Voter I.D. Question

[Navy1960]

Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections

“a state violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution whenever it makes the affluence of the voter or payment of any fee an electoral standard. Voter qualifications have no relation to wealth.”

Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Crawdford v. Marion Country Board of Elections

"The relevant burdens here are those imposed on eligible voters who lack photo identification cards that comply with SEA 483.[2] Because Indiana’s cards are free, the inconvenience of going to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, gathering required documents, and posing for a photograph does not qualify as a substantial burden on most voters’ right to vote, or represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting. The severity of the somewhat heavier burden that may be placed on a limited number of persons—e.g., elderly persons born out-of-state, who may have difficulty obtaining a birth certificate—is mitigated by the fact that eligible voters without photo identification may cast provisional ballots that will be counted if they execute the required affidavit at the circuit court clerk’s office. Even assuming that the burden may not be justified as to a few voters, that conclusion is by no means sufficient to establish petitioners’ right to the relief they seek."

Crawford v. Marion County Election Board - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

24th Amendment

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


Okay here is my question, given the court in 2008 ruled that the Indiana standard for Voter ID does not place a burden on the voter because the ID's are Free, if a voter who seek's an ID for the purpose of voting pays any fee's to get that ID, such as costs to get a Birth Certificate, Proof of Citizenship, address, etc. then they are paying a fee to do so, and thus under Harper and the 24th Amendment are they not paying a Poll Tax? If however the entire process were free to those who wished to vote, and those ID's were Free, for example when a person registered to vote and the voter registration card was the picture ID and was free, then that would itself be well within a states rights to require of a voter no matter what the reason. It is a stretch at best to use a "fraud" standard as a sole basis for this standard and to advocate for it simply on the basis that ID's are required for other aspects of life such as cashing a check etc. are baseless in that none of these are protected under the constitution. Yes, a state can set standards for elections as long as they do not conflict with Federal law, and it would in my humble opinion seem that these Voter ID Laws, as long as they require an individual to pay any fee to aquire these ID's are placing a poll tax on those persons for the purpose of voting.

 

[cutter]

The President and the Democrats are against requiring a voter I.D. because it will keep illegal aliens from voting. If obama is going to win in November he needs the illegal alien vote.

 

[BreezeWood]

... that these Voter ID Laws, as long as they require an individual to pay any fee to aquire these ID's are placing a poll tax on those persons for the purpose of voting.

the registration should come complete with a photo ID if one is required to vote.

the Republicans are obviously trying to suppress voting by requiring both to register and also to produce a photo ID that are not both inclusive at the time of registration.

 

[asaratis]

The President and the Democrats are against requiring a voter I.D. because it will keep illegal aliens from voting. If obama is going to win in November he needs the illegal alien vote.

That is the bottom line. It's all about getting re-elected....not about one man, one vote!

 

[onecut39]

Pennsylvania stipulates that it has no evidence of voter fraud, nor will it present any at the trial.

Pennsylvania Voter ID Trial: State Admits There’s No In-Person Voter Fraud | TPMMuckraker

 

[DiamondDave]

The President and the Democrats are against requiring a voter I.D. because it will keep illegal aliens from voting. If obama is going to win in November he needs the illegal alien vote.

That is the bottom line. It's all about getting re-elected....not about one man, one vote!

Make that one eligible citizen, one vote

 

[g5000]

The President and the Democrats are against requiring a voter I.D. because it will keep illegal aliens from voting.

Bullshit. Strawman fallacy.

If obama is going to win in November he needs the illegal alien vote.

Please provide your evidence that illegals swing elections. Thank you.


How many times have I asked for anyone to provide evidence of voter fraud which only Voter ID could prevent or catch? Countless times.

And how many people have provided such evidence? Zero.

How many times have I said Voter ID is a "solution" looking for a problem? Countless times.

Pennsylvania has confirmed this.

Pennsylvania Voter ID Lawsuit Set To Begin As State Concedes It Has No Proof Of In-Person Voter Fraud

In a stipulation agreement signed earlier this month, state officials conceded that they had no evidence of prior in-person voter fraud, or even any reason to believe that such crimes would occur with more frequency if a voter ID law wasn't in effect.

