Persuasive Speech Opposing Voter ID Legislation

Topic: Elections
Words: 879 Pages: 4
Table of Contents

Problem Definition

The problem in question involves two opposing groups of people with different views on the purpose of imposing a voter ID legislation that requires voters to present a form of identification before they can vote. These forms of identification include a valid driver’s license, a state-issued identification card, or military identification cards. Notably, other states also require photo identification of the voter before voting. Protestors of this law argue that many participants lose their ability to vote due to the voter ID legislation, which restricts participation and runs counter to the country’s norm of inclusion for all citizens in the electoral process. They base their argument on the fact that some American citizens lack any of the allowed types of identification documents for voting. Conversely, the anti-voting ID debaters argue that low-income persons, racial minorities, elderly people, and people living with disabilities make up a disproportionately high number of these voters. Owing to the difficulties that such voters experience in obtaining identification, these arguments tend to suggest that the voter ID laws are biased towards this section of US citizens.

The resistance to voter identification legislation is ridiculous because pushing voters to verify their citizenship before voting is not drastic or racist. This nation has been faced with serious concerns about election irregularities over the years, and I believe that voter ID laws are a step toward the right direction of attaining voting integrity. I concur with Limbaugh (2015) that fighting voter ID laws on the basis that they disadvantage minorities is deeply demeaning to minority groups, as it assumes that minority voters are untrustworthy. It is also unreasonable to claim that asking for identification is seen as a way of discriminating against certain groups of people because, occasionally, every US citizen is required to produce proof of citizenship, for instance, in driving, traveling, or even operating bank accounts. If indeed proof of citizenship is meant to set minorities aside, we would not have a minority as drivers or even bank account holders.

Conversely, almost all countries that have citizens electing leaders require voter identification. This begs the question of why the United States should be different or why the mere suggestion of asking for citizenship proof raises such heated arguments. Who are we trying to protect? What are we trying to hide? These are the prevalent questions that come up, and they need to be addressed by critics of the Voter’s ID laws.

The notion that low-income community members cannot afford or obtain the underlying documentation required to get a government-issued ID card is absurd. This is because one would be surprised at how fast the same group of people can manage to get an ID card if they were required to have it to receive a stimulus check. Also, these debaters feel that a notable number of low-class household members are computer illiterate and the law is discriminatory against them. In response to that, the US government serves every citizen equally. It does not mandate that every citizen be computer literate to acquire an identification. In any case, the government sets sufficient measures to ensure that each citizen is assisted fully in getting the deserving documents regardless of age, education level, or any other variable.


The root cause of the problem is the implementation of a law requiring all voters to present an identification document to gain an opportunity to participate in the voting process. This law was created to address the constant problem of voting irregularities witnessed in several general elections. The growing gap between social groups is also another contributor to the growing concern as minority groups feel victimized and discriminated against. Limbaugh (2015) feels that the problem stems from a group that is used to voting irregularities and does not wish to see it end because they will lose their leverage. The fear of being unable to manipulate election results has stirred an uproar from the critics of the voters’ ID legislation opposers.


Change begins at the individual level and it can only happen if you and I take steps towards ramifying existing wrongs. Every person has a right to be heard and seen, and such is the dream for a perfect America that I have in mind. For this reason, I urge you to join this revolution and vote for change in the flawed voting system that should include the voices of every US citizen. How we can achieve that is by signing a digital petition that proposes enforcement of the Voting ID law. Due to modernization and technological advancements, we have the power to create a better world and correct wrongdoings that have been prevalent for decades. You too can be a part of this movement to ensure integrity in the voting process by taking your phone and logging in to the website to sign the petition to pass the Voting Id law. I would like you to wake up tomorrow knowing that through a small process as clicking a button, you were able to contribute to the betterment of this nation. I do not know about you, but knowing that I stood up for the right thing, makes me sleep better at night. So, join hands in enforcing the revolution to make America equal for all.


Limbaugh, D. (2015). Opposition to voter id laws is insulting to minorities. In N. Merino (Ed.), Minorities and the law (pp. 49-52). Greenhaven Press. Web.

Like all the other papers on our website, this essay has been voluntarily submitted by a student to help you become a better professional. If you would like to use this text in your assignment, we insistently ask you to include a proper reference to this page.

If you are the author of this text and prefer to remove it from our Politzilla database, please submit your request here.

The “Win the Whitehouse”: Election Game
"The Arkansas Voter" and Its Development Since the 70s