Opinion: Question 7 would create barriers for seniors and potentially lead to voters being turned away

Question 7 is an unnecessary barrier to voting. Simply put, there is no widespread voter fraud in Nevada; it is not something that has ever substantially impacted our elections. That is curious, considering the main support rhetoric around Question 7 is that it will make our elections more secure. 

This is a fallacy, and the supporters of Question 7 are searching for answers to a problem that simply does not exist. What is worse, this measure would create substantial barriers to voting in our elections. Many view having to pay for an ID as a poll tax, and the text of the ballot measure outlines no plans for implementation, providing free IDs or low-cost IDs, or education around verifying IDs. 

Underserved communities will be impacted the most by strict voter ID laws, because many in these communities don’t get time off to go vote or to obtain an ID. In Nevada, over half of eligible workers, especially women, do not get paid time off to vote, with 75% of unregistered voters facing this challenge. Voter ID laws worsen this barrier by adding yet another requirement for voters. Seniors, many of whom are still working or do not have their driver’s licenses, would be deeply impacted by strict voter ID requirements. 

First and foremost, I am a senior. I work full-time and support my parents, who live independently. I have already witnessed this. Even my parents, who are both seniors, would be dramatically impacted by Question 7. Recently, I took my father, who is 82 years old to the Department of Motor Vehicles in Las Vegas to update his ID. He was concerned about being unable to vote in the future if his ID expired or was not updated. 

These concerns will be present for many seniors if Question 7 is passed in 2024 and 2026. My father needs a walker and has many health issues as he continues to age. His health issues make it challenging for him to walk, stand, or sit for long periods of time. We sat at the DMV for three hours to get his ID updated. Question 7 will make it even harder for seniors, who want to comply with the law, as they will struggle to meet the requirements. Yes, Question 7 allows for seniors to use expired IDs, but many seniors don’t trust this, including my own father. Issues with verifying IDs will inevitably happen, and many seniors don’t want to take that risk.  

In 2021, Clark County had over 330K seniors aged 65 or higher. That is a substantial number of individuals who may have transportation or financial barriers to obtaining the necessary ID requirements outlined in Question 7. Many seniors let their driver’s licenses expire as they stop navigating driving in their vehicles. 

Without substantial education and implementation plans to teach election workers how to properly check IDs, this measure could impact hundreds of thousands of senior voters. The proponents of Question 7 have no language or plan to assist election workers or members of the community who are struggling to navigate the requirements. 

Voting is a constitutionally protected right, it is not ordering a beer at a bar. Proponents often cite the requirements for showing identification when people purchase alcohol. That talking point makes virtually no sense because purchasing alcohol is not a constitutionally protected right. It is an apples-to-oranges comparison that does nothing to solve the issues that will inevitably come if Question 7 passes. 

Our goal should be to increase voter engagement and participation, not create more barriers. Eligible voters should be able to cast their ballot without costly added requirements that do nothing to increase election integrity.

If Nevadans are required to show ID at the polls, we risk worsening disparities in voter turnout and representation, particularly for our most vulnerable communities, including seniors. No eligible voter should be turned away at the polls because their ID is expired or because they forgot their ID at home. 

With our robust and impressive signature verification process, our elections have been secure for hundreds of years. It is unnecessary to change our constitution and require IDs before someone casts their ballot. 

The complications are further evident when the requirements for voting by mail include writing the last four digits of your social security number or driver’s license on your mail ballot. Many seniors, including myself, are not comfortable writing this information on our mail ballots. For seniors who enjoy voting by mail, because it is easier than driving to a polling place or standing in line, this ID requirement creates a substantial barrier. 

Either we risk our personal information or we vote. For many seniors, including myself, standing in line to vote is physically impossible. These voters should not have to forfeit their right to vote because their bodies have aged. This is not how our democracy should work. 

Every eligible voter should be able to cast their ballot with ease. Extra and unnecessary requirements should not be mandated by individuals who are simply the victims of widespread conspiracy theories around our elections. That’s why I will be voting NO on Question 7 and encouraging my fellow Nevadans to do the same.