Keep an eye on your dogs

Thanks for the story about the turkey hunter who shot a wolf. From the story, I assume the hunter won't be held very accountable for his action.

Do we really want a wolf hunting season with hunters like this? If you live out in the country, they might also shoot your dog.

-- Rod Lysenko, Madison

Just because something is not reported does not mean it does not happen. The absence of reported voter fraud is the most lame reason ever concocted for blocking the requirement to show photo identification when voting.

Voting is the sole defining characteristic of a functioning democracy. Thus it is critical that the integrity of the voting process be ensured.

I have never understood why I have to provide photo identification to buy beer and cigarettes, drive my car or get a passport, yet I can vote simply by stating my name to the polling person.

-- Joseph T. Leone, Brooklyn

Require government-issued ID, not license

I'm dismayed at Wednesday's editorial stance on Voter ID -- that it's not necessary because of scant evidence of fraud. Isn't one case of fraud sufficient? And does the fraud have to be organized?

I have nothing against ease of voting, but more effort and care should be required in voting when compared to cashing a check or buying liquor, both of which require an ID.

I'm unaware of any special cachet in not having to produce a driver's license or a passport, as the editorial mentions. We've had this debate before: A government-issued photo ID doesn't need to be a driver's license.

It's also been suggested that the photo ID be provided at little or no cost so that it wouldn't wind up being a burden, as Justice David Souter wrote.

-- Marlene Hyer, Sun Prairie

Stop illegal voters

It should absolutely be necessary to show government IDs to vote. This would prevent some of the fraud that takes place at the polls.

Too many illegal aliens here vote without any form of ID, some two and three times. It needs to stop.

-- Al Traverse, Madison

Vote fraud happens, even if not caught

Wednesday's editorial against voter ID laws contains a subtle flaw in logic. It says there is no compelling reason to enact a voter ID law because there is little evidence that fraud has taken place or that it occurs in significant numbers.

That's like saying that since we almost never bring charges against people for painting graffiti, then we don't have a graffiti problem here in Madison. In both cases, the low number of prosecutions is a function of how hard it is to catch somebody doing it, not a function of how often it is occurring.

There are supposedly over 40,000 illegal aliens in Wisconsin. Do they have a motivation to commit voter fraud? With illegal immigration a hot political topic, the answer is obvious. What prevents it? Other than their personal morality, nothing.

And not mentioned in the editorial is the fact that the Republican version of the law that Gov. Doyle vetoed contained a provision to provide free IDs to anybody who needed one. So much for the "can't afford one" argument.

Many have pointed out the possibility of Republicans benefitting from a voter ID law, but few seem willing to concede that not passing one may benefit Democrats, possibly with illegal votes. I'm sure that never even occurred to Doyle.

-- Patrick O'Loughlin, Madison

Try better volunteer training instead

Last week I visited my daughter, a student in Michigan. Her Wisconsin driver s license had expired, so we drove her to the nearest license facility.

She had her birth certificate, her three-months expired license, her passport and several pieces of official mail addressed to her where she has lived for the past three years. And she checked their Web site before going.

They told her it was not sufficient to get a driver's license and sent her back to get proof of employment and some other documents. The process took two trips by car and three or four hours. If we hadn't driven her, the bus rides and walks would have taken all day, and she would not have gotten her license.

The idea that such an arbitrary, poorly devised process could be used to determine a citizen's right to vote is frightening.

I volunteer as an election worker. The volunteers who regularly staff the polls know almost every person who comes to vote. Expanding our existing system of skilled, trained volunteers by scheduling half-day shifts to make it easier for working people to volunteer is the way to solve problems on Election Day, not creating more bureaucratic barriers to keep citizens from exercising their right to vote.

-- George Hagenauer, town of Springdale

ID worked in Indiana

Indiana has the toughest "Voter ID" law in the country, and the fear is of massive voter suppression.

The outcome of Tuesday's Indiana presidential primary: A handful of elderly nuns in a convent near Notre Dame did not have proper ID and no provisional ballots were available at that polling place. There were no reported problem in Indianapolis or Gary.

The Democrats claim that 91,000 seniors in Wisconsin would not have the ID required to vote. Are we so different from Indiana? How is it that they had almost no problems in Tuesday's primary, where voter turnout was reported as being "very high?"

-- Richard Kerr, Cottage Grove

Decide based on data

My recommendation regarding "Voter ID" is to collect some data. During the next significant statewide election, collect data on how many people show up to vote with or without some form of photo ID or with a form of ID that can easily be checked.

A utility bill containing their name and address as ID proof is an absurd validation methodology. How many of the "poor and elderly" may be living with relatives or friends and not receive a personal billing from a utility?

Data collection and analysis should be designed and determined by a non-partisan group since the Democrats use the "poor and elderly" argument and the Republicans use the "voter cheating/homeland security" argument.

There's been enough of this unproductive discussion when properly conducted research will shed some sunshine on the issue.

-- John Wardour, Mount Horeb

Potential for fraud is just too great

Your argument against a Wisconsin "Voter ID" law is absurd. You quote Justice David Souter when you state "Showing a drivers license is no big deal for most citizens. But for the poor and elderly who don't need or can't easily afford a driver's license, the requirement threatens to impose nontrivial burdens on the voting rights of tens of thousand."

Even our Gov. Jim Doyle claimed his mother would be disenfranchised because she doesn't have a driver's license. What drivel.

Just some of the occasions that require a driver's license or ID are to drive a car, board an airplane, buy a drink, cash a check, cross into Canada or Mexico, register for Selective Service, get a job, be born, die, marry, get a Social Security card and so on.

But all you need to register to vote is a recent utility bill. The only way to get a utility bill is to rent an apartment or buy a home -- and you need an ID to rent or buy.

You claim that voter fraud is not a problem in Wisconsin.

To prove my point, I could have voted twice in the last election. My neighbor is registered to vote, but was out of town. All I had to do was give his name and address and I could have gotten another ballot. I didn't, but I could have, and I am sure others do.

Voting is an essential ingredient in citizenship. Voter fraud threatens the very core of citizenship.

-- Thomas Miller, Madison

Voting worth effort to obtain photo ID

Everyone should be required to show a government-issued ID when voting. Identification is required for cashing a check, buying alcohol, picking up tickets -- why should such an important privilege as voting be exempt?

Some people think it would discourage the elderly and the poor from coming to the polls. First of all, the government should make it more manageable to acquire an identification card. Second, if someone is not willing to go through the effort, they should not be voting at all.

We are fortunate to live in a country where we can exercise the right to vote. Producing an ID assures that no one abuses this right.

-- Marie G. Ganser, Sauk City