The voter identification bill proposed through the Iowa Legislature may seem at first to be one of great intentions. I for one was initially in complete support of the bill. If voting is a right of the citizenry, then why should fraudulent activity impinge upon that right, and henceforth eliminate votes through one-to-one cancellation? After all, it is our duty as citizens to protect our voting rights and mitigate the possibility of fraud.

After researching the issue, however, I found that the matter isn’t as innocuous as I had formerly thought. I changed my position because I found that there is no prevalence of voter fraud. It is a fabricated reality.

If voter fraud were skewing the results of elections, then I would most definitely be in support of a “cleaner” voting process. However, statistical evidence is to the contrary.

The National Republican Lawyers Association released a report last December documenting all cases of voter fraud over the course of the last decade. There were 311 cases of voter fraud, with citations dating back to 1997. To place that in perspective, a total of 131 million citizens voted in the 2008 elections alone.

In Ohio, a survey from 2002 and 2004 found that out of 9,078,728 votes cast there were 4 instances of voter fraud. In addition, South Carolina, Kansas, Texas and Tennessee have each reported fewer than 10 cases of voter fraud over the past five years, before they integrated voter identification laws.

An investigation performed by the Justice Department examined fraudulent activity from 2002 to 2007. They did not prosecute a single person for impersonating an eligible voter. During this time, the Justice Department found that out of 300 million people voting, federal prosecutors convicted only 86 people.

There are 31 states that already have a voter identification law, despite the absence of prevailing fraud. Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz introduced a bipartisan bill that, if passed, would make Iowa the 32nd. Still, Schultz even stated he “didn’t know how common voter fraud in Iowa was, but it is still important to prevent potential loopholes.”

It seems we are making a hasty assumption of voters without any significant evidence to reveal voter fraud. As of now, the bill is too strenuous and unnecessary. Before continuing, we need a more thorough investigation of voter fraud. As of now, the voter identification laws imply we fear the unknown, an indication of our trust in voters, or lack thereof.

It is my belief that these laws are purely political maneuvering — attempts at diminishing a large voter base that trends to the left. A great example is a Texas law allowing concealed gun licenses to be used as a form of identification while not allowing student identification cards to be used as a valid ID. Gun owners are traditionally conservative while college students are traditionally liberal.

Still, some states do allow student IDs, such as in Wisconsin. However, the IDs must have a picture and a signature of the student and must expire no later than two years after issuance. Most student IDs, such as the ones we use here at ISU, do not have signatures on them. This mandate requires Wisconsin universities to issue new ID cards to their students, which costs the colleges and students even more money.

Why are we forcing voters to jump through hoops just to exercise their right to vote? This is egregious disenfranchisement. For instance, according to the Brennan Center for Justice at the NYU School of Law, if every state passes photo identification laws, approximately 3.2 million citizens would be directly affected. Of that 3.2 million, approximately 11 percent do not have state-issued photo IDs.

But this shouldn’t be a problem, as states offer free IDs to those who don’t already have them, right? Yes, but in order to receive this free identification card, voters must provide secondary sources of identification, such as their birth certificate. Birth certificate requests alone can cost anywhere from $20 to $50 in some states. This is a rather unnecessary imposition and is akin to Post-Reconstruction era poll taxes, which sought to eliminate Black Americans from voting.

Once again, must we force voters to jump through hoops just so they may cast their vote? What happens to the poor, the minorities, students, and the old and disabled who are at a significant disadvantage? While passing this bill may protect some voters from an invisible monster, it has the potential to disenfranchise others. It discourages voter fraud but, in so doing, discourages voting.

Voting is the most fundamental function of our republic. It is truly the purist way for us to exercise our rights as citizens. The acts of abridging and disenfranchising violate the 24th and 25th Amendments. Voter identification laws have the potential to contravene these amendments. We must not enact such laws until we gather significant evidence to warrant the protection of our rights from those who seek to deter it.