California voter ID isn’t racist — it’s the major game changer we need to bring about real political change

Voter ID could change politics in California and across the nation.

For decades, Democratic Party politicians have insisted — without evidence — that voter ID is racist, and unnecessary.

They kept saying it, even after the Supreme Court noted in 2008 that opponents of voter ID could not find one person who was deterred from voting because of it.

That is because the Democratic Party turnout operation relies on not having to check ID — at least not too carefully.

In California, Democrats have relied on vote-by-mail and “ballot harvesting” — a system where party activists can turn in unlimited numbers of ballots for other people.

Theoretically, these ballots have to be verified by machines that compare signatures on the envelopes to those on the voter rolls. But with millions of ballots to count, the standards for matching are lax.

The new proposed voter ID system would keep the convenience of mail-in-ballots, but require voters to verify their ballots using the last four digits on a government ID.

That is a political game-changer that would make races across California more competitive.

California will remain a “blue” state, even after voter ID.

What many Republicans call the “margin of fraud” is probably not enough to cover the gap between the parties in most statewide races.

But Republicans who have given up voting because they have lost faith in the system may return to the polls once they trust the process.

In close congressional races, or tight contests for state and local office, that means voter ID could make a decisive difference.

The effect of voter ID in California would ripple across the nation.

Thirty-six states already require voters to present some form of ID when arriving at the polls.

The others are almost all Democrat-run states: Oregon, Minnesota, Illinois, New York, Massachusetts — to name a few.

If California voters — the largest and most reliably liberal electorate in the nation — choose voter ID, it will become difficult to argue against it elsewhere.

Polling data shows that voter ID is supported by the overwhelming majority of voters, including Democrats themselves. Minority voters also support the practice.

The most vociferous opposition comes from Democrats who hold public office — which naturally prompts questions about whether they believe they have something to hide.

If they truly had faith in the process that elected them, then they should not fear adding security and transparency to that process.

Democratic Party leaders cling to the fiction that voter ID acts to suppress the votes of minorities, the poor, and the elderly, whom they say struggle to obtain government ID.

That is not true. And if it were, it would be a damning indictment of the bad governance of Democrat-run states. It should not be difficult to help ordinary people obtain ID.

Voter ID is the norm in democracies around the world — even in poor Third World countries in Asia and Africa.

It cannot be “racist” to adopt what is common practice in, for example, post-apartheid South Africa.

Voter ID exists to reduce the possibility of fraud. That, in turn, increases public confidence in elections and their results.

That is good, whether you believe there is widespread voter fraud in California or not.

Those who suspect fraud point to the fact that some voters receive multiple mail-in ballots, or that it is legal to hand in ballots for other people.

They point to recent exposés by citizen journalists like Bennie Johnson, who traced voter registrations to parking lots and other ineligible addresses.

They also note that California does a poor job of removing voters from the rolls when the move, or after they die.

Those who defend the current system argue that there are relatively few documented cases of voter fraud — only a handful of convictions, hardly enough to turn most elections.

But whatever you believe, voter ID increases public trust in democracy.

That may be partly why turnout has increased among minorities in those jurisdictions that have adopted it.

It could also be that minority voters turn out in greater numbers precisely because they have been told by Democrats that voter ID will disenfranchise them, and they are determined to fight it.

But whatever the reason, voter ID has not been “Jim Crow 2.0,” as Democrats continue to claim.

It motivates more Americans to vote. That has always been the goal, and it is a worthy one.

Joel Pollak is the opinion editor of the California Post.