The dream of Dr. Martin Luther King, that we should some day become a nation where people are judged by the content of their character, and not by the color of their skin, is closer than ever to becoming true in America.

 Anyone who observes carefully will know that we are not there yet. Just examine the composition of our prison populations, the disparities in employment, wealth, and income, the health statistics, and the irrational lunacy often directed at our President, and one can see that no matter how much progress has been made, the struggle to realize Dr. King's dream continues.

Now we see widespread efforts to restrict voting rights, not by judging people by the color of their skin, but rather by judging the character of who should and should not be allowed to vote. While the stated aim of voter ID legislation is to combat alleged voter fraud, journalist Matthew Vadum, writing at the ironically named "American Thinker", gives the game away by coming out and speaking the unspoken motive that is really behind voter suppression legislation: the poor should not be allowed to vote.

Thanks to the Voting Rights Act of 1965 we have seen the cessation of voting restrictions intended to discriminate against black voters. Today we face a new wave of legislation intended to restrict the rights of legally eligible registered voters to cast their vote.  Those targeted are citizens who choose, for whatever reason, to not carry a photo ID.

Fortunately the first black Attorney General of the United States, Eric Holder, is invoking the Voting Rights Act of 1965 to block  such legislation in South Carolina. 

The National Conference of State Legislatures provides an excellent summary of voter ID laws in the US. Currently 31 states have voter ID requirements, 16 requiring photo ID, and 15 accepting other forms of identification. In 2011 34 states considered legislative action relating to instituting new voter ID laws or strengthening existing laws. In 2011, 47 states either have existing laws or considered measures to establish legislation that restricts access to the polls for those without proper identification.

The charge to pressure state legislatures to pass such voter ID measures is being led by the American Legislative Exchange Council. This is a conservative organization that represents corporate interests by providing legislative templates  to be adopted by states throughout the country. ALEC has been a major contributor to, among other things, the recent wave of tough anti-immigration laws, laws eroding citizen access to the courts, and laws that weaken protection of the environment and the public health.

Any reasonable person might ask: why not make sure the person voting is actually the legally registered voter they claim to be? Certainly this would keep the election system honest and fight against fraud. However, it is an equally legitimate question to ask: is fraud a widespread problem, and would the effect of such laws be to reduce fraud, or to prevent legally eligible and registered voters from casting their vote?

This study of the effect of the voter ID requirements in Indiana, performed by the Washington Institute for the Study of Ethnicity and Race, suggests that the law has a disproportionate effect on the disenfranchisement of low income, low education, and minority voters.

The Brennan Center for Justice at the NYU school of law has produced substantial amounts of research showing that allegations of voter fraud are wildly exaggerated. Just this year in my home state of New Mexico, the Secretary of State, Diana Duran, alleged that she could identify up to 64,000 cases of voter fraud in the State of New Mexico alone. After extensive research and study, only 19 cases of actual illegal votes cast were discovered. The available evidence suggests that voter ID laws are a solution in search of a non-existant problem, and they in fact create the problem of disenfranchising legally entitled voters.

There are many conveniences available to those who carry a photo ID, including ability to open a bank account, ability to board a flight, or the ability to apply for food stamps.  Nonetheless, it has never been a requirement that all Americans carry a photo ID card. Many people choose to opt out of the ID system for religious reasons, because they find the fees expensive, because they wish to protect their privacy, or even in some cases because they fear the government. If we are serious about our democracy, we should not regard voting as a convenience or a privilege; we must defend voting as a right for all citizens.

We may have moved beyond explicit and legally sanctioned discrimination based on skin-color, but is it right that we substitute discrimination based on how we judge the content of people's character?  Shouldn't every citizen have the right to vote, whether they reside in a prison cell, an inner-city rented apartment, a rural farmhouse, an urban penthouse or a sub-urban McMansion? We are all affected by government policies, and prison inmates more so than most. It is no secret that the wealthy use their money to pull the strings of power in favor of their own financial interests. What possible justification could their be to silence the voices of any citizens, regardless of whether you like what they have to say or not?