken to prove a voter’s identity.

Opponents of photo voter ID base their argument on the assertion that photo ID depresses turnout, particularly in minority communities, because those voters are less likely to have a valid photo identification. They also claim that the fraud argument given by proponents is invalid because fraud has not been demonstrably proven to occur on a large scale in Maryland.

However, turnout figures from Georgia and Indiana, states which adopted photo identification laws before the 2008 election, disprove the contention of lower minority turnout. In fact, Indiana had the largest increase in Democratic turnout in the country from 2004 to 2008, presumably with the minority population (which tends to vote Democratic) leading the way. If people are motivated to vote, they will secure the means to comply with the law and non-driving photo identification is already available from the state for a modest cost. Moreover, this bill preserves the right to present an existing voter identification card if the voter has it in his or her possession.

We are pleased by the fact Maryland hasn’t been the home of large-scale allegations of voter fraud as have been the case elsewhere. But just as one doesn’t purchase insurance for an immediate need but rather for protection against unknown future hazards, we consider photo voter identification an inexpensive insurance policy against the potential for polling place fraud. We believe this is especially important because our state has adopted early voting, with Election Day now turned into a process which lasts several days. It’s easier to track who comes and goes to vote in a one-day period than to coordinate these efforts over several days, particularly as polling place personnel can change daily.

Finally, it’s important to consider that one who cannot present acceptable identification is not turned away at the ballot box. Instead, state law provides that they receive a provisional ballot, the counting of which is contingent upon a more thorough investigation of the situation. According to the Pew Center on the States, in Maryland about 2/3 of the provisional ballots cast in 2008 were deemed valid and counted, but the total not counted was around 17,000 out of over 2.6 million ballots cast. On a nationwide basis, the study found that about half of the uncounted provisional votes were cast by people who weren’t registered – a factor photo identification wouldn’t be able to rectify anyhow.

There’s no question that HB113 won’t make our voting system absolutely fraud-proof; unfortunately there are those who willingly break the rules in order to gain electoral office for themselves or assist someone they support in doing so. But if someone is motivated enough about their franchise to use it, which we saw in the minority community for the 2008 election, they’re not going to let the minor detail of getting photo identification stop them. Those who say presenting a photo identification is a hindrance to voting are simply misinformed, and we encourage the passage of HB113 in order to help safeguard our electoral process.

 

Respectfully submitted,

 

Members of the Wicomico County Republican Central Committee:

Dave Parker, Chair
Joe Collins, Vice-Chair
Bob Laun, Treasurer
Michael Swartz, Secretary
Dave Goslee, Sr.
W. Blan Harcum, Sr.
Mark McIver
John Palmer
Ann Suthowski

3 thoughts on “Supporting the ‘insurance’ of voter photo ID (HB113)”

  1. Who is “they”? You know, your hit and run posts are quite annoying yet boring at the same time. Since you don’t come with a real name, at least come with a thought process next time, k?

Comments are closed.