I cannot speak for all Democrats, liberals, or progressives on this subject. For my part, however, I would agree that the states have the right to set up any requirement for voting that they want to, as long as it is not prohibited by the Constitution.

What I, and others, I assume, object to is the thin veil of justification for the rush to put this requirement in place.

I have seen results of research on voter fraud and have found no statistical evidence that would justify spending millions of dollars to "preserve our democracy" from that supposed menace.

Have there been instances of voter fraud? Of course. Have there been enough such cases to sway the outcome of a local election? Perhaps, in a very small jurisdiction where a few votes can make a difference in the outcome.

Could voter fraud at current levels sway the outcome of a presidential election? Not very likely.

Could a phony photo ID be obtained if one were intent on voting fraudulently and/or multiple times? Absolutely! (Just ask the UMW students who were caught recently with Chinese-made photo IDs.)

Could, however, a new voter ID requirement in certain key states that would disproportionately affect those at the lower end of the income spectrum--Democrat Party-leaning segments of the population--affect the outcome of a presidential election? Quite possibly.

Why, then, are the Republican-dominated legislatures in several states bent on initiating new photo ID requirements (among other vote-suppression strategies, e.g., "list purging")?

Is there a sudden need to protect our republic from an epidemic of voter fraud? Or is there a sudden need to stack the deck in what might be a close race?

Dale Brown

Spotsylvania