Kansas: Issues with voter citizenship rule to linger | Associated Press

Kansas appears likely to be dealing for some time with a significant number of new prospective voters whose registrations remain on hold because they haven’t provided proof of their U.S. citizenship, a legislative committee learned Monday. The issue arose during a meeting of the Joint Committee on Information Technology, as it reviewed the Department of Revenue’s work on a $40 million upgrade of the computer system that handles vehicle titles and registrations, as well as driver’s licenses. The next, still-unscheduled phase of the project deals with driver’s licenses. Department officials told the committee that they don’t have a timetable for requiring everyone who renews a driver’s license to submit documents proving their citizenship. The requirement is in place for people who are getting a new Kansas license.

North Carolina: Voters fear new ID law will keep them from polls | Los Angeles Times

Alberta Currie, the great-granddaughter of slaves, was born in a farmhouse surrounded by tobacco and cotton fields. Her mother, Willie Pearl, gave birth with the assistance of a midwife. No birth certificate was issued; a birth announcement was handwritten into the Currie family Bible. Today, 78 years later, that absence of official documentation may force Currie to sit out an election for the first time since 1956. Under a restrictive new voter ID law in North Carolina, a state-issued photo ID is required for voting as of the 2016 election. Voters can obtain a state-issued ID at no cost. But that requires getting to a state driver’s license office, waiting in line — and providing documents that many voters lack, among them an original or certified birth certificate and original Social Security card.  The law’s Republican backers say the new measure combats voter fraud and ensures voting integrity. Civil rights groups contend that the bureaucratic obstacles are a part of a blatant attempt to make it difficult for Democratic-leaning voters — particularly African Americans, students and the elderly — to obtain IDs needed to vote.

Kansas: Push to end proof-of-citizenship rule falters | Associated Press

Critics of a Kansas law requiring new voters to provide proof of their U.S. citizenship when registering urged legislators Tuesday to repeal the policy during their special session, but such an effort immediately stalled. About 100 people gathered at the Statehouse for a rally sponsored by KanVote, a Wichita-based group that opposed the law, which took effect in January. The NAACP, the American Civil Liberties Union and Equality Kansas, the state’s leading gay-rights organization, also called publicly for the law’s repeal. The law took effect in January, backed by Secretary of State Kris Kobach and fellow Republicans, who view it as a way to prevent non-citizens from voting improperly. But more than 15,000 legal Kansas residents’ voter registrations are on hold because they have yet to provide proper documents, meaning they can’t legally vote.

Kansas: Legislature unlikely to change proof-of-citizenship requirement for voter registration | Lawrence Journal World

A proposal to change the new state law that has put at risk 15,000 Kansans’ ability to vote was rejected in the state House of Representatives on Tuesday and probably will not be revived during the special session. Crowd gathered for rally on Tuesday urging the Kansas Legislature to repeal a proof of citizenship requirement to register to vote. As the Legislature started a special session to fix a constitutionally flawed murder statute, state Rep. Jim Ward, D-Wichita, tried to pass a provision to eliminate the new state requirement that Kansans must show proof of U.S. citizenship with a document such as a birth certificate or passport when they register to vote. Since the proof of citizenship requirement took effect Jan. 1, the voter registration applications of approximately 15,000 Kansans, including 600 in Douglas County, have been placed in “suspense,” which means they aren’t completed.

Kansas: Would-be voters are exasperated by Kansas’ new registration law | Kansas City Star

Lee Albee never thought signing up to vote would be so cumbersome. Earlier this year, the Overland Park man registered to vote when he renewed his license at the motor vehicle office. It was supposed to be easy. It wasn’t. Weeks later, the Johnson County election office notified Albee he needed to prove citizenship — with a birth certificate or a passport — if he wanted to register. As it turned out, no one had asked him for those documents at the DMV office. Now he doesn’t have the time to follow up. “They’re making it incredibly difficult,” Albee said. “It’s a pain in the tush.” Albee is among 15,622 Kansans who had their voter registrations set aside until they can prove their citizenship under a new Kansas law that started this year. About 30 percent of those suspended registrations were in Johnson, Wyandotte and Leavenworth counties.

