Except of course its not an honor system. When you vote your name is verified against a list of registered voters, and there are significant penalties for someone who engages in the type of identity fraud that photo ID laws are supposed to prevent. (Also pretty easy to catch, if you show up at a polling station and the actual voter has already voted.)
In the approximately 5 years that Trump has been president, the Republican Klan has worked to cut spending on: meals on wheels, school lunch programs, college aid, and the national endowment for the arts.
I am sure that if the government tries to make an easy-to-get identification, the first thing the republicans will do is to cut funding specifically to make the identification hard-to-get.
In fact we have already seen that, in at least one republican controlled state where they closed multiple DMV offices (where you would supposedly get your 'voter ID' in districts that have a large proportion of minorities.
Ummm, pretty much ever state that requires photo ID for voting allows you to use a driver's license.
But here is the problem... if you are wealth and/or middle class, you will probably have a driver's license by default because, well, you probably own a car. If you have a lower income and cannot afford a car, then you will likely not want to spend the money to get a license that you will never use.
Not really sure what you mean by that.
Indeed, although I will acknowledge that I have only lived in small rural venues, it's not as if voter ID is not already a thing, if not the thing the current administration likes. You can't just walk into the town offices or the registrar's session or whatever is the method of the place, and say "register me." There's some proof required, and an oath taken, and penalties for violation. Once that has been done, further ID should only be a confirmation that you are the voter so registered. Any further requirement is superfluous. Questions of legal citizenship were addressed when you registered and the deal is done.
I would add, however, that it's possible to get a driver's license without being a citizen. After all, at least so far, the idiots in charge have not managed to make it impossible for green card holders to drive a car, and here in Vermont, it is explicit policy to allow licenses even to undocumented immigrants. The qualification or documentation needed to register as a voter, however, should not be required once that has been done. A driver's license ought to be subsequently sufficient to identify who you are. These days, "real ID" licenses exist, which confirm one's legal status in the United States, and "EDL" endorsed licenses confirm citizenship. I don't know just how other states handle this, but a license with the required endorsements ought to be sufficient
de facto proof of legal status and inherently free from challenge without cause.
Aside from the idea to make the necessary ID more expensive and harder to get, we already see in many cases, such as ICE detentions, the fact that if a more uniform sort of ID is required, the powers that be will simply move their goalposts and challenge the ID itself.
I think there is already a pretty good system out there for confirming citizenship which should be sufficient to get a valid voter registration, but I think in any such discussion one must take into account the unfortunate fact that the current administration and its advocates do not want this to be simple or stable. They want it as expensive, burdensome and discouragingly inconvenient as possible. Whatever our administration says is likely a lie. Their goal is abuse, and whatever system of ID is instituted, if it does not disenfranchise their perceived enemies, they can and will simply abuse it. They have learned and taken to heart the art of nuisance and harassment. Our current president is the model, a bully who revels not only in lies but in cruelty and insult. Their goal is ostensibly to clean up the voting process, but it is really to institutionalize selective discrimination. Actual democracy is their enemy.
