For most people, presenting a photo ID isn’t a big problem. Between driver’s licenses, passports… For most people, presenting a photo ID isn’t a big problem. Between driver’s licenses, passports and student or government ID cards, it seems like almost everyone has at least one card, if not several cards, with his name and picture on it. So the fact that a number of groups, including the ACLU and the NAACP National Voter Fund, are protesting a bill that would require voters to show a photo ID every time they vote might at first seem strange. But it is a big departure from current Pennsylvania law, which only requires that a potential voter identify himself the first time he votes. Critics of the bill say that it would ‘infringe on the voting rights of Pennsylvanians … including elderly, low-income, disabled and minority citizens who often do not possess these types of identification.’ And it is true that some people can have a difficult time acquiring government ID cards, most of which require applicants to provide both proof of residence and proof of citizenship. So if a person didn’t have a copy of his birth certificate or couldn’t provide some proof of residency, he could easily be barred from applying for government ID and thus barred from voting in elections. Considering the importance of the ideal of democracy in the United States, the Senate bill suddenly takes on a highly discriminatory tone. But we have to consider in this argument that the bill intends to secure the institution of voting from fraud and unlawful tampering. To achieve that end, it would be necessary to make it a little bit more difficult to vote. After all, if the process is made too easy, people looking to cheat the system wouldn’t have any difficulty doing just that. This bill has the same goals in mind that Allegheny County did when it audited the touchscreen voting machines before the most recent presidential election. It was a security measure, and to that end it had to make sure that the machines and the process of using them were secure. The Pennsylvania Senate bill would achieve the same thing, only instead of auditing the machines themselves, the bill could be thought of as a way to audit the voters. Every person presenting himself to vote would have to present identification, and the election officers on duty at the polling place would examine the ID and sign an affidavit to say they’d done it. This process may seem byzantine and overly complicated, especially for people who have voted in the same polling place for a long period of time ‘mdash; or for those who can’t meet the necessary requirements. But in the interest of promoting security and fair elections, a little bit of compromise is not only necessary but should be expected. In the end, it is a shame that some people might be left out of participating in elections simply because they can’t provide enough identification to verify who they say they are. But if more reliable election returns are provided as a result, it might be a sacrifice worth making.