North Carolina: Road Worrier: Photo IDs, new for NC voters, are a big business for DMV | News Observer

North Carolina’s strict new voting law, which takes effect starting with elections in 2016, will make the state Division of Motor Vehicles a prime source of photo identification cards for non-drivers who want to vote. It turns out that photo IDs already are a big business for DMV. More than 1.1 million North Carolinians have valid DMV-issued photo IDs (which expire after 5 years), compared to 6.7 million with state driver’s licenses. Last year more than 270,000 people provided the necessary stack of documents, posed for the camera and, in most cases, paid a $10 fee. Why did they want these photo IDs? For any of the reasons anybody might be asked to prove his or her identity, of course: To get a loan or cash a check, to satisfy a curious police officer, to receive some kinds of government services, to get a job. Some of the folks who got DMV IDs are ex-drivers who surrendered their licenses because of age or illness. Many are too young to drive (8,671 of them last year were under 15 years old). And 122 of these were less than 1 year old – too young even to walk. “There are a lot of lap babies in our database,” said Marge Howell, a DMV spokeswoman. “A lot of people come in to get these ID cards for their children. Sometimes, as the child grows, they’ll come back to get progressive photographs to show that growth.”

Kansas: Two legislators will file bill to change proof-of-citizenship requirement for voters | Lawrence Journal-World

Two legislators will file a bill during the special session next week that they said would fix a law that has jeopardized the voter registrations of approximately 15,000 Kansans. Sonny Scroggins, a social activist in Topeka, protested Wednesday outside Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach’s office. Scroggins opposes the state’s new requirement, pushed by Kobach, that people show proof of U.S. citizenship to register to vote. Scroggins’ protest came on the 50th anniversary of Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. Noting that there are elections scheduled this fall in Johnson County, state Sen. Oletha Faust-Goudeau, D-Wichita, said today, “Suspended voters will not be able to vote in these upcoming elections without passage of this act. We must protect the right for all people to vote.” In Kansas, approximately 15,000 Kansans cannot currently cast ballots because their voter registrations are in “suspense” because they haven’t proved their U.S. citizenship with a birth certificate or other document. The state’s proof-of-citizenship requirement became effective Jan.1 .

Texas: New law may restrict student voting | The Collegian

Students without a state-issued ID may find it difficult to vote this year since school-issued student IDs will not be accepted. After the Supreme Court struck down the provision of the Voting Rights Act requiring some states to get federal preclearance before changing voting laws, the Texas attorney general immediately enforced controversial redistricting maps and strict voter ID laws approved by the legislature. These are the same laws that a panel of federal judges claimed last year would “impose strict and unforgiving burdens on the poor” and are some of the “most stringent in the country.” In 2008, the 18-to-29-year-old demographic made up 16 percent of Texas voters in the presidential election, roughly 1.3 million. A majority of them voted Democratic. Opponents of the legislation claim this is a tactic used by the Republican Party, along with the controversial redistricting maps, to cut into the Democratic vote. Being the gun-loving state that it is, Texas will accept a concealed handgun license at the polls. Other forms of ID that will be accepted are a state-issued driver’s license or ID card issued by the Department of Public Safety, a military ID containing the person’s photograph, a U.S. citizenship certificate, a U.S. passport or Texas elections ID.

Editorials: Safeguard voting rights in Kansas | Wichita Eagle

If Gov. Sam Brownback and Kansas Attorney General Derek Schmidt feel a responsibility to safeguard voting rights, Kansans wouldn’t know it from their comments Monday related to the state’s 8-month-old requirement of proof of citizenship to register to vote. The voter registrations of nearly 14,000 Kansans, including more than 2,400 in Sedgwick County, are “in suspense” because they haven’t provided the necessary birth certificates, passports or other documents – or they have, to the driver’s license office where they registered, and the papers just haven’t been passed along to election officials. Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach had promised lawmakers that the document sharing would be seamless. When Brownback was asked Monday about the problem, he acknowledged an interest in the voting booth being “open for people” but said, according to the Lawrence Journal-World: “It’s in the secretary of state’s purview.” He also said: “We’ll watch and review the process as it’s coming forward, but there is a constitutional officer that’s in charge of that.”

