Voting Requirements in the United States

The talk about voting requirements in the United States, significant reference is given to democracy. In itself, democracy emphasizes on the necessity of voting. However, dean Searcy (2011) reveals that voting rights do not have clear constitutional protections as other democratic rights have. Even though it would seem logical to strengthen the voting rights of the people through the constitution, the aspect of considering the process as a right can be controversial. In the light of the identified concerns, the aspect of voting requirements should be assessed from the answerability or accountability of individuals for something within their control and management. 

I. When is it ok for the government to disregard the constitution and impede on our right to vote? 

The Voting and Election Laws (2018) website provides that a number of federal laws that have been passed over the years to provide Americans with the protection they need have made it easier for them exercise this right. The different legislations include the Civil Rights Acts, Voting Rights Act of 1965, Voting Accessibility for the Elderly and Handicapped Act of 1984, and the Military and Overseas Voting Empowerment (MOVE) Act of 2009, among others. Even though the government can use the constitution to resolve some of the issues that might arise in relation to the laws that can limit people from voting, the government can use the same system to impede on the people’s right to vote. 

It would be necessary for the government to disregard the constitution to impede on the right to vote. One of the reasons for this claim could be related to the aspect of priming for votes. According to Pryor (2019), priming refers to the ability of polling locations to influence the decisions made by individuals. In this regard, the process occurs subconsciously. It is based on the ideas presented or objects that people come across (Pryor, 2019). For instance, even though the constitution provides people with a number of human rights and freedoms, most of the states prohibit politicians from campaigning within 100 feet where polling occurs. Other laws prohibit individuals from wearing campaign attire while voting. Even though such laws infringe on rights and freedoms of the population, they prevent elements such as vote priming. 

Regardless of the need for government to disregard the constitution and infringe on people’s right to vote, the infringement might can serve as contextual primes. In this case, the strict enforcement of these laws, particularly those discussed above, can force people to develop attitudes that might inhibit their freedom to vote without being manipulated. Priming can also occur in settings that differ from the polling station setting. For instance, individuals can be manipulated to vote for their candidate based on religious influences. The bias created in such situation call for the need for the government to put in place mechanisms, some of which might be infringing on peoples freedoms, thereby impeding their right to vote. 

II. Voter suppression and how voting laws hinder our nation’s young people from voting 

Federal election laws are essential for protecting the election process. The laws are put in place to enhance voter responsibility, even though some people might argue that others might use the aspect of being responsible in voting as a factor that would create irresponsibility. This can be one of the reasons for arguing that voter suppression hinders people from voting. The same is true for some of the laws developed, which fundamentally affect the young American voters. Politicians and interested parties use voter suppression in their favor. Voter suppression is a strategy used by the identified entities to influence the election outcomes (Voting and Election Laws, 2018). The strategy is used to discourage particular groups of individuals from voting, which primarily occurs during the campaign periods. The strategies focus on altering the behavior of the electorate, primarily through changing their opinions regarding a given candidate. 

Some laws can hinder young people from voting. The voting laws, primarily those related to the registration process can affect the voter turnout of young people. The voting laws encourage disenfranchisement. As Searcy (2011) indicates, things that make it difficult for young people to participate in the voting process include the voter registration laws. Other barriers that a number of the would-be-voters face relates to the voter ID laws. Some of the laws in place, such as the law that discourages the use of out-of-state driver’s license to vote prevent a considerable number of young people from participating in the voting process. Among other laws, this law can be regarded as one that hinders the young people from voting, particularly the students studying in different states. 

III. Laws are hindering large groups of people across the country from voting and making it very hard or impossible for these groups to vote. 

In spite of the introduction of laws meant to reduce voting fraud, the new laws have done more harm than good for the society. Armstrong (2016) indicates that the new laws have exacerbated the problems that were experienced in previous elections. Instead of increasing the access to the voting process for the voters, the laws have created additional barriers. For instance, the voter ID law that requires photo identification can be identified as a restrictive law that creates identification issues, as a number of groups might not be able to possess these requirements. Some of the groups affected by this law include the elderly, the student population, individuals with disabilities, Latinos, and other groups, including the low-income voters (Armstrong, 2016). With such laws in place, voter apathy is likely to become a big issue in the future. 

Even though the intention of passing the laws was backed-up by reasonable reasons, which included the protection of the integrity of the votes and the voting problems, legislators did not resolve the actual problems faced by burden voters. The new voting laws, in addition to the lack of proper preparation for the implementation of the same, have made it difficult for different groups of people to get the voting opportunity. Instead of making the process easier for people, the laws have increased the confusion and brought about different problems that voters experience during the Election Day. Additionally, the laws have reduced the participation of individuals in the election. In this case, the laws have reduced the voting opportunities for early voting, which could be considered as the new agenda of the lawmakers. The reduced opportunities for early voting have increased polling congestion, as people flock polling stations and are forced to spend a considerable amount of time to participate in the voting process. 