"There have been no investigations or prosecutions of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania; and the parties do not have direct personal knowledge of any such investigations or prosecutions in other states,” the statement reads.

According to the agreement, the state “will not offer any evidence in this action that in-person voter fraud has in fact occurred in Pennsylvania and elsewhere,” nor will it "offer argument or evidence that in-person voter fraud is likely to occur in November 2012 in the absense of the Photo ID law.”

Slam dunk.


Voter ID has one purpose, and one purpose only. To decrease Democratic turnout.

If the only way you can win is to cheat, what does that say about the integrity of your philosophy?

To me, it screams that you suck, big-time.

The rabid bongwater drinkers' call for Voter ID is one of many reasons why I am not voting this year.

And I have always voted the straight GOP ticket. So how ironic is that?

You assholes deserve Obama.

 

[Navy1960]

Because voter fraud is essentially irrational, it is not surprising that no credible evidence suggests a voter fraud epidemic. There is no documented wave or trend of individuals voting multiple times, voting as someone else, or voting despite knowing that they are ineligible. Indeed, evidence from the microscopically scrutinized 2004 gubernatorial election in Washington State actually reveals just the opposite: though voter fraud does happen, it happens approximately 0.0009% of the time. The similarly closely-analyzed 2004 election in Ohio revealed a voter fraud rate of 0.00004%. National Weather Service data shows that Americans are struck and killed by lightning about as often.

http://www.brennancenter.org/page/-/d/download_file_38347.pdf

Perhaps if those people who were to slip through were to vote, then it might be an issue, however take Arizona for example, given the fact we have a pretty large illegal Alien population and if the fraud issue were as pervasive as some say it is, why then would they not vote to their advantage here? I tend to think the statistics are pretty fair in that they represent a system thats fairly fraud free and again I have no issue with ID's , my issue here is that the a person who is made to aquire an ID for the sole purpose of voting , who then has to pay to aquire that ID, is then being made to pay a tax to vote. If that is the case then it violates the constitution as well as existing case law on the subject. It seems to me that if the purpose is to prevent fraud and to ID the voter then its a simple process of putting one's picture on a voter registration card and the issue is done, however when you have states like Texas that will accept a Gun License and not a State University ID such as the University of Texas, then it appears at least on the surface to have more politcal intent than real intent.

 

[StevenC]

Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections

“a state violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution whenever it makes the affluence of the voter or payment of any fee an electoral standard. Voter qualifications have no relation to wealth.”

Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Crawdford v. Marion Country Board of Elections

"The relevant burdens here are those imposed on eligible voters who lack photo identification cards that comply with SEA 483.[2] Because Indiana’s cards are free, the inconvenience of going to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, gathering required documents, and posing for a photograph does not qualify as a substantial burden on most voters’ right to vote, or represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting. The severity of the somewhat heavier burden that may be placed on a limited number of persons—e.g., elderly persons born out-of-state, who may have difficulty obtaining a birth certificate—is mitigated by the fact that eligible voters without photo identification may cast provisional ballots that will be counted if they execute the required affidavit at the circuit court clerk’s office. Even assuming that the burden may not be justified as to a few voters, that conclusion is by no means sufficient to establish petitioners’ right to the relief they seek."

Crawford v. Marion County Election Board - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

24th Amendment

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


Okay here is my question, given the court in 2008 ruled that the Indiana standard for Voter ID does not place a burden on the voter because the ID's are Free, if a voter who seek's an ID for the purpose of voting pays any fee's to get that ID, such as costs to get a Birth Certificate, Proof of Citizenship, address, etc. then they are paying a fee to do so, and thus under Harper and the 24th Amendment are they not paying a Poll Tax? If however the entire process were free to those who wished to vote, and those ID's were Free, for example when a person registered to vote and the voter registration card was the picture ID and was free, then that would itself be well within a states rights to require of a voter no matter what the reason. It is a stretch at best to use a "fraud" standard as a sole basis for this standard and to advocate for it simply on the basis that ID's are required for other aspects of life such as cashing a check etc. are baseless in that none of these are protected under the constitution. Yes, a state can set standards for elections as long as they do not conflict with Federal law, and it would in my humble opinion seem that these Voter ID Laws, as long as they require an individual to pay any fee to aquire these ID's are placing a poll tax on those persons for the purpose of voting.

