Goodbye to the Undue Burden Voter ID argument
With the passage of the ObamaCare Act, health insurance has become an obligation. Also, of importance is that health insurance has also become a "right."
We have learned ad nauseam the difficulties involved in engaging the system and acquire the health insurance. Compare and contrast this to the effort required to obtain a state-issued identification card for voting purposes.
Voter IDs can take on many different forms from drivers license to just a simple state-issued photo ID. It is said to obtain one is a burden on the poor and minorities. If the application for a state photo ID is a burden, then what is the ObamaCare signup procedure for acquiring the right to health insurance?
Despite the Supreme Court ruling, Eric Holder seems to be running his own country. He still believes that a voter ID is a method for racially filtering people from the voting rolls. Lost on him are the facts, and lost are the comparisons to insurance enrollment.
No longer can Holder point to the purported undue burdens of voter ID acquisition when the mother of all undue burdens has been served up by the Obama administration. If help lines and community organizers can assist people in signing up for ObamaCare, why not voter ID? Some states already will assist over the phone and send the ID via the U.S. Postal Service. The "victim" of such a burden never leaves his chair.
Lets look at some demographics.
There are more poor whites in this country than poor blacks. According to the Census, 11.6 of whites are in the poverty category, 25.8 % of blacks. That gives us 25,659 million poor whites as opposed to 9,472 million poor blacks.
We are then left with these questions for Mr. Holder. What is a "burden" in today's world? And, is voter ID really a racial issue? I would venture that a true burden, in today's world, is more akin to submitting unredacted documents to Daryl Issa.