Reply #145: the issue is cost/accessibility, and oversight to prevent abuse

[rman]

Would you pay $97 to vote?
http://www.commonblog.com/story/2006/9/18/15137/4369

<snips>

On Wednesday, the U.S. House will vote on HR 4844, the Ehlers/Hyde bill, which requires all voters to show a photo ID that must also include proof of citizenship.

Ok, pull out your driver's license. Does it say, "This ID certifies that the holder is a U.S. citizen"? Unlikely. Based on preliminary research, we think that there are only three states--Alabama, Arizona, and Wyoming--that offer citizenship-verified drivers' licenses.

If you're not from one of those states, you'll need a passport in order to vote. That'll cost you $97 and six weeks of waiting, unless you want to pay more to expedite the process.

Of course, if the 75 percent of eligible voters who don't currently have a passport decide that they do indeed want to vote, the waiting time could increase significantly. Six weeks could become six months.

Does this make sense? Of course not. That's why we're urging all Common Cause members and friends to call their congressional representatives and ask them to vote against HR 4844. To find your House representative, go to http://wwwcommoncause.org/FindElectedOfficials .

1. It's a blatantly partisan attempt to limit the ability of some groups of voters to cast a ballot. No rigging of the rules allowed!
2. It places a burden on certain groups of voters--elderly, minority, poor, rural, and urban--and that's unfair.

3. Forcing voters to buy a passport at $97 is a de facto poll tax.

Please call today and ask your representative to vote against HR 4844.