The Voting News Daily: Kloppenburg Files for Recount in Wisconsin, Is that North Carolina ID on the up and up?
WI: Wisconsin court race heads for recount – Reuters
Wisconsin’s election oversight agency said on Wednesday that the challenger in the close race for a seat on the state Supreme Court has asked for a recount. The April 5 high court contest was widely seen as a referendum on the state’s new Republican leadership and the curbs they have imposed on public sector collective bargaining, which drew national attention as other states weighed similar moves. In a statement, the Government Accountability Board said it was “prepared to move forward with a statewide recount of votes for Supreme Court Justice, as requested by the Kloppenburg campaign today.” The announcement came just minutes before JoAnne Kloppenburg, who trails incumbent David Prosser by just 7,316 of the nearly 1.5 million votes in the closely watched race, was scheduled to hold a press conference in Madison outlining her plans. Wednesday was the deadline for her to request a recount. Full Article
NC: Is that ID on the up and up? – News-Record.com
There was a lively discussion on our letters blog today about the proposed Voter ID bill. Supporters of the measure simply can’t understand why anyone would see a problem with requiring voters to show a photo ID at the polls. Joyce McCloy of the N.C. Coalition for Verified Voting didn’t weigh in there, but she forwarded some email correspondence she’s had with legislators. One question she asked was what mechanism the bill creates for election officials to verify whether the ID presented is legitimate. After all, the fake ID industry is thriving. Today, at the behest of Rep. David Lewis, R-Harnett, she received a reply from Kara A. McCraw, staff attorney and legislative analyst for the General Assembly’s Research Division. It said: “HB 351 requires the voter to present a photo ID to the local election official assigned to check registration when the voter enters the voting enclosure. Voters are currently required to state their name and address, and HB 351 would add the additional requirement that the voter present one of the forms of photo ID listed in the statute. The bill does not address the issue of “fake” IDs, specify a verification process by the election official, or require other agencies to share databases for verification of IDs. So Ms. McCloy is correct that the bill does not include a system or funding for verification of the IDs, and as a result the remaining questions (computer system for ID verification, electronic pollbooks , cost of such a system, security, etc.) are not addressed in the bill. “In reviewing the laws of the other 8 states which require photo ID, none appear to have established a process or system to verify whether an ID is fake or not at the polling site. The challenge procedure in current NC law established underG.S. 163-87 for challenges on election day could still be used to challenge a voter on any of the grounds included in that statute, such as the person is not who they represent themselves to be, even if that voter has presented identification.”
