Voter rights: less protected than a Christmas cookie
The Justice Department's civil rights division objected to a photo ID requirement for voters claiming that such a law would disenfranchise African-Americans, Hispanics, people of low-income, and college students. The Justice Department and other critics of voter identification are engaging in selective condemnation.
Why is there no outcry against the many other circumstances which demand a photo ID? Try boarding a plane, visiting a corporate office, checking into a doctor's office or hospital, purchasing a gun or a beer, renting an apartment or a car, cashing a check, registering for school, paying by credit card, or picking up mail from FedEx or UPS without one. It seems that we accept the fact that institutions have the right to know you are who you say you are before giving you money, medicine, or mobility.
Photo identification is also required for most government services. A photo ID is a prerequisite for a getting library card, applying for Medicaid and food stamps, getting a marriage license, and entering a federal building, including the Justice Department, where Eric Holder rails against voter identification.
If it is acceptable to require a photo identification to assure that we protect a box of Christmas cookies from getting picked up by the wrong person, why is it not acceptable to protect our most valuable democratic right from fraud?