Texas: DOJ to Texas: Voter Suppression Will Not Stand | The Nation

In one week last August, federal courts found that Texas’ voter ID law and redistricting maps were discriminatory and violated the Voting Rights Act. The Supreme Court’s recent decision invalidating Section 4 of the VRA, which previously covered Texas, tragically wiped away those rulings. Now the Department of Justice is once again stepping in to fight for voting rights in the Lone Star State. The DOJ announced today that it is objecting to Texas’ voter ID law under Section 2 of the VRA and will also seek to join a similar lawsuit against the state’s redistricting maps. Last month, DOJ asked a court in Texas to force the state to approve its voting changes with the federal government for a period of time under another provision of the VRA, Section 3, based on a finding of intentional discrimination in the restricting case. The federal courts found last year that Texas’ new maps for Congress and the state house were “enacted with discriminatory purpose.”

Kansas: Proof-Of-Citizenship Law Blocks Many From Voting | Huffington Post

A few weeks after moving to suburban Kansas City from the Seattle area, Aaron Belenky went online to register to vote. But he ended up joining thousands of other Kansas residents whose voting rights are in legal limbo because of the state’s new proof-of-citizenship rule. Starting this year, new voters aren’t legally registered in Kansas until they’ve presented a birth certificate, passport or other document demonstrating U.S. citizenship. Kansas is among a handful of GOP-dominated states enacting rules to keep noncitizens from voting, but the most visible result is a growing pool of nearly 15,000 residents who’ve filled out registration forms but can’t cast ballots. Critics of the law point out that the number of people whose registrations aren’t yet validated – and who are thus blocked from voting – far outpaces the few hundred ballots over the last 15 years that Kansas officials say were potentially tainted by irregularities. Preventing election fraud was often cited as the reason for enacting the law.

Kansas: Proof-of-citizenship law targeting fraud puts voting rights in limbo for 15,000 residents | The Washington Post

A few weeks after moving to suburban Kansas City from the Seattle area, Aaron Belenky went online to register to vote but ended up joining thousands of other Kansas residents whose voting rights are in legal limbo because of the state’s new proof-of-citizenship rule. Starting this year, new voters aren’t legally registered in Kansas until they’ve presented a birth certificate, passport or other document demonstrating U.S. citizenship. Kansas is among a handful of GOP-dominated states enacting such a rule to keep noncitizens from voting, but the most visible result so far is a growing pool of nearly 15,000 residents who’ve filled out registration forms but can’t legally cast ballots yet. Critics of the law point out that the number of people whose registrations aren’t yet validated — and who are blocked from voting — far outpaces the few hundred ballots over the last 15 years that Kansas officials have reported as potentially tainted by irregularities. Preventing election fraud was often cited as the reason for enacting the law.

Kansas: Kansas voters’ limbo shows hitch in citizenship law | Fort Wayne News Sentinel

A few weeks after moving to suburban Kansas City from the Seattle area, Aaron Belenky went online to register to vote. But he ended up joining thousands of other Kansas residents whose voting rights are in legal limbo because of the state’s new proof-of-citizenship rule. Starting this year, new voters aren’t legally registered in Kansas until they’ve presented a birth certificate, passport or other document demonstrating U.S. citizenship. Kansas is among a handful of GOP-dominated states enacting rules to keep noncitizens from voting, but the most visible result is a growing pool of nearly 15,000 residents who’ve filled out registration forms but can’t cast ballots. Critics of the law point out that the number of people whose registrations aren’t yet validated — and who are thus blocked from voting — far outpaces the few hundred ballots over the last 15 years that Kansas officials say were potentially tainted by irregularities. Preventing election fraud was often cited as the reason for enacting the law.

Kansas: Brownback hesitant to weigh in on voter registration problems | Lawrence Journal-World

Gov. Sam Brownback on Monday didn’t seem to want to get involved in the controversy over the 13,000 Kansans whose voter registrations are up in the air. When asked about it, Brownback, a Republican, referred to Kansas Secretary of State Kris Kobach, also a Republican. “It’s in the secretary of state’s purview,” Brownback said. Brownback acknowledged an interest in the voting booth being “open for people.” “We’ll watch and review the process as it’s coming forward, but there is a constitutional officer that’s in charge of that.” Again, that’s a reference to Kobach.