You already have the answer to your question. I bolded it for you.

 

[g5000]

Here is the state of Pennsylvania's admission there is no justification for Voter ID: http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/ApplewhiteStipulation.pdf

Respondents will not offer any evidence or argument that in person voter fraud is likely to occur in November 2012 in the absence of the Photo ID law.

 

[Oddball]

... that these Voter ID Laws, as long as they require an individual to pay any fee to aquire these ID's are placing a poll tax on those persons for the purpose of voting.

the registration should come complete with a photo ID if one is required to vote.

the Republicans are obviously trying to suppress voting by requiring both to register and also to produce a photo ID that are not both inclusive at the time of registration.

 

[DiamondDave]

The President and the Democrats are against requiring a voter I.D. because it will keep illegal aliens from voting.

Bullshit. Strawman fallacy.

If obama is going to win in November he needs the illegal alien vote.

Please provide your evidence that illegals swing elections. Thank you.


How many times have I asked for anyone to provide evidence of voter fraud which only Voter ID could prevent or catch? Countless times.

And how many people have provided such evidence? Zero.

How many times have I said Voter ID is a "solution" looking for a problem? Countless times.

Pennsylvania has confirmed this.

Pennsylvania Voter ID Lawsuit Set To Begin As State Concedes It Has No Proof Of In-Person Voter Fraud

In a stipulation agreement signed earlier this month, state officials conceded that they had no evidence of prior in-person voter fraud, or even any reason to believe that such crimes would occur with more frequency if a voter ID law wasn't in effect.

"There have been no investigations or prosecutions of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania; and the parties do not have direct personal knowledge of any such investigations or prosecutions in other states,” the statement reads.

According to the agreement, the state “will not offer any evidence in this action that in-person voter fraud has in fact occurred in Pennsylvania and elsewhere,” nor will it "offer argument or evidence that in-person voter fraud is likely to occur in November 2012 in the absense of the Photo ID law.”

Slam dunk.


Voter ID has one purpose, and one purpose only. To decrease Democratic turnout.

If the only way you can win is to cheat, what does that say about the integrity of your philosophy?

To me, it screams that you suck, big-time.

The rabid bongwater drinkers' call for Voter ID is one of many reasons why I am not voting this year.

And I have always voted the straight GOP ticket. So how ironic is that?

You assholes deserve Obama.

Absolute horse shit...

I don't care if someone is a DEM voter, REP voter. GRE voter or votes for the goddamn Looney Tunes character...

It is about one thing and one thing only, which ones like you cannot get thru your thick skulls... ONLY ELIGIBLE CITIZENS VOTING, ONCE AND ONLY ONCE IN AN ELECTION

 

[gallantwarrior]

The President and the Democrats are against requiring a voter I.D. because it will keep illegal aliens from voting.

Bullshit. Strawman fallacy.

If obama is going to win in November he needs the illegal alien vote.

Please provide your evidence that illegals swing elections. Thank you.


How many times have I asked for anyone to provide evidence of voter fraud which only Voter ID could prevent or catch? Countless times.

And how many people have provided such evidence? Zero.

How many times have I said Voter ID is a "solution" looking for a problem? Countless times.

Pennsylvania has confirmed this.

Pennsylvania Voter ID Lawsuit Set To Begin As State Concedes It Has No Proof Of In-Person Voter Fraud

In a stipulation agreement signed earlier this month, state officials conceded that they had no evidence of prior in-person voter fraud, or even any reason to believe that such crimes would occur with more frequency if a voter ID law wasn't in effect.

"There have been no investigations or prosecutions of in-person voter fraud in Pennsylvania; and the parties do not have direct personal knowledge of any such investigations or prosecutions in other states,” the statement reads.

According to the agreement, the state “will not offer any evidence in this action that in-person voter fraud has in fact occurred in Pennsylvania and elsewhere,” nor will it "offer argument or evidence that in-person voter fraud is likely to occur in November 2012 in the absense of the Photo ID law.”

Slam dunk.


Voter ID has one purpose, and one purpose only. To decrease Democratic turnout.

If the only way you can win is to cheat, what does that say about the integrity of your philosophy?

