Sunday, September 23, 2012

Photo ID Needed to Preserve Vote Integrity

Photo ID Needed to Preserve Vote Integrity
Commentary by Sanford D. Horn
September 23, 2012

A number of The Indianapolis Star readers have written letters to the editor extoling the virtues of why asking potential voters for photo identification is tantamount to murdering their cat. In doing so, these readers have proven themselves ignorant not just to the dangers of voter fraud, but the dilution of the very own votes cast by legal voters.

And while the Star has printed an abundance of anti-photo ID letters, supporting letters, such as this, although altered for this site, have been shunned.

Andy Pike of Indianapolis (“Make it convenient for people to exercise right,” is among the myriad readers and writers who still don’t understand the paramount importance of requiring photo ID of legitimate voters.

Such a requirement preserves and protects the sanctity of the votes of those who cast them. If ever there was a case to be made protecting the rights of the honest voter it’s this case documented in Maryland.

Wendy Rosen, a Democrat running in the first congressional district of Maryland, withdrew her candidacy less than two weeks ago when it was discovered she had committed voter fraud. Rosen, registered to vote in both Maryland and Florida, cast ballots in both states since 2006. ( While the matter is under investigation, Rosen’s withdrawal speaks volumes.

Photo ID is required for so many of life’s daily activities from entering a government building, boarding an airplane, writing a check, using a credit card, purchasing alcohol, tobacco or firearms, opening a bank account, signing a lease to rent a home or property, signing mortgage documents to buy a home or a business, and yes, even attending this month’s Democratic National Convention in Charlotte. Where were the cries of hypocrisy in Charlotte from the Democrats’ rank and file or the so-called mainstream liberal media demanding photo ID of its delegations, but eschewing it at polling places across the country?

Millard Tyrone Sprinkles of Fishers is also wrong to say that while is it perfectly OK to expect a photo ID requirement in order to enter the DNC because this is “an age where vigilance is needed against those who would do harm,” when he cannot see the harm being perpetrated by those committing or attempting to commit voter fraud. (“Voter ID laws curtail fundamental freedom,”

Sprinkles then compounds his fallacious argument saying “There has been only a small number of documented cases of voter fraud related to identification.” [Sic] ( That there is even one case of voter fraud is enough to warrant a strictly enforced photo ID law in all 50 states to preserve the integrity of the votes cast by honest, law abiding voters. Should there not be such a provision until there are a dozen documented cases of voter fraud, Mr. Sprinkles? How about waiting until there are 100? Or 1,000? How many diluted legitimate votes should be weakened before common sense comes in to play? Likewise, should the Centers for Disease Control only work on a cure for a life-threatening disease only after 10, 100, or 1,000 people have contracted or died from it?

Indianapolis Star op-ed columnist Dan Carpenter wrote, in opposing voter ID photo requirements as a form of voter suppression, “Given that most eligible voters who lack IDs tend to be poor, elderly or minority, this hurts Democrats.” (“ID facts and false pictures,” September 5, 2012,

The Supreme Court of the United States disagrees with Mr. Carpenter as it ruled there is no hardship in expecting voters to show up to their polling places with appropriate photo ID according to a six to three High Court verdict in April 2008, specifically citing Indiana’s law.

“The universally applicable requirements of Indiana voter-identification law are eminently reasonable. The burden of acquiring, possessing and showing a free photo identification is simply not severe, because it does not ‘even represent a significant increase over the usual burdens of voting,’” wrote Justice Scalia, also for the majority. (“A Picture Worth A Thousand Votes,” 12/25/11,

And with all due respect to Frank H. Werker of Carmel, that he is a veteran possessing a “DD Form 214” (military service record) that is government issue, albeit one lacking a photo, the photo is what protects the integrity of his vote. All other information about being a retiree, a taxpayer and a native of Vincennes is superfluous. (“We served for right to vote without ID,” Sept. 23, 2012, On the other hand, thank you, Mr. Werker, for serving the United States in the Army for three years, including your year-long tour of duty in Vietnam.

Mr. Pike is wrong about voting being a Constitutional right. Despite Amendments XV, XIX, and XXVI, states still have the legal authority to deny the vote to felons and non-citizens attempting or committing voter fraud. The vote is a privilege and a responsibility not to be diminished by fraudulent actors attempting to sully the democratic-republican process.

Mr. Pike is right about one thing – it should be convenient for legal voters to cast their ballots – geographically convenient. All voters should live within walking distance of their polling site – school, church, synagogue, fire station, etc. Polling places should be staffed by volunteers who live in those neighborhoods and recognize most voters.

Remember, “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.” – Ben Franklin (

Sanford D. Horn is a writer and educator living in Westfield, IN.

No comments:

Post a Comment