Kansas: Democrats want to take stab at amending proof-of-citizenship voter registration law | Wichita Eagle

As the state Legislature prepares for a special session to rewrite an unconstitutional criminal-sentencing law, Wichita Democrats are planning to reopen the debate over a voter proof-of-citizenship law they maintain is equally unconstitutional. Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who wrote the law requiring new voters to provide citizenship documents, said he thinks it would withstand court scrutiny, unlike an Arizona law that recently was overturned by the Supreme Court. And even if it didn’t, Kansas could create two classes of voters: those who provide the proof required by state law and could vote in all elections and those who don’t and who would be limited to voting only in congressional and presidential elections, Kobach said.

North Carolina: Voter ID bill raises controversy in North Carolina | CBS News

Molly McDonough was among the hundreds of North Carolinians jailed this year for demonstrating inside the statehouse against legislation she fears may prevent her from voting. “Voting is a right, and these laws are encroaching on that right,” said McDonough in an interview on the N.C. State campus where she’ll begin her sophomore year this fall. McDonough, 18, doesn’t have a driver’s license or a passport, and her college ID won’t be accepted under the voting reform bill passed Thursday along party lines by both houses of the Republican-majority state legislature. McDonough says obtaining documents required to get a state-issued photo ID — birth certificate, Social Security card, university transcript — and missing hours at her bookstore job to wait in line at the Department of Motor Vehicles is unfairly expensive, she figures, about $120 in all.

Texas: New Voter ID, Unavailable in Seventy Counties in State, Opens With Wealth of Issues Remaining | Houston Press

Between Sen. Wendy Davis’s filibuster and the Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the Defense of Marriage Act, this week has been a strangely successful one for progressives in Texas. However, there was a ruling before either of these realities that girded conservatives and tea partiers in the state. On Tuesday, the SCOTUS ruled in a 5-4 decision that Section 4 of the Voting Rights Act should be excised, and that Congress “may draft another formula based on current conditions.” This section, which contained a formula forcing nine states and assorted counties to pre-clear electoral changes with the federal government, was one of the main pillars of the VRA, providing federal oversight to areas that had used traditionally discriminatory practices to prevent minorities from voting.

Georgia: Georgia voter I.D. law blocked | Atlanta Journal-Constitution

This week’s U.S. Supreme Court ruling partly blocks Georgia from enforcing a law requiring would-be voters to prove U.S. citizenship, Secretary of State Brian Kemp said Wednesday. In a 7-2 decision Monday, the court ruled a similar statute in Arizona is pre-empted by federal law. Passed in 2009, Georgia’s law requires voter registration applicants to provide proof of U.S. citizenship, such as copies of passports or birth certificates. Kemp, however, said Georgia has never been able to enforce that statute because it has not been given access to a federal immigration database it could use to confirm the U.S. citizenship of those seeking to vote. He said he is now considering asking the U.S. Election Assistance Commission to add new instructions on federal voter registration forms so Georgia can require proof of U.S. citizenship. In its ruling, the court indicated that is a possible pathway forward for Arizona. “We will put all options on the table — whether we need to talk to the governor or Legislature or the Attorney General’s Office,” Kemp said.

Editorials: Scalia’s ‘Voter Access’ Case | Spencer Overton/Huffington Post

We are still waiting for a decision about the fate of the Voting Rights Act, but today the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion in another voting rights case. In today’s case, the Court ruled in favor of those who support voter access. Arizona must accept federal voter registration forms — even those federal forms that do not comply with Arizona’s restrictive proof-of-citizenship requirements. The opinion was written by Justice Scalia, who stated in February that the renewal of the Voting Rights Act was motivated by “racial entitlement.” Before assuming that Justice Scalia is a recent convert to voting rights protections, recognize that language in today’s opinion could eventually undermine voting rights. The details of the opinion could empower state and local partisans who manipulate voting rules. The opinion’s reasoning could also hamper federal efforts to protect military voters and restore former offender voting rights.