To me, it screams that you suck, big-time.

The rabid bongwater drinkers' call for Voter ID is one of many reasons why I am not voting this year.

And I have always voted the straight GOP ticket. So how ironic is that?

You assholes deserve Obama.

Why is there an apparent assumption that only Democrat voters have these problems with documentation and acquiring ID?

 

[g5000]

Absolute horse shit...

I don't care if someone is a DEM voter, REP voter. GRE voter or votes for the goddamn Looney Tunes character...

It is about one thing and one thing only, which ones like you cannot get thru your thick skulls... ONLY ELIGIBLE CITIZENS VOTING, ONCE AND ONLY ONCE IN AN ELECTION

As I have shown, no one can provide evidence of any voter fraud which only Voter ID can prevent or catch.

The state of Pennsylvania has even admitted this. I put the evidence right in front of your face. So writing in ALL CAPS does not make your claims any truer. They are completely false.

The evidence of your foolishness has been placed right in your face. You now have to slam your fists over your eyes to willfully blind yourself to the facts.


Are you aware that we have had elections regularly for over two centuries WITHOUT Voter ID?

Yeah. Google it and see for yourself!


And yet with over two centuries of elections, and lots of voter fraud cases to choose from, you cannot identify a single one which only Voter ID would prevent or catch!


That should get something through your thick skull, but it doesn't. You drank the bongwater without asking for evidence.

There is no evidence. None. Zilch. Nada.

Read Pennsylvania's admission. Here is the evidence of your gullibility: http://www.aclupa.org/downloads/ApplewhiteStipulation.pdf

 

[Navy1960]

Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections

“a state violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution whenever it makes the affluence of the voter or payment of any fee an electoral standard. Voter qualifications have no relation to wealth.”

Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Crawdford v. Marion Country Board of Elections

"The relevant burdens here are those imposed on eligible voters who lack photo identification cards that comply with SEA 483.[2] Because Indiana’s cards are free, the inconvenience of going to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, gathering required documents, and posing for a photograph does not qualify as a substantial burden on most voters’ right to vote, or represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting. The severity of the somewhat heavier burden that may be placed on a limited number of persons—e.g., elderly persons born out-of-state, who may have difficulty obtaining a birth certificate—is mitigated by the fact that eligible voters without photo identification may cast provisional ballots that will be counted if they execute the required affidavit at the circuit court clerk’s office. Even assuming that the burden may not be justified as to a few voters, that conclusion is by no means sufficient to establish petitioners’ right to the relief they seek."

Crawford v. Marion County Election Board - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

24th Amendment

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


Okay here is my question, given the court in 2008 ruled that the Indiana standard for Voter ID does not place a burden on the voter because the ID's are Free, if a voter who seek's an ID for the purpose of voting pays any fee's to get that ID, such as costs to get a Birth Certificate, Proof of Citizenship, address, etc. then they are paying a fee to do so, and thus under Harper and the 24th Amendment are they not paying a Poll Tax? If however the entire process were free to those who wished to vote, and those ID's were Free, for example when a person registered to vote and the voter registration card was the picture ID and was free, then that would itself be well within a states rights to require of a voter no matter what the reason. It is a stretch at best to use a "fraud" standard as a sole basis for this standard and to advocate for it simply on the basis that ID's are required for other aspects of life such as cashing a check etc. are baseless in that none of these are protected under the constitution. Yes, a state can set standards for elections as long as they do not conflict with Federal law, and it would in my humble opinion seem that these Voter ID Laws, as long as they require an individual to pay any fee to aquire these ID's are placing a poll tax on those persons for the purpose of voting.

You already have the answer to your question. I bolded it for you.

So then the question becomes, does the Indiana standard apply to all states with Voter ID Laws, in that those without Voter ID's may cast a provisional ballot, while Indiana has it seems found a way around the poll tax issue, in that anyone may vote, even those without an ID, those without just need to vote by affidavit or so it appears. However in those states where a person or persons would need to pay to aquire those ID's or for any part of the process to vote the original question still stands, in that there seems to be a poll tax applied if a person has to pay any fee for any reason for the purpose of voting.

 

[StevenC]

Harper v. Virginia Board of Elections

“a state violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution whenever it makes the affluence of the voter or payment of any fee an electoral standard. Voter qualifications have no relation to wealth.”