IV. Current requirements in my state to vote 

In my state, Arkansas, voting policies are enacted as well as enforced as the state level. The policies are inclusive of early voting mechanisms, the requirements for voter identification, registration systems implemented through online voter systems. The state dictates the conditions in which the residents of Arkansas can cast their ballot. The fundamental requirement for an individual to vote in Arkansas, he or she should be a United States’ citizen. The voters should complete their registration process 30 days before the election that the voter wishes to participate. In Arkansas, citizens can register to vote through their email account or at designated accounts provided for by the state. Contrary to other states, online registration is not possible in the state of Arkansas. The voter identification of the state follow the constitutional amendments. In this case, voters have to provide their photo identification in the polling station for voting purposes. Arkansas is among the 17 states that follow this rule. 

Voters in the state are allowed to vote absentee in an election process, provided that they cannot make it to the polling centers during the material day. The state has few provisions that allow absentee election, which include the physical inability of the electorate. Other reasons that can permit absentee voting include the provision that the voter is in the armed forces, an American citizen that is living in another country on a temporary basis, and one that will not be able to be in his or her designated polling location on the day of the election process. In terms of early voting, the state does not allow excuses for early voting. In this case, the state 

V. Should felons be allowed to vote? 

In a considerable number of states, including the state of Arkansas, convicted felons can only receive their voting rights after the completion of their sentences (Voting in Arkansas, n.d.). Even though some valid reasons can be provided to indicate that felons should not be allowed to vote, it is possible to posit that it is their right as American citizens, and should be afforded the right. One of the reasons against allowing felons to vote is the idea that they have violated the laws of the land, and should not be part of a society that strictly adheres to the law. People supporting this idea as a factor that can reduce crime rates can consider removing their voting rights. 

This argument can be regarded as punitive since voting cannot be regarded as a privilege. It is the right of every citizen. Conversely, the objective of a considerable number of punishments is to reform felons to ensuring they comply with the law once released from the correctional facilities. In this light, disallowing them from voting can be a factor that can enhance their disenfranchisement, consequently alienating them from other Americans, which might not be an ideal approach to upholding the rights of an American citizen. Denying them the right to vote can also affect the electoral process negatively, consequently undermining the legitimacy of a democracy. Through the permanent disenfranchising of felons, an individual could argue that the government receives incentives for using the criminal justice system to gain politically. These reasons are sufficient for claiming that felons should be allowed to vote, as it is their constitutional right. 

References 

Armstrong, S. (Ed.), Election Protection and Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. (2016). The Broken US Voting System Is an Assault on Voting Rights. In At Issue . Voter Fraud. Farmington Hills, MI: Greenhaven Press. (Reprinted from Our Broken Voting System and How to Repair It, 2013) Retrieved from http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/EJ3010620225/OVIC?u=ar_a_oc&sid=OVIC&xid=f89a25fc 

Power-Drutis, T. (2019). The Voting Rights Act Prevents Voter Suppression. In Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection. Detroit, MI: Gale. (Reprinted from It’s Time to Restore and Strengthen the Voting Rights Act, Yes! Magazine, 2017, August 10) Retrieved from http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/DDVMWH115660151/OVIC?u=ar_a_oc&sid=OVIC&xid=2b01c85f 

Pryor, B. (2019). It’s Time to Modernize the Way Americans Vote. In Opposing Viewpoints Online Collection. Detroit, MI: Gale. (Reprinted from Why it’s time to end in-person voting for good, The Conversation, 2016, February 25) Retrieved from https://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/BJPYDY094783948/OVIC?u=ar_a_oc&sid=OVIC&xid=e7aa91fd 

Searcy, D. (2011, April 19). Voting: A right, a privilege, or a responsibility? Retrieved May 01, 2019, from https://www.fairvote.org/voting-a-right-a-privilege-or-a-responsibility 

Voting in Arkansas. (n.d.). Retrieved May 01,2019, from https://ballotpedia.org/Voting_in_Arkansas 

Voting and Election Laws. (2018, October 31). Retrieved May 1, 2019, from https://www.usa.gov/voting-laws 

What Does the US Constitution Say about Voting and Punishment? (2015, September 21). Retrieved May 01, 2019, from https://felonvoting.procon.org/view.answers.php?questionID=000649<>?H01