by Joanne Lee
Of the various contentious elements in the 2020 election, the concept of voter fraud has been instilled as a resolute stance of President Donald Trump’s adamant stipulation for a recount in numerous states including Pennsylvania, Michigan, Georgia, Nevada, and Arizona. Throughout the political history of America, claims of a fraudulent system have often been made and executed by the privileged sector of society and those withholding power, in order to concoct favorable results and prosper from a political standpoint. For instance, according to The Guardian, during 19th century New Jersey, Federalist politicians wanted to increase their partisan power and voted multiple times to tip the election results, undermining the principles that allowed women their right to vote. Through little sense of logic and the performance of illicit behavior, New Jersey ended the women’s franchise to vote in 1807. In some cases where ethnic groups and minorities were targeted, these assertions have historically disenfranchised qualified voters to assemble more power, “In 1959, Washington parish, Louisiana, “purged” its voter rolls. Local officials claimed they were merely removing illegally registered names from the rolls. In fact, they purged 85% of the parish’s purge.” The novel disputes in governmental affairs have once again called attention to this controversial matter where one question lingers: are the election results valid? Ensuing in the outcome of this year’s general ballot , the Trump Administration has failed to disclose any form of evidence that points to deceptive behavior. The voting system stems from a critical security procedure used and established by each prospective state. This may entail photo identification such as a driver’s license, or formal documents like bank statements. There is much dissension surrounding the effectiveness of this methodology; one may argue enforcing identification laws will constructively terminate the possibilities of voter fraud and will not detrimentally affect minorities. An example of this particular stance can be seen in ballotpedia.org where Hans von Spakovsky from The Heritage Foundation details,
“Every individual who is eligible to vote should have the opportunity to do so. It is equally important, however, that the votes of eligible voters are not stolen or diluted by a fraudulent or bogus vote cast by an ineligible or imaginary voter. The evidence from academic studies and actual turnout in elections is also overwhelming that--contrary to the shrill claims of opponents---voter ID does not depress the turnout of voters, including minority, poor, and elderly voters.”
An opposing viewpoint assembled by the American Civil Liberties Union alternatively states,
“Voter ID laws deprive many voters of their right to vote, reduce participation, and stand in direct opposition to our country’s trend of including more Americans in the democratic process. Many Americans do not have one of the forms of identification states acceptable for voting. These voters are disproportionately low-income, racial, and ethnic minorities, the elderly, and people with disabilities. Such voters more frequently have difficulty obtaining ID, because they cannot afford or cannot obtain the underlying documents that are a prerequisite to obtaining a government-issued photo ID card.”
This viewpoint illuminates the detriments of Voter ID laws and the potential issues of discrimination and societal inequity that could arise from their implementation. As ongoing events of the election have highlighted the paramount importance of the voter identification process, it is crucial that we evaluate all potential impacts and states of affairs to devise an impartial yet effective technique to discern the credibility of American voters.
Postal ballots are another method of voting upon which Trump has made profuse amounts of claims in order to build and construct his futile fight against the federal government and states through copious lawsuits and demands. Amid the COVID-19 pandemic, this process was used by a large number of citizens to maintain health protocols as advised by the government. However, in Trump’s final debate with his Democratic opponent and now President-elect Joe Biden, he claimed this process to be “manipulative” and systematically exploited to curve the ballot outcome. In review of some specific examples that have been further confuted to show how states have responded to these contentions, BBC News writes: “In New York, nearly 100,000 ballots were re-sent to voters after some names and addresses were printed incorrectly.” Another case stated: “In Michigan, about 400 postal ballots listed the wrong running mate for President Trump - the Libertarian Party’s Jeremy Cohen instead of Mike Pence..the Michigan secretary of state said it had been an error and “impacted voters immediately received an accurate ballot and guidance to ensure their vote counts.”” These pertinent responses to the integral situation at hand suggests that the likelihood of corruption in votes is extremely low, further backed by extensive sources of analytical research. Studies by the Brennan Center reported incident rates of voter fraud were “between 0.0003 percent and 0.0025 percent.” The comparative evidence between eminent professors, researchers, and universities that have administered this data against Trump’s lack of proof to validate his declarations, is a testament to the legibility in the concept of voter fraud itself.
In conclusion, voter fraud remains a controversial topic in politics as proven in both historical context and recent eras. The accumulation of tension and political hostility raises questions as to whether this is a valid controversy or if Trump is declaring his last argument in vain. Should we enforce identification laws? Should we diminish them to ensure social equity? This pivotal moment in American history further highlights the importance of establishing and enforcing a just legislative system. For America, its citizens, and the future we choose, I believe this is a hugely significant matter with long term implications.