Harper v. Virginia State Board of Elections - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Crawdford v. Marion Country Board of Elections

"The relevant burdens here are those imposed on eligible voters who lack photo identification cards that comply with SEA 483.[2] Because Indiana’s cards are free, the inconvenience of going to the Bureau of Motor Vehicles, gathering required documents, and posing for a photograph does not qualify as a substantial burden on most voters’ right to vote, or represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting. The severity of the somewhat heavier burden that may be placed on a limited number of persons—e.g., elderly persons born out-of-state, who may have difficulty obtaining a birth certificate—is mitigated by the fact that eligible voters without photo identification may cast provisional ballots that will be counted if they execute the required affidavit at the circuit court clerk’s office. Even assuming that the burden may not be justified as to a few voters, that conclusion is by no means sufficient to establish petitioners’ right to the relief they seek."

Crawford v. Marion County Election Board - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

24th Amendment

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.
Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


Okay here is my question, given the court in 2008 ruled that the Indiana standard for Voter ID does not place a burden on the voter because the ID's are Free, if a voter who seek's an ID for the purpose of voting pays any fee's to get that ID, such as costs to get a Birth Certificate, Proof of Citizenship, address, etc. then they are paying a fee to do so, and thus under Harper and the 24th Amendment are they not paying a Poll Tax? If however the entire process were free to those who wished to vote, and those ID's were Free, for example when a person registered to vote and the voter registration card was the picture ID and was free, then that would itself be well within a states rights to require of a voter no matter what the reason. It is a stretch at best to use a "fraud" standard as a sole basis for this standard and to advocate for it simply on the basis that ID's are required for other aspects of life such as cashing a check etc. are baseless in that none of these are protected under the constitution. Yes, a state can set standards for elections as long as they do not conflict with Federal law, and it would in my humble opinion seem that these Voter ID Laws, as long as they require an individual to pay any fee to aquire these ID's are placing a poll tax on those persons for the purpose of voting.

You already have the answer to your question. I bolded it for you.

So then the question becomes, does the Indiana standard apply to all states with Voter ID Laws, in that those without Voter ID's may cast a provisional ballot, while Indiana has it seems found a way around the poll tax issue, in that anyone may vote, even those without an ID, those without just need to vote by affidavit or so it appears. However in those states where a person or persons would need to pay to aquire those ID's or for any part of the process to vote the original question still stands, in that there seems to be a poll tax applied if a person has to pay any fee for any reason for the purpose of voting.

Yes. So long as they follow precedent there should be no problem.
And you can only make a person pay for a Birth Certifacate or such and not the ID itself.
From what I have seen all Voter ID laws allow voters to get Free ID's.

 

[Oddball]

So then the question becomes, does the Indiana standard apply to all states with Voter ID Laws, in that those without Voter ID's may cast a provisional ballot, while Indiana has it seems found a way around the poll tax issue, in that anyone may vote, even those without an ID, those without just need to vote by affidavit or so it appears. However in those states where a person or persons would need to pay to aquire those ID's or for any part of the process to vote the original question still stands, in that there seems to be a poll tax applied if a person has to pay any fee for any reason for the purpose of voting.

The lame-assed charge that ID is a defacto poll tax is yet another red herring....The ID is free in Indiana, too.

If you do not possess an ID that is acceptable for voting purposes, Public Law 109-2005 requires the BMV to issue an Indiana State ID Card for free.

Secretary of State : Election Division: Obtaining a Photo ID

 

[Navy1960]

So then the question becomes, does the Indiana standard apply to all states with Voter ID Laws, in that those without Voter ID's may cast a provisional ballot, while Indiana has it seems found a way around the poll tax issue, in that anyone may vote, even those without an ID, those without just need to vote by affidavit or so it appears. However in those states where a person or persons would need to pay to aquire those ID's or for any part of the process to vote the original question still stands, in that there seems to be a poll tax applied if a person has to pay any fee for any reason for the purpose of voting.

The lame-assed charge that ID is a defacto poll tax is yet another red herring....The ID is free in Indiana, too.

If you do not possess an ID that is acceptable for voting purposes, Public Law 109-2005 requires the BMV to issue an Indiana State ID Card for free.

