Does right to work help

To the editors:

In the not too distant past this newspaper has published various "updates" from both Representatives Richardson and Jacobsmeyer. One such missive dealt with the imperative of making Missouri a right to work state, another with a plan to require photo ID in order to vote. I frankly can't remember who wrote which article, but in reality it hardly matters, since they both tend to vote and apparently hold their beliefs in a more or less lockstep manner, judging by their record at the capitol. I would like at this time to address both of these issues.

First, in the case of right to work, which is in fact a union-busting ploy, I would like to point out that in EVERY state which has passed such legislation the result has been to depress wages. This has been a universal result. Every single time a state has passed a right to work law wages for working people have decreased. The central idea behind such laws is that it will benefit businesses and create jobs. It very likely could do so, but let me ask this: If jobs are created, but none of them pay a living wage, how is this a good thing for workers trying to support a family? It surely aids business owners, but most folks don't own a business, they work for one. Which is why detractors correctly refer to such legislation a right to work for less law.

Insofar as the need for photo ID to vote, let us now examine this burning issue. The argument is that it is necessary to eliminate voter fraud and thus assure a fair election. But where, I wonder, is this fraud? There are NO studies existing which find ANY particular degree of voter fraud in the United States. None. I defy anyone to name a single one. In fact, Loyola University did a study which found 31 cases of voter fraud in the US in the past 14 years. In the entire country in many thousands of elections only 31 substantiated cases of voter fraud in 14 years! However, there have been many studies as well as higher court decisions which have found that requiring a photo ID to vote is a conscious and purposeful attempt to suppress voting among the poor, the elderly and the non-white populous. Which leads me to another question. Is it just me, or does this seem to be a classic example of anti-democracy? I mean, the United States already has one of the lowest voter turn-out in the developed world. Shouldn't we be trying to promote more people to vote rather than making it more difficult? Isn't this what a true democratic republic is all about?

To sum things up, we have elected representatives who apparently believe it would be good for our state if the average worker made less money and only those who favor (and who favor them?) would be likely to vote. Perhaps I'm misreading their intentions. I would welcome a response on these issues. However, I would ask that the response be specific to points I have attempted to make and not be mumbo jumbo politispeak which purport to refute my allegations without actually addressing them.

Marshall Lowe

Ellsinore, Mo.