“Every voter should show a photo ID to vote.”

This is on the ballot directly this November — Arizona, Ohio, Oklahoma, California, Nevada, and North Carolina all have constitutional amendments or ballot measures on voter ID, and the federal SAVE Act has been pushing the same requirement in Congress. Supporters call it a basic safeguard most Americans already back; opponents say the burden falls unevenly on voters who don't have easy access to an ID, even if outright fraud is rare either way.

President Trump (a commonsense, obvious safeguard): pushing the SAVE Act, he framed it simply — "How simple is that? Could I have your photo, please? Photo voter ID. All voters must provide proof of citizenship" — and cast opposition to it as self-interested: "the only reason you wouldn't do it is you want to cheat." Brennan Center for Justice (the burden falls unevenly): "These laws disproportionately burden elderly, minority, student and low income voters. Photo IDs, even drivers' licenses, can cost as much as $65 — a high price for any person to participate in our democracy," noting more than 49 million American adults lack an unexpired driver's license with their current name and address. Economists Enrico Cantoni and Vincent Pons, in the most-cited study on the topic (both sides overstate it): found voter ID laws "have no negative effect on registration or turnout, overall or for any group defined by race, gender, age, or party affiliation" — and also found "strict ID requirements have no effect on fraud — actual or perceived." Their conclusion: "efforts to improve elections may be better directed at other reforms."