I follow a number of twitter users who have been following the recent Ohio bill to reduce barriers to entry — to the voting booth. More specifically, a bill was proposed that required a valid form of Ohio identification in order to vote… a decision that “sparked outrage from voting rights groups, unions, the League of Women Voters of Ohio, [and] the Ohio Democratic Party”.
I don’t have a strong opinion either way about the potential bill, although I certainly don’t see how such a bill would cause any serious harm to our democratic process. But I had not thought much more about it until I read a piece by James Taranto in the Wall Street Journal. Here is the relevant bit:
[T]these days there is a good chance you will be asked for identification when you check into a hotel. You need ID to board an airplane or to drive a car. Recently we visited a doctor whose office is in a hospital. Just to enter the premises, we needed to present ID to a security guard.
If black people have trouble producing identification, how come nobody ever claims that these requirements are discriminatory?
Another important aspect of civil rights is equal employment opportunity. Under the 1986 immigration law, when you are hired for a job, you are required to provide your employer with documents proving both your identity and your citizenship or legal residency. How come nobody ever claims these requirements discriminate against blacks?
Isn’t that a fair question? How come nobody ever claims ID verification is discriminatory in any other context? But perhaps all this discussion about discrimination is really to miss the bigger point: who out there honestly thinks Democrat politicians would be so engaged about this issue if everyone without a photo ID leaned Republican? Right?
