Among those cited by Democrats is Mary-Jo Criswell, a 71-year-old Indianapolis Democrat, who could not vote last November because she had no driver's license or valid passport.
She previously had used a private bank-issued card with her photo when voting. The former precinct committeewoman had difficulty rebuilding an identity trail, and still does not have a valid photo ID. Criswell said in an affidavit she felt intimidated by the burdensome bureaucracy she claims is needed to vote.
This whole issue is so infuriating because the Dems and media lapdogs like this one are so insulting to any thinking American. This 71-yo woman has in past elections used a private bank-issued card. Of course she needed ID to prove to the bank who she was before they issued to her their own ID. Here's a woman that was actually civic-minded enough to be involved in the political process as a committeewoman claiming that she was "intimidated" by the very bureaucracy she played a part in making. What is so intimidating? Why do you not have a state-issued ID in the first place? Whta was the difficulty in "rebuilding an identity"? yada, yada.
If the Dems are arguing that the process is too "intimidating" then doesn't that refute their every bureaucratic impulses in the first place? For Democrats to argue that the very act (voting) that puts in place politicians that put in place the very regulations/policies that are supposed roadblocks to voting is the very definition of hypocrisy.
What is always inconvenient to the Dems is any "disenfranchisement" of voters due to a lack of ID is miniscule compared to the unquestionable disenfranchisement of voters with ID by those people that cannot legally vote either due to age, location, or illegal status.
State laws on voter identification vary widely, with Indiana's and Georgia's considered the most restrictive. Nearly all states require a photo identification when people first register to vote.
So the voter is required to prove intially that they are who they claim to be and thus legal to vote. Are the Dems going to claim even that is too difficult?
The bottomline is the ID is needed to prove, just like a ticket to a professional sports game, that you have the right to access. As of now any state that doesn't require an ID each time they vote is unquestionably allowing illegal votes to be cast. All one needs to do is to know a person (or many more) that you know intially registered but are not voting and show up and "do them a favor" and vote for them proxy. For college students it would be a crapshoot. Be aggressive in registering all your friends to vote (or let motor voter do it for you), inquire non-chalantly whether they are going to vote and if not, go in their stead. Get info on senior citizens that are infirmed and vote for them. Etc, etc, etc.
Ultimately, if this lax standard continues and expands, Pubbies are going to give-up their standard of fair play and start doing some free voting for lazy Dems.