The standard argument against the "Don't let N#####s vote act" just passed by the Republican congress is presented clearly in this
New York Times Editorial.
It touches on all the right points, voter suppression, poll taxes, etc.
This is not the right argument to make though, the right argument is present in this sentence from the OP/ED:
Starting in 2010, that photo ID would have to be something like a passport, or an enhanced kind of driver's license or non-driver's identification, containing proof of citizenship.
Three words: National ID Card.
They are requiring an internal passport to vote. How long before you need it to board a bus, or it's demanded on a whim by private companies and your average beat cop.
This bill needs to be called what it is, the "2005 National ID Card Act".
There are a lot of people out there who buy into the entire (false) vote fraud thing, but a national ID card plays into their winger paranoia, and they will call their senator or rep about this.
Remember, after the National ID,
they'll take our guns!