Twenty Fourth Amendment- Protection From Poll Taxes

Section 1. The right of citizens of the United States to vote in any primary or other election for President or Vice President, for electors for President or Vice President, or for Senator or Representative in Congress, shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or any State by reason of failure to pay any poll tax or other tax.

Section 2. The Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation.


In my opinion, the twenty fourth amendment continues what was started in the fifteenth amendment. After the passage of the fifteenth amendment people were still reluctant to give everyone equal rights. It seems as though its passage was premature to the thinking of the people and therefore they fought to get around the rule. To this day we are still fighting for equality. The twenty fourth amendment continues the fight that is still going on today. By eliminating poll and other taxes for voting, our Constitution took one more step towards eliminating voter discrimination.





My Opinion: I chose this video because it introduces a new kind of poll tax. I agree with Rachel in that a tax to vote does not have to be the actual payment of money but it can be a forfeiture of time as well. We live in a society where time is money. I don't think that this is something that can be fix by an amendment to the Constitution or a new law passed. I believe that it can only be stopped by better planning. There is no reason why someone should not get to vote because they cannot afford to stand in a line for six hours. When I voted in 2008 I did not have to wait at all. I walked in, filled out my ballot and left. But there were many election workers standing around doing nothing. It seems as though the distribution of workers should be spread out enough that there are not too many in slow areas and there are plenty in the more populated areas. There is no doubt in my mind that long voting lines are a form of poll tax and need to be addressed.



Texas Senate Sharply Debates Voter ID Bill
By: Terrence Stutz
The Dallas Morning News
March 11, 2009

Democratic and Republican senators skirmished Tuesday over legislation that would require Texans to show a photo ID before voting – but the debate was mainly for show, as the measure was expected to win approval.

From the moment the Senate convened Tuesday morning to consider the GOP-backed voter ID bill, it was obvious that any important votes would wind up 19-12, the exact partisan split in the chamber.

That was the tally on the first vote as senators decided to begin a public hearing on the issue over objections from Democrats.

Republicans – reaching back to Tammany Hall, the Pendergast machine and Lyndon Johnson's 1948 U.S. Senate race – said the threat of voter fraud is present everywhere, including Texas. The only way to prevent it, they insisted, is to require voters to prove their identity.

Democrats, on the other hand, contended there is no evidence of voter fraud in Texas and warned that requiring voters to produce a photo ID will discourage voting by senior citizens, the disabled and lower-income residents.

Democratic Caucus Chairwoman Leticia Van de Putte of San Antonio cited a study indicating that about 1 million of the state's 13.5 million registered voters lack a photo ID and would be harmed by the proposal.

"This is a recipe for disaster," she told other senators. "It threatens the voting rights of seniors and lower-income Texans."

Van de Putte said the move to pass a voter ID bill "is not about voter fraud. There is no voter fraud. This is about voter suppression."

But Sen. Troy Fraser, R-Horseshoe Bay, author of the bill, said there are numerous instances of voter fraud in the U.S. and Texas – dating to the Tammany Hall and Pendergast political machines in New York and Kansas City, Mo., as well as LBJ's questionable win in the 1948 U.S. Senate race in Texas.

"Voter fraud not only is alive and well in the U.S., but also alive and well in Texas," he said, arguing the "danger of voter fraud threatens the integrity of the entire electoral process."

Fraser pointed to voter ID laws in Indiana and Georgia that he said helped boost voter turnout in those states. "It actually increased voter turnout because it increased voter confidence," he said.

His legislation would require Texans to show, with their voting card, either one photo ID, such as a driver's license, or two non-photo IDs, such as a birth certificate and a bank statement. A voter could request a state photo ID free of charge.

Senators from both parties spent hours buttressing their arguments on Tuesday, sharply quizzing witnesses whom they disagreed with and helping friendly witnesses with questions supporting their testimony.

Before the hearing began, Democrats raised several parliamentary objections in an effort to postpone the proceedings. But they were overruled on every challenge by Senate President Pro Tempore Robert Duncan, R-Lubbock.

Senate passage of the measure was assured during the first week of the legislative session in January, when Republican senators pushed through a change in rules that exempted the bill from the so-called two-thirds requirement. Under that rule, no bill can come up for debate unless two-thirds of Senate members agree – a provision that allowed Democrats to kill the proposal two years ago.

Senate Democrats sought to question Attorney General Greg Abbott on the $1.4 million his office spent investigating voter fraud – without finding a single case where someone tried to impersonate an eligible voter at a polling place.

Sen. Eliot Shapleigh, D-El Paso, said he wanted to know why all 13 voter fraud indictments returned by the Republican attorney general involved Democrats and most involved minorities.

But the attorney general declined to appear at the hearing, and his decision was supported by Duncan, who said the attorney general may be called on to defend the legislation in court.

The first expert witness for the Republicans was Hans von Spakovsky of the conservative Heritage Foundation, a former federal election commissioner, who pointed to increased turnout after voter ID laws were adopted in Indiana and Georgia.

But Democrats contended that voter turnout jumped in those states because of Barack Obama's campaign for president last year.

Currently, seven states require voters to show a photo ID before being allowed to cast a ballot.


My Opinion: I chose this article because it brings up the ongoing debate about whether requiring voters to have a photo id is a poll tax or not. I think that if the state provides a way for voters to obtain an id for free then it is not a poll tax. Otherwise voters are essentially paying for the right to vote. I find it amazing that there are currently seven states who already require voters to present an id. I understand the debate that it helps to prevent voter fraud but there has to be a way that it achieves this without making it harder to vote.