Voter ID seen as a poll tax

Re “Voter ID law heads to Supreme Court,” Jan. 7

This article notes that the Supreme Court struck down the poll tax in the 1960s. It neglects to mention that the 24th Amendment of the Constitution states that the right to vote “shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.” If a registered voter has no driver’s license or passport, does not the requirement that he or she purchase a photo ID in order to cast a ballot violate this provision?

Tom Morton

Riverside

Re “Rechecking voter ID,” editorial, Jan. 8

What is wrong with a government-issued photo-identification that ensures the prevention of noncitizens from being involved in the election process?

Two arguments against it are that evidence is thin and proof of voter fraud is not justified. I guess that means if there are no criminal convictions there is no proof. Criminal convictions in most states are given low priority because of the costs involved and political pressure against it.

I’ve never been asked for proof, and I doubt that I’m the only one. What if applying for a major credit card was as easy as voting in a election? It’s ironic that it requires far more proof to apply for credit than it does to vote.

Clyde Feldman

Sherman Oaks

Nowhere in your editorial do you mention the citizen’s responsibility to follow the law. Because one is low income does not mean he is exempt from responsibility. Nor does it mean that the state should impose the “poll tax of photo ID” on individuals for whom this would create an undue burden. Perhaps the answer would be for the state to provide this ID at no cost.

Most of us want to be assured that our votes are valued. The present system of no ID required invites fraud and cheapens our votes. Any poll worker can tell you there is fraud going on at the polls, and they are powerless to do a thing about it.

Maureen Ardron

Yorba Linda