Secretary of State : Election Division: Obtaining a Photo ID

How so Oddball, the ID is free, but the cost to aquire the ID is not, how then is that not a poll tax? As I said before Indiana seems to have found a way around this issue by allowing those without to vote with a provisional ballot that must be counted, but existing case law and the constitution makes no distinction on the fee to vote, be it for a ID or the cost one has to pay to get a Birth Certificate to get one. I submit that if the sole purpose of these laws is to prevent fraud then they would be totally free and the voter registration would be the ID, rather than the requirement for one to provide additional documentation at cost. It's pretty clear the number of cases of fraud are so small that this is more a solution in serach of a problem rather than the other way around, and still further had it been such an issue why then was it not an issue in 2000, 2002, 2004,2006, 2008,2010? why now? Taking all the politcal points out of it, the fact remains if a person or persons are required to pay a fee for the sole purpose of voting for any reason, then that is a poll tax, and according to my reading the State of Indiana seems to have made provisions for that with the provisional ballot.

 

[Oddball]

So then the question becomes, does the Indiana standard apply to all states with Voter ID Laws, in that those without Voter ID's may cast a provisional ballot, while Indiana has it seems found a way around the poll tax issue, in that anyone may vote, even those without an ID, those without just need to vote by affidavit or so it appears. However in those states where a person or persons would need to pay to aquire those ID's or for any part of the process to vote the original question still stands, in that there seems to be a poll tax applied if a person has to pay any fee for any reason for the purpose of voting.

The lame-assed charge that ID is a defacto poll tax is yet another red herring....The ID is free in Indiana, too.

If you do not possess an ID that is acceptable for voting purposes, Public Law 109-2005 requires the BMV to issue an Indiana State ID Card for free.

Secretary of State : Election Division: Obtaining a Photo ID

How so Oddball, the ID is free, but the cost to aquire the ID is not, how then is that not a poll tax? As I said before Indiana seems to have found a way around this issue by allowing those without to vote with a provisional ballot that must be counted, but existing case law and the constitution makes no distinction on the fee to vote, be it for a ID or the cost one has to pay to get a Birth Certificate to get one. I submit that if the sole purpose of these laws is to prevent fraud then they would be totally free and the voter registration would be the ID, rather than the requirement for one to provide additional documentation at cost. It's pretty clear the number of cases of fraud are so small that this is more a solution in serach of a problem rather than the other way around, and still further had it been such an issue why then was it not an issue in 2000, 2002, 2004,2006, 2008,2010? why now? Taking all the politcal points out of it, the fact remains if a person or persons are required to pay a fee for the sole purpose of voting for any reason, then that is a poll tax, and according to my reading the State of Indiana seems to have made provisions for that with the provisional ballot.

In most cases, getting to the polls isn't free either.

Do we now try to claim that gasoline, auto insurance, or even bus fare are now defacto poll taxes?

 

[Navy1960]

You already have the answer to your question. I bolded it for you.

So then the question becomes, does the Indiana standard apply to all states with Voter ID Laws, in that those without Voter ID's may cast a provisional ballot, while Indiana has it seems found a way around the poll tax issue, in that anyone may vote, even those without an ID, those without just need to vote by affidavit or so it appears. However in those states where a person or persons would need to pay to aquire those ID's or for any part of the process to vote the original question still stands, in that there seems to be a poll tax applied if a person has to pay any fee for any reason for the purpose of voting.

Yes. So long as they follow precedent there should be no problem.
And you can only make a person pay for a Birth Certifacate or such and not the ID itself.
From what I have seen all Voter ID laws allow voters to get Free ID's.

While I have not read every states new Voter ID Law am aware that more than a few offer free ID's perhaps all of them, however if the cost to aquire those ID's involves paying for the documentation to get them, that seems in my humble opinion to be an issue and a poll tax, for that matter should a person have to pay any fee, for the purpose of voting falls under that. As I stated, according to my Indiana reading, if most states adopted the Indiana standard then it would be a non-issue because even those without ID's would still be able to vote, because they allowed to vote by provisional ballot. I have no issue with what states are an are not allowed to do, within the constitution, but this one seems to be a bit of a stretch in the case of some states.