National: Arizona voter ID case about more than driver’s licenses | Constitution Daily

It is about 2,300 miles from Phoenix, the capital of the state of Arizona, to Washington, D.C., the capital of the United States. That’s a long way. But beyond physical distance, the philosophical divide between Phoenix and D.C. may be even bigger. The Supreme Court is poised to decide the case known as Arizona v. The Inter Tribal Council of Arizona, Inc., which could have implications much broader than the matter of whether extra identification must be presented if a person without a driver’s license is trying to register to vote in Arizona. The National Voter Registration Act (NVRA), sometimes called the “Motor Voter” law, was passed in Washington, D.C., by the federal government back in 1993. It established uniform procedures for all states to follow in federal elections. Under the NVRA, someone who is registering to vote has to check a box affirming under penalty of perjury that he or she is a U.S. citizen.

Iran: How the ballot works in the Iran election | BBC

Nearly 50 million people are eligible to vote in Friday’s elections in Iran – almost 70% from the capital, Tehran, and the major cities while about 30% of voters come from rural areas. There are nearly 70,000 polling stations and, according to the authorities, nearly one million people are involved in making sure the vote will go smoothly. All a voter needs to cast a ballot is his or her birth certificate, which will be stamped to show that they have voted. Also, they will have to press their thumbs into an ink pad to make sure there are no repeat voters. Voters will be given a ballot paper on which they will have to write the name of their candidate of choice. Those who cannot read or write will be helped by those inside the polling stations – this is always the cause of speculation as a source of irregularity.

Wisconsin: GOP May Push Through New Voter ID Law | WPRN

Opponents of a new bill want more time to study the legislation that would require photo ID and repeal a ban on corporate campaign contributions. The new legislation, introduced as previous voter ID legislation is tied up in the courts, is 78 pages long, leaving may Democrats asking for more time to analyze it. Wisconsin’s voter ID law is currently tied up in the courts. Rep. Jeff Stone, R-Greendale, believes his revised bill would be constitutional. Those who can’t afford a photo ID would have to reveal to election officials their lack of income or sign an affidavit why they don’t have a birth certificate to get an ID: “This is very similar to Indiana’s current photo ID law that was held in the U.S. Supreme Court.”

Wisconsin: GOP proposes sweeping election reforms | San Francisco Chronicle

One of the chief authors of Wisconsin’s voter photo identification plan is shopping around a new bill designed to allay legal concerns that the requirements are too burdensome by letting poor people opt out. Republican lawmakers passed voter photo ID requirements two years ago, saying the move was needed to combat election fraud. But a pair of Dane County judges struck the requirements down in separate lawsuits last year. One ruled the requirements were unconstitutional because some people entitled to vote might lack the resources to obtain an ID. The other said the law substantially impairs the right to vote for poor people, noting birth certificates are required to obtain the IDs and voters who lack them must pay for them. The state Justice Department has appealed both decisions. Two federal lawsuits challenging the requirements are still pending.

Wisconsin: GOP lawmaker pushes new voter ID legislation to address court concerns | Green Bay Press Gazette

One of the chief authors of Wisconsin’s voter photo identification plan is shopping around a new bill designed to allay legal concerns that the requirements are too burdensome by letting poor people opt out. Republican lawmakers passed voter photo ID requirements two years ago, saying the move was needed to combat election fraud. But a pair of Dane County judges struck the requirements down in separate lawsuits last year. One ruled the requirements were unconstitutional because some people entitled to vote might lack the resources to obtain an ID. The other said the law substantially impairs the right to vote for poor people, noting birth certificates are required to obtain the IDs and voters who lack them must pay for them. The state Justice Department has appealed both decisions. Two federal lawsuits challenging the requirements are still pending.

North Carolina: Voter ID proposal clears House Elections Committee | WRAL.com

A bill requiring voters to present photo identification at the polls was endorsed Wednesday by a North Carolina House Committee. Republicans in the House Elections Committee overcame solid Democratic opposition to advance the bill, 23-11. The vote followed more than two hours of mostly unsuccessful amendments from Democrats who wanted to broaden the forms of acceptable ID and ease restrictions. Voter ID is a contentious issue nationally and on the state level. Republican lawmakers say it ensures election integrity but Democrats label it an attempt to suppress voter turnout in the name of a problem that lacks documented proof.

