The outrage over the Supreme court's ruling to allow states to require a photo ID raises some interesting questions.  Why would anyone disagree with this ruling?  Surely anyone with the mental capacity to vote, can arrange to get either a driver's license, or a state id.  With growing accusations from the right and the left about fraud, requiring an ID seems to be a great first step to to avoiding mischief at the ballot box.
The only logical explanation is that voter fraud is widespread, someone knows this, and is willing to pull out all the stops to see that it can continue.
If the fraud was minimal, it wouldn't be worth so much effort to fight the ruling.  Surely the opponents don't expect rational people to believe that it is to great a burden to go have a picture taken.  Almost all of the opposition seems to be coming from the left.  The only logical conclusion is that in some areas, there must be thousands and thousands of illegal votes cast, and these votes are tipping the results.  Those opposing the ruling have a vested interest in perpetuating the fraud. 

I just don't see any other logical reason for the fight.  The oddest and perhaps most disturbing argument is that, "People of color" will be disenfranchised.  Is it just me, or is this one of the most racist statements uttered so far this year?  What is the point of this statement?  Does someone really believe that black people are not capable of getting a drivers license?  Or worse, that black people can't find the BMV?  How could this possibly stop anyone from voting regardless of skin color? 

Those who read my blog regularly know that I'm a big fan of plain old fashioned logic and rational thought.  Well, in this case I think the logic is perfectly clear.  Someone wants to perpetuate the fraud.  There is no other rational answer. 

In a democracy, two things are vital to the survival of the nation, the rule of law, and the sanctity of the vote.  If either of these pillars falls, there are just one of two results possible.  The first is mob rule, overturning real justice. The second is rule by criminals, who have no problem stealing an election. Those on the left and the right would be well advised to study your history a bit.  Both of these scenarios ultimately lead to rule by tyrant.

A thorough and honest investigation in to the voting practices of The United States is long overdue. This should be a bi-partisan effort that spans several years, to cover national elections, at the local level. As a fiscal conservative, I would still be in favor of lofty spending to see that this happens, because as I've said, nothing is more important.   Elections should be monitored in hundreds of cities and towns, absentee voters checked, and comprehensive reports delivered after every election to determine if further action is needed.

The ruling allowing states to require a photo id for voting should have passed without much notice.  The ensuing hand wringing and outrage by some, demands that we look under the covers to see just exactly what they're trying to protect.