Voter IDs: Preservation of Democracy or Just Another Hurdle for Folks to Vote?

   Elections are right around the corner. But, before Virginia voters head to the polls on November 4th, they must be sure to have the proper form of identification in tow. This will be the first election with the new voter identification law in place, and State Board of Elections reports 198,000 registered voters in Virginia do not own a driver's license. The debate surrounding the new law has mostly fallen along party lines, and the two competing arguments hinge on what factors citizens might consider when weighing the costs and benefits of going to the polls. Democrats argue that the voter identification law creates additional barriers to democratic participation, particularly for the elderly and minority individuals who are less likely to have a government issued forms of identification. While Republicans contend that voter identification is necessary to prevent voter fraud.
   The Democrats' perspective is in-keeping with Johnson's rational voter theory. It is unlikely that a voter's time will be measured at an infinitesimally low value or that the outcome differential will be very large. It is even more improbable that an individual will cast the deciding ballot. And so, for Democrats, it follows that any additional costs to voting might overwhelm the marginal benefit for its rational constituents. Even "misinformation...just a perception about what the law indicates" poses an additional cost for voters to learn what the law actually means. To minimize such costs, Democrats have been calling citizens and initiating direct voter contact to make sure that they understand student IDs from Virginia institutions and passports will also be considered valid forms of voter identification at the polls.  
   On the other hand, Republicans, such as Garren Shipley, argue that the minimal burden of identification is well worth "the certainty that comes with knowing that the person who shows up at the poll is who they say they are". Republicans believe that each act of voter fraud is a serious crime because it "disenfranchises someones vote that was cast legally". In the last election, 160 people voted in both Maryland and Virginia. In sheer numbers, voter fraud does not appear to threaten our representative democracy. However, the Republican argument takes into account the marginal benefits voters derive from simply being good citizens. These marginal benefits disappear if voters lose trust in the voting institution. The logic follows that voter identification is worth the additional cost to citizens because of the larger benefit that citizens derive from being able to trust in democratic institutions.