North Carolina: Voting changes may lengthen lines, wait times | The Davidson Dispatch

Republican-led legislation could prompt major changes for elections in North Carolina, including shorter early voting periods, elimination of same-day registration and ID requirements at the polls. While bill sponsors believe the changes will save money and prevent voter fraud, elections officials across the state say the measures could lead to longer lines and wait times at the polls. Most discussion has surrounded a proposed voter ID law, introduced by House Republicans last week. The law, which would take effect in 2016, would require voters to show one of eight state-issued forms of photo identification or a tribal ID card. Provisional ballots for those without photo ID on Election Day are allowed but would only be counted if the voter returns to a local election board before results are official, according to the bill. The legislation also includes a provision waiving fees for state-issued IDs for those who sign a statement swearing they don’t have a birth certificate or the means to pay.

Editorials: Virginia’s voter ID law is a backdoor poll tax | MSNBC

Pretty much anything we do is taxed.  Whether it’s flipping on our cable, making a call on our cell phone or biting into a Snickers bar. Taxes are inescapable. The one tax-free haven, at least in theory, is voting. A free and fair vote is the bedrock of our political system. Voting is the one instance where all of us, no matter how rich or poor, influential or humble, are completely equal because there is no cost involved. Voting is the great equalizer, of course, assuming it is free. However, this week the state of Virginia joined a growing number of states that have implemented or are pending implementation of a voting system that taxes voters. In other words, Virginia has implemented a poll tax.  Governor Bob McDonnell signed into law a bill that requires voters to present a valid photo identification in order to vote. At first read, the new voting requirement seems innocuous. Most people tend to have a photo identification either in the form of a driver’s license or school ID. And if they don’t have one, then the state will provide one free of charge. But what the bill does not address is the cost it takes to secure the documents needed to get that free ID.

Editorials: Protecting Voting Rights Is Not “Crazy | Spencer Overton/Huffington Post

I attended yesterday’s U.S. Supreme Court oral argument in the Arizona voter registration case. The argument went well generally, but Justice Alito suggested the Justices would create a “crazy” double standard by requiring that Arizona election officials accept the federal registration form. Alito’s concerns are unwarranted. Arizona chose to create two standards when it chose to add special “proof of citizenship” to register. The National Voter Registration Act requires that all states “accept and use” a single, uniform voter registration form for federal elections (states can also still use their own registration forms). The Federal Form requires that prospective voters check a box and sign an affirmation that they are U.S. citizens under penalty of perjury. Arizona, however, adopted a state law requiring “satisfactory proof” of U.S. citizenship to register, such as a birth certificate, U.S. passport, or state driver’s license that shows citizenship. As a result, Arizona rejected over 31,000 registrations that lacked its “proof of citizenship”–including Federal Forms–even though Arizona concedes it has no evidence that any of these individuals were non-citizens.

Arizona: Voter Registration Law Takes Heat At Supreme Court | Fox News

Monday marked yet another Supreme Court showdown for Arizona and the Obama administration. At issue, this time, was the state’s Proposition 200 measure, which requires voter registration applicants to provide documentation proving U.S. citizenship. Critics of the measure say the state has no authority to go beyond what’s required on the simplified federal voter registration form. On the federal form applicants must check a box indicating U.S. citizenship, sign attesting to that fact and drop the form in the mail. Arizona officials, citing hundreds of cases of non-U.S. citizens registering to vote, say additional barriers need to be put in place.  Under Proposition 200, applicants can present a number of various documents, including driver’s license, birth certificate and certain Native American tribal documents. “If somebody’s willing to fraudulently vote, that person would be willing to sign falsely,” said Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne, who argued the case Monday. “We need evidence that the person is a citizen,” he added.

National: U.S. Supreme Court justices ask tough questions on voter registration law | Arizona Republic

The U.S. Supreme Court’s nine justices lobbed a volley of tough questions at Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne on Monday as he argued for the state’s voter-registration law aimed at keeping illegal immigrants off the voter rolls. At stake is Proposition 200, a law passed overwhelmingly by voters in 2004, that asks Arizonans who want to vote to provide documentary proof of citizenship, such as a copy of a driver’s license, birth certificate, passport, tribal identification card or naturalization number. The law goes beyond what federal voter-registration rules require for proof. The law inflamed the immigration debate when it was passed and was almost immediately challenged by voting-rights advocates as burdensome to the young, elderly, minorities or naturalized citizens and to voter-registration organizations. Supporters touted the law as a check against voter fraud.